It's strange that under friendly conditions, these ships had a habit of burning, but during WWI, the RAF had difficulty at first bringing raiding Zeppelins down

@stejer211

2 жыл бұрын

It must be a conspiracy!

@randomuser2461

2 жыл бұрын

@@stejer211 Probably was.

@MrChainsawAardvark

2 жыл бұрын

Relative to the size of the thing, the machine-guns make very small holes, and the rate of gas escape is not particularly fast. Furthermore, inside the gasbag, there isn't enough oxygen to support combustion - and even with a leak, it takes a while to get a proper mix for a conflagration. Combined with some safety release valves - well flammability is not much more of a concern than a 747 with thousands of gallons of jet fuel. Everything else about the airship though - is a lot more fragile.

@mikekemp9877

2 жыл бұрын

the hidenburg according to a history show i watched was quite safe as regards the gas bags.its downfall was a new paint they used on the fuselage.one spark either at docking or lightning caused it to go up with the bags then exploding.they did a reenactment with a scale model and exact spec paint.it was frightening to see how fast it went up! and from a tiny spark! much like the cladding used on the grenfell tower in london recently that turned it into a death trap!

@_NguyenHoangLong-kg6ko

2 жыл бұрын

Bullets unlike ones in American Movie, dont ignite or create spark when come into contact with metal let alone gasbag made of intestine, the size of the bullet is also small so holes on the gasbag probably wasnt fatal.

This is family history for me - the Chief Coxswain George ‘Sky’ Hunt was my great uncle and he died when, having actually escaped from the wreck, he went back into the inferno to try to rescue his best friend. I represented the family at the 85th anniversary commemoration of the disaster at the mass grave and memorial to the victims in Cardington, Bedfordshire, not far from the huge sheds where R100 and R101 were built.

@mycroft1905

2 жыл бұрын

R100 was constructed at Howden, the former RNAS airship station near York.

@smiffy1947

2 жыл бұрын

@@mycroft1905 Of course she was - I stand corrected.

@mboyer68

2 жыл бұрын

What an honor to represent your brave Great Uncle! Cheers from the US!

@voornaam3191

2 жыл бұрын

That weird word Cockswain always makes me smile. You daring Brits, you have the guts to use these naughty words, for it is tradition.

@smiffy1947

2 жыл бұрын

@@voornaam3191 Except that the pronunciation of Coxswain is “Cox’n” in the same way that Boatswain is pronounced “Bosun” - two words of naval origin that have no other connotation, daring or otherwise!

Smoking, Asbestos and Hydrogen, sounds like a dream flight

@testaccount4191

2 жыл бұрын

don't forget fine dining

@davidhollenshead4892

2 жыл бұрын

The type of lighters used in the German smoking rooms was similar to those on autos, so they couldn't ignite the tobacco but they could get it to smolder. So smoking wasn't the big fire danger, but lightning was...

@Tuberuser187

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidhollenshead4892 You don't even need something smoldering to make Hydrogen ignite, just something hot or the tiniest, weakest static spark that would need very sensitive detectors to measure. It also always *will* absolutely leak, especially with the tech of the day because it will slip between the actual atoms of anything containing let alone the sealants and materials back then. There are reasons things like Hydrogen are not used much as fuels outside of things like fuel cells in space flight, its a nightmare fuel, literally.

@slome815

2 жыл бұрын

​@@Tuberuser187 Thats not exactly right, hydrogen in space flight is not rare at all. The centaur upper stage has been using it since the 50's, The saturn 5 used it for all it's stages except the first stage. The space shuttle used it for it's main engines, and SLS will use it. If you want to look at nightmare fuels, just look at all the hypergolic fuels used in space flight or the lovely toxic fuels like the hydrazine used for the EPU in F16's. It's also not as easily ignited as you say, while a air/hydrogen mixture does indeed ignite very easily, pure hydrogen (like in the gas bags) will not ignite, nor will low concentrations, (you need at least 20% hydrogen in air for it to ignite, compared to the 2% of propane or lpg for example). This is one of the reason why they were almost impossible to set on fire by fighter planes during WW1, at least until the invention of incendiary bullets. They would sometimes crash land because of the sheer amount of holes shot in them, but thats about it. It's also notable that there are way more airships that crashed because of wind or storm then there are that went up in flames. If you want to look at a succesfull airship you don't have to look further then the the Graf Zeppeling, it flew almost 2 million km and was in the air for 700 days. It was in service from 1928, and was only retired after the Hindenburg disaster. By that time air travel was also becoming a better option even for long distance flights. Hydrogen is also not nearly as likely to leak through materials as helium is, while hydrogen is a smaller atom then helium, hydrogen gas is a diatomic molecule (H2), while helium is just atomic (helium does not form He2, it's just He atoms moving about). Leakage was never a problem during normal operation on a airship, since it was acually necessary to vent hydrogen to compensate increased buoyancy from fuel consumption.

@Tuberuser187

2 жыл бұрын

@@slome815 I said it was rare "outside spaceflight", not rare in space flight.

Just gonna throw this out there : the visuals in this video are absolutely mind blowing. Aside from archival footage, the whole blueprints and 3D models used are really serving the narrative of the documentary. Absolutely zero regrets to be a subscriber. Amazing story telling, voice over, use of visuals and editing skills. Hats-off sir. Cherry on top is the shout out to Bill Hammock, The Engineering Guy at the end.

@millomweb

2 жыл бұрын

I will add my comment here. This is a great video but the images interfere with the smooth running of the audio - having to pause frequently to properly view images interrupts the audio. Possibly bizarrely, I have knowledge of Walney where the Mayfly 'didn't' - I believe a gust of wind blew the ship sideways as it was emerging from the building causing the collapsible side of the ship to fail on impact with the doorway of the building. As for Cardington - the 2 sheds are still there and have been sporadically maintained - with the framework cleaned off with angle grinders sending sparks fair distances into a nearby car park damaging car paint. The car park belongs to the DVSA and the buildings are where books and guides on driving are written - including The Highway Code !

@skysunknownheroes

2 жыл бұрын

yup the quality of his videos are great! tho, a fair warning, enjoy it while it lasts, sooner or later this channel would probably bombard the viewers with Nebula subscriptions to everyone and their mom

@jimdavison4077

Жыл бұрын

Yes, now that you mention it this channels videos use of archival footage and not CGI from video games and such makes it so much more enjoyable. Nothing more annoying in a history video that a bunch of artificial images showing the creator was to lazy to piece together the mountain of stock archive footage.

