Clarkson’s documentaries are in another league. The choice of music, shots, his depth and articulation of knowledge presented in an easy to grasp manner are just impeccable.
I really don't know how people can be offended by him. He exaggerates for comic effect, he is happy to insult and compliment any nation in equal measure. Some people are really humourless. But he actually had topics that are informative and well as fun
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Encyclopedia Britannica: Whittle obtained his first patent for a turbo-jet engine in 1930, and in 1936 he joined with associates to found a company called Power Jets Ltd. He tested his first jet engine on the ground in 1937. This event is customarily regarded as the invention of the jet engine, but the first operational jet engine was designed in Germany by Hans Pabst von Ohain and powered the first jet-aircraft flight on August 27, 1939. The outbreak of World War II finally spurred the British government into supporting Whittle’s development work. A jet engine of his invention was fitted to a specially built Gloster E.28/39 airframe, and the plane’s maiden flight took place on May 15, 1941. The British government took over Power Jets Ltd. in 1944, by which time Britain’s Gloster Meteor jet aircraft were in service with the RAF, intercepting German V-1 rockets. Whittle retired from the RAF in 1948 with the rank of air commodore, and that same year he was knighted. The British government eventually atoned for their earlier neglect by granting him a tax-free gift of £100,000. He was awarded the Order of Merit in 1986. In 1977 he became a research professor at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. His book Jet: The Story of a Pioneer was published in 1953.
essentially, a jet engine somewhat works similar to a propellor -- it's a fan that spins air quickly and throws the air behind to create thrust. Albeit, it's a much bigger, much faster moving fan, and it does have a compressor for added thrust. But at the end of the day, they're pretty similar. What really is fascinating is the scramjet engine. No moving parts at all -- it just takes the incoming air and squirts fuel on the air's way out the back. A remarkably simple yet crazy idea.
The A-380 is already out-of-production, with only 254 made...by contrast, the 747 numbers 1,574... The Concorde numbered only twenty aircraft, one was scrapped, another was lost in the one and only crash of Concorde.
@@nigelbenn4642 Wrong Point. What he’s trying to say was that the A380 was too little too late for civil aviation. If the A380 came out in the 80s or 90s when the demand for High Capacity Wide Bodies outweighed fuel efficiency, the A380 would likely have thousands of units in the air. Quality Wise, the 747 is mostly held together. The aircraft hasn’t seen an airframe related hull loss in the last decade. I know that Boeing right now isn’t in the best spot but we have to remember that there was a time when Boeing stood for quality and robustness, something the 747 was birthed during.
No, a black African villager invented it and it was stolen by racists. Also the jet engine was invented by Muslims during the "golden age of Islam" and stolen by racists. Planes, trains, vaccines, cars, the television, the telephone, the computer, the internet, modern agricultural techniques, spacecraft and the fidget spinner were all invented by blacks and Muslims, and of course, were stolen by racists.
From the sounds of it, Griffith was thinking of the Turboprop engine. This sort of engine using the same gas turbine principle as the jet, but doesn't produce sufficient thrust through the exhaust gas exiting the engine, instead spinning a propeller
I'm just sat here thinking how simple but effective the production is on this, like in terms of logistics, the way they film it, it is 75% Clarkson and then what ever setting they decide to film him in, e.g. they go from one country to another like it's nothing but then only include 30 seconds worth of Clarkson making whatever point he's making. Just goes to show really. If you've got the budget to fly wherever you need, even just economy, you can make basic conversational stuff seem interesting in a video entertainment sense by using this simple formula! But ultimately it is 75% Clarkson so you need to have interesting ideas and a way of communicating it effectively in the first place. Really cool when you think about it!
I'm sure the views of this particular episode isn't as much as this RUclips counter shows us here. But they were able to justify the cost to do that at the time.
