Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/SIMON to get a special offer. Individual results may vary

@ashestodust2313

2 ай бұрын

video 2 days ago, comment pinned 3 days ago

@allandavis8201

Ай бұрын

Could you define the difference between a “major war” and a “non major war”????, it, in my opinion doesn’t matter if you are actually fighting a war, the bombs, bullets and artillery are just as deadly to the personnel involved. Whether that be land, sea or air it is all dangerous and deadly, the wars and conflicts you quoted were simply wars where people fought and died. Sorry Simon but you dropped the ball on this video, you presented the show in your same concise and professional manner but the script was not up to the standard usually provided to you, it is not that you should not criticise anything or that your facts and figures were wrong but, in my opinion the wording was wrong for this particular show. The point that you made about Britain’s “slow stuttering decline as a major power” is the most on point remark you made, if only the political leadership of the country would see that as well, since the end of WWII the British military has been systematically reduced to the point where we couldn’t even fight our way out of a soggy paper bag, during my 24 years service we were constantly being tasked to do more with less and less, whether it was manpower,equipment or money we were so undervalued, not just by the political leadership but by the civilian population as well, it was the happiest time of my life and I was proud to serve but overall we were let down time and time again by people who only told us what to do but wouldn’t provide us the tools to do it with, and that is shameful and disrespectful.

@delphinazizumbo8674

Ай бұрын

the AI host is better now, but the beard still doesn't look quite right it moves like a solid object, not "hair" pretty good, though the voice is a bit wanky

@firebald2915

Ай бұрын

Put a single tail on the sea Vixen and maybe two angled tails and look at the f22 Raptor. They were on to something. There are others y'all designed that were odd. Mostly after WW1. Same with France. Or Italy. Or the US.

Although I predominantly flew Buccaneers I did do a conversion onto the Vixen. It was a beast but once airborne flew like a thoroughbred. It was a Fleet interceptor and was not intended to "dog fight" although it could turn well. It certainly was not terrible as the title suggests.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

The statistics dont lie, de Havilland made jets with appalling loss rates and mediocre performance, the company became infamous for its jets breaking up in mid-flight.. not just one but all of its jet types.

@yakymua

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeshoo russian, back to your troll farm

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@yakymua Tell me the name of a british jet still in production in the UK?

@marcdornan1454

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Most western jets are made by multi-national consortiums now. What is true is the UK has retained some cutting edge technologies -- 15-20% of the F35 is made by BAE Systems. And we all know Rolls Royce is among the very best engine makers today. Eurofighter Typhoon is probably the only non US one you could say is in production even if that is made by a consortium. The Tempest is in development and when all is said and done what will emerge will likely involve UK, Spain, Italy, Japan. I have no doubt it will be a true 6th Gen aircraft. I truly doubt Russia will ever manage to catch up after it has finished destroying economy. Of course there will be lots of prototypes wilth absurd claims made about their capabilities.

@andrewhotston983

Ай бұрын

​@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke All early jets suffered such losses. De Havilland weren't unique.

I have seen one of these at the fleet air arm museum. I was with my father a former RN aircraft mechanic. When my father saw it he took a good look and then went over to the museums book stall. He proceeded to find a book about the aircraft on display and flipped to the back of the book. "I told them it would never fly again and I was right. They brought it here on a lorry."

@GaudiaCertaminisGaming

2 ай бұрын

Why would they get it in flying condition just to take it to a museum? I’d stick it on a lorry.

@daffyduck780

2 ай бұрын

@@GaudiaCertaminisGaming He had got it airworthy for the base open day. So they could put on a jet display. He got it flying in time but made it clear that it would be its last flight. He was correct but was posted elsewhere so never knew what happened until we came across it in the museum.

Oh Simon, Airplane nerds unite! Yes the Sea Vixen was an underwhelming deathtrap, however across the world as designers were faced with many new challenges...the sound barrier, swept wing technology, early giant radar sets, and really terrible early jet engines it was no worse than the underpowered Vought F7U Cutlass, the deadly stall spin of the MiG 15, or the North American F100 and it's fatal Sabre Dance. Not pretty, but not terrible...I do like the name!

It's hardly a weird looking plane!!! I think it looks gorgeous! Too bad it didn't pan out!

@Rollermonkey1

2 ай бұрын

Yeah, I've always thought it looks really cool, but sadly looking good isn't as important as BEING good.

@guaporeturns9472

2 ай бұрын

It held down the fort till better planes came along. I love it

@DjHixxie

2 ай бұрын

Its a cracking looking plane to my eyes, along with the vampire

@laststraw6734

2 ай бұрын

I like it as well.

@xaderalert

2 ай бұрын

Yeah, I think it looks a lot better than most jets of its time. From certain angles, it has a similar profile to the Phantom, which I've always loved

I don't think the Sea Vixen weird looking. I find it to be a rather beautiful aircraft. Not that I'm in a hurry to go up and crash in one.

@fuckinantipope5511

2 ай бұрын

I mean, weird doesn't mean it can't be beautiful. The Sea Vixen is super weird looking but also beautiful.

@guaporeturns9472

2 ай бұрын

It wasn’t as bad as he made it sound in the introduction either. It held down the fort till better planes came along and replaced it.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@guaporeturns9472 Comparable aircraft of the period could fly Mach 2!!! while this flying coffin couldnt fly supersonic!!!

