F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
I have a request! The very first plane (that I know of) given the F-15 designation. The Northrop F-15 Reporter. It was an under produced, and less remembered Korean war workhorse completely forgotten.
Mr Martin was told that nothing could've saved his friend, so he set out to invent something that could've done. If an ejector seat doesn't have a Martin-Baker Label, it's copied from - or licensed by - them. Nobody can count how many lives Mr Martin has saved.
I would think the military, who’s basically the only ones that use ejector seats, have a list of the number of ejections that have happened just like they know the number of accidents every military aircraft has been involved in. So, there’s a list out there of lives saved. Be interesting to know exactly how many it’s been. A lot I’m sure.
@@mouser485 Martin Baker keeps a list on their site iirc, it's in the thousands currently and those who ejected can even buy exclusive merch from them.
I found an original factory brochure for the MB5 among my stepfather's effects after he died; he'd sent for them from the company as a boy (it was in its original mailing envelope postmarked 1946). I passed them on to a friend who works for Martin-Baker today, and they found their way back into the company archives -- they had not retained a copy themselves, so it was new to them. So that's one small piece of history saved for posterity I guess!
War is a fast moving entity - a small company like this could not adapt changes quick enough....sure luck is involved but production flexibility is far more important.
In WWII air warfare, they had to make do with what was available, in the condition it was available. As simple instances, specs don't matter when pilots were dog-tired and barely able to keep themselves from dozing off; or when aircraft were overdue for maintenance, or certain pilots newbies, etc etc. The whole aim of the air battles was not to have an even-steven competition with the enemy, but to arrange for advantageous factors (time, weather, distance, fuel, etc) that were not reliant upon the airframes. The flight spec-wars we have today is abstract.
Dornier 335 A-6 or B-12 since it's has two canopies. Most likely the A-6 since the B-12 was a trainer aircraft. What it lacked in beauty it perhaps made up in other areas.
Top class video, thanks Rex Hangar. I love how Martin dedicated his business and life to ejection seats (very successfully) from the tragedy of losing his best friend and business partner. True grit that, despite the rejection of his aircraft
Lovely to hear the company is still going and a fitting tribute to his friend and partner that they specialise in ejection seats, so as to prevent further fatal accidents. It's indeed a pity that there isn't one in a museum, as it is in many ways a remarkable aircraft.
Not only still going, but still run although not owned by James Martin's descendant, John Martin. However, things are not all rosy due to a scandal in 2011 that involved a death of a pilot; see the Red Arrow Incident.
@@JS-ob4oh That's a pretty specific case, that has since been addressed. 1 death due to incorrect maintenance compared to many, many thousands of lives saved, so why mention it? Quite a few people have died as a result of ejection seat incidents, usually as a result of poor maintenance practice, mis-handling, or incorrect use. As a mech in the RAF, I was always very wary of the bang seats ability to kill me. Deaths in service happen, but fewer happen as a result of an ejection seat being present than would if one was not in use.
@@memkiii My, no need to be so defensive unless of course you work for Martin-Baker. So do you? Interesting "logic" of yours where if thousands were save, it's fine if 1 dies. And if 10 died while 10,000s were save, that's fine, too. and If 1000s died, that's fine if 1 million survived., that's wonderful. Sounds like something a money grubbing businessman or a Conservative would believe.
@@memkiii It's just like an airbag ir an improperly maintained seatbelt. Poor maintenance or improper use can absolutely result in a death. But the number of lives saved, in contrast, is so large that deaths caused by aforesaid poor maintenance are virtual statistical anomalies by comparison. Bailing out of a modern military plane is basically impossible without an ejector seat, simply due to the speeds they fly at. So a round of applause to the makers of them, and the maintenance personnel who ensure the seats do their job. :)
A small technology firm for which I once worked had this sign on the wall: "Warning: there comes a time in the history of every project when it is necessary to shoot the engineers and go into production." We too had an issue with letting perfection being the enemy of the good, and risked losing our market by taking too much time in development, as was the fate of the MB-5.
🤣🤣🤣 I had a friend in southern California who was like this. He was a former thermal engineer for Huges. Somewhere he picked up a Fournier RF4D motorglider, and installed a 2.1 liter Revmaster conversion on it. He then spent the next two years designing and redesigning baffles for the engine, so that all CHT's and EGT's were equal. I don't mean within a few degrees of one another, I mean exactly the same. He finally got it done. Then he decided to fabricate and mount an electric propeller adjustment. Guess what that caused? He then spent another six months balancing temps again! Not long after finally completing his project, he lost his medical🙄🙄
My grandad worked for MB based in Denham, Bucks for 40 years. He worked in the sheet metal design office. He retired in 1991. He actually got me an IV there when I left school at 16. I didn’t get it simply because I had interests elsewhere. I have great memories of my grandad though.. He would bring home the warning stickers & labels that were put on the ejector seats, and I would stick them on my school bag and bike 😊
Rex, you certainly open our eyes to a wide variety of aircraft, making it easy for us to visualize the progress add development of the various improvements through the ages. Your coverage of how the aircraft improved, and how well they performed in actual combat. A pilot myself, I certainly do appreciate the knowledge, and wish I could fly them for some test hops!
At 85 now, my memory may not be serviing so well ... but as I recall, Eric Brown, a penultimate pilot's pilot, of those years ... was a major contributing aviator to the development of the MB-5. Astonishing that he is not even mentioned in this document!!!! Serious omission IMO. I wrote Mr Brown many years ago, to inquire if he might collaborate on an aircraft document featuring, the MB5. He declined due to being occupied on other projects at the time. I still have his note... somewhere. In any case, yes, an experienced career aviator, now retired, I've always had an major interest in the MB-5!!! Contrary to other's discussions/implications here implying there was more than one MB5, to my knowlege, ONLY ONE airframe was ever flown. And Mr. Brown did much of that flight test time. He spoke very highly of the machine. This was a beautiful design. My impression seems to be that aside from arriving too late on the scene (jets were beginning to show up) the airplane was a complex one--would have been complicated to manufacture, as compared to the Spitfire/Hurricane technology of the time, and was also very heavy.