@@Jwlar I'm talking the actual footage of Clarkson, and yeah that's what I'm saying, they utilised whatever budget they had really well, and it's really simple, Clarkson had this formula from day one, it's not too far away from what Top gear, GT or Clarkson's farm is if you think about it, I think the ultimate point is that it goes to show, if you can tell a story into a camera in an engaging way, it don't matter the budget
You do understand that most of Clarkson filming was done in a studio using a blue screen to add in exotic locations Same way most things are filmed to save money and make it look expensive Top gear was such a different concept it's scary Top gear had no option to use a blue screen as they had to drive the roads etc They always hidden the active true cost of top gear on the understanding that some wouldn't watch such indulgent crud They played it extremely well for top gear and Clarkson does the best documentary's ever My favourite is The greatest raid of all time ST nazire
Concorde was a wild time, they charged "if you have to ask you can't afford it" prices for tickets. I remember it as a fighter jet with passengers, they would take off over my house and sounded like the F-15s of the time
Funnily enough, BA did once explicitly ask that question. Concorde was an expensive plane to operate, and by the mid-1980s it was costing more to run the flights than BA was making from the ticket sales, mainly due to fuel prices. Then someone in BA management had a brainwave: They realised that most of the passengers on Concorde didn't buy the tickets personally - they had secretaries or assistants who did that for them. So a questionnaire was issued on the next few flights, with many questions for passengers, but the only one that BA was truly interested in was how much did you think your ticket had cost, or words to that effect. As it turned out, their idea was correct, and that passengers had no idea what the ticket prices really were, so most of them guessed way above the price they had actually paid. Armed with that information, BA simply upped the price, matching it to the expectation. As such, Concorde flights became far more profitable than they ever had been. If that hadn't been done, Concorde might well have been grounded a lot sooner than it actually was.
My grandad used to build them. He told me that the bulkhead and cockpit would expand so much at top speed because of heat differences that there would be a four inch gap between them ! He told me an interestimg story that on the last flight the two pilots inserted their caps into this gap and when they landed the caps were so tightly squeezed between the two structures that they were impossible to remove. Cool.
In April 1985, British Airways were trialing one of their Concorde's up and down the North Sea, it was being test flown after some maintenance work had been cared out, no passengers aboard of course. The pilots of the British Airways Concorde offered themselves as a target for NATO fighters to try and overtake, so at an altitude of 57,000 feet and without reheats, maintaining supercruise, flying at a speed of Mach 2.02 none of them could do it despite trying several times. On full Power and reheats a RAF Lightning only just struggled past Concorde, before quicky having to switch its reheats off so it didn't run itself empty. As the Lightning passed, the Concorde pilots congratulated the pilot, who had managed to overtake Concorde. However when you think about it the Lightning only just managed to overtake an aircraft that weighed over 140 tonnes and was designed to carry 100 passengers and their luggage, and what is even more impressive is that, throughout the entire *competition," the fighters had all been using their reheats to try and pass, yet Concorde had been comfortably cruising and staying ahead of the fighters with its reheats switched OFF! It is incredible to think that an aircraft can carry 100 passengers and their luggage and maintain a speed of Mach 2 without reheats for over two hours! Fighter planes cannot do this, and they cannot maintain supersonic flight for more than about 15 minutes or they will run out of fuel! This event just goes to show what an unbelievable feat of engineering Concorde was and still is! An aircraft with Power and Beauty which has touched the hearts of millions and gone on to inspire many more!
@@mikewa2 Not that much of a surprise, since the English Electric Lightning was a notoriously fuel-thirsty aircraft, with a well deserved reputation for being overpowered and having fuel tanks which were far too small. However, it was designed from the outset to be a point interceptor, the purpose being to climb to cruise altitude as quickly as possible, shoot down incoming Tupolev bombers and then land again, so flight endurance was understandably low on the list of priorities. The power difference is also substantial: The Lightning had a pair of Avon turbojets, with a maximum combined thrust (with afterburners on) of 32,720 lbf. Each engine on Concorde ( Snecma-Olympus 593) was capable of 32,000 lbf of thrust with afterburners off, or 38,000 lbf with afterburners on. Concorde had 4 of these, giving it almost 4 times the power of the Lightning. This doesn't make the Concorde any less of an incredible achievement of course. It did have economies of scale on its side, since you can cram far more fuel into an airliner than into a much smaller fighter, and larger aircraft have a greater proportion of maximum takeoff weight as "payload" than smaller ones. Even so, some of the NASA engineers who worked on the Apollo Saturn V launch vehicle have been heard to say that getting man to the moon was easy compared to getting Concorde to work.
Coanda's engine was a duct fan that had a piston powered compressor. It had no form of thrust other than the compressed air it chucked out. Whittle's turbine engine used the principle of expanding hot gases to create thrust and propel the aircraft forwards.
The Coandă-1910, designed by Romanian inventor Henri Coandă, was an unconventional sesquiplane aircraft powered by a ducted fan. Called the "turbo-propulseur" by Coandă, its experimental engine consisted of a conventional piston engine driving a multi-bladed centrifugal blower which exhausted into a duct. The unusual aircraft attracted attention at the Second International Aeronautical Exhibition in Paris in October 1910, being the only exhibit without a propeller, but the aircraft was not displayed afterward and it fell from public awareness.
