You have your details wrong on where #2 is. It's crashed out in the middle of nowhere Alaska near Delta Junction. Spent the night in it once with my dog.
I worked for Peter Ahrens in FL right out of college in the 90's. He had a new version of the 404 with a circular fuselage in parts in a couple 40' containers. It looked even more like a mini-130. He claimed at that time it would be PT6 powered. Nothing even came of it. As is common with aviation projects, he was kind of a carnival barker to try to raise funding to get that thing off the ground.
It made me happy to hear you talk about the Gafhawk. I saw it every school day at the airport where it was stored before it went to Poland. I got to see it fly before it went away. It's sad to hear where it ended.
@@The-GreenHornet I was in highschool at yucca valley high and took the bus from Landers. We passed everyday on Old Woman Springs Rd. It has my attention because the drafting teacher worked for Hawk Industries before teaching at the high school and he pointed it out to me one day and told me it's story. Good times.
4:00 that’s not the only example - there was a CP-107 Argus maritime patrol aircraft, based on Bristol Britannia turboprop and fitted with radials to improve fuel efficiency while flying low and slow.
I had the privilege of working for Carl Mortenson as an engineer for several years. He was a very clever man, and had a very witty sense of humor. He passed away in 2020. His second design, the Angel 44 is both higher performance and better looking.
The Gafhawk was built in Yucca Valley, California at Hawk Industries at the small airport. I lived in Yucca Valley and my dad owned many small private airplanes in my childhood. I watched this aircraft being built throughout the years and saw it fly in 82'.
For a part II video, I'd like to nominate the IAI Arava. I have read one account where the plane was described as, "A spread-eagle monkey humping an American football." It did it's job well as a reliable, rugged STOL aircraft. It was not built in large numbers and not one design element was for aesthetics.
Noted! I saw an Arava up close when visiting Argentina, watching it blast off from a tiny dirt strip. We called it the "flying watermelon". The company my dad worked for in the early 80s imported Aravas but they were a flop in the US market.
Back in the late 80’s and early 90’ as college student I did many road trips in Southern California, I remember seeing a strange airplane at one remote airport. Corrugated metal high wing, looked like a mini Shorts but with a single engine (which was missing so it was squatting on its tail) and when the photo of #2 the GAF Hawk appeared I thought I finally knew what I saw back then. I am going to try and search through my old photos and see if I can find it. It was in pretty good condition but sitting outside on the ramp. it was a very strange aircraft but looked professionally built. I remember stopping at California City, Mohave and Needles. hopefully the photos will jog my memory
I flew on this development aircraft to measure the performance of the PT6A-45R engine it had installed. I had to wear a seat parachute "just in case - but don't get out of the aircraft if the engine quits....stay with it"...and I remember watching the trucks on the road going faster than we were (at times....)
I rode the Dash 7 back in the mid-80s, was a short hop in Georgia, don't recall the airline. I was so excited for the flight that I don't recall that rough part.
@@aircraftadventures-vids the people who made it didn't really know what they were doing. It isn't a bad idea to try to make something that suits your needs but when other people's lives are at risk and they aren't aware of the flaws and risks it's problem. Also it sounds like your making the FAA the enemy atlest the tone of the AI voice does and true the FAA isn't perfect but is responsible for alot of the safety we enjoy today when it comes to air travel. Basically if the plane was only going to fairy people aware of it's fatal flaws then I guess it's good. I would fly it for fun. Basically I don't have the results of the FAA tests so I can't say completely it's bad but I assume that if they didn't certify it it must have been unsafe
Thanks for the comment! I will be producing more videos soon, stay tuned. And in the meanwhile, check out my Instagram which has tons of content on rare planes: instagram.com/aircraftadventures/
@@aircraftadventures-vids I'm sure I will... The history of aviation is beautiful and enormous, written not only by those who manage to make large-scale productions but also by those other brilliant minds who don't. Keep this on, please. Thanks to you :)
An LD3 carrier is a great idea, just surprising it took so long to come to fruition. FX have started to use them now as made by Cessna, but before that had spent ~10 years developing one unsuccessfully with a twin-pack turbine setup (2 engines, 1 prop). If the Aarons had come along say 5-10 years later, it could have found a ready market in the express carriers, maybe in a short fuselage version. Unloading loose bulk packages from an aircraft takes a long time, and exposes then to rain and snow (and loading into them). Then even more time to re-build them into a container. The AN26 could be equipped as a ULD carrier, and was excellent for the role. It was used in EU somewhat, but was just too much of a leap for western carriers to procure eastern aircraft on a large scale.