@guaporeturns9472

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@guaporeturns9472 Simon was very kind to this dismal failure...

The Sea Vixen was the product of a Royal Navy requirement for a all weather day/night jet fighter first proposed in 1946 . The lack of forward firing armament was probably a mistake , but they were not alone with that thinking . It took another war for the Americans to realize that with the F4-Phantom , yet another two crew fighter . The reason behind the navigator/radar operator being enclosed in a concealed compartment was quite simply for better reading of the radar scopes and nav aids. Unlike the Americans and French , the British from conception to service took a long time , so frequently good ideas or designs were outdated when ready for active service. The top speed of the Vixen of 690 mph was impressive for its period. Regarding the accident rate , it was nothing out of the ordinary for early jets . An acquaintance who flew Meteors and Vampires said of the latter . When you are diving at nearly 600 mph and the realization that all that separates you from the outside air is Plywood , does not give a feeling of confidence . A further note upon that subject , The Lockheed F-80 Shooting Star had its baptism of war in Korea . 80% of all of those built were lost in that conflict and nearly half to accidents. Simon has a supercilious attitude that doesn't go down well with me . Unlike he , I am of an age who knew many personally of those who experienced first hand ,what he derides as crap.

@williestyle35

Ай бұрын

I don't think that Simon was unnecessarily harsh in his commentary. And the Sea Vixen was nearly obsolescent when delivered, especially that lack of speed or fuel for loiter time.

@allandavis8201

Ай бұрын

I can’t say I agree with you 100% about Simon and his presentation but I do agree that he did do the aviation industry of the era a disservice with the maligning of the Sea Vixen, the fact is that during the era the number of successful British aircraft produced far outweighs the ones that were not quite up to the mark in terms of being almost obsolete by the time they entered service, but aircraft like the Vulcan and stable companions Victor and to a lesser extent the Valiant were not only groundbreaking but extremely long lived, the most significant advances in aviation usually occurred during combat and, as you pointed out, all the world’s manufacturers had aircraft that were more deadly to the crews than the enemy. Who knows what could have resulted in being designed and manufactured here in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 IF the government’s of the time hadn’t systematically destroyed the companies that had proven to be world leaders in aviation, insisting that the industry amalgamated most of the leading names into one company was the death nell for the industry, something I can never forgive or forget, buying almost exclusively from the United States 🇺🇸 and collaboration with European companies is not how it should have turned out.

@allandavis8201

Ай бұрын

@@williestyle35I don’t disagree with you 100% but I do think his criticism of the aircraft industry and the Sea Vixen was a bit off, I agree that the Sea Vixen was almost obsolete when it first entered service but the fact is that every new aircraft of the era was to a certain extent experimental and still in the infancy of jet powered aircraft, British 🇬🇧 aviation of the era produced more successful aircraft than unsuccessful ones and yet Simon has decided to pick on the Sea Vixen for maligning, perhaps because it is one of the few that lent itself to being criticised.

@richardeames808

Ай бұрын

@@allandavis8201 and let's not forget the E.E. Canberra - so good Martin built them under licence as the B-57

@allandavis8201

Ай бұрын

@@richardeames808 Absolutely 💯 % agree. 👍, thanks for the reply.

To my mind the Sea Vixen is no stranger than the Gloster Javelin. Being 'all weather' the aircraft had to carry a big radar. A radar far bigger than the 'fire control' 'intercept' radar of interceptors like the Lightning. It was not the only British aircraft with an offset pilot cockpit, variants of the Canberra also had them. It showed a visual lineage from the early Swallow prototypes, with additions of a tail. Offset cockpits allowed a better view of the deck in landing. It was never intended for dog-fighting.

@johnp8131

2 ай бұрын

Always thought they were a strange choice for the RAF to adopt a few, as static, ground crew technical training aircraft? Until I was posted to Wyton and had to fit ejection seats to Canberra PR9's. Different positioning of the seats but many similarities especially with both 'Nav' seats.

@WilhelmKarsten

2 ай бұрын

Ironically all of the Swallows crashed.. de Havilland jets had an absolutely appalling loss rate which was the death nail of the company that didn't survive to see this plane enter service!

@smalltime0

2 ай бұрын

@@WilhelmKarsten Yeah, weird how that it had poor low speed handling... like the Komet it was copying. edit: de Havillands crash rate did lead to Martin-Baker making excellent ejection seats

@jpatt1000

2 ай бұрын

I actually like the looks of both the Javelin and Sea Vixen. I wish I could have been at one of the airshows that the Vulcan and Sea Vixen flew at together. Both sound amazing!

@WilhelmKarsten

2 ай бұрын

@@smalltime0 The Komet was introduced into service 15 years earlier!!! Ejection seats saved many pilots but weren't enough to save de Havilland... they went tits-up there year before the sea b!tch entered service!!!

If nothing else, I think it's an aesthetically pleasing airplane.

@WilhelmKarsten

2 ай бұрын

Certainly not aerodynamic looking... because its wasn't

@thelandofnod123

Ай бұрын

Great looking, reminds me of British race cars of the era.