Very unfortunate that this advanced plane ended its life as a ground target. I was completely unaware of this plane. This is still a great success story, however, because Mr. Martin went on to develop and build ejection seats. No doubt this has saved many lives. Another very informative video.
I would love to see a video one day about the plane in the upper left at 14:40, the Dornier Do 335 Pfeil which should be one of the fastest or even the fastest piston driven plane of WW2. Well at least the single seater version.
Thank you for this video! I personally am aquainted with the two brothers that built the replica in Nevada: one had owned a P-51 for many years, but passed away before the replica was flying (I think). Their last name is Marlin, and I met them through a gentleman that was good friends with them, by the name of Fred Sebby, who had a love for warbirds, and flew the one brothers' P'51 often. Unfortunately, Fred also passed away, back in the '90's. He had a bad habit of sunning himself in front of his hangar, in an old easy chair and he used a mirror, and sadly, it killed him: he developed skin cancer, and it entered his brain via a tear duct. He was quite the character, and I still miss that guy.
I recall meeting a John Marlin ( same as my name) working on a MB at the Chino airport I believe back in the late 60 's or early 70's . Never knew much else about the plane or him . Thanks for the video
Arguably the best video documentary I have watched regarding an aircraft that has fascinated me since I was eleven years old (a very long time ago). When you consider the comments made by three of the very best pilots / test pilots of their day (if not ever) this aircraft was a tragic loss to the world of aviation - something that has plagued the British aviation industry since the Second World War.
My sheer contempt to those who used it as a target. Sounds like others wanted to see the back of it asap. Thanks for the video, at the very least there are a collection of fine photos of the MB.
I didnt even know about this failed bird. I wonder if this keeps this way what will be the future off online documentaries with this talented UA-camrs delivering like this.
Way ahead of obsolescence. Whatever war contracts were keeping Martin Baker going, they were in no position to produce a fighter aircraft in useful numbers, no matter how good it was, and it wasn't all that good until long after it was needed, One prototype, a year and a half after Germany was able to produce any real improvement on it's first-lime fighters, was the definition of useless,
I've been fascinated by the MB-5 since I read about it in a book as a child many years ago. It's like the best CD player when everyone else streams their music. A petrol supercar in the age of EVs. That appeals to me.
Thanks very much for your outstanding review of the Martin Baker MB5. As you mention in your final comment, Martin Baker is the Western Power's default ejection seat to date.
On the end you made excellent teaser for the second part of Martin-Baker company story 😉. When can we expect history of the most important invention in aviation since the appearance of the parachute?
The P-51's ventral scoop was designed that way to take advantage of the Meredith Effect, pioneered by the British, who used it (sub-optimally) on the Mosquito. The British provided the documentation to Curtis, who were asked to pass it on to North American when the British contracted with them to develop for them the aircraft that became the P-51. MB couldn't steal from the P-51 what it was lent to it by the British.
Dutch Kindelberger, president of North American, was forced to "buy" the plans from Curtis but his response was it "Only told him of what NOT to build. The Mustang scoop was developed by North American. Baker copied the Mustangs general design. obvious as the nose on your face !!!
Everyone had access to the Meredith paper (1935) which was mostly theory. It was the german B. Goethert who applied it to working radiator systems in wind tunnels and published a study in 1938 regarding the ducting and ideal rad temperature differentials. NAA used that information to some extent and developed it further, whereas Curtiss failed on both the XP-40 and XP-46. RAE's Shenstone and Thomas were instrumental in helping NAA perfect the radiator ducting in the P-51 series.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 The interesting issue is why didn't Hawker use the Meredith scheme or the Goethert study or NACA research to fix the problems with the outdated Hurricane which was clearly outclassed by the Spit in 1936. Profiteering and influence peddling to keep the money flowing in.
@@ElsinoreRacerFinnigan is an all--over Yankee hack, to him, anything and everything aeronautical of note, especially of British, was really American. Easily embarrassed, often utterly propagandist, he is best ignored, but with mocking laughter first.
For the record: the first ejection seat was invented by Romanian engineer Aneastase Dragomir in 1929. The German Heinkel firm and Swedish Saab continued development in the 1930s, and debuted on the Heinkel He-280 jet prototype, and was fitted to the He-219 night fighter, He-162 jet "fighter", and the Dornier Do-335. The early German and Swedish systems used compressed air to propel the seat, but by 1943 this was replaced with a gunpowder charge. The Martin-Baker design improved upon the German and Swedish designs by adapting them for faster jet aircraft and became the de facto standard postwar.
According to a book by William Green, as well as flying like a dream, pilots also thought that the cockpit and instrumentation was very well laid out, and should be made as standard for all succeeding aircraft, though whether this includes jet aircraft is not known. Oh, and a very good video. I'd heard of the MB4, but I knew nothing about it.
Criminal what happened to that beautiful bird. The MB 5 has always had a mythical status in my personal aviation museum of the mind. The success of MB Ejection seats is lengendary though. With sales to an amazingly diverse collection of countries and companies
14:41. That picture has a captured Dornier DO 335 Arrow in the upper left. It looks like it's the A6 or A7 night fighter variant, owing to the second canopy.
My uncle flew one while in the RAF. He told me it was one of the finest handling prop planes he flew. Smooth, responded well to controls and was very fast.