I mean…..this was just Clarkson at this best most of this. Great narration, decent logic to deeper stories covered. The music was amazing. Golden stuff back then.
41:01 Cook was killed in Hawaii wasn’t he? The Mutiny on the Bounty was plotted here though, and the descendants still live on Pitcairn, with the Bounty’s anchor and other remains still at the bottom of the sea just off the coast where they burned it. The rift between the mutineers is still going on with their great, great grandchildren, by all accounts.
For those of you not familiar with academia in Britain, Whittle's story is repeated here year in year out. This country has a culture, which does its utmost to stand in the way of productive people. Power and control in this country are allocated unfairly to inept imbeciles who's only claim to their position is their wealth, or their aristocratic heritage or even their race or their gender....these inept lowlifes in turn through their idiocy and lack of understanding and therefore lack of appreciation for good work, put up barriers in the way of great minds which hamper their progress and make their life impossible. Many a great mind and a great work have been lost as a result of this backward culture.
i remember my mother sending me from toronto to st john's to live with my grandmother when iwas about 7 and her teling me this was special because it was a JET ! No propellors! i was amazed. it might as well have been a sppaceship to me! i was thrilled! i remember looking out that window, the people and cars looking like ants..... so young, such a good innocent time. when i was 19 i came to toronto to meet my father and was absolutely thrilled to ride the subway and asked if we vould go to the front and look out the window, driver's perspective. it was awesome!
And maybe in 100 years from now when they have planes than can go around the world in few hours, people will watch this show as we watch the wright brothers first flight :/
My nieces and nephews always laugh at old attempts at flight. I have to remind them that these people were trying to invent a plane without any idea what a plane even looks like. Like, the average person couldn't build a flying plane today even though they KNOW what planes have looked like throughout the century. This is also apparent in old "what the future will look like" videos. Novel ideas and the ones that DO come true are completely different in execution.
I find this stuff fascinating and I've just come across it, and you Jeremy/the series. I first started watching Jeremy about 1996/7 on Top Gear, in NZ. I'm no petrolhead but I became one because he made all things motoring, fascinating. Much like the rest of the crew...Hammond and May. BBC right shot themselves in the foot. On all 3 fronts. These were and are extremely intelligent people, very humble, and overwhelmingly curious...as well as so funny and entertaining and having great broadcasting voices. I watch anything I can from Guy Martin for similar/same reasons. I want to see more of this stuff on the net.
We invent, design, build, and patent the jet engine. We send the inventer mad with exhaustion and finally death. We then give it away free to the rest of the world. Now that shows a touch of sheer class that no other country would even consider lol. Bless us. We rock. We really do :)
The first commercial people mover levitated by electromagnets which was simply called "MAGLEV" officially opened in 1984 near Birmingham, England. British electrical engineer Eric Laithwaite developed the first full-size working model of the linear induction motor. He went on to develop the Maglev for British Rail.
Hans von Ohain of Germany was the designer of the first operational jet engine, though credit for the invention of the jet engine went to Great Britain's Frank Whittle.
Frank Whittles engine was the first to run self sustained several months before Hans von Ohains engine which could could only run powered by an electric motor, it was not self sustained.
It was made in Britain 🇬🇧 and if you don’t like it tough. And another thing that happened in that time we liberated Europe something that is easily forgotten.
Oh sure you brits love "liberating" people. I have a huge respect for all ww2 soldiers, british included, i have none for dummies like you. Fight against nazi germany was an effort by many nations, russians taking by far the most casualties.
Daniel Bejsta 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
The place where the Wright Brothers flew their first machine is right outside my house and the factory they started making them in is also right next to my house :-)
consider you made this comment 4 years ago. How do you think about it now? Funny, right? I think it is PS: i could have made the comment you made 4 years ago. Since what we now experience was predictable even back in 2012
The Americans didn’t invent it, so they complained about the noise it made when breaking the sound barrier. You can bet your life if they had made Concorde it would have had a different story. One crash happened in all of it’s time in service, and that was a convenient excuse to wrap it all up. The world is a different place now, and mass transport numbers seems to be the way to go.