The fact that the R. 101 and the Hindenburg had the same metal sure was a twist for me.

@stevemastnick5034

Жыл бұрын

I just learned that a few years ago. Both the R101 and the Hindenburg were magnificently beautiful ships.

The R100 design team included Barnes Wallis, the R101 essentially used an enlarged R100 frame and Barnes Wallis had doubts about it's strength and when the 14 metres was added he again expressed his concerns. When R101 departed Cardington the altitude was about 25m ASL, just to the South East is Hammer Hill about 4km at about 80m ASL, R101's lift was so poor it failed to clear the hill. A gondola gouged the hill and the furrow was still visible in 1981 when I visited the site.

@brober

2 жыл бұрын

Wow. Truly a led zeppelin.

@eleventy-seven

2 жыл бұрын

Also the R100 used Aluminum in it's frame and the R101 because of it's unusual design change used cheaper but heavier alloy with steel and aluminum compounding the weight problems. The maker of this video is being polite. Almost all of the problems were the same as all projects when politician's make unreasonable demands and override sound engineering practices with changes along the way. The 100 was a success but was hidden away to prevent the failed 101 from more embarrassment. At least those who were at fault paid the ultimate price by being aboard her. There are many sources of info regarding this debacle. It reminds me of the F-35 as far as political will overriding common sense.

@ZGryphon

2 жыл бұрын

Nevil Norway, Wallis's deputy who took over as chief engineer of R100 when Wallis left the project--and who would go on to fame under a pen name as the novelist Nevil Shute--spends a fair number of column inches on the R100 project, and the political mess that was R101, in his memoir _Slide Rule._ He, too, had grave reservations about the corners being cut by the R101 team, but they were ignored when he tried to raise them to the Air Ministry, because he was, after all, working for the competition.

@johnwolf2829

2 жыл бұрын

@@ZGryphon Socialists never respond well to criticism. Not then, not now. Honestly, there are land mines can can handle more pressure, and do less damage than those people.

@hernanposnansky4830

2 жыл бұрын

Yes Nevil Shute Norway wrote an accurate account of the development of both Airships. Unfortunately his book Slide Rule as you said ,is hard to find. But very informative about the Industry at the time and technically correct, as he was himself involved with the stress analysis of the 100 which he describes in detail, A good book for engineers.

Iron Maiden (Bruce Dickenson) wrote a 20 minute masterpiece about the R101's last day, called "Empire of the Clouds." It's an amazing song, and if Bruce's cancer treatment hadn't been as effective as it was, it might have been the last Iron Maiden song ever written. The Engineering Guy channel (professor of engineering) also wrote a book about the R101 and did several presentations on the airship as well.

@ackelcurns4814

2 жыл бұрын

i love that song! it does a great job of telling the life story of the R.101! it's such a great song to listento!

@Lehr-km5be

2 жыл бұрын

Amazing song, in my opinion the very best done by Iron Maiden ever. Simply love it!

@chatteyj

2 жыл бұрын

Did Led Zepplin do a song about it?

@Nausica112

2 жыл бұрын

my favorite on that album!!!

@tomyrody4412

2 жыл бұрын

The whole intro is beautiful, it reminds me of the title screen of many JRPGS

Your channel is one of KZread’s hidden gems. Very interesting content.

The Iron Maiden song"Empire of the Clouds"is a moving and powerful telling of the story of this airship

@BrettonFerguson

2 жыл бұрын

Let me guess: "Empire of the clooooouuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuououououds!" (Repeat 12 minutes)

@hammondpickle

2 жыл бұрын

@@BrettonFerguson Oddly enough it's not. I'm not a fan of Maiden but my wife is and plays me the song quite often when she's drunk (she likes it). It's basically roughly five minutes of singing followed by about ten minutes of guitar solos, drum solos, and guitar solos. I've not stayed awake long enough to find out what happens after that.

@joro5748

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the hint! I just checked the lyrics. A great combination of facts and poetry. Next, I'll listen to the song.

@TheAllAroundMan

2 жыл бұрын

@@BrettonFerguson it's actually 18 minutes

@DagarCoH

2 жыл бұрын

@@BrettonFerguson Let me add that apparently, you have no idea who Iron Maiden are and what kind of songs they make. It's a good song, even for non metal fans.

Although airships were inherently dangerous, (given the available technology of the era) I'd love to have had the opportunity to see one, even travelled on one - perhaps the R100 rather than the R101. RIP to everyone who died in all airship accidents - true pioneers.

@datadavis

2 жыл бұрын

What's not safe about flying on thousands of cattle intestines glued together holding hydrogen gas?

@georgethompson1460

2 жыл бұрын

@@datadavis about as safe as relying on thin canvas sheets to keep you aloft.

@Lucius1958

2 жыл бұрын

My father was about 10 years old when he saw the R100 arrive in Montreal: we had some photos of it in a family album. As for myself, I saw one of the Goodyear blimps at Johnnycake Field in CT; that was impressive enough in itself.

@arnbo88

2 жыл бұрын

Try www.zeppelin.nt-de . This modern age short (75m) rigid airship uses a carbon fiber/ aluminium air frame along with helium filled gas bags. Short 45 minute flights over southern Germany are 380 Euros. Not quite the same design as 100 years ago but much safer. I doubt that we will ever see long range airships again but rather only joyrides in blimps and balloons. A modern aircraft can fly non-stop 14,500 km in 17.5 hours and cost $1000 USD return. Our ancestors could only dream of international travel like this.

@flybobbie1449

2 жыл бұрын

Still not safe, we had Virgin airships for a few years at Halfpenny Green airfield. One day one tried to land, then a short storm dumped snow on it. They decided to fly on to next stop, but it crashed on Clent Hills.

The Tragedy is that R100 got scrapped and there was no problems with it.

@hurri7720

2 жыл бұрын

There were problems and it didn't compete even with smaller German airships.

@hernanposnansky4830

2 жыл бұрын

Peter Brazier The R 100 completed a successful flight to Canada and back as described by Nevil S Norway

@hurri7720

2 жыл бұрын

@@hernanposnansky4830 , True, and almost surprising, isn't it. But it was too litle and much too late. Nothing to weep about, the time of the airships was approaching it's end. No need to claim the British was any good at it either.

