This guy hovers on the verge between shit poster and troll. Its his marketing device. Don't get too worked up about nonsense he spouts. He has intentional mispronounciations, says things like "cruising altitude of 24 tbousand kilometers" etc all on purpose. I just give thumbs down to any of his videos that have stuff like that in them which is quite a few.
What really made helicopters effective was the turbo shaft engine with its much better power-to-weight ratio as compared with piston engines. Would have been more interesting if it had looked at the Fairy Ultralight or the McDonnell with the tip jet rotors
For a helicopter designed in the 50's it had a far superior rotor-head design when compared to anything robinson ever produced. The aircraft should have been repurposed for the civilian training market years later.
The production Skeeters used a rotor-head design based on that developed by Raoul Hafner in the late 1920s and used also on the Sycamore, Belvedere, Scout , Lynx and Wildcat.
i was able fly in these helicopters a few times whilst serving at Munster Lager when the pilots were doing a check flight, had to keep a look out for power lines and such, it was mostly very low level, how ever one day the pilot took it up high, then turned the engine off, he had not told me before hand. in enjoyed to the look on my face as we dropped on the rotors. We had a few Sailors from the Fleet Air Arm, that came to maintain the Skeeters, their Uniforms were great Girl pullers.
Saw one of those Mosquitoes once. We (8th Trans. BN., Lt. Helicopters) were doing maneuvers with the British in 1961 up by Hanover when one of them flew overhead at about 100'. The CO of the 18th company told us to turn on the radio as he fired up a two-seater Bell H-13 Sioux to which he'd affixed a Browning .30 caliber machine gun to one of the landing struts and attached a pull cord to the trigger. He contacted the 'skeeter on the two way and told him he'd just captured him and to land. The British pilot replied with: "But, we're observation. Non-combatants ... ", to which the Captain replied with a burst of machine gun fire [blanks, of course] and then told "The Old Chap, 'Now I've killed you. Now get your dead ass on the ground!". The following February, he and his company went to South East Asia from West Germany to form a new battalion.
That was lovely. A look into the unsung designs of British post war aviation. You'll be doing the Gannet and Wyvern soon won't you? Go on, you know you want to!😊
A helicopter with rocket boosters. That's one I didn't see coming. Though can't say I'd feel safe with all that High Test on board. That stuff is scary.
I had to do that in a Bell H-13 Sioux once during the AIG Inspection at our airfield in 1961 to get from one end to the other as there was only one, two lane road, the inspector general's entourage was on it and he'd just finished Gigging my wall locker. (I was the Public Information Office photographer for the 8th Trans. Bn. Lt. Helicopters stationed 5 miles from both Munich and Dachau. The little bird had its canopy off for replacement, but was the only one available, so we went 15 feet off the active to avoid attracting attention and got there in plenty of time, I set up to take more photographs of him arriving and the look on the general's face was first one of shocked surprise at seeing me again as he knew I had not left by road when he did, then pleased that we managed to pull it off.)
@@tonywright8294, No, I did not watch a different video. That was the only Sioux we had available in operating condition at that moment and it had the canopy removed for some reason, but was in otherwise flyable condition. So, that's what we used. Like I said, we managed to get me there to be ready to greet the IG before he arrived back at HQ, just like I was when he got there the first time and then, using the two lane road, at the opposite side of the airfield when he gigged my wall locker. He did look puzzled, then pleased when he figured it out. (After all) we were a helicopter transportation company.
Saunders Row, the greatest development company you never heard of. From Plywood to replace steel, they built/designed Campbells record breaking Blue Bird K3 speed boat, the hovercraft, built the worlds largest working flying boats, were behind Britain's Rocket program with Black Night far superior to what the US had, developed the SR-53 and SR-177 rocket powered interceptor, helicopters and much much more... Another criminal demise in British Industry.
Early Rotors were wood covered in doped canvas to save weight all metal rotors didn't come in til the Vietnam War proved rotors were too vulnerable to small arms fire, of course now we use fibreglass/carbon fibre composites.
