Love the serious commentary and orchestral backing.

A parishoner of ours, the late Robert Herd AO, former RAN Chief Naval Architect, worked on the S&R Princess project, his wife, Dulcie, too, as a technical draftsman. Another deceased friend, HH the late Prince Michael Andreevitch Romanov, worked as an engineer at Ansett ANA's flying boat depot at Rose Bay, Sydney, Australia. He had been seconded to the RAAF during WWII, and so liked it here, he stayed.

Since airstrips made for heavy bombers were getting increasingly common in WW2 and paved runways made with comparatively little effort, I don't see how they thought the glory days of the flying boats in the 30's would still be true by the 1950's, especially considering the dawning of the jet airliner. The operating costs (less fuel efficient) and service on those flying boats negated any benefit of skipping the need for paved runways and land based airports.

While all this was going on, De Havillands were developing the Comet, the worlds first jet airliner...........

Boa noite !!!! Que vídeo excelente. Aeronave fantástica. Realmente, uma pena todos terem sido desmontados. Muito triste não ter pelo menos um em algum museu. Só saudades..... Obrigado pelo vídeo e parabéns pelo canal. Abraço do Brasil.....

Well, at least the Spruce Goose survives.

awesome plane

I wonder why no one bought them, they were such a great thing for Britain. And no one even funded Duchess and Queen. If Britain still had them, then that would have been great. I know it sucks to pay for maintenance to keep it healthy from corrosion, but they were soooo amazing!!!

wow what a great collection of rare footage..thanks so much.. I wish they got the jet fighter flying boat going..think of what that would be like !

"Is it to much to hope that some use could be found for these flying boats?" Would have made one hell of a maritime reconnaissance plane, imagine the payload of bombs, torpedoes, sonar buoys and survival packages (ASMs too if it surived until the 60s) it could have carried over such a huge range and in good weather it could even have landed.

@user-os8xr2it3p

4 жыл бұрын

hehe... it's a good idea, it has the load capability of a medium bomber and flying capability of an MPA since MPAs are designed to be able to fly low and slow / high and slow etc. and i also thinks it works for airfields, many places even today still unable to be reached with ground aircrafts, like Tristan De Cunha and many other small islands

lol handles like a jet fighter

This was a cool plane, great sound and majestic in the air. Might have made a good refueler or transport, with that range and size, and it was mostly already paid-for.

The Princess Flying Boat, what a great idea and remarkable achievement. Pity wrong timing and technolgy allowed aircraft to fly higher and faster. Economicly not viable. Shades of Hughes's Spruacce Goose. A very good posting

@ragemanchoo82 I`m fairly sure its a De Havilland Comet, one of, if not the first transatlantic jet liner, the start of the end for the flying boats... It had square windows that caused the fuselage on many of them to rip apart.

Wings Over the World

Love the Jet boat at 0:54. It's a sign dude. A sign.

Great video. Maybe flying boats could make a comeback.

I saw the Hughes "spruce goose" in California...Howard continued the project with his own money and in 1947 (date may be wrong) she flew and after that put away...I think if HH did not have the money, he would not have saved it...Many aircraft were a bit late for the times; the taxpayers did not want to pay for them so...

ANewNormalcy is right about corrosion, but as flying boats are slow-movers, skin heating by friction (eg. Concorde) is no problem, so they could well be skinned with composites. I'm sure they could find many uses, civil and military, in this day and age.

@IronMountainMan1 Was the hughes h4 hercules (spruce goose) bigger than the Princess by much ?

Coupled with the Brabazon , boy oh boy, did we get it wrong. That's what happens when governments interfere with commercial enterprise

@tucoramirez4558

6 жыл бұрын

Yeah, you get General Motors, currently doing better than before (American but you get the point). Funny how you fail to acknowledge how many times the government got it right and saved jobs. Oh, and many of these projects would *never* have started without government loans. Surely you don't expect many of them to finance themselves?? "commercial enterprise"... with tax payer loans

@mrrolandlawrence

6 жыл бұрын

there was nothing principally wrong with the brabazon in aircraft design though terrible idea of ocean liner seating allocation. Had they refined the design and seen the 1st prototype as just that a prototype, they could have come up with a 707 competitor in around about the same time. With the brabazon budget they also built up the Filton facility that has been used ever since. By comparison the coffin nails for flying boats were being hammered in soon as the excellent DC3 got into production.