Well well well. I never knew that. Thank you. I am very aware of MB ejector seats but didn't know why MB came to make them rather than aircraft. Fascinating.
I remember someone talking to me about the MB5 when I was a kid (I am 67). He suggested that it would equally have rivalled the Spitfire as one of the best planes of ww2, if they had had more time for R and D. I suppose we will never know now.
Great backstory had no idea this plane was built by the same company known for ejection seats. just clicked! Your engineering histories behind the planes are the best.
It is somewhat ironic that Martin-Baker operates those Meteor aircraft as it was their introduction into service that may have been the most significant reason for the MB.5 not being ordered by the Air Ministry. As is so often the case, in life, timing is a crucial element.
Neither of course was the Hawker Fury 1, also first flown in 1944, whose production order was cancelled. The naval version, the Sea Fury, of course had a distinguished career, with both the RN and in overseas airforces.
The replica is (or was as of 2016) hangared in Stead Nevada, Home of The Reno National Championship Air Races. If memory serves it was for sale. I was always impressed by its size, and I always had a yen for contra -rotators....It was there for several years, usually in some form of disassembly or what I thought at the time was restoration work. They usually displayed it "opened up" and as far as I could tell ( judging by the condition of the paint on the engine) maybe run on the ground at most. I'll poke around and see what happened to it. Excellent piece, I'll look at more of your stuff. Thanks
The MB.5 shares the fate of the DH Hornet - it was the last hurrah of the piston-engined fighter even as the first jets were entering service. The Hornet went to sea for a bit until the Navy worked out how to launch and land jets but after that it was all over.
This shows why near enough can be better that perfect. Near enough would have given use a fantastic aircraft at a time when it was needed instead of when it was no longer needed.
Robert Watson Watt, the radar pioneer adopted as his motto "Second Best Tomorrow". If he'd pfaffed around seeking perfection like James Martin the CH system would never have been completed and we would have lost the Battle of Britain
Most of the war products were just good enough, as they were available and in use, in war time you do not have time to invent new products, you use what you have or modify, and you use what is AVAILABLE and make it do !!!
Fun fact: when contractors make proposals to the US DOD, hoping to win a competition, one of the important criteria is to prove that the contractor has the facilities and workforce to actually build the article. If the MB.5 had been perfected in mid 1943, a time when it might have played an important role in the war, the question would still be "where will you build 100 planes a month and where will you get the trained workers and raw materials?"
I love this plane, tragic as it story might be. A question, could you put metric speeds, dimensions and weight in text on screen? My compliments again for presentation and script.
Much as I agree with the idea, I think it's more appropriate to use the system in place at the time the aircraft was designed and built. You lose a lot of the history if you convert everything. For instance (to switch topics for a moment) in railway history, the original passenger carrying, steam-drawn railways in the UK, that started the whole railway revolution used a gauge of 4' 8.5", because that was the gauge that happened to be used on the internal tramway in the quarry where Stephenson had been employed when he started building steam engines. To describe it as 1.435m is to lose all that history. Stephenson would have been blissfully unaware of the metric measurement of his railway. Had such railways first been developed in (say) France, then the world might now run on 1.5m gauge lines, but no one would refer to them as 4' 11" gauge!
14:41 Do 335 my beloved, this is one of the ~11 A-0 models converted into A-10/11/12 (All three designations exist and refer to the two-seated trainer versions, as far as I know) and also the one that sadly ended up crashing into a school, killing Group Captain AF Hards.
Interesting to learn a bit about the history of Martn-Baker. I work for a company that supplies parts for MB ejector seat systems, so it's of interest that they used to make complete aircraft.
That was really interesting - thank you. For someone who isn't really an aircraft nut, I'm amazed at how I still find this channel so interesting! Must be something to do with the quality of the research and videos, I suppose... Two possible future videos occur to me after watching this: First the impact of jet power on fighters. Had the Germans produced decent jet fighters earlier in the war and in numbers, would it have had a effect on the way the war ended? Would it have significantly affected the allies' ability to achieve air superiority before F Day, for instance? Or, if we had developed jet powered fighters earlier, would it have shortened the course of the war by (for instance) giving us air superiority during bombing raids and bringing total air superiority earlier, so bringing D Day forward? And, secondly, I have always been fascinated by contra-rotating propellers, as they seem to have two great advantages - more power, and the elimination of one-sided propeller torque. So why weren't they used more, why didn't they become the norm? Was it just the increased technical difficulties, or was it simply down to conservative attitudes in the air force and air industry?
While working with the RCAF in Europe in the late 1950s my dad, John Hemphill Stewart, DFM, developed an ejector seat that was trialed against The Martin-Baker seat and was not adopted for various reasons.
Fantastic job to actually see authentic photos of what you're talking about when you're talking about it in World War II aircraft nowadays on UA-cam I mean that's kicking the crap out of the big channels known for such stuff You see it all the time they're talking about one thing and they show something completely different too much filler in them
I mentioned this fighter in the comments section a while back. Half of the story was that the death of Baker in a testing accident affected James Martin’s resolve to produce aircraft prototypes, and instead focused on pilot escape methods. I did a lot of archival research on MB and came away with the opinion that the company knew they were only ever producing experimental designs to satisfy ministry requests to advance aspects of engineering during wartime. I know Martin was more adept at solving specific problems through mechanical ingenuity, such as the very successful wing mounted cable cutter.
So basically. 2 buddies made a plane that killed one of them. Other dude decides to create a masterpiece of an aircraft and when nobody wanted it, he decides to develop a way to save pilots. Astonishing man.
Amazing video, I believe that for being a teenager, i feel to say your video are the perfect example of how the quantity and quality of information on UA-cam is increasing in the right way. Great work!