At least the Skeeter had a tubular steel spar in the Rotor blade, the Bristol Sycamore only had a metal root fitting and tip mass the majority of the blade was a fabric covered wooden spar and structure.
Hey man, I don't know your name(s), but I am subscribed to every single one of Dark Skies, Dark Footage, Dark Seas, Dark Docs, Dark Tech, and every single one is on the list of my personal faves out of the ~550 channels I am subscribed to. I really appreciate the level of effort you put into research and production. The narration is impeccable, the writing is great and builds suspense to a crescendo, and then settles into the final few facts of the video. And as for the asshats that are like "Hey your videos suck because in that one video there was a BF-109 on screen in frame 363 in stead of the FW-190 you were talking about!" Well... screw those guys. That wasn't a mistake, that was filler footage because what you wanted on screen doesn't exist. Your research is astonishing, somehow you find facts that are obscure and interesting, and I am really glad to have your channels to thrill, entertain, and inform me on things I wouldn't get from anywhere else!
It absolutely blows my mind that they managed to build a viable mass-produced rotary wing aircraft around an engine with less power than the one in my '94 Mustang Cobra... stock, from the factory, the '94 Cobra sports 245 HP and 305 ft/lbs of torque at 5k RPM... that's a full 100 more than the original engine and 30 HP more than the 7a version! It's like they thought "Wellll... with all the bombing and firestorms and such we have a ton of extra lawn mowers laying around. Let's just cannibalize those engines and use them to create us a bunch of experimental aircraft!"
"the '94 Cobra sports 245 HP and 305 ft/lbs of torque" and enuogh kg to make sure nothing will ever fly powered by it and btw torque is irrelevant. even in a car.
It sure would’ve been very helpful to the average viewer to have an explanation of a particular phrase. He used multiple times without defining it. Ground resonance is an imbalance in the rotation of a helicopter rotor when the blades become bunched up on one side of their rotational plane and cause an oscillation in phase with the frequency of the rocking of the helicopter on its landing gear. The effect is similar to the behavior of a washing machine when the clothes are concentrated in one place during the spin cycle.
There's a few things you need before money and time. A shed, a pipe, a black lab or whippet, tweed jacket, a flat cap, a good tea pot, a stick for pointing and chalk. Lots and lots of chalk.
@@tallthinkev That's funny, although I suppose one thing on that list I actually would need is a shed large enough to house it. At least as long as I wasn't doing one of those micro-copter kits. Those feel like a death trap, so I'd rather do a quad-copter or use a jet engine and have ducted fans and redirects. Difference being between ease of design and construction versus fast.
@@crono331 It's just that quad-copters are safer and easier to balance. The only reason they didn't start with them is because they didn't have computers to control flight characteristics nor the engines that were both light enough and powerful enough to power them. We have the technology now, and it's easier and safer.
@@anon_y_mousse the only reason they didnt start with them is that they didnt want to die and had 0 chances one would ever be certified. no offence meant, my friend, but you dont seem to have any idea about helicopters, multicopters and flying gear in general. multicopters are ok for toys, but they dont scale up. in fact, all designs with high payload enough to carry people need to have zillions of motors and propellers which make them horrendously inefficient, and a dead end if battery powered. Plus, they need to have multiple redundancy in order to be at least a little safe. more weight and complexity where you need it less. multicopters will never be viable until they invent the kg that weights 500 grams.
I get why we nitpick DS Boys historical accuracy and shot selection but his voice is fine. That being said, I'm from a country that considers Americans to be very sloooow talkers.
I’m not sure if that’s the weight of the pipes, chambers, rockets etc. but not the fuel. It used one imperial gallon a minute, 1.2 US gallons, and provided thrust for 15 minutes. So 15 imperial gallons. Which is certainly lot more than 30lbs. He’s reading almost word for word from the wiki article but not considering any nuance or what the source articles may say.