the sonic boom was so loud & dangerous that pretty much every government on earth banned overland supersonic flight. This pretty much killed Concorde's (and SSTs in general) market potential, since there are vastly many overland long-haul high-demand routes than there are oceanic ones. Plus, they deemed it uneconomical to operate (because even though the plane was pretty efficient while it was in cruise, the afterburners -- which were needed to take it up to cruise -- drank fuel like there was no tomorrow. And they were very noisy at takeoff and landing). Google tells us that Concorde "burned approximately 25,629 liters (6,770 gallons) of fuel per hour. For comparison, a Boeing 747-400 burns about 12,700 liters (3,350 gallons) of fuel per hour." That isn't entirely fair, because Concorde could cover much more distance in that period of time than a 747 could, however it carried much fewer passengers than a 747 did. So let's fit both these considerations in our calculations: - Concorde flew at Mach 2.4, while the 747-400 flew at Mach 0.85. So concorde flew 2.4 times faster, aka covering 2.4 times more distance in that hour than the 747 would. So we can divide the Concorde's fuel consumption by 2.4. We get 2820 gallons. - The 747-400 carried 4.16 times as many people as Concorde in a typical configuration (416 passengers in the 747, vs only 100 in Concorde). So we can divide the 747's fuel consumption by 4.16. We get 805 gallons. 2820/805=3.5. So, the Concorde burned about 3.5 times more fuel per passenger per mile flown than the 747, which itself was infamous for being a gas-guzzling plane. This, and the sonic boom, are the main reasons why Concorde was retired. We can fix the latter since we now have much more advanced & efficient ways of developing planes, such as software wind tunnels, CAD, precision manufacturing using robots, carbon fiber + other advanced materials, better engines, advanced technology (such as cameras, which eliminate the need for the heavy droop snoot), and more. But the sonic boom will be tricky to get rid of.
Japans MITI did the research and that was their findings, that 54% of modern inventions were British. Unless you've got evidence to suggest otherwise I'm all ears. However, just saying that the "Romans/italians and Germans" invented the most, without any evidence is a bit like saying, "I discovered time travel, but only i can see and do it"...
The internet was initially a U.S. military invention in order to communicate in a manner that would make it difficult to be cut off in the case of an invasion. The protocol we use to browse as civilians was created by an Englishman though ..
Controversial perhaps. All Henri Coandă did was to design an aircraft using a 4-cylinder petrol engine (NOT any kind of 'jet') that (instead of using a propeller) sucked air in at the front, and blew it out the back. Needless to say, it never flew. It was only later in the 1950's that he started making wild claims that he had invented a 'motorjet' Sad old git.
34:20 "If it weren't for the fact the wings would rip of while it turned over, the 747 could in theory fly upside down." Possibly not just in theory, mr. Clarkson. I thought they said that on the unveiling flight, the test pilots had both Boeiing's and Pan Am's top brass crap their pants by preforming a barrel roll in Mr. Trip's new bird. The hump reminds me a bit of the Boeiing B-17 Flying Fortress. That too was designed with a hump and a partial "double deck" fuselage. Be it for other reasons than being able to fit a front loading door.
for starship point-to-point rocket travel - spiral/shuffle everyone in with window seats, flight attendants buckle you back in after your zero-g experience )
2023 and still watching this....well done Jeremy and crew!
yoooo im watching this again rn hell yeah
If only the BBC had prepared a hot meal for Jeremy that day, then we would still have a proper Top Gear show.
Thanks... I was the camera man for the black and white footage 🙂
Just watched this for first time interesting comments on sars and jet age 🙈
Unfortunately tho as much as Jeremy is a Conservative Unionist National Treasure he still talks rampant bollocks a lot of the time.
Clarkson’s documentaries are in another league. The choice of music, shots, his depth and articulation of knowledge presented in an easy to grasp manner are just impeccable.
"Sydney, ghastly place, full of Australians." - Jeremy Clarkson
funniest line in the show.
Not many Australians there nowadays
As an Australian I can confirm this as true 😂👍🏻
G’day from Sydney
98% kiwis, isn’t it?
Countless hours on a plane. Mr Clarkson, the Gameboy was made for just such an occasion.
you can only play video games for so long before you get bored
I really don't know how people can be offended by him. He exaggerates for comic effect, he is happy to insult and compliment any nation in equal measure. Some people are really humourless. But he actually had topics that are informative and well as fun
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Certain people are miners of offence, outrage and racism, and, absent any actual content to be offended by, will drag it out of the most benign behaviour whilst ignoring absolute atrocities as long as they are carried out by the correct groups. Virtue signalling wan*ers.