@hurri7720

2 жыл бұрын

@@hernanposnansky4830 , Nevil was too involved to be honest, try instead the Wikipedia. "The end of the British airships The tale of the design of R100 and its claimed superiority to R101 is told in Shute's Slide Rule: Autobiography of an Engineer, first published in 1954. Although flawed and not quite as overwhelmingly superior as Nevil Shute Norway implied, R100 represented the best that conventional airship technology in Britain had to offer at the time.[citation needed] R101 suffered in comparison partly because of its many groundbreaking but ultimately dubious innovations, and also because of the weight of its diesel engines. In lifting efficiency, both dirigibles were inferior to the smaller LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin.".

@spaceranger3728

2 жыл бұрын

@@hurri7720 I thought it was interesting how, in Slide Rule, the engineers seemed more concerned about fire hazard of the aviation gasoline that was needed to power the engines than they were of the hydrogen.

When my dad was a small boy he saw R101 at no great height on a test flight over Coventry. He remembered waving at the crew in the control car who saw him and they waved back. He was later taken to Cardington by his grandfather (by motorcycle) and saw R101 on the mooring mast. His lifelong interest in aviation began at this point and he subsequently flew fighter jets.

Thanks for the recognition of the magnificent L59 (LZ-104) and Captain Bockholt. Things like the rings without wires had been tried by Schütte-Lanz in Germany in 1916-1918, and while some things there innovated were quickly adapted by the builders others did not.

Incredible accurate and great footage as well! Please keep up this quality, even if it takes longer to produce. We don't need another 'Dark Skies' on KZread...

@TheCommissarIsDead

7 ай бұрын

Question,what’s wrong with dark skies? I haven’t watched that group of channels in a while

Important to remember that R100 designed by Barns (bouncing bomb) Wallace never had an accident but was scraped due to the the R101 tragedy.

@legitbeans9078

7 ай бұрын

I hate when things get scarped

Amazing video! A video on the harrier (callsign ZA176) that landed on a cargo ship (Alraigo incident) would make my dreams come true! And expect to see me here on every video! Keep up the outstanding work!

@PaperSkiesAviation

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you, Helen! Glad you liked it! Alraigo incident is now in my list. And I wonder why it wasn't there yet. Great story! Thx for reminding.

@testaccount4191

2 жыл бұрын

That poor pilot got screwed afterwords

Also: USS Akron and USS Macon were awesome! The loss of both ships had more to do with poor operational planning and Navy brass not fully grasping the limitations of airships than any design flaw (though I will concede that the tail framework of both airships was substandard).

R101 was part of a competition in Airship designed envisioned by Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald. The other design, the R100, was build by Private Companies. Among those who helped build the R100 was a young Nevil Shute Norway, better known as Nevil Shute, author of the 1957 Nuclear War book On The Beach

I gave up my job at the helium factory. I won't be talked to in that tone.

@goawayleavemealone2880

2 жыл бұрын

Groan.

It takes a lot of guts to fly an airship...

@na3044

2 жыл бұрын

Enter the Imperial German Navy Airship Detachement: "I have an idea, let's leave the parachutes and the reserve fuel at home and go bomb London!" The DELAG operated civillian passenger-ships before ww1, and the germans frequently used them for recon and bombing missions. And that was 15 years before R-101. They housed the ships in gigantic halls, some of which were actually able to be rotated into the wind.

@futurepig

2 жыл бұрын

@@na3044 I suspect you missed my point

@na3044

2 жыл бұрын

@@futurepig Well damn, I guess you're right. takes a lot of the other kind as well though

@futurepig

2 жыл бұрын

@@na3044 I was just being silly. Of course, it also takes courage. And cow intestines.

@na3044

2 жыл бұрын

@@futurepig Sorry, english idioms are hard.

I have watched literally hundreds of documentaries about the Hindenburg, not once was I ever told that it was made, at least in part, from a British crashed air ship. Amazing research. Sterling video. Thank you

What a beautiful little film .... lovely historical clips and great new drawings ... VERY informative - well done, and thank you Paper Skies.

The engineer guy audio book over 6 or so hours is absolutely brilliant on a human level and technical. It was free from his site when I listened to it 3 years ago.

1930: what is airship look like in future? 2021: where is future airship?

@davidhollenshead4892

2 жыл бұрын

Airships are making a comeback, due to their ability to fly across the world and deliver heavy cargo, to remain in the sky for months for unmanned survalence, and for carrying heavy loads in & out of remote locations. Expect them to have: Diesel Electric Gensets powering multiple Propellers, Variable Buoyancy Systems that don't require venting Lifting Gas, Either lifting bags of Helium or lifting bags of Hydrogen inside Lifting Gas Bags of Helium, To produce some lift aerodynamically as a lifting body, and a fly-by-wire system that controls the multiple fans like electric thrusters on large ships... Given the costs of heavy Cargo Aircraft, and even greater costs of Sky Cranes modern airships will economical, once someone spends the funds needed to build & certify modern designs...

@chillinthefeelin943

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidhollenshead4892 I sure hope so... I wish to see an airship during my lifetime, that similar to the Hindenburg's majesty.

@Lucius1958

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidhollenshead4892 The combo hydrogen/helium gasbags sound interesting: what would be the minimum amount of helium required to insulate the hydrogen?

@cinegraphics

2 жыл бұрын

2021: Everyone hiding from a virus.

@chatteyj

2 жыл бұрын

@Bill the Welding Sloth We need helium to make funny high pitch sounds at parties, theres no room to be wasting it on air travel.

21:20 We do still build airships, we are one of the few nations that do. There was that arse-shaped airship we were building for the US Navy, the US have since pulled out of the program but the company building it are going ahead and you sometimes see it flying around when it's not slowly crashing into things. It's called the Hybrid Air Vehicles Airlander 10.

@datadavis

2 жыл бұрын

Good luck.

@naturewalks661

2 жыл бұрын

Not slowly crashing into things, fucking lmao.

@sixstringedthing

2 жыл бұрын

"Despite the US Navy cancelling their contract, we are confident of commercial success for this design... as soon as we can get it to stop slowly crashing into things". The marketing department has their work cut out for them it seems.