Its"Dark sky's".....they're a hit and miss gamble.(Always a fun"time hog"ok?) They are like"Based on a true story". Seriously...Fact check them? They're alot better than most. Their narrator? Tether that boy out and get him a seditave. Needs to chill out.....😮😉
😉😇😅 So in a rare moment of lucidity I actually managed to catch a rare error in your narration... and I have to say: If this is the worst of the errata we will find in your videos I think the future of facts is safe. It was essentially just a typo at that. I feel like I should win a prize, tho, for finding any errors in your videos. Like I said, it was the narration equivalent of an insignificant typo: 6:53 - "The layout was standard helicopter fare: a single-piston engine powered by a 3-bladed main rotor and a tail rotor at the end of the boom", when it should have been "The layout was standard helicopter fare: a 3-bladed main rotor with a tail rotor at the end of the boom, all powered by a single (#?)-piston engine."
Wow! The Brits were 10 yrs late, again. Sikorsky solved this problem in WW2. Didn't US Helos removed wounded Brits from SE Asia? I guess, Dark Skies has run out of history.....all good.
Why yes. Even the Brits had the Sikorsky R-4 in WWII. Dark Skies -and its sister channels- just churns out stuff like this. No time for decent research or even using the correct clips. All quantity and no quality.
Gotta say this is the ultimate clickbait title and thumbnail, seems totally unrelated. Revolutionary?? The Skeeter seems a low cost low effort design, probably underperforming in every realm, and looks as safe as sword swallowing. 1950s was not a great decade all round.
Gotta say, Its just infomation? Hows it clickbait. Unless its wrong somewhere, I dont know. Just dont click lol. Have you ever invented anything? Let alone put into production? Have a good day sir, may peace be upon you
Why is this video so long, with such a lot of repetitions and surperfluous information in the script and endless repeating video sequences? This could have been a good 4 minutes video instead of a boring, irritating 12 minutes one. The person producing this should learn to write better scripts, ones that fit the available footage.
It was the 1950's, the country was bankrupt following WWII and this was supposed to be a light scout helicopter. There were no advanced alloys or composites like today, you either used wood, Aluminium or doped canvas or a combo of them.
Exactly what "weird design" of the Skeeter changed helicopters forever? These documentary channels just put any clickbait title these days.
And how was the ground resonance solved? Always have a solution with the problem.
At least dude doesn't speak at 4000 WPM now...
@@MadScientist267😂turning playback to 1.5 is like a going back in time 😂
This guy hovers on the verge between shit poster and troll. Its his marketing device.
Don't get too worked up about nonsense he spouts. He has intentional mispronounciations, says things like "cruising altitude of 24 tbousand kilometers" etc all on purpose.
I just give thumbs down to any of his videos that have stuff like that in them which is quite a few.
@@shadroidit’s AI bozos.
As a helicopter mechanic I find these odd 1 off attempts fascinating. The things I've seen at Edwards AFB are just crazy.
What really made helicopters effective was the turbo shaft engine with its much better power-to-weight ratio as compared with piston engines. Would have been more interesting if it had looked at the Fairy Ultralight or the McDonnell with the tip jet rotors
Aaand Robinson continues with the old tech!
For a helicopter designed in the 50's it had a far superior rotor-head design when compared to anything robinson ever produced.
The aircraft should have been repurposed for the civilian training market years later.
speaking of robinson, i have a poster/calandar thing with a BUNCH of their helicopters on it
Speaking of Robinsons as well ,,,um , they crash twice as often than any other 'copter , here in New Zealand ,,crazy pilots ??
The production Skeeters used a rotor-head design based on that developed by Raoul Hafner in the late 1920s and used also on the Sycamore, Belvedere, Scout , Lynx and Wildcat.
i was able fly in these helicopters a few times whilst serving at Munster Lager when the pilots were doing a check flight, had to keep a look out for power lines and such, it was mostly very low level, how ever one day the pilot took it up high, then turned the engine off, he had not told me before hand. in enjoyed to the look on my face as we dropped on the rotors. We had a few Sailors from the Fleet Air Arm, that came to maintain the Skeeters, their Uniforms were great Girl pullers.