Encyclopedia Britannica: Whittle obtained his first patent for a turbo-jet engine in 1930, and in 1936 he joined with associates to found a company called Power Jets Ltd. He tested his first jet engine on the ground in 1937. This event is customarily regarded as the invention of the jet engine, but the first operational jet engine was designed in Germany by Hans Pabst von Ohain and powered the first jet-aircraft flight on August 27, 1939. The outbreak of World War II finally spurred the British government into supporting Whittle’s development work. A jet engine of his invention was fitted to a specially built Gloster E.28/39 airframe, and the plane’s maiden flight took place on May 15, 1941. The British government took over Power Jets Ltd. in 1944, by which time Britain’s Gloster Meteor jet aircraft were in service with the RAF, intercepting German V-1 rockets.
Whittle retired from the RAF in 1948 with the rank of air commodore, and that same year he was knighted. The British government eventually atoned for their earlier neglect by granting him a tax-free gift of £100,000. He was awarded the Order of Merit in 1986. In 1977 he became a research professor at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. His book Jet: The Story of a Pioneer was published in 1953.
I'm glad he didn't share the same fate as mikhail kalashnikov!
it never crossed my mind that people would find it hard to believe there was a plane without a propeller. interesting stuff
or fat people
essentially, a jet engine somewhat works similar to a propellor -- it's a fan that spins air quickly and throws the air behind to create thrust. Albeit, it's a much bigger, much faster moving fan, and it does have a compressor for added thrust. But at the end of the day, they're pretty similar.
What really is fascinating is the scramjet engine. No moving parts at all -- it just takes the incoming air and squirts fuel on the air's way out the back. A remarkably simple yet crazy idea.
One of the best documentaries I have seen.
Would not go so far as to say that but it sure as hell is up there.
47:29 Damn it Clarkson, did you have to be so damn good at predicting disasters!
I thought the same. We should make him the world's leader.
You beat me to the punch with that one by 6 months! Talk about foreshadowing.
Funny how exactly 10 years after this was aired, it became a reality
47:29 foreshadowing by Clarkson with respect to the Covid-19 pandemic
i think we all know that covid would have "spread" worldwide even if we had no planes ....
Where do you think they got the idea 🤷♂️
Cheers for the soundtrack!
Great set of 'cafe del mar'ish chill out collection...
I love all the songs/music used
Nice documentary, Jeremy Clarkson! Greetings from Morocco XD
The A-380 is already out-of-production, with only 254 made...by contrast, the 747 numbers 1,574...
The Concorde numbered only twenty aircraft, one was scrapped, another was lost in the one and only crash of Concorde.
747? Boeing? Like they're not in trouble. If they carry on like this they'll be bust in 24 months
@@nigelbenn4642 Wrong Point. What he’s trying to say was that the A380 was too little too late for civil aviation. If the A380 came out in the 80s or 90s when the demand for High Capacity Wide Bodies outweighed fuel efficiency, the A380 would likely have thousands of units in the air. Quality Wise, the 747 is mostly held together. The aircraft hasn’t seen an airframe related hull loss in the last decade. I know that Boeing right now isn’t in the best spot but we have to remember that there was a time when Boeing stood for quality and robustness, something the 747 was birthed during.
@@VermyScrubs It's ALL the point mate.
@Lucky Waleson - What the Germans are credited with is the first operational jet powered plane. And Jeremy mentions him, Hans von Ohain
Frank Whittle IS the undisputed true inventor of the turbine engine. Coanda's engine was a piston powered compressed air duct fan.
Okay sure, and the Yanks say they invented the phone too. Tribalism is a disease.
No, a black African villager invented it and it was stolen by racists. Also the jet engine was invented by Muslims during the "golden age of Islam" and stolen by racists. Planes, trains, vaccines, cars, the television, the telephone, the computer, the internet, modern agricultural techniques, spacecraft and the fidget spinner were all invented by blacks and Muslims, and of course, were stolen by racists.
The music at the start is the same as the final scene in Spaced, and now that I've figured that out i can enjoy the documentary ty xx
Yes, I noticed that.
On the off chance you don't know the song.
ARTIST : The Cardigans.
TUNE : Erase & Rewind.
From the sounds of it, Griffith was thinking of the Turboprop engine. This sort of engine using the same gas turbine principle as the jet, but doesn't produce sufficient thrust through the exhaust gas exiting the engine, instead spinning a propeller
I'm just sat here thinking how simple but effective the production is on this, like in terms of logistics, the way they film it, it is 75% Clarkson and then what ever setting they decide to film him in, e.g. they go from one country to another like it's nothing but then only include 30 seconds worth of Clarkson making whatever point he's making. Just goes to show really. If you've got the budget to fly wherever you need, even just economy, you can make basic conversational stuff seem interesting in a video entertainment sense by using this simple formula! But ultimately it is 75% Clarkson so you need to have interesting ideas and a way of communicating it effectively in the first place. Really cool when you think about it!