Finally, some light on one of the most forgotten yet one of my favorite airships

I watched a video the other day about tower crane operators. I'm trying to decide which would be a more intimidating way to start your workday; climbing 100 meters up a rickety ladder inside a swaying metal tower to get to the crane cab, or climbing 3 meters down a vibrating ladder 500M above the ground to get into the engine cab with the roaring diesel. I suppose it doesn't really matter... it's not the height of the fall that's the problem, it's the sudden stop at the end. As an electrician I'm not unfamiliar with working at heights, but yeah... no thanks! In terms of critique: well researched, wonderfully produced, and your accent is a pleasant change from the British/American voiceovers, very pleasing to hear. Thanks for the videos! Edit: And thank you for the audiobook link too! :D

@K.A.T.W.M

2 жыл бұрын

I’m a tower crane operator and I’d never EVER climb down a three meter vibrating ladder into a cramped Diesel engine.

Interesting vid thanks for posting. Another British Airship that deserves a mention is the R34 which made the first ever East-West transatlantic flight and also return flight.

@hurri7720

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder what you mean with the "first ever". I believe what you want to say is that it was the first. Germany had a regular transatlantic passenger traffic for many years. "Hindenburg, which began passenger flights in 1936 and made 36 Atlantic crossings." "In the summer of 1931 a South Atlantic route was introduced, from Frankfurt and Friedrichshafen to Recife and Rio de Janeiro. Between 1931 and 1937 the Graf Zeppelin crossed the South Atlantic 136 times."

@sirjames26

2 жыл бұрын

You failed to mention that happened in 1919 just a few days after the first nonstop trans Atlantic flight from Newfoundland by Alcock and Brown. The 1919 R34 flight had 22 RN people on board. That flight started near Edinburgh and as you correctly said they flew back again a few days later.

@nor0845

2 жыл бұрын

@@sirjames26 I didn’t ‘fail’ to mention anything, the subject is airships. I only mentioned the R34 as I thought it may be of interest given the subject of the vid.

Incredibly, the huge hangars where these amazing airships were made are still in existence at Cardington, Bedfordshire. Take a look! Love and peace.

Nevil Shute's autobiography 'Slide Rule' has a lot about the design of R100, and the politics between the two. Well worth a read if interested in this story.

@TertiaryBrewing

2 жыл бұрын

Really good book that, definitely worth reading if you have any interest in inter-war aviation

@SuperHeatherMorris

2 жыл бұрын

Very much recommended.

@45641560456405640563

2 жыл бұрын

Y The book came to mind as soon as I saw the video but the name of it - and the author- escaped me. Read it many years ago and it wasn't bad. 👍

@georgew2014

2 жыл бұрын

The novel The Airshipmen, by David Dennington, is a fictionalized account of the R101. The focus is on the personalities involved, like Schute, Lord Thomson, and Major Scott. But the politics are just below the surface.

This is already an outstanding channel - you've really hit the ground running. I only discovered your channel a day or two ago and I've already been spreading the word. I look forward to seeing whatever you come up with next.

Interesting would be to experience a flight on such giant. Successful flight :) thank you for your video. 👏👏👏

This is the third film of yours I've seen. I have to say your delivery, illustrations and occasional flashes of humor/irony have made it a hugely enjoyable and satisfying experience. Subbed

This story was very personal for me too. I inherited several pieces of the airship Akron which encountered a similar fate. Thank you for telling the story.

Built very near to were i live in howden. Think my great great grandparents were involved in the construction. Nothing much left of it now, although you can still seen the remains of the sidings at howden Station that used to branch off to the airship complex

If you can find the Neville Shute book, "Slide Rule" it is very much a great read about the R.100/101project.

@nafs53

2 жыл бұрын

I think Neville Shute actually worked at Cardington on the R101.

@AlanTheBeast100

2 жыл бұрын

@@nafs53 I believe so since the book is his personal life story (in parts) and the detail in there on the airship side could only come from an insider. I haven't found the book yet - buried in the downstairs guest room somewhere....

@firstlast4413

2 жыл бұрын

@@nafs53 You have got it backwards; Nevil Shute Norway (his actual name, as an aeronautical engineer) helped design the R-100, not the R-101. 'Slide Rule' is a fabulous book, and pulls no punches about the incompetence and political BS in the the government airship program which were responsible for the disaster to the R-101.

@hernanposnansky4830

2 жыл бұрын

Nick Shaw No he did not . His work was building the R-100 as stress engineer and later as chief engineer

@georgew2014

2 жыл бұрын

@@nafs53 Schute worked on the R100. The two teams received updates on each other's work, which is how Schute knew that the R101 had serious flaws.

As a kid I used to always wonder why airships went extinct, as they were such neat technology. Then as I got older I learned that they were never safe... though that said, I'm sure that with modern tech they could be made significantly safer, there's just little incentive or reason to make one other than as a luxury transport.

@arahman56

2 жыл бұрын

Its the economics that stands in the way, can't really make an airship that's both safe and economical enough to hit a midpoint between cruise ships and airplanes.

@lemondeepfried

2 жыл бұрын

Modern airships are extremely safe, and small ones are still built. They just aren't built on anything approaching the scale of these behemoths for economic reasons. No one wants the combination of both higher cost and slower cruising speeds for any sort of commercial application.

@pepebeezon772

2 жыл бұрын

Even then it can't compete with helicopters

@badbeardbill9956

3 ай бұрын

They’re plenty safe. Especially when well designed and operated. That was never the issue - even after the Hindenburg disaster a second Hindenburg-class airship was built and a third was under construction when WWII broke out. What actually killed airships, or more accurately accelerated their death, was WWII. During the war the Zeppelins were scrapped for material. Meanwhile, you had some countries building hundreds of thousands of aircraft during the war, and producing a similar number of pilots. In the immediate post war world, the sheer number of transport aircraft, airfields, and experienced pilots and ground crew globally made any alternative a non starter. Even the great ocean liners, which had experienced problems in the Depression, would begin to be drastically outcompeted by conventional airplanes. Airships could have potentially become a larger industry though aircraft would have eventually taken over regardless. The immediate post WWI era actually saw a great opportunity for airship travel in Europe, and the Zeppelin company was building passenger airships. However, when the Treaty of Versailles came into effect they had to hand them over to Entente militaries, and wouldn’t get to build another Zeppelin for years. They did try though, and for a short time there was trans-Atlantic Zeppelin service. The Hindenburg and the Graf Zeppelin airships made a number of flights across the Atlantic. Yes, the Hindenburg disaster was not its maiden flight.

Airships are so cool, I have a blow up model of the Goodyear blimp hanging in living room, had it for like 10 years

@krashd

2 жыл бұрын

Surely you've had the entire house for ten years and not just the living room?