Welcome to the jet age MB5, great looking plane and serious performance. Timing is everything though. Martin Baker live on with ejector seat, I believe you get a tie from them if you have had to eject using one of their seats
Makes you wonder how things might have been different if the prototype hadn't have crashed and Baker wasn't killed. Might the company have been a bit less perfectionist in it's design philosophy with it if Baker were still around to reign Martin in a little? If so, maybe the plane gets finished soon enough for the RAF to be able to put it into production.... but then the company might not have gone on to make ejector seats, thus potentially costing thousands their lives. Definitely a very interesting divergence point for sure.
A wonderful video Rex! The photo at 14:40 is very interesting with a Supermarine Spiteful in the foreground, then the MB5 and then a machine that looks like a Tempest II or Sea Fury fuselage with squared off wingtips and tail. The vertical stab is also mounted forward of the horizontal stab with possibly an arresting hook underneath, what type is this?
Hi Rex! My name's Scott and I have to tell you that I truly appreciate these ultra Cool videos. These videos go so perfectly with my Houka times. I personally feel that you are up on the same shelf as Lemme Kilmister and Bon Scott. I hope the new house 🏠 things are going smoothly. Tytyty 😊😊😊
Most interesting -- what a beautiful plane. What a shame that the timing didn't work out. And what a tragedy that Mr Baker died. Test pilots are truly brave souls. (My husband already knew that all the best ejection seats are Martin-Baker ... I'll never catch up haha.)
And since everyone is pointing out the Do-335, maybe someday, when Rex is feeling he has too much sanity, he'll take us down the rabbit hole that are the "Luft 46" designs in greater detail (like the Ta-183 Huckebein).
![The WW2 Super Fighter That Was Built Backwards | Curtiss XP-55 Ascender [Aircraft Overview #76]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NJNc4rvf_qs/mqdefault.jpg)
![The WW2 Super Fighter That Was Built Backwards | Curtiss XP-55 Ascender [Aircraft Overview #76]](/img/tr.png)
![A Domestic Failure That Became An International Success | Curtiss P-36 Hawk [Aircraft Overview #33]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lTgY8za-2Xw/mqdefault.jpg)
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
Just keep sending with the same quality.
Another great vid from the Flying Tea-Rex. I'd love to see the Hughes H-1 Racer added to your list.
Czechoslovak air force in 1938 and viability of Czechoslovak defence against German aggresion?
If you could, cover the Douglas XB-42/43
I have a request! The very first plane (that I know of) given the F-15 designation. The Northrop F-15 Reporter. It was an under produced, and less remembered Korean war workhorse completely forgotten.
Mr Martin was told that nothing could've saved his friend, so he set out to invent something that could've done. If an ejector seat doesn't have a Martin-Baker Label, it's copied from - or licensed by - them.
Nobody can count how many lives Mr Martin has saved.
I would think the military, who’s basically the only ones that use ejector seats, have a list of the number of ejections that have happened just like they know the number of accidents every military aircraft has been involved in. So, there’s a list out there of lives saved. Be interesting to know exactly how many it’s been. A lot I’m sure.
@@mouser485 Martin Baker keeps a list on their site iirc, it's in the thousands currently and those who ejected can even buy exclusive merch from them.
The number is 7,674 lives as of 2022
@@dylanmilne6683 D.M. ..............thanks for that number !!!! .....was wondering
@@dylanmilne6683 Thanks Dylan !
I found an original factory brochure for the MB5 among my stepfather's effects after he died; he'd sent for them from the company as a boy (it was in its original mailing envelope postmarked 1946). I passed them on to a friend who works for Martin-Baker today, and they found their way back into the company archives -- they had not retained a copy themselves, so it was new to them. So that's one small piece of history saved for posterity I guess!
I'd love to see the brochure mentioned as I'm twenty years into research of the MB5 . probably have to ask for a visit to the head office one day.
Very interesting & well done you.
If it's one thing this channel has taught me, it's how much of a role luck has to play in the success or failure of an aircraft.
War is a fast moving entity - a small company like this could not adapt changes quick enough....sure luck is involved but production flexibility is far more important.
Unless were talking about Brewster. No amount of luck could've offset their incompetence
And in life in general!
Fortune favors the bold .Dithering around, trying to perfect a "pretty good "aircraft, is a recipe for failure.
In WWII air warfare, they had to make do with what was available, in the condition it was available.
As simple instances, specs don't matter when pilots were dog-tired and barely able to keep themselves from dozing off; or when aircraft were overdue for maintenance, or certain pilots newbies, etc etc.
The whole aim of the air battles was not to have an even-steven competition with the enemy, but to arrange for advantageous factors (time, weather, distance, fuel, etc) that were not reliant upon the airframes.
The flight spec-wars we have today is abstract.
This is the best documentary on the MB.5 I have ever seen. A first class coverage of this remarkable aircraft and its history.
Dornier 335 just chillin in the background at 14:43
Dornier 335 A-6 or B-12 since it's has two canopies. Most likely the A-6 since the B-12 was a trainer aircraft. What it lacked in beauty it perhaps made up in other areas.
Top class video, thanks Rex Hangar. I love how Martin dedicated his business and life to ejection seats (very successfully) from the tragedy of losing his best friend and business partner. True grit that, despite the rejection of his aircraft
As DEFYN once said, it’s the Man’s Baked.5
It’s a real shame we didn’t see it.
mustang x spitfire lore
A Spitstang 🤗
@@priyanshuraha
A Mustfire?
@@AllonKirtchik Story of Louis XIV?
they had an abortion sadly
@@AllonKirtchik
Must...fire...
I must fire
Lovely to hear the company is still going and a fitting tribute to his friend and partner that they specialise in ejection seats, so as to prevent further fatal accidents.