@homolgus1

Ай бұрын

I agree I had a model of the vixen and it was one of my favourites

@hernerweisenberg7052

Ай бұрын

Also it wasnt as bad as the worst jet in history, the Gloster Meteor :D

@thelandofnod123

Ай бұрын

@@hernerweisenberg7052 😮. I would take a Meteor over a He-162 or F-104 any day.

As a USAF brat whose Dad was stationed at RAF Wethersfield in Essex from 1955 to 1958, he used to take me to a model shop on Halstead's High Street. One of the many plastic aircraft models I bought and put together was a DH 110 by FROG. I was always impressed by its off-center cockpit. JJS

A video about Eric 'winkle' Brown RN/FAA would be a great tribute. His take off and landings from aircraft carriers has never been beaten, flew more aircraft types (Including the Me163) than any other pilot.

@Suprahampton

2 ай бұрын

Agreed but that should be on the Biographics channel

@paulqueripel3493

2 ай бұрын

I think the BBC 4 documentary with his interviews is on KZread. He told his life story. Probably better than anything they'd do here.

I was lucky enough to see the last flying Sea Vixen at an airshow, even if by then it still had Red Bull livery

@grahammitchell9415

2 ай бұрын

I saw the same aircraft a few years later when it was returned to its fleet air arm livery practicing for the Bournemouth air show but over Boscombe. It was fantastic, hard to believe it was as old as it was.

@Abo999

2 ай бұрын

Same here, saw it display over Rockingham circuit years ago. Sadly it also managed to 'crash' in 2017, it was belly landed after a display as a hydraulic failure prevented the landing gear from being deployed

Simon, we want to see a (historic) picture of you with a full hair!

@chickenspoonful

2 ай бұрын

What style do you think he had ? 😂

@Shipfixer

2 ай бұрын

@@chickenspoonful I'll bet he tried a mullet back in the day. Imagine that.

@omrilapidot6770

2 ай бұрын

@@chickenspoonful Definitely a mullet .

@cedhome7945

2 ай бұрын

He should get a tattoo of a rabbit on his head and tell anyone who asks about it "it's my hares"

@pf844

2 ай бұрын

Turn your screen upside down !

I remember that old adage "Never buy hair restorer from a bald Barber."

"Then that future would have to involve an aircraft, that, simply, wasn't this one..." Cold

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

The future of aircraft wasnt de Haviland either.. they went tits-up before production started.

@jakubznojemsky4936

2 ай бұрын

Yes it is cold but if you consider crash and death rate of the aircraft future WITH it would be abysmal.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@jakubznojemsky4936 You also must consider that comparable aircraft of this timeframe could fly Mach 2+... while this poor excuse for a plane struggled to stay airborne yet was unable to reach supersonic at all... a shameful and humiliating example of how and why the UK aircraft industry died.

@jakubznojemsky4936

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes. Despite falling victim to canon-less fashion of the time, losing valuable highly trained personel during crashes and getting slowed down to stop breaking apart while airborne it still had some qualities since it might help with development of modern aircraft systems. Still with it's shortcommings I would expect limiting production to few dozen planes and keeping it only experimental for development of better succesor. But considering it was somewhat sufficient lets say it was close enough for time being.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@jakubznojemsky4936 The Sea B!tch was a very costly blunder... it entered operational service for no other reason than britain had nothing better to replace it with, and buying foreign aircraft was seen as a shameful humiliation... thet would eventually happen anyway as the UK aircraft industry imploded before dying out completely.

The blackburn bucaneer would be a good episode 🤞

@errantalgae

2 ай бұрын

its airbrake is certainly something

@steveb6386

2 ай бұрын

Absolutely! The finest strike bomber ever.. Probably. Especially a feature about Redflag 77...Now THAT is a story.

@garethsheppard240

2 ай бұрын

As has been told to me by various RAF types: How-to take off in a Buccaneer- accelerate to take off speed, raise landing gear, decent to operating mission height 😎

@steveb6386

2 ай бұрын

@@garethsheppard240 Story goes that a Bucc groundcrew bod was sipping coffee on the balcony of his third storey flat in Germany not far from the base. He heard the Bucc and then saw it scream between his block and the one adjacent with a green between the two BELOW him. The pilot had decided he'd prove he could fly hands off because the Bucc would fly on the pressure wave and took every opportunity to prove his theory..this was one of those times!

@randalscott7224

Ай бұрын

The Buccaneer would be an excellent choice for a video! Though there wouldn't be much for Simon to indulge in his favourite pastime, "Brit-bashing."

Naval aviation, especially on the small RN carriers, as jets got bigger and heavier, was extremely dangerous. The Sea Vixen had a 38% loss rate. The Supermarine Scimitar lost 51%.

@davidwright8432

Ай бұрын

Who needs enemy fire when the planes regularly self-destruct?

Fighter jets have long been a fascination for me, fond memories growing up in the 90's building AirFix models with my father. Love watching these videos

The US Navy had something very similar looking and performing around that time called the Gutless Cutlass or F7-U1 Cutlass.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

The Mach 2+ F-4 Phantom appeared about the same time as the Sea B!tch... the Cutlass was years earlier.