I know that one! By coincidence, I am considering doing a video on the Guarani. I think people won't believe how crazy that one looks. (I love it, tough)
Interesting video, but please don't add the subtitles (captions at bottom of screen). These are distracting and unnecessary. If somebody needs them, they can click the CC button. If somebody uses the CC and translate features to watch in another language, your added caption are in the way of the translation.
It seems like to me it was kind of a "condemned by business model" type. of failure, not so much the plane itself. Then again it probably would have fared better with twin PT6s.
7:18 What does it mean that they could not get certification, as the aircraft is stall proof? Was being stall proof seen as a negative? Did they want a plane to be capable of stalling to certify it?
idk they look kinda good tbh i know, my type of aircraft looks is a bit weird. i like short 737s like 737-600 and others, also 747sp is one of my favourites!
stall recovery has been a pain in the rear for FAA certification on some aircraft. you have to prove the aircraft can recover from a stall within 1500 feet, for a single engine aircraft... the problem is when the aircraft either can't stall or you have to do something truely extreme to even get it to stall, that the FAA says it fails stall recovery. For example, in one case, the aircraft had so so much power that it could accelerate in a vertical climb. trottling back in a climb you'd slow down below... stall speed. and could actually hover hanging by the props. so where an aerodynamic stall SHOULD happen, nose up to high, wings low... the prop wash over the wings kept the aircraft in flight till... well... till the angle hit the point where the props held the aircraft up on its own.. to recover you just increased power start climbing then nose over once you have abit of speed. problem was this wasn't considered a stall, so it couldn't do stall recovery and failed.
@@aircraftadventures-vids i can't remember the exact name, it was a kit aircraft based on the Vought V-173, reproduction with different engines. the 173 already was all but impossible to stall. So a reproduction made in 2001 with modern materials...
@@aircraftadventures-vids oh on a side note some early canard aircraft had problems too because the canards would stall out before the wings and thus cause the nose to drop and an "auto stall recovery" to occur... the FAA had trouble with this and making rulings on canard aircraft...
@@aircraftadventures-vids Look how long it took them to get the FAA to change the regulations on twin engine aircraft flying Atlantic routes. Boeing had to fight tooth and nail to get the FAA to relax their rules. It used to be 3+ engines to fly Atlantic routes.. it wasn't until 1985 when ETOPS rules were loosened to allow twin engine. - Boeing 767 to fly trans Atlantic...
4:00 "The only aircraft "upgraded" from a turboprop to a piston radial in history" Not true, at least not quite. The Canadair CP-107 Argus maritime patrol aircraft was derived from the turboprop airliner Bristol Britannia, yet reverted to Wright R-3350 TC18EA1 18 cylinder Turbo-Compound air-cooled radial engines, 3,700 hp (2,800 kW) each. Presumably this was done due to the radial's lower fuel consumption at low power settings, allowing for an endurance of approximately 26½ hours with full armament, see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CP-107_Argus
The AVRO Athena Mk I first flew in 1948 with a Mamba turbo prop but was re-engineered to take the RR Dart turbo prop making it a Mk Ia, but in an attempt to get the RAF interested it was re-engined a second time as the T Mk 2 with a Rolls Royce Merlin.
#1 cocaine mule plane. #2 The American government hates the American people plane. #3 Cheaper, different, Rejected plane. #4 Question plane. #5 The Franken-flyer plane. (The FAA turns up a lot it seems. Never a good thing.)
Nothing that did exactly what the Evangel did - twin engines (600 hp total), boxy fuselage, STOL. If you can name an equivalent, I stand corrected. (and someone should have told the designer too, lol)
@@aircraftadventures-vids Antonov An 2 with 18,000 built. De Haviland Otter with 450 built. Dornier Do 25 or 27 with 550 built. That's a good start. I'm sure any of them would have loved to sell more.