@alexwest2573

2 жыл бұрын

@@krashd well I like to take my old living room with me when I move, makes decorating easier lmao

@krashd

2 жыл бұрын

@@alexwest2573 RC enthusiasts always have planes, some have helicopters, but I'd love an RC blimp. Considering you can buy a tank of helium for birthday balloons and even buy hydrogen in some places it would be a costly but fun hobby.

@alexwest2573

2 жыл бұрын

@@krashd a rc blimp does sound really cool, I could never get the hang of rc helicopters, I used to really like the big styrofoam gliders they use to sell, I had a blast with those and the rockets they sold at the hobby shops that had parachutes, I lost one on the top of a church one time because the wind grabbed it while floating down

@meetoo594

2 жыл бұрын

@@krashd You can buy RC blimps, they are actually really cool. A mate of mine used to have one that just floated around his living room and you could steer the thing around (very slowly) with a little infrared controller. It was great fun trying to land it on top of things or steer it between chairs etc because it was so unwieldy to accurately control. Very relaxing toy. It was about 3ft long and looked like a Zeppelin. Cost around £150 back in the 90`s.

The two hangars at Cardington are a sight to see, I drive past them frequently and can only imagine what those bohemoths must have looked like. Those hangars are HUGE!

Helium also wasn't available, as the US had a monopoly on its production (as a byproduct of natural gas production) and Congress banned its export under the Helium Act (1925) in order to ensure, among other things, adequate supply for US navy airships. In the 1920s and 1930s the navy experimented with rigid airships for long range reconnaissance, and during World War II large numbers of nonrigid airships (blimps) were used for anti submarine patrols on both coasts.

"To ride the storm to an Empire of the Clouds. To ride the storm, they climbed aboard their silver ghost. To ride the storm to a kingdom that will come. To ride the storm and damn the rest oblivion. Royalty and dignitaries, brandy and cigars, gray lady giant of the skies, you hold them in your arms. The millionth chance they laughed to take down His Majesty's craft. To India they say, magic carpet float away. An October fateful day..." - Iron Maiden "Empire of the Clouds"

Fantastic documentary with amazing video footage. Two very interesting books on the subject I read many years ago were "The Millionth Chance" by James Leasor (R101 bias) and "Slide Rule" an autobiography of Neville Shute , who was also a design engineer on the R100 project.

Your illustrations are beautiful and very well detailed! The way you explain how this tech worked is amazing.

Wow. Fantastic work. Lots of very interesting details I just hadn't known before. Excellently put together. Please make more. Your channel is an absolute hidden goldmine! 😊

21:30 There is a single reason that lead to the R101 crash: Government meddling. If the designers of the R101 had been given the time to test the ship instead of being pushed to do a mission they could not accomplish, this may not have happened.

I can only imagine in horror when the first German Zeppelin air attack happened in Hull 1915. Unseen it slipped in during nightfall and dropped bombs which was to be the first aerial attack on British soil. People must have been in utter panic.

I like that you included that part about where the scrap went to. There was a whole after story of psychic events around the R- 101 that involved Arthur Conan Doyle and several other well known people. I saw your video last night about the Yu- 104 crash and after only a few minutes I subscribed. Your work work is fascinating, really detailed and professional. I enjoyed very much so far and will now catch up on all. Thanks

I've watched all of your videos and I love the presentation, factual tid-bits and choice of music and footage. You put great passion into them and it shows. Subscribed, keep them coming.

Your thumbnails are some of the best I’ve ever seen. Great thumbnail for a great video!

Hindenburg: I am the most tragic airship disaster in history R-101: hold my engine... oh... sh-t

@die1mayer

2 жыл бұрын

Hindenburg was a amazing machine which performed 63 successful flights with a flight distance of 335,000 km, it was a tragedy because its destruction was caused by crew error and the German Zeppelin Transport Company was moving towards profitability with Graf Zeppelin and Hindenburg. The R-101 was a piece of shit which couldn't even survive its first flight, a deeply flawed machine.

@ZaHandle

2 жыл бұрын

@@die1mayer Zeppelin transport company has more in common with modern computers than their zeppelins does

@die1mayer

2 жыл бұрын

​@@ZaHandle Imperial Airships have more in common with Chinese Knock-Offs.

@Logovanni

2 жыл бұрын

@@die1mayer unsurprising attitude coming from Someone displaying a reichsadler.

@callumwilliams1449

2 жыл бұрын

@@die1mayer A deeply flawed machine describes the entirety of airships and the tragedy is the loss of life, not the loss of the airship and the loss of profits for the company, what the hell? You're pretending the Hindenburg was anything other than that because it made 63 flights? Just over a year since it's first flight it was destroyed and kill over half on board. The Hindenburg and all airships like it were disasters.

Your videos are better that the ones I see on my TV. You don't take all the science out (because it's "boring") and you don't replace research by actors, staring moodily through a rain-streaked window :-) You also have a wonderful narration-voice. Oh, and you don't pad them out to 60 minutes by telling us the life-story of every single passenger on board, so well done you.

@1:33 don't think I've ever seen this footage until now- actually took me a few moments before I knew what I was looking at, very cool 👍🍻

Read 'The Millionth Chance' by James Leasor. The best account I have ever read on this subject. He wrote it in the 1950s when many of the people involved in the project were still alive and even working.

I know about this from the Dr Who 8th doctor audio series from big finish, “Storm Warning”. It’s good to remember these things. Thank you.

@nefariousgremlin7554

2 жыл бұрын

Same here, that's how I learned about the R101

@ 18:20 ... one of those emails in my spambox promising to enlarge my airship. The best line of the week. Thanks, mate!

yall, the picture and explanation of the airships in the sky mixed w airplanes is wild. a fabulous reminder that truth is stranger than fiction. I wish for my fellow Americans that they will see this...for more reason than one...

@owenkegg5608

2 жыл бұрын

As opposed to USA Norwegians?

@kewl851

2 жыл бұрын

@@owenkegg5608 ok, I just realized I said that haha

I had never heard the reasoning behind the choice of hydrogen over helium was based on lifting capability I have always heard it framed as US would not sell other nations like German Helium because they considered it a vital military resource. I am so happy I have found your corner of KZread great channel which I doubt will remain "little" much longer Well Done

@Simon_Nonymous

2 жыл бұрын

Hydrogen was also ever so cheap to produce in the volumes needed - this would have been a good addition to the video - helium really was not an option.