@georgesheffield1580

Ай бұрын

Similar but the cutlass had terrible powerplants ,the sea vixen had a week airfare and excellent power

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@georgesheffield1580 The Cutlass and the Sea Vixen are not contemporaries. The Cutlass first flew in 1948 and was retired before the Sea Vixen entered service.. the F-4 Phantom is its closest contemporary.

@fritzwrangle-clouder6033

23 күн бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, The Vought F7U Cutlass first flew in 1948, the Sea Vixen first flew in 1951 and the F4 first flew in 1958. Clearly the Vixen was a closer contemporary of the Cutlass. Sums clearly aren't your strong point.

The coolest thing about the Sea Vixen is it looks like something that belongs in the TV programme Thunderbirds.

@WilhelmKarsten

Ай бұрын

That's exactly where it belonged

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

Certainly would have been much safer if it was suspended from wires and flown by a puppeteer.

@Classicgamer73

Ай бұрын

I think it looks awesome, even today!

@milanondrak5564

Ай бұрын

@@Classicgamer73 Looks awesome performs average.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@milanondrak5564 Performance was dismal... this engineering disaster had a loss rate as high as the "Aluminium Death Tube" but couldn't even reach Mach 1 in a dive... it would crash!

I think the intro does a big disservice to the UK air industry. Before the Vixen we had the Vampire, Venom, Javelin and Hunter. The Vixen was a blip. If we're talking about bad starts the US had the Airacomet

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

de Havilland did much to tarnish the reputation of the UK industry... the Vampire and Venom,,, still made from wood and linen fabric with high loss rates... the catastrophic in-flight structural failures of the Comet and the Swallow destroyed d-H and devasted the UK aircraft industry when they became insolvent in 1958.

@user-lt9py2pu6u

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke you make some good points but the demise of Britains aircraft manufacturing was probably in part due to the fact we had too many manufacturers competing for too few customers, in some cases it would be just one, either the RAF or the Royal Navy, both of which were beginning to down size, even in the nineteen fifties, as Britain's former colonies gained independence. The other thing that you have omitted is the fact that following WW2 Britain as a country was broke. D H already had experience of building a high performance piston engined aircraft, and probably thought that they might be able to save money by applying the experience they had gained to jet propelled aircraft instead of starting from scratch on designing an aircraft made from very expensive materials. The D H factory where I grew up survives to this day and is owned by Airbus Industries (UK) and is considerably larger and a major employer in the area. It is still occasionally referred to by older residents as De Havilands, or DeHavs.

@welshpete12

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke nope !

@Taketimeout3

Ай бұрын

Oh dear. Wrong. If the vampire and venom were so bad why did they sell so well abroad? And have USAF officers be amazed how much more manoeuvrable than any American jet? They were cheap too. However in some ways you are right. Management of British Aircraft Companies was appalling.

@BanjoBob337

Ай бұрын

Don't forget the Canberra bomber as well which was a beautiful airship even bought by the Americans!

Just to be pedantic when you say its unladen weight was 14 tons that should be American Tons (or short tons in Imperial), for Imperial Tons it was around 12.5.

@YouTube_user3333

Ай бұрын

Canadian tons 😂

@MrUxbridge

Ай бұрын

@@KZread_user3333 The great advantage of the Imperial Long Ton is that it's almost the same as the Metric Tonne ( there's only 36lb in it)

In some ways, this aircraft reminds me of one of the early American naval fighters, the Vought F7U Cutlass--it too had a high accident rate (but it was also appalling underpowered).

@Auldpharte

Ай бұрын

Indeed. This was when turbojets and associated airframes were going through a period of rapid discovery and development. The Gloster Javelin was not the easiest plane to fly.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@Auldpharte This was also a period when de havilland attempted (unsuccessfully) to transition from building jets from wood and fabric to modern construction methods... an attempt that failed spectacularly

@fritzwrangle-clouder6033

23 күн бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke DH 125.

There’s one in the Wings museum in Southampton and another at the Gatwick aviation museum. An impressive machine to inspect up close!

It's such a lovely looking aircraft in my opinion, saw it flying twice incredible sound.

In fairness to de Havilland, at the time of its introduction a lot of jets and naval jet fighters had very abysmal low speed performance and safety de Havilland just happened to never improve its safety record.

The Sea Vixen was the most beautiful aircraft I've seen since the post-Piston Engined fighters. I watched it flying at an RAF Base in England while I was doing a Gliding Course at RAF Kirkton in Lindsey back in 1965. I flew in at zero feet & the build-up of the sound barrier was amazing. It may have had troubles but I'll never forget the sight.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

The Sea Vixen couldnt fly supersonic

@macdodd

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes it did in a shallow dive just as the Hunter did but that didn't stop it creating the build up around itself at nearly that speed. The Aura around it was spectacular that day, I'll never forget the thrill of seeing it. Here is another Video about it breaking the barrier.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@macdodd Thats a bald-faced lie, the Vixen could not fly supersonic in dive either. its straight horizontal tail element prevented it from safely reaching Mach 1 in a dive.

@macdodd

Ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Your opinion but facts don't lie. Ehd of discussion.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@macdodd The Facts are irrefutable, the Vixen WAS NOT capable of supersonic flight. To any qualified aerospace engineer this is instantly recognizable at the first glance

My father was an army ambulance driver that day at Farnborough. He's 91 now and the aftermath of what he had to see and deal with has haunted him all his life. He told me in detail what he saw that day and what he had to do. It was truly awful.