I'm going to assume the landing was ok🤣
Saw one of those Mosquitoes once. We (8th Trans. BN., Lt. Helicopters) were doing maneuvers with the British in 1961 up by Hanover when one of them flew overhead at about 100'. The CO of the 18th company told us to turn on the radio as he fired up a two-seater Bell H-13 Sioux to which he'd affixed a Browning .30 caliber machine gun to one of the landing struts and attached a pull cord to the trigger. He contacted the 'skeeter on the two way and told him he'd just captured him and to land. The British pilot replied with: "But, we're observation. Non-combatants ... ", to which the Captain replied with a burst of machine gun fire [blanks, of course] and then told "The Old Chap, 'Now I've killed you. Now get your dead ass on the ground!". The following February, he and his company went to South East Asia from West Germany to form a new battalion.
That is not a „Dark Skies“ video. This is an „Fascinating Skies“ video.😎
TY Dark Skies for your hard work. This was very interesting! ❤ :)
That was lovely. A look into the unsung designs of British post war aviation. You'll be doing the Gannet and Wyvern soon won't you? Go on, you know you want to!😊
Did I miss the part where you mention exactly WHAT about the Skeeter's design was weird and changed helicopters forever?
One can see the Scout and Wasp in this design.
A helicopter with rocket boosters. That's one I didn't see coming. Though can't say I'd feel safe with all that High Test on board. That stuff is scary.
I can’t imagine not having a canopy over myself between me and the wind from the blades
Maybe near the main shaft there is an eye of the storm experience? Either way I’m with you.
I had to do that in a Bell H-13 Sioux once during the AIG Inspection at our airfield in 1961 to get from one end to the other as there was only one, two lane road, the inspector general's entourage was on it and he'd just finished Gigging my wall locker. (I was the Public Information Office photographer for the 8th Trans. Bn. Lt. Helicopters stationed 5 miles from both Munich and Dachau. The little bird had its canopy off for replacement, but was the only one available, so we went 15 feet off the active to avoid attracting attention and got there in plenty of time, I set up to take more photographs of him arriving and the look on the general's face was first one of shocked surprise at seeing me again as he knew I had not left by road when he did, then pleased that we managed to pull it off.)
Did you watch a different video ? They are fully enclosed.
@@tonywright8294, No, I did not watch a different video. That was the only Sioux we had available in operating condition at that moment and it had the canopy removed for some reason, but was in otherwise flyable condition. So, that's what we used. Like I said, we managed to get me there to be ready to greet the IG before he arrived back at HQ, just like I was when he got there the first time and then, using the two lane road, at the opposite side of the airfield when he gigged my wall locker. He did look puzzled, then pleased when he figured it out. (After all) we were a helicopter transportation company.
This is the Best of any and all Videos and History Channels other than the History Guy! Thanks Dark Skies
Saunders Row, the greatest development company you never heard of. From Plywood to replace steel, they built/designed Campbells record breaking Blue Bird K3 speed boat, the hovercraft, built the worlds largest working flying boats, were behind Britain's Rocket program with Black Night far superior to what the US had, developed the SR-53 and SR-177 rocket powered interceptor, helicopters and much much more... Another criminal demise in British Industry.
Roe
@@colibri67 Yes your right, only just noticed damned error correction on my phone..
They also were involved in the development of nuclear powered flying boats.
Pretty neat to see an S-58, that was a workhorse!
Those were S-55's
The title is very misleading......
Fabric covered rotors?
Early Rotors were wood covered in doped canvas to save weight all metal rotors didn't come in til the Vietnam War proved rotors were too vulnerable to small arms fire, of course now we use fibreglass/carbon fibre composites.
Isn't it crazy what people would fly back in the day 😂
At least the Skeeter had a tubular steel spar in the Rotor blade, the Bristol Sycamore only had a metal root fitting and tip mass the majority of the blade was a fabric covered wooden spar and structure.
