Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
“I am not an animal…”; The Short S.B.3
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 кві 2021
- Another...interesting...looking anti-submarine aircraft from the Short company, the S.B.3 was what can happen when you keep messing with a design to try to meet changing requirements.
If you like this content please consider supporting me at Patreon:
/ ednash
Want another way to help support this channel? Maybe consider buying my book on my time fighting ISIS:
amzn.to/3preYyO
Interested in military affairs/history?
militarymatters...
![The Fighter That Tried To Replace The Spitfire | Martin-Baker MB.5 [Aircraft Overview #82]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1CJWEc_sQkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![The Fighter That Tried To Replace The Spitfire | Martin-Baker MB.5 [Aircraft Overview #82]](/img/tr.png)
In this episode, Mr Nash struggles to not call a plane ugly for 3 and a half minutes
hahahaha. Legend.
I just can't help but imagining a cut away of that nose section that reveals a bloke on the toilet having a dump reading The Autotrader.
😂
It surely wouldn't have been the Financial Review or the Times he was reading
Aero trader lol
Does that count as that lavatory humour or a crap joke?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Too right!
Looks like Rocky finally showed Bullwinkle how to fly.
Its just as well that it was cancelled...Imagine the young man, who has dreamed of being a military flier his entire life, imagining himself dancing through the air in a Typhoon or a Spitfire, and then the Royal Navy assigns him to one of these.....heartbreaking.
shattered dreams indeed
Yeah it's ugly but it flys, takes off and lands on carriers .
mutual feelings for an Air Force pilot thinking of F-16, 15s or 35s gets an A-10 Warthog rooting thru the dirt 50 ft above ground...until he pulls the trigger on that 30mm can opener in front.
He would fly Gannets instead!
@@K1W1fly Well, I suppose that would be somewhat better....Still, a Gannet isn't really a handsome aircraft, is it?
Oh my, they showed this at a world famous airshow? That poor pilot.
'Pretty nice looking bird' - I noticed that - only because I've been in quarantine since Nov...
Know how you feel Bud.
You are a funny guy....
@@petervollhiem3109 I'm also available for Weddings, Kid's birthday parties, funerals and Bar Mitsvahs.... :-)
@@nickpapa1721 Can you do Mitsvahs which didn't get a drinks licence too?
Talk about a face only a mother could love.
My son said it looks like an airborne Squidward
@@mattheweagles5123 yeah , your son.
@@mattheweagles5123 A flying Manatee instantly came to mind.
And still better looking than the Fairly Gannett!
I wince every time I hear the words 'prototype' and 'scrapped'. Really wish I could see some of these in a museum. Thanks for another fascinating vid.
@MichaelKingsfordGray eh?
In aviation the saying goes, "If it looks right, it flies right". The S.B.3 looked wrong!
Very very very wrong.
thats my problem with the british aircraft designers they always fail to take a good long look at what they build. its like they dug in their heels and said its my design this is the way its gonna be and I dont care what you say.
@@mikepette4422 Camel, Spitfire, Hunter, Vulcan, Lightning, Buccaneer, TSR2 Harrier, Hawk, Eurofighter Typhoon ,,,,,,, or more concisely - bollocks.
You did it again...presented a plane I had never heard of.
And now I will have nightmares about this 'thing'.
Peace.
If Jay Leno was a Aeroplane he would be a Short S.B.3
He probably owns one.
Or Bullwinkle.
Yeah "Lantern Chin"...LOL...
I actually think this is a design that could grow on me! It reminds me of the ARC-170 ships from Star Wars.
So it does, says one sci-fi nerd to another. 😅🤣😂👍
Wouldn't surprise me if the ARC's design was based on this plane. It's similarity is striking.
@@andrewharper3165 may the force be with you 👍🏻
@@SandsOfArrakis
The ARC-170 was based on the P-61 you can see it in the crew positions.
Bang on! You knew what I was thinking before I knew what I was thinking. Not that I watch childish sci films on dvds,tut tut,I'm watching them all on 4K and I got the model kit! Year of '64 :-)
Thank you Mr Nash! I did not know about this one. A bit of a dropped pie look about it I must say.
Really interesting & watchable.... Yet more little known stuff unearthed by this clever aviation history detective.
This only happened because a French bomber designer from the 30's broke into the drawing office.