@Auldpharte

Ай бұрын

I was at the show the day before in company with my dad. The news of the disaster the following day caused some sober anxiety on my parents’ part.

I saw the last flight of the Sea Vixen. Displayed at Duxford then did a wheels up landing back at Yeovilton. It was decided it was uneconomical to repair.

@Legomaster2211.

2 ай бұрын

oh i was there too!

@smalltime0

2 ай бұрын

Wheels up landing on an airframe is a essentially a crash...

@Legomaster2211.

2 ай бұрын

@@smalltime0 yeah it was

@ShinyHelmet

2 ай бұрын

@@smalltime0 Was far from being a crash. It was a controlled belly landing that the pilot walked away from, so a good landing in difficult circumstances.

@smalltime0

2 ай бұрын

@@ShinyHelmet atemlos durch die Nacht... Its a crash

A 38% loss rate was not very different from some contemporary aircraft such as the Starfighter and Supersabre, and they didn't fly from aircraft carriers.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

De Havilland had the highest loss rate in the industry with some notable flying coffins like the DH-106 and DH-108

@timhancock6626

Ай бұрын

​@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeThe Boeing 737 Max has killed more people than the early DH106 accidents did. The later DH Comets were excellent. The DH108 was a test aircraft. You sound like a complete fool.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@Begeye-bh5ux Germany is the largest manufacturer of jet aircraft in Europe... please name a british company that is still making british jet aircraft in the UK???

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@Begeye-bh5ux No one cares... about british jets, at least the folks who buy jets, they stopped buying them and all the british manufacturers wents tits-up.

@fritzwrangle-clouder6033

23 күн бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, by your own standard a british company that is still making British jet aircraft in the UK would be BAE Systems. In the same way that Germany doesn't build any jets of their own neither does Britain. As you know old fashioned autarky so favoured by WW2 Germany has been replaced by international co-operation which is why for instance BAE Systems is a principle partner in the F35 project that Germany has lately and desperately bought themselves into after getting the wind up about the Russians. As you know the British BAE Systems also has the largest national share of the Eurofighter at 33% followed by Leonardo of Italy at 21% with France, Spain and Germany sharing the rest. Britain is also the largest procurer and therefore builder of Eurofighters. As you will be aware, it is this model of co-operation that allowed Britain to develop the world's second largest aerospace industry after the US and for BAE Systems to become Europe's biggest defence contractor and Rolls Royce to be the biggest European jet engine producer. Of course as you know Germany in WW2 failed signally to co-operate with its partners in this manner whereas the Allies benefited significantly by such co-operation by for instance the Tizard Mission. As you know, the British were able to significantly support the US with their early jet engine development (this following on from the famous sharing of the technology of the Merlin engine) leading to the US license building several British engines. One very ironic product of this co-operative model is, you'll recall that Rolls Royce will be supplying F130 (BR 725) engines for the B52 which will be built at Rolls Royce's Indianapolis plant that it acquired by buying Allison Engines the makers of the engine the Merlin replaced in the P51 Mustang. The further irony being that the Rolls Royce BR 725 is part of a series developed by Rolls Royce to help BMW get back into jet engine production in a Rolls Royce BMW international partnership (BMW having been the makers of the rather inconsequential BMW003 in WW2). Sadly as you know BMW couldn't hack it and now the company is a wholly owned Rolls Royce German subsidiary.

the timing of this vid. i just finished making a revell model of a sea vixen on my twitch channel lol

Stunning plane and one of my many favs

@johnmoruzzi7236

Ай бұрын

Yes I agree…. not remotely as crap as the presenter tried to make out. Everything in its design and development was done for a reason, it was a sophisticated combat aircraft and it operated in demanding and unforgiving environments. He also skipped right through the preceding DH Venom and Sea Venom aircraft which were successful or at least satisfactory and a big interim jump from the tiny largely wood constructed Vampire. The DH Comet had a similar history… started out very ambitious but flawed, redesigned and improved into an effective and popular aircraft, but ultimately overtaken by other designs an technology and experience quickly moved on.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

@@johnmoruzzi7236 Not really, the Sea Vixen couldnt even fly supersonic! All of de Havillands jets were poorly designed and had similar problems with mid-air break-ups and high rates of crashes. The according to official Mod records the RAF lost 82 Vampires in a single year! The Comet Disaster is the single worst engineering failure in jet aviation history. Comet 1 was so fatally flawed that 6 crashed before being grounded, its Certificate of Airworthiness was permanently revoked... later Comets didn't perform much better, a total of 39 hull loss accidents out of 114 built and only 76 in revenue service. de Havilland had a well-earned and notorious reputation from building unsafe aircraft that crashed with shocking regularity... so much so that operators stopped buying them and the company became completely insolvent in 1958

There was one flying from Bournemouth airport some years ago.

Ah, the F-4 also called a flying brick. Love that aircraft.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

The F-4 could fly Mach 2.23.... this POS turkey couldnt reach Mach 1!!!!

This aircraft design was an unparalleled success... in how NOT to do it.

I get wanting to have a darkened area for the radar operator, but That would still have easily been possible with a tandem or sideby side cockpit layout, that would have gone a long way to fixing what I reckon is the real reason why they never even tried to fix the Vixen. Other planes have had worse accident rates yet were fixed over time, but not the Vixen.