There were many choices. Helo Couriers were popular for example. There was a certain market though, that they were focussed on, the christian missionaries, who had some different requirements, mainly carrying more stuff more frequently.
@@jeffstrom164the AN2 was and is an awesome bush aircraft, but I'm not sure if it could have been exported from the USSR at the time... automobiles were exported, and trucks and busses, but I'm not aware of any aircraft examples...
I've been thinking about getting an experimental plane. The one that checks all the boxes is the BD-4C, but it is so dang UGLY I just don't think I can do it
I "stole" nothing, lol. All the videos I sourced from are listed in my description, as I do in my videos. Anyhow, if yours is not listed there, please share the link and I'll make sure it's credited.
@@aircraftadventures-vids Improvised? Do you mean improvised tools or improvised repairs? I'm a mechanic, you can make some repairs using the wrong tool for the job but, you are definitely using a tool, for example you can remove a nut with a pair of pliers where ideally you would use a socket or a correctly sized wrench. An example of an improvised repair would be repairing a hole in the fuselage or wing using tape or aluminum to cover the hole using adhesive to hold it in place, where ideally a panel would be replaced using rivets. I can imagine a wide range of creative makeshift or improvised repairs but, these are still done using tools.
@@aircraftadventures-vids Not really. The Ahrens and the Nomad were both junk Easily among the worst airplanes I've ever flown. My company rejected both types for their operation, even after sinking a bunch of money into the Ahrens.
Lol, ok point taken. My dad (who sold commuter planes in the 80s) told me the Nomad was a POS and hangar queen. As a young kid I didn't know or care, just thought they looked cool. @@prophetsnake
Lol, scared is right. I've tried it before (look up the Pond Racer video) and my voice puts everyone to sleep. My next video is a collab with another youtube with a great voiceover, coming up very soon.
@@aircraftadventures-vids Hey, saw in your other message that you're gonna narrate yourself next video but still wanted to say that your voice is fine, and a big improvement over the AI. Only suggestion would be to use a decent mic and do your best to minimise any reverb or sound from the room you record in. Looking forward to the next video!
@@aircraftadventures-vids I'll be watching ;) BTW I have access to some interesting and unusual aircraft in the UK, I dont know how to message on UA-cam but I can elaborate privately if of interest to you.
![The Giant Airliner With Cabins In Its Wings | Junkers G38 [Aircraft Overview #19]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5uFNOtsucKE/mqdefault.jpg)
great content but the AI voice is a bit annoying
Totally agree - no more Ai voice moving forward. 👍
I refuse to watch to robot narrated videos
I’m glad I can turn off that annoying voice and music
Sorry I refuse to watch AI voiced Bull crap Youttube should bann the AI voice crap
@@aircraftadventures-vidsRequest no music over the narration
The Evangel is quite a practical aircraft and it’s surprising it didn’t get more use. Great video. 👍🏻
Would be great if someone tried to resurrect it.
I see a very specific use for an airplane that can fly a ton of cargo safely from a South American jungles.
You have your details wrong on where #2 is. It's crashed out in the middle of nowhere Alaska near Delta Junction. Spent the night in it once with my dog.
Thanks for the update, I didn't know (and a shame of what came of it)
Informational, educational and presented with quite a bit of humor. What more could one ask for!
Thanks for watching! I'm learning as I go too.
Man the 404 looked gorgeous. I’m tempted to go over to LV and rescue that one.
I worked for Peter Ahrens in FL right out of college in the 90's. He had a new version of the 404 with a circular fuselage in parts in a couple 40' containers. It looked even more like a mini-130. He claimed at that time it would be PT6 powered. Nothing even came of it. As is common with aviation projects, he was kind of a carnival barker to try to raise funding to get that thing off the ground.
So glad the Pratt and Whitnet engines worked so well.
It made me happy to hear you talk about the Gafhawk. I saw it every school day at the airport where it was stored before it went to Poland. I got to see it fly before it went away. It's sad to hear where it ended.
I'm happy to give it some exposure! An extremely obscure type for most.
I think it’s here in my town. Bethel alaska
I too saw the gafhawk at Yucca Valley Airport.
I lived on the Airport in Yucca Valley during those years.