I'm sure the views of this particular episode isn't as much as this RUclips counter shows us here. But they were able to justify the cost to do that at the time.
@@Jwlar I'm talking the actual footage of Clarkson, and yeah that's what I'm saying, they utilised whatever budget they had really well, and it's really simple, Clarkson had this formula from day one, it's not too far away from what Top gear, GT or Clarkson's farm is if you think about it, I think the ultimate point is that it goes to show, if you can tell a story into a camera in an engaging way, it don't matter the budget
You do understand that most of Clarkson filming was done in a studio using a blue screen to add in exotic locations
Same way most things are filmed to save money and make it look expensive
Top gear was such a different concept it's scary
Top gear had no option to use a blue screen as they had to drive the roads etc
They always hidden the active true cost of top gear on the understanding that some wouldn't watch such indulgent crud
They played it extremely well for top gear and Clarkson does the best documentary's ever
My favourite is
The greatest raid of all time ST nazire
Very well said good Sir
wow!...they really spared no expense..they went with 46 pixel resolution on this bad boy
@29:32 Jeremy has teased us about the first episode of The Grand Tour
A great presenter,fantastic personality and a very funny guy.
39:20 the pilots must have noticed the voice of this tv presenter sound exacly like their plane's GPWS.
Concorde was a wild time, they charged "if you have to ask you can't afford it" prices for tickets. I remember it as a fighter jet with passengers, they would take off over my house and sounded like the F-15s of the time
Funnily enough, BA did once explicitly ask that question. Concorde was an expensive plane to operate, and by the mid-1980s it was costing more to run the flights than BA was making from the ticket sales, mainly due to fuel prices. Then someone in BA management had a brainwave: They realised that most of the passengers on Concorde didn't buy the tickets personally - they had secretaries or assistants who did that for them. So a questionnaire was issued on the next few flights, with many questions for passengers, but the only one that BA was truly interested in was how much did you think your ticket had cost, or words to that effect.
As it turned out, their idea was correct, and that passengers had no idea what the ticket prices really were, so most of them guessed way above the price they had actually paid. Armed with that information, BA simply upped the price, matching it to the expectation. As such, Concorde flights became far more profitable than they ever had been. If that hadn't been done, Concorde might well have been grounded a lot sooner than it actually was.
My grandad used to build them. He told me that the bulkhead and cockpit would expand so much at top speed because of heat differences that there would be a four inch gap between them ! He told me an interestimg story that on the last flight the two pilots inserted their caps into this gap and when they landed the caps were so tightly squeezed between the two structures that they were impossible to remove. Cool.
In April 1985, British Airways were trialing one of their Concorde's up and down the North Sea, it was being
test flown after some maintenance work had been cared out, no passengers aboard of course. The pilots of
the British Airways Concorde offered themselves as a target for NATO fighters to try and overtake, so at an
altitude of 57,000 feet and without reheats, maintaining supercruise, flying at a speed of Mach 2.02
none of them could do it despite trying several times. On full Power and reheats a RAF Lightning only just struggled past Concorde, before quicky having to
switch its reheats off so it didn't run itself empty. As the Lightning passed, the Concorde pilots congratulated
the pilot, who had managed to overtake Concorde. However when you think about it the Lightning only just
managed to overtake an aircraft that weighed over 140 tonnes and was designed to carry 100 passengers and
their luggage, and what is even more impressive is that, throughout the entire *competition," the fighters had
all been using their reheats to try and pass, yet Concorde had been comfortably cruising and staying ahead of
the fighters with its reheats switched OFF! It is incredible to think that an aircraft can carry 100 passengers and
their luggage and maintain a speed of Mach 2 without reheats for over two hours! Fighter planes cannot do
this, and they cannot maintain supersonic flight for more than about 15 minutes or they will run out of fuel! This
event just goes to show what an unbelievable feat of engineering Concorde was and still is! An aircraft with
Power and Beauty which has touched the hearts of millions and gone on to inspire many more!
@@mikewa2 Not that much of a surprise, since the English Electric Lightning was a notoriously fuel-thirsty aircraft, with a well deserved reputation for being overpowered and having fuel tanks which were far too small. However, it was designed from the outset to be a point interceptor, the purpose being to climb to cruise altitude as quickly as possible, shoot down incoming Tupolev bombers and then land again, so flight endurance was understandably low on the list of priorities. The power difference is also substantial: The Lightning had a pair of Avon turbojets, with a maximum combined thrust (with afterburners on) of 32,720 lbf. Each engine on Concorde ( Snecma-Olympus 593) was capable of 32,000 lbf of thrust with afterburners off, or 38,000 lbf with afterburners on. Concorde had 4 of these, giving it almost 4 times the power of the Lightning.