@RandomGreymane

2 ай бұрын

I mean it’s no Osprey but the track record is pretty bad…

@daffyduck780

2 ай бұрын

1950s display technology.

@nigelclinning2448

2 ай бұрын

It’s essentially a side by side cockpit, just without the bubble canopy of the pilot.

Don't forget the fact that the Meteor and Vampire had equally bad crash/loss rates.

Bit harsh, a lot of early jet fighters were complete dogs.

@REDDeadFishy

2 ай бұрын

It’s better to pick everything apart and then praise the merits. Otherwise the value is lost to time

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

brit jets in particular, especially those designed by de Havilland

@poweredbypies

2 ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke but let's not forget most early jets were flying with British designed engines. The German jets had lifespans of hours. And the first russian jets were just parade planes.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

@@poweredbypies Lets not forget that German jets were the only ones effective in combat. The british centrifugal turbojet was an evolutionary dead-end and completely obsolete on arrival... they wouldn't have axial engines until the 1950s. All fighters of this era had engine lifespans of hours, a typical TBO for a Merlin engine was 5 hours in combat, Allied jet engines were not much better. All the Allied jets were parade planes, they never saw aerial combat, the Lockheed P-80 and the Gloster _"Meatbox"_ only killed Allied pilots! any questions?

@poweredbypies

2 ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke have to say it's actually nice to debate with someone with knowledge beyond what they learn from war thunder. Shall we just agree that early jets were just a bit naff and it wasn't til second gen jets started to appear til things started to get going properly.

When I joined the RAF in 1980, we used Sea Vixens as training aircraft to teach how to fit Ejection Seats, as the system was so complicated the instructor said "If you can fit a set of seats to this aircraft every other will be easy" :)

It had a great engine sound

I think the Sea Vixen looks... interesting. Not terrible looking.

I like the look of the Sea Vixen.

Personally, I think its not only beautiful, but cool af. I love the asymmetrical design of the front fuselage.

I like learning stuff. That's why I watch all your channels

Simon should do an episode about the Fairy Gannet.

@WilhelmKarsten

2 ай бұрын

Simon should do a whole British ugly planes series.

@richstrasz6653

Ай бұрын

@@WilhelmKarsten True - not the best-looking aircraft but I've always has a soft spot for the Gannet. I love the innovative tandem dual engine design. A real work horse, kept in service right up to the RN scrapping of its conventional carriers.

love another accident prone airplane, the mighty Scimitar

"If you wanted to see one now you can rest assured that it won't be flying" Red Bull would have something to say about that, too bad it was flying until a wheels up landing a few years ago

My dad flew Sea Vixens, and he said that they wers great for their day.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

Ай бұрын

either you, or your dad is telling porkies

@colrhodes377

Ай бұрын

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke My dad wasn't one to tell porkies. He loved his career in the Fleet Air Arm. I was a little boy and only heard him speak with great passion about his time in the RN.

It was far from “Crap”, of its time it was precisely what was ordered, the radar could only be read in the dark because all radars of that era could only be read in the dark (check out some videos of the London Air Traffic Control Centre LATCC West Drayton, rows of dark radar operators in a dark room with only red light) as for the accident rate, totally normal for the time particularly when you consider that sticking a supersonic jet on an aircraft carrier that just a few years earlier had only seen single engine piston aircraft and as you said but I notice didn’t elaborate on, the vast majority of the incidents were when the catapult launcher failed and was unable to give the aircraft enough airspeed to avoid an instant stall into the sea. In short it provided the Fleet Air Arm an interim jet fighter before technology moved on at a pace. Also it’s a great looking aircraft.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

de Havilland became infamous for its staggering loss rates and catastrophic in-flight structural failures

@fritzwrangle-clouder6033

22 күн бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, as you know all jets have their dangers, you will no doubt be aware of the appalling crash rate of the F104G in German operation. As you know de Havilland is a famous and greatly admired mark with such historically important and iconic aircraft as the Mosquito and the Vampire and de Havilland now has its place as a legacy company of BAE Systems, Europe's largest defence contractor.

Triangular wings, triangular intakes, triangular landing gear arrangement. _So many triangles._

@guaporeturns9472

2 ай бұрын

Triangular pilots

@derekspringer6448

2 ай бұрын

It must have originally had a Rotary engine. No not that rotary... the aircraft one prop planes had... duh

@guaporeturns9472

2 ай бұрын

@@derekspringer6448 huh? Rotary?

@kommissarkillemall2848

2 ай бұрын

"so many Triangles".. So, "Illuminati Confirmed".. XD

@gecila1

2 ай бұрын

Operation pawn sacrifice.

it is seriously one of the coolest early cold war jets imo i even have model of it lol

The weirdest looking british jet? "Hrm, hrm... the Javelin clears its throat and looks pleasantly suprised."

Too bad XP924 (featured in this film) was recently grounded. A chap I flew with ejected from one during his days in some Navy aero team. He got wake turb from the one ahead and punched out- I think his radar op didn't make it. Charley Beilby- where are you now? Edit to add- still ticking- and 80 last year!😃

That's a shame, I think it looks cool, I'm a sucker for Twin Booms like the Lightning and the Bronco

Always chuckle when I spot someone actually flying one of these in war thunder.