@@The-GreenHornet I was in highschool at yucca valley high and took the bus from Landers. We passed everyday on Old Woman Springs Rd. It has my attention because the drafting teacher worked for Hawk Industries before teaching at the high school and he pointed it out to me one day and told me it's story. Good times.
You're right. These were all aircraft I've never heard of.
4:00 that’s not the only example - there was a CP-107 Argus maritime patrol aircraft, based on Bristol Britannia turboprop and fitted with radials to improve fuel efficiency while flying low and slow.
Very true, I do recall that one.
I had the privilege of working for Carl Mortenson as an engineer for several years. He was a very clever man, and had a very witty sense of humor. He passed away in 2020.
His second design, the Angel 44 is both higher performance and better looking.
That's awesome to hear, what an experience. Shame neither design panned out.
The Gafhawk was built in Yucca Valley, California at Hawk Industries at the small airport.
I lived in Yucca Valley and my dad owned many small private airplanes in my childhood.
I watched this aircraft being built throughout the years and saw it fly in 82'.
Great story about aircraft adventures!!
FAA: This thing has to pass the test everyone else does.
Gaff Hawk: "TYRANNY!"
Good to see the great Bruce Spence getting some profile
Gyro captain is my favorite movie character, hence my avatar.
For a part II video, I'd like to nominate the IAI Arava. I have read one account where the plane was described as, "A spread-eagle monkey humping an American football." It did it's job well as a reliable, rugged STOL aircraft. It was not built in large numbers and not one design element was for aesthetics.
Noted! I saw an Arava up close when visiting Argentina, watching it blast off from a tiny dirt strip. We called it the "flying watermelon". The company my dad worked for in the early 80s imported Aravas but they were a flop in the US market.
Your pronunciation and terminology are... unusual, shall we say, graciously. Very graciously.
That belongs to a friend, but I’ll pass on the praise 😂
Back in the late 80’s and early 90’ as college student I did many road trips in Southern California, I remember seeing a strange airplane at one remote airport. Corrugated metal high wing, looked like a mini Shorts but with a single engine (which was missing so it was squatting on its tail) and when the photo of #2 the GAF Hawk appeared I thought I finally knew what I saw back then. I am going to try and search through my old photos and see if I can find it. It was in pretty good condition but sitting outside on the ramp. it was a very strange aircraft but looked professionally built. I remember stopping at California City, Mohave and Needles. hopefully the photos will jog my memory
That's awesome, it seems you stumbled upon a very rare bird indeed. California was (and still is) ripe with highly experimental aircraft.
I flew on this development aircraft to measure the performance of the PT6A-45R engine it had installed. I had to wear a seat parachute "just in case - but don't get out of the aircraft if the engine quits....stay with it"...and I remember watching the trucks on the road going faster than we were (at times....)
Fascinating! It reminds me a bit of a single engine Shorts, which I had the opportunity to fly a couple times @@janhawranke8064
Truly a pity that it never got a chance.
Can't say I have ridden on any of those but you made mention of the Dash 7. The Dash 7 rode a bit rougher than a paint mixer.
Really? I always thought the DASH 7 looked like a real smooth flier.
@@akizeta Yes really! Having an OJ was quite the challenge. I felt like I needed a child's 'sippy cup'. BTW I don't have Parkinsons either.
I rode the Dash 7 back in the mid-80s, was a short hop in Georgia, don't recall the airline. I was so excited for the flight that I don't recall that rough part.
I could sort of see that. Those slow-turning blades on the -7 were huge and produced a very low hum.
That second plane should never have flown. It was a deathtrap for all in the area. Thank you FAA
How so? Just curious. To me it's looks like a single-engined Skyvan, which has been proven safe.