This doesn't make the Concorde any less of an incredible achievement of course. It did have economies of scale on its side, since you can cram far more fuel into an airliner than into a much smaller fighter, and larger aircraft have a greater proportion of maximum takeoff weight as "payload" than smaller ones. Even so, some of the NASA engineers who worked on the Apollo Saturn V launch vehicle have been heard to say that getting man to the moon was easy compared to getting Concorde to work.
@@twt3716 can you smell that? Smells like a farmyard. Kinda like bullshit
Coanda's engine was a duct fan that had a piston powered compressor. It had no form of thrust other than the compressed air it chucked out. Whittle's turbine engine used the principle of expanding hot gases to create thrust and propel the aircraft forwards.
9 yrs ago....
there are an INCREDIBLE amount of inaccuracies in this film
+babs beaver its clarkson :D
Such as?
Очень правильный подход к созданию передач, которые должны показать, что многие важные изобретения фактически созданы в твоей стране.
True but the best British export is Heavy Metal.
Thanks for the video. Hope Jeremy lives forever.
2:40 wonder if he meant Maumu? I love the fact Erase and rewind is the first song and the last one too.
Moorea
@@davidt8087 Ah Mo'orea French Polynesia? Good man! well done
@@dantaylor7344 this was 4 years ago
@@davidt8087 The documentary was 2004. Four years?
@@dantaylor7344 he meant your first comment maybe
Clarkson you’re a legend
Old stuff is alot of fun to watch isnt it cdg03?
The Coandă-1910, designed by Romanian inventor Henri Coandă, was an unconventional sesquiplane aircraft powered by a ducted fan. Called the "turbo-propulseur" by Coandă, its experimental engine consisted of a conventional piston engine driving a multi-bladed centrifugal blower which exhausted into a duct. The unusual aircraft attracted attention at the Second International Aeronautical Exhibition in Paris in October 1910, being the only exhibit without a propeller, but the aircraft was not displayed afterward and it fell from public awareness.
A ducted fan is not a jet however.
I mean…..this was just Clarkson at this best most of this. Great narration, decent logic to deeper stories covered. The music was amazing. Golden stuff back then.
Best presenter In the world😉 BBC you are fools
I think you mean "Best presenter........in the world".
41:01 Cook was killed in Hawaii wasn’t he?
The Mutiny on the Bounty was plotted here though, and the descendants still live on Pitcairn, with the Bounty’s anchor and other remains still at the bottom of the sea just off the coast where they burned it. The rift between the mutineers is still going on with their great, great grandchildren, by all accounts.
29:30 and that right there is the intro song for "The Grand Tour" 😉
?
An hour long ad for an Airbus starring Jeremy Clarkson. Cool cool.
I once flew non stop Tokyo to New York. Economy class. Never again.
For those of you not familiar with academia in Britain, Whittle's story is repeated here year in year out. This country has a culture, which does its utmost to stand in the way of productive people. Power and control in this country are allocated unfairly to inept imbeciles who's only claim to their position is their wealth, or their aristocratic heritage or even their race or their gender....these inept lowlifes in turn through their idiocy and lack of understanding and therefore lack of appreciation for good work, put up barriers in the way of great minds which hamper their progress and make their life impossible. Many a great mind and a great work have been lost as a result of this backward culture.
I've just discovered this series and I love it, but rather unfortunate that it seems to have been recorded using a toaster.
29:35 "Sunshine Day"
Who would've guessed that would open TGT S01E01
i remember my mother sending me from toronto to st john's to live with my grandmother when iwas about 7 and her teling me this was special because it was a JET ! No propellors! i was amazed. it might as well have been a sppaceship to me! i was thrilled! i remember looking out that window, the people and cars looking like ants..... so young, such a good innocent time. when i was 19 i came to toronto to meet my father and was absolutely thrilled to ride the subway and asked if we vould go to the front and look out the window, driver's perspective. it was awesome!
And maybe in 100 years from now when they have planes than can go around the world in few hours, people will watch this show as we watch the wright brothers first flight :/
They did! The first was built in 1966... the SR71 Blackbird! In 1974 they flew one from New York to London in 1 hr 54 mins!