The Sea Vixen shows an obvious lineage from the earlier twin boom De Havilland jet fighters, the Vampire and Venom. However, by the time the Sea Vixen entered service, this configuration had become very much outmoded. Still at least it could be launched from a level position with all its wheels on the deck, unlike the more conventional looking Supermarine Scimitar, which was launched at a high angle of attack with its nose wheel in the air.

Sea Vixen was the only supersonic aircraft built with a swept wing and straight tail surface. This created two different shaped shock waves in close proximity, just aft of the trailing edge. This caused cruel and unusual stresses to form in the wing, tail booms and engine bay, which engineers never really got hold of. In operational service the pilots were given very stringent flight parameters in speed, bank and climb to mitigate the stresses. This made it a very poor interceptor, and still very prone to crash. However the record for Royal Navy fast jet crashes is the Supermarine Scimitar that came out just before the Sea Vixen. Of the 76 built 39 were lost in accidents, a 51% loss rate. Compared to Sea Vixen's 145 built and 55 lost in accidents, a 38% loss rate.

@WilhelmKarsten

Ай бұрын

*The Sea Vixen was not supersonic.*

@davidrendall7195

Ай бұрын

@@WilhelmKarsten The DH110 was designed as a supersonic all weather fighter. It was in fact the first British production fighter to fly supersonically and the first two seat supersonic fighter in the world to fly. It crashed at Farnborough in 1952 while putting out sonic booms to the delight of the crowds. Until it broke apart and killed dozens of spectators. After that FAW.1 was limited to subsonic speeds by pilots notes. FAW.2 was limited to M0.91 by the addition of the dorsal fuel tanks and heavier fuselage members. But it was designed as a supersonic aircraft - with swept wing and straight tail.

@WilhelmKarsten

Ай бұрын

@@davidrendall7195 *Thank you for proving my point.. the Sea B!tch was not supersonic.*

Says, "RAF went for the Gloster Javelin"... and shows a Blackburn Buccaneer which only flew with the RAF once the RN had retired its steam catapult aircraft carriers, in the late 1970's, and gifted Navy Buccaneers and Phantom II's to them.

@SgtChip

2 ай бұрын

They're similar looking but not the same. That's a Javelin, the elevator structure is all the way at the top on that plane. A Buccaneer has it's a little lower.

Stuff that ! That right hand seat ! No friken way...😮 Cheers from New Zealand

There was one other British aircraft that had the side mounted cockpit. That was the original English electric Canberra. The McDonnell Douglas version had a standard cockpit.

@bassetdad437

2 ай бұрын

The american version, the B-57 had tandem seating and was built by Martin. The british Canberra with offset seating was the B(I)8 followed by the PR9.

@PhantomLover007

2 ай бұрын

@@bassetdad437 thank you. I don’t know why I was thinking McDonald’s Douglas.

Oddly cool looking though

1:25 - Mid roll ads 2:55 - Chapter 1 - Design & development 8:55 - Chapter 2 - Specs & capabilities 12:45 - Chapter 3 - A bumpy ride

I was about to rush to the defence of the Sea Vixen, it was always a great aircraft to catch at Yeovilton air show. Then remembered it's fairly recent wheels down landing so fair play.

Sadly the last flying example crashed after the hydraulic pump failed a common problem.

A thunderbirds inspiration or - Captain Scarlet 😏 Looks too much like a toy to be taken seriously.

The funny thing is this is actually a pretty decent aircraft in War Thunder once you get used to it

My father was at Farnborough that day. He was working for BOAC at the time working on Argonauts and later Comets.

It did the job it was intended to do. Which is more than can be said for the Javelin.

Does this channel now just lean on lazy roasting? What has happened to these scripts in the past few months?😅

de Havilland made appallingly bad jets... the DH-100, DH-106, DH-108 and DH-110 all had catastrophic inflight structural failures and staggering loss rates... the highest in the industry.

Interesting plane, very cool looking.

@14:00 - "... that the plane's pilots l_ved". THIS is the fun of a cold read! Lol

Stupidest cockpit design ever implemented.

@chrisknight6884

Ай бұрын

No, it was practical. The pilot got an excellent view for deck landings and the navigator/ radar operator got to see his CRT display. It was designed for purpose and was not stupid, unlike your comment.

Does anyone else find the audible sneer in the presentation unpleasant?

@jamescurran64

Ай бұрын

I have put off watching any of these Megaprojects aviation videos because I didn’t think Simon’s style and tone would lend itself well to aviation oddities… this is the first I have watched and I think you’re right… the script feels far too subjective and technical detail is lost

@scotttait2197

Ай бұрын

Thought that was only myself thanks for the clarification

@kevin-parratt-artist

Ай бұрын

Can't stand him. 😖 In Cockney rhyming slang, he's comes across as a "Merchant banker".

@raymondhardman7286

Ай бұрын

He was better in the beginning if you watch his first videos. It was more of a personal learning journey he was on, and we came along with. It wasn’t as grating. Over time, it seems to have landed on a unique combo of pretentious and “know-it-all”. I can’t watch any more, unfortunately.