LOL
Nice one 👍
These people may have been the same ones who, some 50 years before, had designed the French navies battleships which looked like floating hotels
Or a drunk Russian aircraft designer from the era.
He was discovered before he could split the tail.
Let's face it,great body shame about the . . .! Desperate Dan with wings. Either way yet another great video with lots of interesting well researched info. Easy to listen to but keeps your attention. Like the Sunderland,short but full of stuff. Thanks Ed, keep nailing it!
Where does British aviation find these things? It's like they do all their buying out of a marked-down bin. Thanks for these Ed.
We looked at German and us aviation and decided that what they had was much too cool....sooooooo let’s build the equivalent of wacky racers
@@babaganoush6106 - May I have a cuppa, Mrs. Doyle? 😉
@@daveogarf oh go on!
They can’t all be Spitfires.....
@@howardmaryon and if you look at the original spitfire that Mitchell designed.....it would fit very nicely here
Love the Elephant Man reference. There is a dwindling proportion of the population who would see the title and get the reference straight away. I'd love to see a Venn diagram of the set of those people and the set of Ed's viewers.
I'd be in both circles
Honestly I quite like the look of it!
Ah, the Short S.B.3 "Eeyore". My favorite airplane.
Looks like it parked up too close behind one of those new-fangled jets and melted.
If you squint a lot and use your imagination, it vaguely resembles an HP Hampden - at the front anyway
Bit of an insult to the Hampden designed about 20 years earlier.
I agree with you regarding the TT2/3 Sturgeon ... looks like a cut and shut job on the front half of a Sturgeon and the back half of a Mosquito!
@@chrisrichards2544 Sort of Argosy ish maybe?
I would NOT have looked forward to landing that chin in a carrier deck heaving up and down!
It's maybe not so bad if you're the pilot, way up on top. Might be rather traumatic if you're the radar crew who has to sit in that ungainly bulge.
@@johnladuke6475 yeah, landing with your feet off the floor!:)
Well, after watching (in quick succession so as NOT to lose my nerve!) three of these entrants in the Ugly Baby contest, I have to say, Ed old top, you DO have a penchant - and a bizarre talent - for finding the dregs de la dregs of the crop! I wish only that we could see your face as you're doing the commentary . . . perhaps the prototypical Stiff Upper Lip fails you! Good job! "Steady, boys, steady!"
Excellent short, Ed
"Hey Rocky, watch me pull a do-not-see-me-rabbit out of my hat!"
Short Bros were not known for building pretty aircraft but they sure build some very effective and practical machines, the big Sterling, Belfast and Skyvan are good examples.
Would have loved to see one on an airshow!
Excellent video. There is a French Elise anti submarine aircraft from the Foch and Charles DeGaule on a roundabout near me. It looks like a sleek version of the Ganet. The anti sub aircraft always seem to be on the ugly side.
I didn't know you could use the words "sleek" and "Gannet" in the same sentence. LOL.
Perhaps the designer was a fan of Bruce Forsyth? The handling characteristics made it easy for the pilot to "give us a twirl".
Really, this...thing seems got out from a '30s french design board...on a bad day!
... after a long lunch!
Is it weird to say at this plane in particular looks weird and Goofy but also adorable
The Sturgeon in the photo's is a nice looking machine.
But those twin, contra rotating propellers, and the timeframe ... surely that would indicate RR "Griffon" engines, not the "Merlin"?
Edit, seems they were Merlins, didn't think that contra props were fitted to the Merlin, you learn something new every day
Yes, I was a little surprised as well!
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters it's to stop torque turn on takeoff/landing, big problem on aircraft carriers. the hornet used handed engines to achieve the same results, by far the better solution, as early contra props were unreliable.
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters Amazing how far they developed that engine! AFAIK the very first pre-production "test" engine produced 750 hp in the mid 30's and the first production engines were around 1,000 hp. They finished the war producing 2080 hp with the same 27 liter displacement... that's an amazing development One high altitude version (RM.17.SM) achieved 2,640 hp
The contra-rotating props on the TT2s were matched with Merlin 140s.
it looks as if they had installed wings on a sikorsky 58 fuselage + a chin...
On the helicopter? No even that bizarre aircraft would still look better than this.
Yes! Its got a wessex front!