@tkmiller_author

2 жыл бұрын

Helium act of 1925 forbid the export of helium but yes, at any road, hydrogen gave more lift. That said, helium might have been safer. 😊

@jimdaw65

2 жыл бұрын

A chemist writes: Hydrogen is diatomic, whereas helium is monatomic. What that means, in practical terms, is that the helium "molecule" is half the size of hydrogen, and is therefore much more likely to leak. For the scientists among us, 31 picometres vs 53. The other reasons stated still apply, by the way; I'm not trying to start an argument :-)

As usual with Paper Skies, informative and entertaining, outlining a tragedy with lessons that are still valuable today. I have to admit that I did have to stop the video to laugh when he mentioned that the British did not employ an email in their spam folder telling them how to enlarge their airship though!

This is one of the best and most informative videos on airships I've seen. Explains perfectly why in the day they went with hydrogen over helium. Thanks for posting this.

Great production, very interesting to get the extra tid-bits like how the engineers fared tending the engines, and the cost and process of making the hydrogen bags. Well done!

Thank you for another great video. A book also worth reading is Nevil Shute's autobiography 'Slide Rule'. He was a 'computer', (a human calculator), for the R100 project, under Barnes Wallis, whose 'geodetic' contruction was used in its design. He had a lot to say about the failure of R101, especially the way the designers were boxed in by political decisions.

@nilsnilsnilsify

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed, that was a great book. Mr. Shute definitely had strong ideas about the role of private industry vs. government. Also just a great engineer's story.

This is a well-researched and presented story. I remember a succinct and similar article about this in the Airfix magazine in the early-to-mid 1960s. This contractual and constructional debacle was one of the main things to convince me that Government-led projects were always doomed to be either technological failures or well over budget, or both. I have seen nothing in the UK since to change my mind.

This video wins my most interesting Historical youtube film award. The Narrator is excellent and the film and plan material used is Jaw dropping. Thank you Paper Skies.

That gasbag breakdown is epic! Helium is expensive and when it escapes its basically gone forever. Great info! Hard to believe these were actually used, that boarding is nuts, high risk high reward.

That coincidence between the R101 and the Hindenburg is second only to the eerie Lincoln/ Kennedy one.

@SuperHeatherMorris

2 жыл бұрын

Not sure there is much coincidence between the two, other than they both ended up on the ground. The R101 flew, out of control, into the ground, the Hindenburg caught fire and then sank to the ground.

@steve-ph9yg

2 жыл бұрын

The only coincidence I see is the hydrogen caught fire and exploded in both of them for different reasons.

@SuperHeatherMorris

2 жыл бұрын

@@steve-ph9yg Just a technical point, the hydrogen burned, it did not explode. You will only get a hydrogen explosion if it is fully mixed with air (well, oxygen really) before it is ignited.

im loving this content, thanx very enjoyable .. (Comet ? , avro Tudor ? next ) ive been to the abandoned avro plant recent in my video. shame it got shut down

@PaperSkiesAviation

2 жыл бұрын

I know. It's always very sad when air plants are closing and dying. Especially those that have a long history. To be honest, I wasn't aware about Avro Tudor. I do have Avro Canada Arrow in my list, though. But you gave me something I can search and read about now. Will see, may be I can make a story out of that. Thank you, Richie!

@RichieWellock

2 жыл бұрын

Tudor very unknown but it preceded the comet , started as a prop plane on the same development of the Lancaster bomber, the Tudor would have overtaken the comet except the tragedy of a crash that killed its very famous designer Mr Roy Chadwick C.B.E its a interesting sorry. Ive watched the avro Arrow . brill

@The_Modeling_Underdog

2 жыл бұрын

@@RichieWellock Agreed on the Tudor. Would make for an excellent video, indeed. Those aerodynamic forces. Cheers.

Oh wow. You're really pumping out videos quickly! You're doing great work and I'm sure your channel is going to explode even more than it already did in its (apparently) short life.

Great video, I love the history of the airships. Look for Nevil Shute's "Slide Rule", an account of when he was an engineer working on the building of the R-100, he rode on it to Canada and back. Incredible history!

As a young woman, my mother saw the R101 flying over London on its last flight.

Blew mind when I found out that metal from this airship was used for the Hindenburg construction

This guy does a great job of getting into the details. Second video of his I have watched and have learned so much.

I just found your channel and have been binge watching your videos. You are a amazing story teller and I cannot fathom why you only have 70Kish Subs! Keep it up! This is amazing content!

This is a great video. Although I am very familiar with the history of R101, I loved seeing all this footage. I have been fascinated by rigid Airships since I was a little boy. Not one of my fellow school students or friends could ever understand why. I feel that the even greater tragedy was having the R100 dismantled. So much potential lost to cheap politics.

2:51 wow epic scene of 4 airships taking off at once! in a brief period when airships had more payload than airplanes.

@owenkegg5608

2 жыл бұрын

There are 5 airships taking off in that clip lol.

Wonderful video, well done Bill 👏

Such a well researched and well-composed presentation. Thank you for uploading this.

The successful R100 airship was built by the Vickers Co. at Howden, Yorks. The Chief Designer was one very young (23 years old I believe) brilliant Engineer called Barnes Wallis, who went on to design many other things including the Vickers Wellington Bomber, the Dambusters bouncing bomb and the Tallboy earthquake bomb. Chief Stressman or "Calculator" with his two Assistants (who did all their calculations on slide rules in those days) was one Neville Shute Norway. Later to become co founder and Managing Director of the Airspeed Aircraft Co. Then famous author under the name of Neville Shute. In Neville Shute Norway's autobiography "Slide Rule" Neville describes how ALL the design decisions of the R100 HAD to be vetted by the Air MInistry. However ALL the design decisions of the failed R101 were vetted by the Air Ministry for the same Minster responsible for its design. This was a "socialist" government, lets not forget. The R100 was very successful and made its maiden voyage across the Atlantic to Toronto, Canada and back to Cardington. After the R101 failure it could also have successfully made the voyage to India too, but the Labour Government of the day vetoed that of course and as a symbol of a successful "capitalist" venture vs. a failed "socialist" one, had it scrapped. The Airship shed at Howden was dismantled and transported by road to Cardington where it was reassembled next to the failed R101 shed and the two hangers are still there today.

@richardstuart325

2 жыл бұрын

"Slide Rule" is a superb book, with a very perceptive description of the events and decisions leading to the R101's disastrous end.