@FlyingForFunTrecanair

Ай бұрын

Yes. The Sea Vixen might have been terrible but Fizzgog and his ghastly beard are worst.

I saw a Sea Vixen flying at the Classic Jets meet at Kemble about 15 years ago. It was very, very impressive!

ok, but comparing it to the F-86 and MiG-15, the Sea Vixen definitely looks the coolest.

A shallow, ill-informed analysis presumably aimed at generating views rather than informing the viewer.

@jeffdroog

2 ай бұрын

Are you describing your comment?

@GodOfWallpaper9526

2 ай бұрын

That one was good ​@@jeffdroog

@TheArtofFugue

2 ай бұрын

@@jeffdroog10/10 response. I’m an aircraft enthusiast and I’ve gotta say this was about an 8.5/10 video on the entire history and impact of this aircraft. That’s a very high score by my standard by the way.

@floridaboiwoody

2 ай бұрын

It's just this channels S.O.P.

@jeffdroog

2 ай бұрын

@TheArtofFugue Considering the original poster had zero corrections to make,nor any specifics on the failings if the video,I'm going to assume they have no idea what they're talking about lol When it comes to usage,and opinions of any vehicle,of any kind,there is always going to be differences of opinions,but as far as the factual information in this video,yeah,its pretty spot on

Id love to see a megaprojects video on the Douglas A-4 / Skyhawk

I worked with a guy who used to be 'ground crew' on carriers... he said it was an absolute sod to work on

Definitely a cool looking aircraft

The sea vixen is my favourite aeroplane, beautiful with wings folded too! Certainly doesn't look any stranger than that TSR2 shoe box!

I had an Airfix model of this as a kid..i kind of liked it. Fun fact, I am off to the DeHavilland museum next week.

@EricIrl

Ай бұрын

I bet you didn't. Airfix didn't do a Sea Vixen model until very recently (a lovely 1/48 kit). However, FROG did do a Sea Vixen.

I've seen pictures of the Sea Vixen and assumed that the 'coal hole'was some kind of photographic equipment ,never thought that there was a man in there!

My great uncle was an Air Observer (radar man) and had the misfortune to be in a Sea Vixen 'coal hole' when the pilot fumbled a deck landing. Neither of them made it out.

always one my favorite designs

Keeping is about keeping Simon's beard around.

I *LOVE* the offset cockpit

I think its beautiful and wish a modern version was made.

@WilhelmKarsten

Ай бұрын

Why? It's a horrible design

That offset cockpit is fascinating. Weird as all get out, but intriguing. It has a Star Wars needs an iteration of this feel.

5:10 "Despite early setbacks from the Royal Navy changing its mind about what sort of aircraft it wanted, opting instead to refit an existing aircraft that was drifting towards obsolecence..." My first thought was that I'd never heard of the RN fitting a jet engine to a biplane. :D

@cornellkirk8946

2 ай бұрын

A refitted sopwith camel with a pair of jets fitted? 🤔 I’d love to see how the plywood and canvas skin would hold up close to Mach 1 lol

@chrisknight6884

Ай бұрын

​@@cornellkirk8946 Messersmit Me 163, Vampire, Venom all had wood in their construction and flew close to the sound barrier.

Such a pity, I always thought it was a quite beautiful looking aircraft. You are correct about being able to view one in Australia, the air museum at Caloundra in Queensland has one and I managed to sit in the coal hole in one of their open cockpit days.

I saw these flying over the eastern end of Portsmouth Hampshire in the early 1970's. I seem to recall they were radar targets. Last time I saw one was at a Bournemouth air show in the summer of 2015.

It wouldn't be a UK aviation industry creation if it wasn't over engineered and designed by a committee of 100 old lords who like they fell out of Dickens novel.

It’s astonishing, from today’s perspective, that following the tragic crash at Farnborough the display flying resumed. It’s difficult to imagine that happening today.

I used to see a couple of those 'Vampire'jets out at the Reno Air races every year.

@WilhelmKarsten

Ай бұрын

Termites love the D-H Vampire.. because the in-flight meals are always free!

Nice french and swedish fighters got a little mention in the start. 😊

i think it looks neat. boom tail aircraft always have a good look to them.

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

8 сағат бұрын

Its also why the plane could not fly supersonic... in terms of high-speed aerodynamics de Havilland remained in the dark ages right up until the company went bankrupt.

I like how it's a British jet with the cockpit on the left side instead of the right....

Great looking plane!

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

before or after the crash?

@javierrflores

2 ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke both

@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke

2 ай бұрын

@@javierrflores I think the flaming wreckage is a marked improvement

@javierrflores

2 ай бұрын

@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke yes

The crash of the prototype, DH-110, flown by John Derry, at the 1952 Farnborough Air Show, which killed 31 people, including Derry and his observer, Tony Richards, is still one of the most horrific pieces of newsreel footage that exists. The fuselage section, containing the bodies of the crew, that drops out of the sky right in front of spectators, is bad enough, but the two white hot engines flying into the crowd of people is an utterly appalling sight. Horrific. Oh, and did they stop the show? No. After the debris had been cleared away, and the bodies removed, Test Pilot Neville Duke took off in the prototype Hawker Hunter, as a salute to his dead friends. He later took the new aircraft supersonic, as well.