The only men with four balls are bad batters and helicopter test pilots. 😆
Now follow up on the Westland Wasp and Lynx.
Hey man, I don't know your name(s), but I am subscribed to every single one of Dark Skies, Dark Footage, Dark Seas, Dark Docs, Dark Tech, and every single one is on the list of my personal faves out of the ~550 channels I am subscribed to. I really appreciate the level of effort you put into research and production. The narration is impeccable, the writing is great and builds suspense to a crescendo, and then settles into the final few facts of the video.
And as for the asshats that are like "Hey your videos suck because in that one video there was a BF-109 on screen in frame 363 in stead of the FW-190 you were talking about!" Well... screw those guys. That wasn't a mistake, that was filler footage because what you wanted on screen doesn't exist. Your research is astonishing, somehow you find facts that are obscure and interesting, and I am really glad to have your channels to thrill, entertain, and inform me on things I wouldn't get from anywhere else!
The video doesn't seem to have much to do with the narration.
Need more heilichopter :-) stuff on Dark Skies
It absolutely blows my mind that they managed to build a viable mass-produced rotary wing aircraft around an engine with less power than the one in my '94 Mustang Cobra... stock, from the factory, the '94 Cobra sports 245 HP and 305 ft/lbs of torque at 5k RPM... that's a full 100 more than the original engine and 30 HP more than the 7a version! It's like they thought "Wellll... with all the bombing and firestorms and such we have a ton of extra lawn mowers laying around. Let's just cannibalize those engines and use them to create us a bunch of experimental aircraft!"
"the '94 Cobra sports 245 HP and 305 ft/lbs of torque"
and enuogh kg to make sure nothing will ever fly powered by it
and btw
torque is irrelevant. even in a car.
Remind me of dragonflies.
It sure would’ve been very helpful to the average viewer to have an explanation of a particular phrase. He used multiple times without defining it.
Ground resonance is an imbalance in the rotation of a helicopter rotor when the blades become bunched up on one side of their rotational plane and cause an oscillation in phase with the frequency of the rocking of the helicopter on its landing gear. The effect is similar to the behavior of a washing machine when the clothes are concentrated in one place during the spin cycle.
I really want to make my own VTOL craft. If only I had the time and money for all the material that would go into building such a craft.
There's a few things you need before money and time. A shed, a pipe, a black lab or whippet, tweed jacket, a flat cap, a good tea pot, a stick for pointing and chalk. Lots and lots of chalk.
@@tallthinkev That's funny, although I suppose one thing on that list I actually would need is a shed large enough to house it. At least as long as I wasn't doing one of those micro-copter kits. Those feel like a death trap, so I'd rather do a quad-copter or use a jet engine and have ducted fans and redirects. Difference being between ease of design and construction versus fast.
@@anon_y_mousse "I'd rather do a quad-copter"
all helo engineers till now be damned
@@crono331 It's just that quad-copters are safer and easier to balance. The only reason they didn't start with them is because they didn't have computers to control flight characteristics nor the engines that were both light enough and powerful enough to power them. We have the technology now, and it's easier and safer.
@@anon_y_mousse the only reason they didnt start with them is that they didnt want to die and had 0 chances one would ever be certified.
no offence meant, my friend, but you dont seem to have any idea about helicopters, multicopters and flying gear in general.
multicopters are ok for toys, but they dont scale up. in fact, all designs with high payload enough to carry people need to have zillions of motors and propellers which make them horrendously inefficient, and a dead end if battery powered. Plus, they need to have multiple redundancy in order to be at least a little safe. more weight and complexity where you need it less.
multicopters will never be viable until they invent the kg that weights 500 grams.
A competitor to the R-4.
More closely the S-52
UK quartermaster: Make me an Austin Mini, but that can fly!
Was the Dad of cat voice of Doom Boom and Gloom in a bit of a rush on this one ?
It kind of looks like a Robin Reliant.
Reliant Robin
A modern version of the Skeeter would be better than a frigging Robinson.
Click bait! No rocket as shown in the title picture.