While it doesn't sound very scientific, there does seem to be some validity to the "If it looks good, it'll fly good" rule of thumb. So I would have been more surprised if it DID fly well.
the first iteration of the Short SB3 was a direct knock off of the Mosquito with the twin Merlins and the cooling radiators in the wing roots between the engines and fuselage. Even the tail config was identical.
Not really ... the Mosquito had wings with straight leading edges and swept forward trailing edges, whereas the Sturgeon had wings with swept back leading edges and straight trailing edges. The Mosquito had semi-elliptical tailplanes and fin and the Sturgeon had angular tailplanes. The Mosquito had three (or four in the TR 33) bladed propellors, whereas the Sturgeon had six bladed contra-rotating propellors and used a mark of the Merlin engine that was never fitted to the Mosquito. As for wing root radiators, the Westland Whirlwind had them when it entered service in May 1940 ... long before the Mosquito made its first flight on 25th November 1940. So really only a passing similarity between the Mosquito and the Sturgeon, in that they were both light twins with inline engines.
This one is clearly blessed by the Holy Blackburn Blackburn, also known as the Blackburn R1.
At first, I thought the title said snort. Seems like an appropriate name for a flying proboscis.
Ahh the muppets weren't the first to create gonzo!! 😋
The flying Jimmy Hill (RIP)
Short SB3 walks into a bar. Bartender asks “why the long face”?
Shorts just couldn't seem to shake the big-bottomed-flying-boat idea out of their designs. Everything they built from the Stirling heavy bomber to this thing seems to have been designed with that philosophy in mind.
The Stirling was a design compromise(disaster), key elements from the Sunderland, a segmented bomb bay which couldn't carry the big bombs required to attack Germany. Insufficient angle of attack on take-off, solved with a spindly undercarriage setup and it couldn't carry the weight of bombs needed nor could it fly high enough.
And the electric rather than hydraulic control systems. I still have a 1000v rated fire axe from a Stirling, passed down from my grandfather who worked for Shorts and then Armstrong-Whitworth.
By way of contrast the Sunderland was spot on.
How nice of the designers to put a crew cabin right between the propellers.
Thanks for the vid.. An interesting bit of military history.
0:36 The canopy looks like a pair of cartoon eyes.
Too bad both were scraped. Would have made nice museum piece.
the Royal Navy proceeded with other designs.. the Gannet. There's obviously something about ASW that produces "distinctive" aircraft!
In fairness, if you have to accommodate a massive radar scanner it's difficult to make any aircraft pretty. The AWACS weren't pretty, ot the ASW versions of the Avenger.
Life has shown us, don't be dismissive of Ugly Ducklings. For some reason I like some of these oddities you show, keep up the good and interesting videos Ed Nash MM.
Yes, reminds me of the tank "funnies" of WWII, same sort of esprit if you will.
Form follows function and sometimes the function is a bit...off?
When you say "odd" but mean UGLY I would agree...It is said that a beautiful aircraft will fly well. The F7F Tigercat, or the "BAT" come to mind. The Brits have always had a propensity for ungainly design. (A Camel is a horse design by a committee) case in point is the Buccaneer. One would need to examine 1930's french or Italian craft to find such a stomach turning design. (lets forget the "guppy series as the design was driven solely by the need for capacity)
Who would have thought that aesthetics were a significant factor in appraisals for military applications
Shorts had a some great seaplanes such as the Shorts Sunderland
The British are renowned for producing aircraft that can only fly because the ground is too embarrassed to hold them.
I saw a giant exhaust on the 1 pitcher and was going to come in asking whether they had been powered by turbo props. As the world works though, you said just that exact fact as I was typing the 1st sentence.😂
When I saw the photograph I thought it was some sort of flying radar for the fleet
Two shots of the Bobsleigh & no mention.
Looks like if the de Havilland mosquito and the grumman F6F hellcat had a baby
Looks like a cross between an aircraft and an anteater
My eyes...MY EYES!!!!
2:27 Note the SB3 in the flyby has its left prop feathered
I'd tear up and discard any orders directing me to fly this thing. UGH!
de Havilland Mosquito - face palms laughing ....
Although interesting looking, perhaps worth bearing in mind the technical realities of 1940s RADAR which meant bulky and heavy equipment along with dedicated operators? It looks like they just stuck the RADAR gubbins onto the front of an existing aircraft that would allow it to be quickly put into production for carrier operation? I couldn't find much Internet info on SB.3 more detailed design. Does anyone know of any good books that covers the history of lesser known Shorts aircraft like the SB.3?