It's indeed a pity that there isn't one in a museum, as it is in many ways a remarkable aircraft.
Yes a main producer of
aircraft ejection systems.
Not only still going, but still run although not owned by James Martin's descendant, John Martin. However, things are not all rosy due to a scandal in 2011 that involved a death of a pilot; see the Red Arrow Incident.
@@JS-ob4oh That's a pretty specific case, that has since been addressed. 1 death due to incorrect maintenance compared to many, many thousands of lives saved, so why mention it? Quite a few people have died as a result of ejection seat incidents, usually as a result of poor maintenance practice, mis-handling, or incorrect use. As a mech in the RAF, I was always very wary of the bang seats ability to kill me. Deaths in service happen, but fewer happen as a result of an ejection seat being present than would if one was not in use.
@@memkiii My, no need to be so defensive unless of course you work for Martin-Baker. So do you? Interesting "logic" of yours where if thousands were save, it's fine if 1 dies. And if 10 died while 10,000s were save, that's fine, too. and If 1000s died, that's fine if 1 million survived., that's wonderful. Sounds like something a money grubbing businessman or a Conservative would believe.
@@memkiii It's just like an airbag ir an improperly maintained seatbelt. Poor maintenance or improper use can absolutely result in a death. But the number of lives saved, in contrast, is so large that deaths caused by aforesaid poor maintenance are virtual statistical anomalies by comparison.
Bailing out of a modern military plane is basically impossible without an ejector seat, simply due to the speeds they fly at. So a round of applause to the makers of them, and the maintenance personnel who ensure the seats do their job. :)
A small technology firm for which I once worked had this sign on the wall: "Warning: there comes a time in the history of every project when it is necessary to shoot the engineers and go into production." We too had an issue with letting perfection being the enemy of the good, and risked losing our market by taking too much time in development, as was the fate of the MB-5.
🤣🤣🤣 I had a friend in southern California who was like this. He was a former thermal engineer for Huges. Somewhere he picked up a Fournier RF4D motorglider, and installed a 2.1 liter Revmaster conversion on it. He then spent the next two years designing and redesigning baffles for the engine, so that all CHT's and EGT's were equal. I don't mean within a few degrees of one another, I mean exactly the same. He finally got it done.
Then he decided to fabricate and mount an electric propeller adjustment. Guess what that caused?
He then spent another six months balancing temps again!
Not long after finally completing his project, he lost his medical🙄🙄
There is a fine line on that.. . . Go into production too early and you could have a big failure problem on you hands and no more orders.
Better is the enemy of Good.
It is the eternal question of "When is good enough actually good enough?". Hard to answer I think.
@@rooramblingon895 When it achieves its design criteria !
Outstanding story of two brilliant men. And to think their legacy lives on!!
My grandad worked for MB based in Denham, Bucks for 40 years. He worked in the sheet metal design office. He retired in 1991. He actually got me an IV there when I left school at 16. I didn’t get it simply because I had interests elsewhere.
I have great memories of my grandad though.. He would bring home the warning stickers & labels that were put on the ejector seats, and I would stick them on my school bag and bike 😊
Why do you think anyone would be interested in your totally boring story ?
Thanks for your interesting story.
Nice to hear your story. Explaining that your Grandfather working there for 40 years days a lot about Martin Baker as a company.
Why would you think anybody would be interested in your rude opinion.@@tonywright8294
@@tonywright8294 It's called a personal connection dyk hed.
Rex, you certainly open our eyes to a wide variety of aircraft, making it easy for us to visualize the progress add development of the various improvements through the ages. Your coverage of how the aircraft improved, and how well they performed in actual combat. A pilot myself, I certainly do appreciate the knowledge, and wish I could fly them for some test hops!
I had never heard the story of Martin Baker. Thanks Rex. Great vid. 👍👍👍👍👍
At 85 now, my memory may not be serviing so well ... but as I recall, Eric Brown, a penultimate pilot's pilot, of those years ... was a major contributing aviator to the development of the MB-5. Astonishing that he is not even mentioned in this document!!!! Serious omission IMO. I wrote Mr Brown many years ago, to inquire if he might collaborate on an aircraft document featuring, the MB5. He declined due to being occupied on other projects at the time. I still have his note... somewhere. In any case, yes, an experienced career aviator, now retired, I've always had an major interest in the MB-5!!! Contrary to other's discussions/implications here implying there was more than one MB5, to my knowlege, ONLY ONE airframe was ever flown. And Mr. Brown did much of that flight test time. He spoke very highly of the machine. This was a beautiful design. My impression seems to be that aside from arriving too late on the scene (jets were beginning to show up) the airplane was a complex one--would have been complicated to manufacture, as compared to the Spitfire/Hurricane technology of the time, and was also very heavy.
Thank you for commenting. 😊
Just wanted to say Winkle is a hero of mine, a real lion-heart.
Have another listen. He flew it.
Very unfortunate that this advanced plane ended its life as a ground target. I was completely unaware of this plane. This is still a great success story, however, because Mr. Martin went on to develop and build ejection seats. No doubt this has saved many lives. Another very informative video.
Utter thoughtless vandalism.
@@paulhaynes8045 Yes, especially when you think of how many hundreds and maybe thousands of redundant airframes there were after the war.
Thankfully there is a full scale replica in Stead Airport in Reno Nevada!
Isn’t it 6 feet shorter than the original and has the wings from a P51? That’s stretching the term replica a bit, more a collection of parts.
I would love to see a video one day about the plane in the upper left at 14:40, the Dornier Do 335 Pfeil which should be one of the fastest or even the fastest piston driven plane of WW2. Well at least the single seater version.