@Simon_Nonymous

2 жыл бұрын

As soon as anyone says "this was of course due to socialism" you can, if you wish, disregard anything they say from then on as they might just have a political agenda, let alone debate whether the Labour government of that time could actually be called socialist, with a big S, or even a little one. . Let's just put it this way - how many capitalist/fascist/non-socialist countries made a success out of airships for intercontinental travel in the 20s and 30s. I will buy you a pint of beer for each one who did.

@aeroearth

2 жыл бұрын

@@Simon_Nonymous Comrade Simon Nonymous! Ah yes mark of a true communist! NOWHERE did I say "this was of course due to socialism" Most regrettably I have come to expect that of communists/socialists or whatever they choose to currently call themselves. Misquote people and then "cancel" people opposed to their murderous ideology, as indeed history proves to be true. I am curious. Do the communists pay you to post such misleading comments or do you do it out of a misguided sense of ideology?

@SAHBfan

2 жыл бұрын

Just a minor point, if anyone cares, Barnes Wallis did NOT design the Wellington bomber, despite this misconception being repeated in many publications and sources. His geodetic construction technique was used in five Vickers aircraft designs, I believe, but the actual aircraft designer was Reginald 'Rex' Pearson.

@davidstroup100

Жыл бұрын

BRAVO! Nevil Shute's "Slide Rule" is a must for historians covering this subject. ...a first person account of the "conservative" and successful completion of the contract. R-100 was not perfect, but compaired to its' politically driven rival, and following efforts.... History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. 👍

Seems like combining large vehicles and the term “maiden voyage” is something of a curse for the Brits.

@KebabMusicLtd

2 жыл бұрын

Not necessarily... Being an island race we greatly relied on our sea power and over the centuries there have been many great ships that flew the British flag and lasted long beyond their maiden voyage (including the Cutty Sark, HMS Defiance, The Mayflower, The Dogs Hind Quarters etc) We cetainly aren't the only country to lose an airship or a ship at sea. Indeed, the Titanic was an American owned ship (IMM)

@suburbia2050

2 жыл бұрын

@@KebabMusicLtd What?! No it wasn't, it was owned by White Star Line

I appreciate the context you give of how, in those early days, thinking airships were the way of the future was reasonable based on what they knew.

Magnificent and entertaining instructional video. We so often hear about German and US Navy airships. These British airships are often overlooked. Thank you for all of the hard work that you lovingly put into these wonderful vids.

How *NOT* to conduct a test flight of an experimental aircraft: Load it up with lots of government and industry VIPs and set off for a destination thousands of miles away. 🙄

@owenkegg5608

2 жыл бұрын

An X craft BUILT ENTIRELY BY THE GOVERNMENT. Truly horrifying.

RIP the AN-225...

I had never heard of the R101 or what happened to it until 45 minutes ago, when I stumbled across another video about this Zepplin and watched it. Words fail me. To everyone who died, Rest In Peace.

The author Nevile Shute (On the beach, A town like Alice) worked on the R100 as a "computer" i.e. he calculated the stresses in the "spokes". You should all read his autobiography "Slide Rule" which contains a month by month account of the R100/R101 project, explaining the many pressures which resulted in the R101 failure. For example, the 5 diesel engines were four to go forward and one to go in reverse! So it only had thrust from four. It was a great shame that the successful R100 was scrapped and never given the chance to complete its trial flights and go into service.

Empire of the clouds..

@davekp6773

2 жыл бұрын

Bruce Dickinson’s masterpiece.

Прав был Константин Эдуардович Циолковский, говоря, что космос нужно осваивать с помощью ракет, а воздушный океан с помощью дирижаблей! Так почему капиталисты не хотят строить дирижабли??? Да по тому, что это выгодно народу, выгодно стране, а не лично им! С космических программ они научились переводить потоки в свой карман за счёт фейковых "полётов", а вот с дирижаблями это сделать труднее.