If they had only painted a huge skull on that nose! Everyone would have thought it looked awesome.
Agree with Katy Jones. This looks like something the Armée de l’Air would be flying...
Thank goodness for the Gannet. 👍
Short Brothers never had much luck with government orders, the Sunderland flying boat being the only unqualified success I can think of?
I remember the RAF scrapped its entire fleet of ten Short Belfast wide-bodied transports (in favour of the smaller US Hercules) only to have to lease three of them back again during the Falklands crisis.
Man oh man!
*The Flying Manatee!!!*
Appears to have a serious case of nose droop. Perhaps an "underwire" would help.
A flying walrus...or maybe elephant seal.
The real reason Shorts went out of business is that Shorts got sued by Disney for stealing their design sketches for Droopy the Dog.
It's not the only Sturgeon that is short, lacklustre in appearance and not best suited to the job.....
" If the plane looks weird, it's Russian. If it's ugly, it's British"
It's a Romulan Warbird with propellers.
The Short S.B.3 was beaten with an ugly stick.
Eventually the Royal Navy would create the Nimrod, the mighty hunter, and that was a good looker and a good plane.
Very good
To be fair most aircraft of that type have weird looks. The Gannet is strangely bulbus as well.
Oh that Fairey Gannett is a real eye popper! The first time I saw one was at the Moorabbin Air Museum in Melbourne, Australia, and it was parked outside with it's wings folded up. It was a real WTF moment.
mistake. Should've tried the Centaurus radial engine. Liquid cooled engines on carriers, put a screen door an porches on submarines.
It would have been a nice addition to say what designs beat it at the close of the video. Otherwise, very nice ;-)
this is the ARC-170 from Star Wars
Whoever designed this aircraft had absolutely no desire to be seen near it.
this plane needs some love hehe quite cool
Looks a bit like a tapir with a few plane parts strapped on.
Over 4000 HP and all the Short Sturgeon could manage was 366 mph? Color me disappointed because it was such a sleek looking plane, akin to a metal Mosquito.
Tender is not normally by invitation. Buy to be fair it's not a bad aircraft in the beginning it's only after the goalpost moved that things got a bit different shall we say. But the navy are well known for not having a clue what they want until they get what they asked for and then change their minds. Typically Short's built some very good aircraft and held a few military contracts for different things.
OK it does look a bit french.
Don't suppose you've also reviewed the weird looking Miles M52 Libellula?
“I am not an animal.”-Cpl. DiNardo- The Siege of Firebase Gloria
It reminds me of a tapir or a character in the film where Anakin Skywalker was a child (not sure which film).
British aircraft designers sure had a talent for giving birth to some ...shall we say unusual looking things. Not everything was strange (Avro Lancaster and the Concorde) but a whole bunch make me blink and then blink again. Wheww!
We shall indeed say unusual looking things.
The first droop-snoot.
The Short Sterling was no prize either. Not a very elegant design team there.
The Sniffer. That's my guess at a nickname if it went into service.
The nose has melted!
I would say this beats even the Blackburn Blackburn for looks...
The Eyore of aircraft.
I'm pretty sure there are uglier aircraft, but this is the most depressed looking one.
It makes me think about de french Breguet alizé but with à longuer carrier.
I can't help wondering............
Did the guys responsible for the name have in mind the old schoolboy quip about SBDs?
Or were they so aloof the similarity never registered?
The design however seems logical. Bizarre that they couldn't make the modifictions to erradicate any trim problems. You'd have thought that one of the easist fixes to achieve.
Ok, this is what happens when rocky and bullwinkle mate... 🤣😂
You say scrapped, I say "erased."
Hi Ed. I haven't seen this for some time . I needed to be reminded how hideously ugly it was . By Jiminy, it certainly got hit by the ugly stick ! Thanks Ed.
this plane suffers from "cherubism "
Bizarre!! I believe there were carrier versions of the mosquito - I wonder why they didnt carry on using that? any ideas?
They trialed carrier ops with one, the DH test pilot did a few take offs and landings, but I don't think it was ever developed officially.
ua-cam.com/video/d9Hjne0OA4w/v-deo.html