I just spent a few minutes Googling trying to figure out what that weird plane in the background was, and it was the Do 335 :P.
The Germans certainly were on the edge of design.
The " Pfeil " was a great aircraft........ as long as you remembered to turn on the rear engine. Believe it or not, some pilots didn't.
In postwar testing, it walked away from every Allied piston fighter as if they'd been chained to a wall. Absolute unit.
Man, those late war german planes. where crazy.
Bravo to Mr. Martin, and his company!! Well done chap.
Thank you for this video!
I personally am aquainted with the two brothers that built the replica in Nevada: one had owned a P-51 for many years, but passed away before the replica was flying (I think). Their last name is Marlin, and I met them through a gentleman that was good friends with them, by the name of Fred Sebby, who had a love for warbirds, and flew the one brothers' P'51 often.
Unfortunately, Fred also passed away, back in the '90's. He had a bad habit of sunning himself in front of his hangar, in an old easy chair and he used a mirror, and sadly, it killed him: he developed skin cancer, and it entered his brain via a tear duct.
He was quite the character, and I still miss that guy.
I recall meeting a John Marlin ( same as my name) working on a MB at the Chino airport I believe back in the late 60 's or early 70's . Never knew much else about the plane or him . Thanks for the video
@@johnmarlin4661 it was more than likely one of the two!
John used to keep his P-51 at Chino: that's where I first met him!
Arguably the best video documentary I have watched regarding an aircraft that has fascinated me since I was eleven years old (a very long time ago). When you consider the comments made by three of the very best pilots / test pilots of their day (if not ever) this aircraft was a tragic loss to the world of aviation - something that has plagued the British aviation industry since the Second World War.
My sheer contempt to those who used it as a target. Sounds like others wanted to see the back of it asap. Thanks for the video, at the very least there are a collection of fine photos of the MB.
Ah, what a great way to start my Saturday! Great video as always!
I didnt even know about this failed bird. I wonder if this keeps this way what will be the future off online documentaries with this talented UA-camrs delivering like this.
By the time the MB5a appeared, it was the age of the Gloster Meteor. Amazing piston fighter, way ahead.
Way ahead of obsolescence. Whatever war contracts were keeping Martin Baker going, they were in no position to produce a fighter aircraft in useful numbers, no matter how good it was, and it wasn't all that good until long after it was needed, One prototype, a year and a half after Germany was able to produce any real improvement on it's first-lime fighters, was the definition of useless,
Do you realise that your first sentence completely contradicts the second?
I've been fascinated by the MB-5 since I read about it in a book as a child many years ago.
It's like the best CD player when everyone else streams their music. A petrol supercar in the age of EVs. That appeals to me.
Thanks for another interesting video.
Keeping me nearly sane on my laundry day.
Thanks very much for your outstanding review of the Martin Baker MB5. As you mention in your final comment, Martin Baker is the Western Power's default ejection seat to date.
Finally 😁 one of my favorites. Dug up alot of info on this aircraft, so much so I worked for Martin-Baker
On the end you made excellent teaser for the second part of Martin-Baker company story 😉. When can we expect history of the most important invention in aviation since the appearance of the parachute?
Incredible that martin-baker's legacy with ejection seats comes from this story. A rare, truly beautiful moment in aviation
The P-51's ventral scoop was designed that way to take advantage of the Meredith Effect, pioneered by the British, who used it (sub-optimally) on the Mosquito. The British provided the documentation to Curtis, who were asked to pass it on to North American when the British contracted with them to develop for them the aircraft that became the P-51. MB couldn't steal from the P-51 what it was lent to it by the British.
Dutch Kindelberger, president of North American, was forced to "buy" the plans from Curtis but his response was it "Only told him of what NOT to build. The Mustang scoop was developed by North American. Baker copied the Mustangs general design. obvious as the nose on your face !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Sorry. Meredith effect is real, British and already in use. Rant forever. Still true. Not really an opinion thing.
Everyone had access to the Meredith paper (1935) which was mostly theory. It was the german B. Goethert who applied it to working radiator systems in wind tunnels and published a study in 1938 regarding the ducting and ideal rad temperature differentials. NAA used that information to some extent and developed it further, whereas Curtiss failed on both the XP-40 and XP-46. RAE's Shenstone and Thomas were instrumental in helping NAA perfect the radiator ducting in the P-51 series.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 The interesting issue is why didn't Hawker use the Meredith scheme or the Goethert study or NACA research to fix the problems with the outdated Hurricane which was clearly outclassed by the Spit in 1936. Profiteering and influence peddling to keep the money flowing in.
@@ElsinoreRacerFinnigan is an all--over Yankee hack, to him, anything and everything aeronautical of note, especially of British, was really American. Easily embarrassed, often utterly propagandist, he is best ignored, but with mocking laughter first.
Thanks!
For the record: the first ejection seat was invented by Romanian engineer Aneastase Dragomir in 1929. The German Heinkel firm and Swedish Saab continued development in the 1930s, and debuted on the Heinkel He-280 jet prototype, and was fitted to the He-219 night fighter, He-162 jet "fighter", and the Dornier Do-335. The early German and Swedish systems used compressed air to propel the seat, but by 1943 this was replaced with a gunpowder charge. The Martin-Baker design improved upon the German and Swedish designs by adapting them for faster jet aircraft and became the de facto standard postwar.
Like many ideas, conceiving the idea and making it work 100% of the time from 0 altitude/0 knots are two very, very different things.
As always, a splendid video, a well-researched exploration of a might-have-been fighter plane.
What an amazing but obscure machine with an unfortunate end to its life... So wish I could see it in a museum 😭
Love your channel. Thanks for covering this. Keep up the good work Rex!