@@aircraftadventures-vids the people who made it didn't really know what they were doing. It isn't a bad idea to try to make something that suits your needs but when other people's lives are at risk and they aren't aware of the flaws and risks it's problem. Also it sounds like your making the FAA the enemy atlest the tone of the AI voice does and true the FAA isn't perfect but is responsible for alot of the safety we enjoy today when it comes to air travel. Basically if the plane was only going to fairy people aware of it's fatal flaws then I guess it's good. I would fly it for fun. Basically I don't have the results of the FAA tests so I can't say completely it's bad but I assume that if they didn't certify it it must have been unsafe
Thanks for sharing this information man. Every day one can learn about aviation, thank you! :)
Thanks for the comment! I will be producing more videos soon, stay tuned. And in the meanwhile, check out my Instagram which has tons of content on rare planes: instagram.com/aircraftadventures/
@@aircraftadventures-vids I'm sure I will... The history of aviation is beautiful and enormous, written not only by those who manage to make large-scale productions but also by those other brilliant minds who don't. Keep this on, please. Thanks to you :)
How hard is it to have a living person narrate these videos??
the paras cargo is such a sploingly scrumble
An LD3 carrier is a great idea, just surprising it took so long to come to fruition. FX have started to use them now as made by Cessna, but before that had spent ~10 years developing one unsuccessfully with a twin-pack turbine setup (2 engines, 1 prop). If the Aarons had come along say 5-10 years later, it could have found a ready market in the express carriers, maybe in a short fuselage version.
Unloading loose bulk packages from an aircraft takes a long time, and exposes then to rain and snow (and loading into them). Then even more time to re-build them into a container.
The AN26 could be equipped as a ULD carrier, and was excellent for the role. It was used in EU somewhat, but was just too much of a leap for western carriers to procure eastern aircraft on a large scale.
1:51 lol I forgot about those!
We can't all be Spitfires.
Looks like a Ford Trimotor had a baby. The Gaf hawk.
it does indeed!
Terrible computer generated voice makes this just about unlistenable.
Sorry about that, honestly. But I tried recording it with my own voice and trust me, it's even more unlistenable.
Antonov AN2 and Shorts Skyvan would do all of these
Antonov An 2 I only saw once flying in AUS .I thought how does that big mother of a thing stay in the air flying so slow.Thats a real Bush plane
Engineering Ambitions to ever have survived FAA scrutiny.
Those that are into planes will click on this video - and most of us have heard if ALL of them. So no surprises here !
That's true I guess. But I am also trying to reach people who like planes but not necessarily obscure ones.
Fun thx!
Some crazy designs. But ass the say you can not fly if you do not spread your wings.
8:00 ...looks like s.k.o. a 'Poor-man's Hercules'...! 😉
Basically...
Caribou baby...there already was a little cargo plane.
What of the "AirTruk", seen in the 3rd "Max Max" movie, "Beyond Thunderdome"?
Ahhhh! You'll be happy to know that's my next video coming out. Hang tight...
TransAvia Air truck limited production crop spraying aircraft made in Sydney Australia in the 1970s really ugly.
could you turn up the music....i could almost hear the dialogue. but otherwise nice video
Living n learning, music is long-gone in my videos now.
The Hawk looks like a Caravan
Here an oddity from Argentina that you have probably never heard of the DINFIA IA 35 Huanquero
I know that one! By coincidence, I am considering doing a video on the Guarani. I think people won't believe how crazy that one looks. (I love it, tough)
yeah looks pretty standard (no spoilers ... until you notice something :) :)@@aircraftadventures-vids
Especially the 'thread' of arrows.
Interesting video, but please don't add the subtitles (captions at bottom of screen). These are distracting and unnecessary. If somebody needs them, they can click the CC button. If somebody uses the CC and translate features to watch in another language, your added caption are in the way of the translation.
Howdy! 3:57
It is not PZL radial!
But АШ62(USSR engine) and AV2 propeller
The same installed on Antonov Аn2
But I think this was licensed-built by PZL (not their original design)
... which in turn was a development of the Wright R-1820 Cyclone that had been built in the USSR under licence!
404 is awesome sad it’s not flying
It seems like to me it was kind of a "condemned by business model" type. of failure, not so much the plane itself. Then again it probably would have fared better with twin PT6s.
Ahrens 404 was a project of Lego-Aircraft
😂
FAA jump scare 😨
Great video, crap music.
7:18 What does it mean that they could not get certification, as the aircraft is stall proof? Was being stall proof seen as a negative? Did they want a plane to be capable of stalling to certify it?
idk they look kinda good tbh i know, my type of aircraft looks is a bit weird. i like short 737s like 737-600 and others,
also 747sp is one of my favourites!
I'm right with you! Hang tight for my next video coming up on the Airtruk. Ugly, but in a beautiful way!