@xetalq

4 жыл бұрын

@@mrrolandlawrence You should read the story of the Vickers VC7 - if you have not done so, already.

According to "I know you got soul" by Jeremy Clarkson, the book that made me search up the Princess just now, they were all scraped.

Over 100 passengers? Whow. Thats a lot. So sad that nobody bought them.

If I'm a billionaire, or have a dedicated mechanics crew, I ask you how much would it be to build one of these now adays? (With amphibious construction obviously...)

WOW

3:23, what plane is that?

@drmartyn - Just try landing one of these at Alice Springs or Mount Isa.

The fuselage makes me thing of a KC-97 if it were a flying boat.

Why not use the beauties to help in fighting fire fires in Southern California???

Just bet everybody was just thrilled to be the guinea pigs on that one!

But both the Hercules and the Princess were doomed by modern air travel. Flying boats were obsolete. I wonder if the Navy could have used either plane for fleet support.

It was more a matter of both. Jets coming of age, and large air strips left over from WW2 making cheaper land planes (such as the Connie and DC-7) a lot more useful for getting into places the flying boats couldn't, doomed them.

we need bigger flying boats

It wasn't the jet age which doomed the Princess flying boat. She was no match for the Constellations and DC-7s either. Politicians are not technologically educated and invariably make the wrong decisions when it comes to technology. (I loved the guys cranking up the engines by hand. Like ancient Rome).

:( WoW, how a sad of an ending.............. However same thing happened to the Spruce Goose in the USA..... :(

@daveh3997

5 жыл бұрын

Not quite. Hughes' H-4 Hercules (Spruce Goose)test flight lasted only 26 seconds at 70 ft (21 m) off the water at a speed of 135 miles per hour (217 km/h) for about one mile (1.6 km). Princess actually flew The Princess' first flight lasted 35 minutes, which included a complete circumnavigation of the Isle of Wight.

I think it was another outrageous example of nationalised industry not paying attention to real world market conditions.

@HalNordmann

3 жыл бұрын

They just tried to place their bets on something different than the others were doing, and it has shown itself to not be profitable. Private companies do this all the time.

all suders princess damage? OR stay in ather lanwitches a pricess plane?

How sad an ending..................................

2020?

@cluta

4 жыл бұрын

no

They may have been intended for 200 people but these people would not have been crammed in like sheep on a jetliner... the insides of these thigs were like stately homes, not passenger compartments. If they had modern seat plans, the size of them suggests they could carry 500+ people with ease.

@davidtompkins3291

6 жыл бұрын

Saw these beautiful flying boats on a day trip to the IOW by paddle steamer from Bournemouth about 1952/3, before the engines were fitted.

beautifal flying boat, do bad they where far to late

The Saro was a dinosaur, in many aspects, simple as that. It was of Empire, Cairo,(Sunderland)?.. I, just wonder what migh thave been said of this aeroplane.

Its unfortunate they didn't save any of them. Would have come in handy with all these wildfires...

such a shame that such an awesome plane be useless. It seems like some of the most promising designs turn out to fail. If it had been released before the war, (probably with less powerful engines) it would have been hugely successful

And it was pushed out BY PEOPLE?! Wow.

Before people ridicule the flyingboats,think about this. lf someone hadn't had the guts to design,build and fly these leviathans all those years ago,where do you think the aviation industry would be today. Planes like Dornier DoX, Mars, Princess were a natural part of the developement of the aircraft we fly in today that goes far beyond commercial viability. They were the test beds for the giant air frames of today.So,next time your up there,think about that and thank god someone built them.

You wouldn't mind these politicians if they would "in fact" reduce their decision making to "dollars and cents", Instead you get nothing, neither fish nor fowel, just a desperate dash for illusory gains that get us nowhere. Neither fiscal stability or simple pride in a countries own handiwork. But, it's been like that since day one. > : )) Happy new Year!!

Any 2020

@cluta

4 жыл бұрын

no

They should never, ever destroy all examples of any aeroplane. Why the hell couldn't one be put in storage? Think of all the vacant hangars as the RAF and aero industry contracted.

use windows explorer and real player, you can then download

Overwhelming disappointment, in that the Aircraft was not placed into service, by anyone!! I would have liked to believe, some bloody Official might have demanded the Saunders-Roe Princess be placed in Service and tasked with recouping the cost of £10,000,000.00!!!