"Fuselage." YAY!
I get why we nitpick DS Boys historical accuracy and shot selection but his voice is fine.
That being said, I'm from a country that considers Americans to be very sloooow talkers.
where eagles dare
It was a wonderful video about British designed helicopters ( Skeeter 4,5 ) in 1950 .
HA!.... Skeeter.... lol...
ill just go, I know, Im sorry, I shouldnt have but just could not resist....
🤷♂
One gallon a minute, weighing 30lbs so a duration of... 5 minutes?
Yes, the rocket fuel that boosted the rotors did not last long. Did you think they meant the fuel that runs the engine?
I’m not sure if that’s the weight of the pipes, chambers, rockets etc. but not the fuel. It used one imperial gallon a minute, 1.2 US gallons, and provided thrust for 15 minutes. So 15 imperial gallons. Which is certainly lot more than 30lbs.
He’s reading almost word for word from the wiki article but not considering any nuance or what the source articles may say.
your bloody friend made one cheap helicopter and you sell it like it's some new tesla car?
This is clickbate af i was expecting Airwolf but got herbie......
Stop expecting
That’s what she said.
Those aircraft are from an alternate universe.
Herbie!
Its"Dark sky's".....they're a hit and miss gamble.(Always a fun"time hog"ok?)
They are like"Based on a true story".
Seriously...Fact check them? They're alot better than most.
Their narrator? Tether that boy out and get him a seditave. Needs to chill out.....😮😉
Yeah
Yeah watt?
@@JSFGuy yeah 😂
Flying Auto Rickshaw
Look like a very nimble little craft.
😉😇😅 So in a rare moment of lucidity I actually managed to catch a rare error in your narration... and I have to say: If this is the worst of the errata we will find in your videos I think the future of facts is safe. It was essentially just a typo at that. I feel like I should win a prize, tho, for finding any errors in your videos. Like I said, it was the narration equivalent of an insignificant typo:
6:53 - "The layout was standard helicopter fare: a single-piston engine powered by a 3-bladed main rotor and a tail rotor at the end of the boom", when it should have been "The layout was standard helicopter fare: a 3-bladed main rotor with a tail rotor at the end of the boom, all powered by a single (#?)-piston engine."
110 HP????
Wow! The Brits were 10 yrs late, again. Sikorsky solved this problem in WW2. Didn't US Helos removed wounded Brits from SE Asia? I guess, Dark Skies has run out of history.....all good.
Why yes. Even the Brits had the Sikorsky R-4 in WWII.
Dark Skies -and its sister channels- just churns out stuff like this. No time for decent research or even using the correct clips.
All quantity and no quality.
Gotta say this is the ultimate clickbait title and thumbnail, seems totally unrelated. Revolutionary??
The Skeeter seems a low cost low effort design, probably underperforming in every realm, and looks as safe as sword swallowing.
1950s was not a great decade all round.
Gotta say, Its just infomation? Hows it clickbait. Unless its wrong somewhere, I dont know. Just dont click lol. Have you ever invented anything? Let alone put into production? Have a good day sir, may peace be upon you
Why is this video so long, with such a lot of repetitions and surperfluous information in the script and endless repeating video sequences? This could have been a good 4 minutes video instead of a boring, irritating 12 minutes one. The person producing this should learn to write better scripts, ones that fit the available footage.
Now it shows up.
It's already here 😨😭😂🎺👎👊🎯⚔️
Seventy seven produced? Doesn't sound revolutionary.
Where is your channel?
An revolution is not necessarily defined by numbers
One need only imagine just how much one could accomplish with 77 helicopters?
CLICKBAIT TITLE
Brits, man. Gotta build 'em cheap.
It was the 1950's, the country was bankrupt following WWII and this was supposed to be a light scout helicopter. There were no advanced alloys or composites like today, you either used wood, Aluminium or doped canvas or a combo of them.
🇬🇧 ingenuity
Multiple repetitions of the same info done by an AI (bot) voice...
Come on, you can do better than this...