The Flying Carriers (Part 4)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 27

  • @darwinhall8550
    @darwinhall8550 4 роки тому +5

    Excellent documentary on the Navy's airships. Thanks you.

  • @wademasterson3148
    @wademasterson3148 3 роки тому

    Watching this excellent program for the third time. Quality you should be proud of sir. Thank you very much.

  • @SSmith-fm9kg
    @SSmith-fm9kg 4 роки тому +1

    "The best laid plans, of mice and men..." Nice series. Thanks for saving this history for all to see.

  • @matthewlawlis2421
    @matthewlawlis2421 2 роки тому

    Thankyou. This was interesing and also helped my fall asleep.

  • @Adventure_Bum
    @Adventure_Bum 4 роки тому +3

    Great doco. Saw a bunch of footage I've never seen before. Would love to have seen a big rigid in flight. Spectacular machines.

  • @harri2626
    @harri2626 3 роки тому

    A remarkable documentary. Thank you. It is incredible that, in spite of the obvious limitations and susceptibilities of the airship, plans were continually evolving. Having had the pleasure of flight in a modern Zep from Friedrichshafen, I would loved to have been on a Hindenburg voyage - but during the 1936 season.

    • @garionporter5961
      @garionporter5961 2 роки тому

      maybe one day some rich billionare will reconstruct a hindenburg replica! :)

  • @phillipchapman169
    @phillipchapman169 Рік тому

    Absolutely fascinating. I watch all parts one after the other. Glued to it.
    I have had a thing for the old rigid airships. Enormous yet graceful. Brave crews hanging on the plane cradle banging away at the hook to release the plane. Yikes!

  • @danielprates2208
    @danielprates2208 3 роки тому

    What a great, trully great documentary.

  • @tomh6183
    @tomh6183 3 роки тому

    Thank you for all the info and pictures.

  • @danisrasyid8461
    @danisrasyid8461 4 місяці тому +1

    I like the music

  • @reyleno926
    @reyleno926 Рік тому

    Beautiful documentary! Instead of just something floating around out there, we are personally acquainted with the development , operation and downfall of these aircraft. FDR was involved, the airplanes were called sparrow hawks, there was a piano on board. 🤗🤗🙄🙄

  • @7775Kevin
    @7775Kevin 4 роки тому

    Thanks for this. Lots of good information and footage.

  • @IndependentBear
    @IndependentBear 4 роки тому +4

    Very well done. One observation: I'm sure the narrator said the Hindenburg's fire started 'aft' of the rudder. I believe the location was just "forward' of the rudder and stabilizer unless the intention was to say the fire began inside the vertical stabilizer itself.

    • @Handleyman
      @Handleyman 4 роки тому

      I believe that is correct. It was just forward of the tail assembly.

    • @omegavladosovich6757
      @omegavladosovich6757 3 роки тому

      Richard Van Treuren is an advocate of the flammable paint theory and claimed that the fire began near the tail cone according to some eyewitness testimonies, namely Elizabeth Tobin who had a view from the starboard side and testified that the fire started behind the rudder. In the latest iteration of his theory Addison Bain claims the fire began over 30 seconds with the outer skin burning before it spread to the port side where everyone saw it and only igniting the hydrogen later in the crash. Alas, many investigators have debunked or dismissed these claims as cherrypicking eyewitness accounts. It's hard to know whether Tobin's report came before or after other witnesses saw the fire on the starboard side. Bain also claimed Helmut Lau saw the fire start in the starboard side, but his testimony clearly states the fire started as a bright reflection at the front of cell 4 which which disintegrated shortly followed by the surrounding gas cells as the fire spread more towards starboard (the wind was blowing in this direction according to witnesses). Mark Heald and his family saw the supposed "St. Elmo's Fire" from the starboard side along the entire back of the ship but didn't say the fire broke out at the tail end. MOST eyewitnesses from the port side said the fire began in front of the upper fin near the valve, but quite a few said it started on the horizontal port fin first. Herb Morrison claimed one of the engines backfired and spouted fire that ignited the hydrogen, but years later he would agree that "we will never know".

  • @na3044
    @na3044 2 роки тому

    Killer music selection.

  • @reyleno926
    @reyleno926 Рік тому

    Nice and best view of the Hindenburg’s conflagration! The last time a swastika flew over America. Swastikas are best seen on the fins during its flight over Manhattan, summer of ‘36.

  • @wademasterson3148
    @wademasterson3148 3 роки тому

    AWESOME

  • @allanegleston4931
    @allanegleston4931 4 роки тому

    a friend of mine who said his grandfather as a boy would see the german zepps come in. after a while the locals began to resent the german zepps .

  • @nurlatifahmohdnor8939
    @nurlatifahmohdnor8939 2 роки тому

    Page 47
    1783 is the year where the balloon was invented.

  • @stephenbirks6458
    @stephenbirks6458 3 роки тому

    Act 4 :- I thought I was watching streets of San Francisco ?

  • @ВикторКонстантинов-э8щ

    воздушный Титаник

  • @williamkelly8237
    @williamkelly8237 9 місяців тому

    The United States did not and boycotted the sale of helium to Germany for the Hindenburg not the other way around

  • @jakegorman7121
    @jakegorman7121 11 місяців тому

    So much un-true history....

  • @duckbizniz663
    @duckbizniz663 11 місяців тому

    Thank God the US Navy gave up on airships. A giant target in the sky, slow moving, and its vulnerability to rough weather makes airship useless in warfare. The only thing airships are good for is advertising during peace time. The absolute absurdity that a gigantic target, slow moving, easily damaged by projectile airships can be used by the military is ridiculous. There were times in this film documentary when the narrator seems to advocate airship use in the military. What type of reasoning is this? Eventually after spending an outrageous sum of taxpayer money this crazy idea was abandoned. With the approach of WWII the decision makers were forced to stop wasting taxpayer money, develop effective weapons, and discard this joke.
    The number of disasters associated with airships is a testament to its failure. Regardless of national fabrication, structural design, source of air-lifting force, ... All airships ended in disastrous failure. That itself should tell you this does not work especially for the military.

    • @quickestscoped7603
      @quickestscoped7603 4 дні тому

      no they didn't all: the graf zeppelin was operated without disaster and peacefully decommissioned, as were the r100, uss los angeles, bodensee, etc. airships have great endurance, low fuel costs/emissions and can hover in place - airplanes don't have those as much. it just seems like the tech of the day wasn't very safe, and that the germans (really just hugo eckener honestly) were the only ones who really knew what they were doing, especially when it came to rough weather