According to a book by William Green, as well as flying like a dream, pilots also thought that the cockpit and instrumentation was very well laid out, and should be made as standard for all succeeding aircraft, though whether this includes jet aircraft is not known. Oh, and a very good video. I'd heard of the MB4, but I knew nothing about it.
Criminal what happened to that beautiful bird.
The MB 5 has always had a mythical status in my personal aviation museum of the mind.
The success of MB Ejection seats is lengendary though. With sales to an amazingly diverse collection of countries and companies
@malcolm carter "Personal aviation museum of the mind." I like that thought and it sums up my aviation interest too.
That ending got me, what a wonderful and important legacy for Captain Baker
14:41. That picture has a captured Dornier DO 335 Arrow in the upper left. It looks like it's the A6 or A7 night fighter variant, owing to the second canopy.
MB.5 has always been a favorite. Now you tell me I can never see one. Nonetheless, thanks for making these videos lol. Always love them
Your spot on about that MB5 Rex, another goodie m8!
My uncle flew one while in the RAF. He told me it was one of the finest handling prop planes he flew. Smooth, responded well to controls and was very fast.
Really? Was his name Winkle Brown or Jeff Quill? Zurakowski maybe? LOL.
Muito interessante! Gratidão pelo vídeo e pelas informações!🌟
Well well well. I never knew that. Thank you. I am very aware of MB ejector seats but didn't know why MB came to make them rather than aircraft. Fascinating.
I remember someone talking to me about the MB5 when I was a kid (I am 67). He suggested that it would equally have rivalled the Spitfire as one of the best planes of ww2, if they had had more time for R and D. I suppose we will never know now.
Another fascinating and fantastic video!
Great video as always, really enjoy your channel Rex, thanks! Nice to hear at the end they put the statue up at the gold course where Baker crashed.👍
Great backstory had no idea this plane was built by the same company known for ejection seats. just clicked! Your engineering histories behind the planes are the best.
It is somewhat ironic that Martin-Baker operates those Meteor aircraft as it was their introduction into service that may have been the most significant reason for the MB.5 not being ordered by the Air Ministry. As is so often the case, in life, timing is a crucial element.
Neither of course was the Hawker Fury 1, also first flown in 1944, whose production order was cancelled. The naval version, the Sea Fury, of course had a distinguished career, with both the RN and in overseas airforces.
Quelle triste histoire. Merci de nous l'avoir conté. Vous êtes passionnant!
Very happy to see this channel, deservedly, blowing up with views, keep up the good work
The replica is (or was as of 2016) hangared in Stead Nevada, Home of The Reno National Championship Air Races. If memory serves it was for sale. I was always impressed by its size, and I always had a yen for contra -rotators....It was there for several years, usually in some form of disassembly or what I thought at the time was restoration work. They usually displayed it "opened up" and as far as I could tell ( judging by the condition of the paint on the engine) maybe run on the ground at most. I'll poke around and see what happened to it. Excellent piece, I'll look at more of your stuff. Thanks
Incidentally I heard that it might be the last year of the reno races!
Id love to see you look into the Bugatti racing plane, such an interesting plane imo
Your speech is wonderful for us, foreigners, to study the english language
The MB.5 shares the fate of the DH Hornet - it was the last hurrah of the piston-engined fighter even as the first jets were entering service. The Hornet went to sea for a bit until the Navy worked out how to launch and land jets but after that it was all over.
This shows why near enough can be better that perfect. Near enough would have given use a fantastic aircraft at a time when it was needed instead of when it was no longer needed.
Robert Watson Watt, the radar pioneer adopted as his motto "Second Best Tomorrow". If he'd pfaffed around seeking perfection like James Martin the CH system would never have been completed and we would have lost the Battle of Britain
Most of the war products were just good enough, as they were available and in use, in war time you do not have time to invent new products, you use what you have or modify, and you use what is AVAILABLE and make it do !!!
While you are correct, the man was haunted by guilt for his friend's death.
Fun fact: when contractors make proposals to the US DOD, hoping to win a competition, one of the important criteria is to prove that the contractor has the facilities and workforce to actually build the article.
If the MB.5 had been perfected in mid 1943, a time when it might have played an important role in the war, the question would still be "where will you build 100 planes a month and where will you get the trained workers and raw materials?"
I always look forward to your videos
Thank you for the clear reporting and for bringing this story out into the open. Had never heard of this aircraft before.... Subscribed !
👁💗 this channel because there's NO MUSIC. Thank you Rex.
I love this plane, tragic as it story might be. A question, could you put metric speeds, dimensions and weight in text on screen? My compliments again for presentation and script.
I'm a metric boy, but in aircraft I think altitude in feet, speed in mph.
@@dougerrohmer The only thing Rex could have done better was to put on-screen speeds in Furlongs per Fortnight. tm.
@@gyrene_asea4133 Not if he is pandering to the Yanks - you need football fields in there somewhere 🙂
For the record, metric was originally in the script - but I believe Rex uses the measurement system of whichever country he is talking about
Much as I agree with the idea, I think it's more appropriate to use the system in place at the time the aircraft was designed and built. You lose a lot of the history if you convert everything.
For instance (to switch topics for a moment) in railway history, the original passenger carrying, steam-drawn railways in the UK, that started the whole railway revolution used a gauge of 4' 8.5", because that was the gauge that happened to be used on the internal tramway in the quarry where Stephenson had been employed when he started building steam engines. To describe it as 1.435m is to lose all that history. Stephenson would have been blissfully unaware of the metric measurement of his railway.
Had such railways first been developed in (say) France, then the world might now run on 1.5m gauge lines, but no one would refer to them as 4' 11" gauge!
Subscribed. Enjoyed this video very much. You have a talent for presenting and providing facts. Keep up the good work!