@daveh3997

5 жыл бұрын

They would never have recouped their costs. Better, faster airliners were already in service. By the time someone found a potential use for them, their airframes were corroded to the point they were useless.

I think it was a great idea that these planes were built to take off from the sea, obviously to save building an airport and causing outrage from hippies! It should of carried on this way!

As far as stupid and random comments go that takes the prize.

So sad

I don't get it! Look: You have a plane 80-90% done. It would be very cheap to then put it in service, you are looking at just a few million dollars. But no, they decide to start a completely NEW program, that costs a few 50 or 60 million dollars. How is it cheaper to start something newer, if all you have to do is continue with something you've already built?

@diabeticalien3584

7 жыл бұрын

***** Hm, yes I guess.

@hoppinonabronzeleg9477

7 жыл бұрын

Same thing happened in 2010 when the tories cut up th enearly finished Nimrod fleet. Now if Gordon Brown had stepped aside. The Lib Dems could have made the coalition with Labour, under a new leader, and they'd have saved th efleet. But it was not to be

@pierstheoneandonly

4 жыл бұрын

@@hoppinonabronzeleg9477 The old Nimrod was outmoded and well past its time. If you want to inculpate a political party for sharp dealing, how about the categorically treasonous action of a Labour pol who gave the Soviets a crated Bristol jet engine? A leaking of top secret technology which gifted the totalitarian regime a hand-up to threaten the West.

Just goes to show that romanticism doesn't sell tickets...

@pierstheoneandonly

4 жыл бұрын

In context of the UK, flying boats came about to serve a specific purpose: that of being able to land on sea, lakes, or rivers in far-flung regions of an empire.

Yeah, they were replaced with REAL planes that take off on runways!

Wonder what did happen to them? What a waste! Just like the Spruce Goose.....I agree....retrofit them and bring them back....

Princess, Brabazon....and after that, Britain still believed that it would be able to compete with the United States having built before their small and slow-moving comet. The Americans released their 707 just when it made sense

@davekp6773

6 жыл бұрын

Max Almazov Post war Britain, nearly bankrupt by the Second World War, still managed to design, build and fly a fully pressurised jet airliner despite the governmental meddling and it is universally recognised to be one of the most beautiful, inspirational aircraft ever built (the nose lives on with the 787). Of course it was going to be difficult to compete with the Americans and their vast wealth even after a costly war in two theatres. I do not understand why there is a need to denigrate the efforts of brilliant designers and engineers (describing the worlds first jetliner as small and slow moving Comet) rather than accepting that the result of their hard work was a pioneer and a ground breaker. Yes, with the benefit of hindsight we can easily criticise the aircraft for example, the square windows was a fatal design decision (not much was known about metal fatigue on pressurised aircraft at high altitude), but the research and investigation (at the time was ground breaking and revolutionary and paved the way for modern aircraft investigation) ultimately has lead to safer aircraft. Also, lets not bring sales as the only measurable mark of quality, this is the equivalent of saying one pop group must be better than another because they sold more records.

Oh, Mr. Logic? Lets first go over the fact that money is made up worthless paper and depending on what country it is from it may also be backed by absolutely no physical worth. Ie: The former gold standard for the US$ Moving along.. WATER isn't always calm and depending on the weather it could make for very risky landings unlike A RUNWAY!! Everything comes from the earth, so "ALL" physical things on this planet are essentially free. Id appreciate it if you thought before you typed next time :)

boat should not fly, it costs too much

Criminal

Oh yea...the comet. The plane that kept falling out of the sky and killing people.

@davekp6773

6 жыл бұрын

Y6packdan You must be thinking of the DC-10, an aircraft with far too many design defects leading to unnecessary deaths. Badly designed cargo doors, badly protected hydraulic lines....at least the Comet was a worlds first and consequent design defects were known only after the event. Both the Comet and the DC10 were re-designed and both ended their days much loved by pilots and passengers alike, so quit the cocky attitude because you just embarrass yourself.

what a stupid idea for an airplane. no wonder airbus builds such junk.