Only the French would ignore the deadly flying flea and try to build a bigger version of it
stall recovery has been a pain in the rear for FAA certification on some aircraft. you have to prove the aircraft can recover from a stall within 1500 feet, for a single engine aircraft... the problem is when the aircraft either can't stall or you have to do something truely extreme to even get it to stall, that the FAA says it fails stall recovery.
For example, in one case, the aircraft had so so much power that it could accelerate in a vertical climb. trottling back in a climb you'd slow down below... stall speed. and could actually hover hanging by the props. so where an aerodynamic stall SHOULD happen, nose up to high, wings low... the prop wash over the wings kept the aircraft in flight till... well... till the angle hit the point where the props held the aircraft up on its own.. to recover you just increased power start climbing then nose over once you have abit of speed. problem was this wasn't considered a stall, so it couldn't do stall recovery and failed.
Thanks for the insight on that. Which aircraft was that, by the way?
@@aircraftadventures-vids i can't remember the exact name, it was a kit aircraft based on the Vought V-173, reproduction with different engines. the 173 already was all but impossible to stall. So a reproduction made in 2001 with modern materials...
@@aircraftadventures-vids oh on a side note some early canard aircraft had problems too because the canards would stall out before the wings and thus cause the nose to drop and an "auto stall recovery" to occur... the FAA had trouble with this and making rulings on canard aircraft...
@@jenniferstewarts4851 which i assume was the kiss of death for the starship
@@aircraftadventures-vids Look how long it took them to get the FAA to change the regulations on twin engine aircraft flying Atlantic routes.
Boeing had to fight tooth and nail to get the FAA to relax their rules. It used to be 3+ engines to fly Atlantic routes.. it wasn't until 1985 when ETOPS rules were loosened to allow twin engine. - Boeing 767 to fly trans Atlantic...
The evangel with 2 diesel engines would be the perfect fit for canada or such places
4:00 "The only aircraft "upgraded" from a turboprop to a piston radial in history"
Not true, at least not quite.
The Canadair CP-107 Argus maritime patrol aircraft was derived from the turboprop airliner Bristol Britannia, yet reverted to Wright R-3350 TC18EA1 18 cylinder Turbo-Compound air-cooled radial engines, 3,700 hp (2,800 kW) each. Presumably this was done due to the radial's lower fuel consumption at low power settings, allowing for an endurance of approximately 26½ hours with full armament, see here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CP-107_Argus
Very true and someone else commented on that. I stand corrected
The AVRO Athena Mk I first flew in 1948 with a Mamba turbo prop but was re-engineered to take the RR Dart turbo prop making it a Mk Ia, but in an attempt to get the RAF interested it was re-engined a second time as the T Mk 2 with a Rolls Royce Merlin.
Okay so the 15 aircraft put into service were all T2 with Merlin 35 engines?
@@alastairmellor966
The crazy zoom in/out stuff gave me a headache!
#1 cocaine mule plane. #2 The American government hates the American people plane. #3 Cheaper, different, Rejected plane. #4 Question plane. #5 The Franken-flyer plane. (The FAA turns up a lot it seems. Never a good thing.)
There is an Evangel in Colombia, they are trying to restore it
Yc-14?
Arens 404... shoebox and a ruler.
😂
The first story. There weren't any small bush cargo planes? In the 60s? I call bs.
Nothing that did exactly what the Evangel did - twin engines (600 hp total), boxy fuselage, STOL. If you can name an equivalent, I stand corrected. (and someone should have told the designer too, lol)
@@aircraftadventures-vids Antonov An 2 with 18,000 built. De Haviland Otter with 450 built. Dornier Do 25 or 27 with 550 built. That's a good start. I'm sure any of them would have loved to sell more.
There were many choices. Helo Couriers were popular for example. There was a certain market though, that they were focussed on, the christian missionaries, who had some different requirements, mainly carrying more stuff more frequently.
@@jeffstrom164the AN2 was and is an awesome bush aircraft, but I'm not sure if it could have been exported from the USSR at the time... automobiles were exported, and trucks and busses, but I'm not aware of any aircraft examples...
why AI voice? not good
Noted, and next video will have human voice (a friend is helping with that part)
I've been thinking about getting an experimental plane. The one that checks all the boxes is the BD-4C, but it is so dang UGLY I just don't think I can do it
Do it! Can't see the ugly from the inside, besides, imagine all the oohs and aahs at any airport when you fly in.