14:41 Do 335 my beloved, this is one of the ~11 A-0 models converted into A-10/11/12 (All three designations exist and refer to the two-seated trainer versions, as far as I know) and also the one that sadly ended up crashing into a school, killing Group Captain AF Hards.
Fascinating stuff. One of the many what might have been stories of WW2.
French magazine aero-journal has a great article on Martin-baker and the mb5. What a gorgeous machine
Always loved this plane
Interesting to learn a bit about the history of Martn-Baker. I work for a company that supplies parts for MB ejector seat systems, so it's of interest that they used to make complete aircraft.
After reading about this aircraft long ago, I thought is was unfortunate it was not produced for service in WWII. Thanks for your work on this.
Another grand video, Rex. Thanks and kudos.
When you allow a frisky Mustang and a horny Spitfire alone in a hangar for too long.
Great job as always, keep'em comin'!
This is without doubt my favourite fighter 'might have been' of WW2
Excellent video, thoroughly enjoyed that.
That was really interesting - thank you. For someone who isn't really an aircraft nut, I'm amazed at how I still find this channel so interesting! Must be something to do with the quality of the research and videos, I suppose...
Two possible future videos occur to me after watching this:
First the impact of jet power on fighters. Had the Germans produced decent jet fighters earlier in the war and in numbers, would it have had a effect on the way the war ended? Would it have significantly affected the allies' ability to achieve air superiority before F Day, for instance? Or, if we had developed jet powered fighters earlier, would it have shortened the course of the war by (for instance) giving us air superiority during bombing raids and bringing total air superiority earlier, so bringing D Day forward?
And, secondly, I have always been fascinated by contra-rotating propellers, as they seem to have two great advantages - more power, and the elimination of one-sided propeller torque. So why weren't they used more, why didn't they become the norm? Was it just the increased technical difficulties, or was it simply down to conservative attitudes in the air force and air industry?
Lovely stuff, as always.
Good video man! thoroughly enjoyed this!
Great Video!
Thanks for sharing this info with us…
Cheers!
While working with the RCAF in Europe in the late 1950s my dad, John Hemphill Stewart, DFM, developed an ejector seat that was trialed against The Martin-Baker seat and was not adopted for various reasons.
What? Did it eject downwards or something?
Babe wake up new rex's hangar video dropped
LMAO!!!
What an amazing channel and video. Well done Sir. 👍
This was excellent. Very well produced. I'm definitely subscribing.
Fantastic job to actually see authentic photos of what you're talking about when you're talking about it in World War II aircraft nowadays on UA-cam
I mean that's kicking the crap out of the big channels known for such stuff
You see it all the time they're talking about one thing and they show something completely different too much filler in them
I mentioned this fighter in the comments section a while back. Half of the story was that the death of Baker in a testing accident affected James Martin’s resolve to produce aircraft prototypes, and instead focused on pilot escape methods.
I did a lot of archival research on MB and came away with the opinion that the company knew they were only ever producing experimental designs to satisfy ministry requests to advance aspects of engineering during wartime. I know Martin was more adept at solving specific problems through mechanical ingenuity, such as the very successful wing mounted cable cutter.
So basically. 2 buddies made a plane that killed one of them. Other dude decides to create a masterpiece of an aircraft and when nobody wanted it, he decides to develop a way to save pilots.
Astonishing man.
best plane i have never heard of...............thanks for the video! The MB5 is was what we could call.......the super prop that almost made it.
Amazing video, I believe that for being a teenager, i feel to say your video are the perfect example of how the quantity and quality of information on UA-cam is increasing in the right way. Great work!
Welcome to the jet age MB5, great looking plane and serious performance. Timing is everything though. Martin Baker live on with ejector seat, I believe you get a tie from them if you have had to eject using one of their seats
Makes you wonder how things might have been different if the prototype hadn't have crashed and Baker wasn't killed. Might the company have been a bit less perfectionist in it's design philosophy with it if Baker were still around to reign Martin in a little? If so, maybe the plane gets finished soon enough for the RAF to be able to put it into production.... but then the company might not have gone on to make ejector seats, thus potentially costing thousands their lives. Definitely a very interesting divergence point for sure.
Seemingly a terrific plane !
From what I have read it was pretty decent. Yes with some issues, which could have been worked out.
Thanks.. this is an excellent presentation.
Wait, the same Martin Baker that made the ejection seats for our F-4's?
A wonderful video Rex!
The photo at 14:40 is very interesting with a Supermarine Spiteful in the foreground, then the MB5 and then a machine that looks like a Tempest II or Sea Fury fuselage with squared off wingtips and tail. The vertical stab is also mounted forward of the horizontal stab with possibly an arresting hook underneath, what type is this?
It's the Blackburn firebrand, a naval torpedo bomber to replace the glorious fairy swordfish
@@euanmorris7835 Thanks for that!
Hi Rex! My name's Scott and I have to tell you that I truly appreciate these ultra Cool videos. These videos go so perfectly with my Houka times. I personally feel that you are up on the same shelf as Lemme Kilmister and Bon Scott. I hope the new house 🏠 things are going smoothly.
Tytyty 😊😊😊
14:35 shows Supermarine Spiteful XIV RB521, (another very interesting aircraft)
Excellent original content, well done! Subscribed.
Most interesting -- what a beautiful plane. What a shame that the timing didn't work out. And what a tragedy that Mr Baker died.
Test pilots are truly brave souls.
(My husband already knew that all the best ejection seats are Martin-Baker ... I'll never catch up haha.)
And since everyone is pointing out the Do-335, maybe someday, when Rex is feeling he has too much sanity, he'll take us down the rabbit hole that are the "Luft 46" designs in greater detail (like the Ta-183 Huckebein).
Great presentation.