@aquilarossa5191

2 жыл бұрын

That is the big difference huh. Motives for producing. Capitalism produces goods and services to accumulate capital for the private capitalist. If it does not profit the capitalist, the goods and services do not get produced. The alternative is producing to meet the material needs of humans, plus their cats and dogs etc. For example, the western economic reformers who went to post Soviet Russia and liquated so many factories for not being profitable enough, but with little apparent regard for the social impact. Huge numbers of people became unemployed. There was severe hardship. I worked at sea here in NZ with a lot of people who lived in the USSR and the post Soviet Yeltsin era (at sea from 1996-2009). They went to sea for work and sent money home. That's how I know about how difficult the post Soviet Yeltsin years were and how it is better now, e.g., living standards have increased ten fold. The USA openly boasted that their money and subterfuge got Yeltsin elected, i.e., election meddling. Now I am a communist like they usually were, but I recently voted for the slightly socialist NZ Labour Party, because we do not have lots of communists like Russia still has. What surprised me is those crew members talked about the USSR like it was the good old days and were very defensive of it. Media had given me the impression that people hated living in the USSR and celebrated its dissolution. I now get the impression those Soviet people liked some things and not others, while the dissolution of the USSR is often considered a disaster. They did not like the vodka and Cossack dancing stereotype and said Russia is so much more than that. Vodka jokes by online westerners usually intend to denigrate Russians. I think some rich westerners want to own Russia's oil and gas, which is currently mostly owned by the Russian public, as are a portion of the profits, i.e., public revenue for roads, hospitals and schools etc. Almost every country that does that with its oil and gas seems to upset Uncle Sam. The USA seems to want another Yeltsin to hand over all those resources to Wall Street. Socialism gets argued over a lot. Usually the argument is about what it is and if it works or not. Many tend to think that only their definition is right. There have been many types of socialism. Utopian versus Scientific for example. Therefore there is no single definition I think. Socialism is not defined by its methods. It is about what it is trying to achieve. Every type of socialism was trying to solve issues the working class face in a capitalist society and in some cases perhaps create a socialist one if they could win enough public support for it. The proposed solutions and attempts vary a lot, but they were all forms of socialism. People in some countries like the USA tend to conflate socialism with liberalism. A political science misunderstanding usually caused by extremely partisan politics. They are very different things. Liberalism was the ideological weaponry during the Industrial Revolution when the emerging social class it created became the new elites, while the feudal aristocrats lost power. Liberty, equality and fraternity during the French Revolution etc. The people removing heads were generally radical liberals of this new social class. The new elite class were what the French called the Bourgeoisie (capitalists and their political acolytes etc). Liberalism was usually their ideology. It is not socialism. Many right wing parties around the world follow the liberal economic doctrine of laissez-faire for example, i.e., not all liberalism is left wing. In fact it tends centrist, because in capitalist society it is the dominant ideology, because the interests of capitalists tend to dominate politics etc (Marx's pobservation said the dominant culture in any epoch is the culture of its ruling class). Liberalism promised peasants and the working class reforms in order to win their support in places like late 1700s France. Radical liberals were sat on the left of their general assembly, while those who opposed the radical approach to liberalism sat on the right and were what became known as conservatives and reactionaries. Therefore that is how we got left and right wing politics in liberal democracies. Socialism arose out of people not liking what the new elites of capitalism were doing, e.g., terrible conditions for the working class in mines and factories etc. The more radical socialists wanted to overthrow those elites, others wanted reforms, while some wanted to create utopian socialist communities, e.g, Owenites etc. Communism is different again. It is partly about what the world could be like when the capitalist mode of production is superseded due to advances in technology. That process has happened several times throughout human history, so will probably continue to happen. Historical materialism. For example, when the production of goods and services becomes so automated that capitalism's need for labour is reduced to the level that hiring workers is no longer the primary method of production. It would not be capitalism any more. It would have evolved into something else. That's because a capitalist hiring workers to produce commodities is what defines capitalism. It is also how new capital is created in its root form, i.e., productive work creates wealth. Communists want the next mode of production and the way it is governed to not be yet another one based on exploitation of the many by the few, while also meeting all our material needs etc. From each according to ability, to each according to need. Marx, Engels and Lenin said that communists would need to harness capitalism's ability to increase productive forces, in order to supply the needs of society. Communists using capitalism. Many seem to overlook that and go directly to socialism, even communists. China may have noticed that advice though. Many conflate markets and making a profit with capitalism. That is an error too. Capitalism is relativity new, but trade and commerce via markets has existed for thousands of years, as has supply and demand. Communists like a good deal and shiny new stuff as much as the next person. People will probably always trade in some form or another. Communism is also about social classes, their function, and which social class gets to govern and after gaining ascendency in the almost perpetual class conflicts throughout history, e.g., the struggle of the orders in ancient Rome, or the peasants revolt in England etc. It is about how that struggle shapes history. Therefore 'workers unite' and self governing is the antithesis to continuing to be ruled by an elite class according the needs of capitalism, with that status quo being the thesis. Much of the modern world is a synthesis of that effort, e.g., the impact of communism and socialism had on the labour movement and decolonization etc. Dialectical materialism. It is possible that a form of communism will still eventuate, because technological advances will require us to reorganise how society functions. A communistic civilization is a better description. Machines and AI do most of the work to provide us with our material needs, while people get on with enjoying life and doing what interests them, while governing it all democratically without a social elite dominating and exploiting the majority. That is what Marx imagined and he knew that if it could happen, it would take many generations, i.e., it can not happen rapidly after a revolution etc. It can only proceed at the pace of technological progress. In the USA it is proven that corporations and billionaires dominate nearly 100% of political outcomes. The working class has almost zero influence upon governance, apart from being able to vote for candidates mostly preselected by just two parties who mostly serve billionaire donors etc. Those representatives rarely represent the material interests of the working class. The US studies called that plutocracy, not democracy. Princeton and Stanford universities, plus others. How can you self appoint as a champion of democracy when you are not a democracy yourself? The slogan 'money out of politics' is popular there. PS. What is my position on Stalin? It's complicated. I oppose all forms of capital punishment and will argue reasons why that is the correct position to take for a communist. The deaths are a stain on communist history. On the other hand, Stalin's mass industrialization and modernization made the Soviets capable of producing 90% of the war material they needed to destroy 80% of Germany's armies. The Soviets did the most by far to defeat the Nazis and then defeated Japan's largest remaining army, which was based was in Manchuria. If the USSR had been conquered, the Axis would have been very difficult to beat. I am forever grateful to the more than 20 million Soviets who lost their lives in preventing that. No wonder Russians are proud on Victory Day, although those who died were from all over the USSR, not just the Russian SSR. I think CCCP 2.0 can be a good idea in practice, providing it only includes nation states who wish to be in it. It could prosper on the new belt and road etc. Russia and China working together is proving a potent partnership, so hopefully there are no major disagreements that derail it and give Uncle Sam hope of remaining the sole superpower in a unipolar world.

New favorite channel. This is so well done and presented.

Never knew dudes worked in airship's engine bays. Brave (and deaf) engineers. Amazing paper Skies doesn't have more subscribers, quality stuff.

cursed metal

When somebody tells you "this was made by the government" that should be all the warning you need.

@goawayleavemealone2880

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed.

@callummckeown4815

2 жыл бұрын

There are numerous instances where private companies have designed and built something that turned out to be a disaster.

@ConsumerWatchdogUK

2 жыл бұрын

@@callummckeown4815 So what?

This is the first time I've seen this channel. Got to say I really like your style of storytelling and explaining the info

I LOVE THIS CHANNEL. Fascinating history. Thank you. That was a mind blowing fact!

Very good, but I get so tired when videos start "The forgotten....." They are not forgotten. It is a journalistic way of saying 'I have just discovered this. It is a scoop on my part'

Даёшь русские дирижабли! Вместо ненужного "Марса" давайте деньги направляйте на дирижабли!

@aquilarossa5191

2 жыл бұрын

I like the idea of Mars. Perhaps teaming up with China to do it. If the Americans get there first, Hollywood will never stop reminding us. However if Russian and China get there first, Hollywood will make excuses about spying, stealing technology and copying, because of course only they can invent stuff.

This is the second video of yours ive come across i love the animation you've added to them

Excellent video with plenty of footage that I haven't seen before. I live near Cardington and have been inside one of the hangars, they are massive. I always look for the progress of the Hybrid Air Vehicles' blimp that is being built inside the same hanger, but the first production model is still a long way off, I believe. Helium this time around.

The R100 was a better ship.

The R101 reminds me of the trump presidency, it crashed and burned.

@xaenon

2 жыл бұрын

Well, Trump was (IS!) a big bloated gasbag.... and quite volatile.

Wow! The same metal in two crashes. With receipts. Thank you, sir!

Well presented & good source material. Additional reading: "The Millionth Chance" by Lessor. "The Airmen Who Would Not Die". And Sir Peter Masefield's excellent tome.