Hey You stole one of my videos and used it in there !!! - ( Its ok, as long as you promote Aviation. ) Regards from Alaska!
I "stole" nothing, lol. All the videos I sourced from are listed in my description, as I do in my videos. Anyhow, if yours is not listed there, please share the link and I'll make sure it's credited.
El Evangel me recuerda un poco al FMA IA 50 Guaraní.
That's a design I REALLY love. It's so strange looking that it's cool. Hmm, maybe I'll do a video on that one.
1:11 makeshift tools? Like what, using your mom's butter knife as a screwdriver? I think what you mean is they could be repaired with basic tools.
Ok, how about improvised? Like whatever you've got in hands
@@aircraftadventures-vids Improvised? Do you mean improvised tools or improvised repairs?
I'm a mechanic, you can make some repairs using the wrong tool for the job but, you are definitely using a tool, for example you can remove a nut with a pair of pliers where ideally you would use a socket or a correctly sized wrench. An example of an improvised repair would be repairing a hole in the fuselage or wing using tape or aluminum to cover the hole using adhesive to hold it in place, where ideally a panel would be replaced using rivets. I can imagine a wide range of creative makeshift or improvised repairs but, these are still done using tools.
why the anoying music ????
Noted! I have since done away with music on the newer videos.
The fake voiceover is terrible
totally agree! I'm taking care of that for the next video
Details wrong and an annoying computerized voiceover 👎
It's Pou-du-ciel, not Pou-de-ciel.
This are genesis
I've heard of all of them and flown two of them, so no.
Well, you're a lucky one among us!
@@aircraftadventures-vids Not really. The Ahrens and the Nomad were both junk Easily among the worst airplanes I've ever flown. My company rejected both types for their operation, even after sinking a bunch of money into the Ahrens.
Lol, ok point taken. My dad (who sold commuter planes in the 80s) told me the Nomad was a POS and hangar queen. As a young kid I didn't know or care, just thought they looked cool. @@prophetsnake
1680 x 4 = 6720
PLEASE! GET RID OF YOUR ROBOT! It can't read the text properly.
Good news: robot has since been fired. Bad news: I can't read text properly either 😂
AI Voiceover detracts from an otherwise interesting video.
Agreed. Ai voice has been fired 👍
Interesting content, but the motion sickness inducing effects earn a thumbs down from me.
Top tip: Get a human to read the script.
Agreed! See my latest video on pusher planes, that human is me. 👍
Super annoying background music that don't let you hear two thumbs down
Yeah, no more annoying music on the newer videos
@@aircraftadventures-vids why do Utubers deem it needed ????
What annoying narration. That's what you get when you rely on AI, I guess.
Agreed - that Ai voice has been fired from the staff!
The minute words are mispronounced I stopped watching.
Sorry to hear that! I no longer use computer-generated voices in my latest videos. But no guarantee I won't flub up a word or two myself 😂
Ai voice and bad captions ruin your videos.
Do the voiceovers and narration yourself!
We are no longer user ai on the latest videos
I gave this, some what informative clip, a thumbs down. Get a real person to narrate your clips. Dump the A.I. !
Totally understood, and I'm getting a lot of backlash on that. Next video up is 100% human voice! (would you mind reverting the thumbs down?)
Why are you scared to just talk? I can't stand the ai voice it ruined the video.
Lol, scared is right. I've tried it before (look up the Pond Racer video) and my voice puts everyone to sleep. My next video is a collab with another youtube with a great voiceover, coming up very soon.
@@aircraftadventures-vids Hey, saw in your other message that you're gonna narrate yourself next video but still wanted to say that your voice is fine, and a big improvement over the AI. Only suggestion would be to use a decent mic and do your best to minimise any reverb or sound from the room you record in. Looking forward to the next video!
Today at 6PM EST! With a friend's voice, but possibly next one will be mine. @@eddcla7766
@@aircraftadventures-vids I'll be watching ;) BTW I have access to some interesting and unusual aircraft in the UK, I dont know how to message on UA-cam but I can elaborate privately if of interest to you.