@@markallen7215 not around the world though
@@Live.Laugh.Lobotomy true, but probably could of with a couple of mid flight refuels
@@markallen7215 could have - that's just ignorant. idiots in this world sheesh
My nieces and nephews always laugh at old attempts at flight. I have to remind them that these people were trying to invent a plane without any idea what a plane even looks like.
Like, the average person couldn't build a flying plane today even though they KNOW what planes have looked like throughout the century.
This is also apparent in old "what the future will look like" videos. Novel ideas and the ones that DO come true are completely different in execution.
That poor guy in the seat in front of Jeremy at 37:47. He must have had whiplash after that
Great stuff as usual, but what happened to Singapore?
Jeremy Clarkson is a National Treasure. Maybe even in the UK.
But not an astronomer: comets don't crash into the ground - they whip round the Sun.
@@nemo6686: Tell that to the Dinosaurs.
I find this stuff fascinating and I've just come across it, and you Jeremy/the series. I first started watching Jeremy about 1996/7 on Top Gear, in NZ. I'm no petrolhead but I became one because he made all things motoring, fascinating. Much like the rest of the crew...Hammond and May. BBC right shot themselves in the foot. On all 3 fronts. These were and are extremely intelligent people, very humble, and overwhelmingly curious...as well as so funny and entertaining and having great broadcasting voices. I watch anything I can from Guy Martin for similar/same reasons. I want to see more of this stuff on the net.
We invent, design, build, and patent the jet engine. We send the inventer mad with exhaustion and finally death. We then give it away free to the rest of the world. Now that shows a touch of sheer class that no other country would even consider lol. Bless us. We rock. We really do :)
Same with the computer really. Alan Turing was pushed to suicide and then someone had the bright idea to give all of his work to the CIA.
what's the music at 33:52?
Anyone know the song at around 17:00? It's not listed in the songs. Its a great song I just can't place my finger on the band.
The song is Destiny, by Zero 7 from the album Simple Things.
Song at 29:13 please?
Brits have a knack for giving things away… the jet, maglev, computers, the internet, trains, America, Australia 😂
When did the Brits invent or give away the Maglev? As far as I know the Germans were the ones who gave it away to the Chinese.
The first commercial people mover levitated by electromagnets which was simply called "MAGLEV" officially opened in 1984 near Birmingham, England. British electrical engineer Eric Laithwaite developed the first full-size working model of the linear induction motor. He went on to develop the Maglev for British Rail.
38:21 this works, btw. If you're flying across the Pond, get upgraded
When you get a dash-cam, do you also get a free pass to amble in the passing lane?
Awl man. I'm really enjoying the 1st part here. Totally funny. When I was a kid, we tried similar things to fly. hahah. Lots of fun. Never worked :-)
Hans von Ohain of Germany was the designer of the first operational jet engine, though credit for the invention of the jet engine went to Great Britain's Frank Whittle.
Frank Whittles engine was the first to run self sustained several months before Hans von Ohains engine which could could only run powered by an electric motor, it was not self sustained.
Probably because Whittles engine was running 6 months before Ohains.
It was made in Britain 🇬🇧 and if you don’t like it tough. And another thing that happened in that time we liberated Europe something that is easily forgotten.
Oh sure you brits love "liberating" people. I have a huge respect for all ww2 soldiers, british included, i have none for dummies like you. Fight against nazi germany was an effort by many nations, russians taking by far the most casualties.
Daniel Bejsta 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
The place where the Wright Brothers flew their first machine is right outside my house and the factory they started making them in is also right next to my house :-)
The first flight was shorter than the wingspan of a 747.
North carolina!:)
Is it ? Wow . Have some ice-cream
I wonder if they were allowed to use the soundtrack from A Beautiful Mind
what's the song starting at 3:17 going on about a minute or two?
ruclips.net/video/Al-7V950sUs/видео.html
@@innerstorm Why, thank you!
how many pixels is this video?
yes.
36:42, caught my attention suddenly when he said "right at Chicago".
47:09 watching this in 2021
Excuse me, Capt James Cook was killed in Hawai'i
"If Ebola got into a plane, then we would have something to worry about."
Erm...
consider you made this comment 4 years ago.
How do you think about it now?
Funny, right?
I think it is
PS: i could have made the comment you made 4 years ago.
Since what we now experience was predictable even back in 2012
@@bertjesklotepino lol the actual film was made way before 05 or right around there
The last 747 just came off the line. RIP to the Queen of The Skies.
It's best for all the passengers and airlines
No body tells it like he does!
It's funny I started watching this video the same time they stopped production on the 747.
Yeah, don't mention the ME 262. Alright.
Also, what is Clarkson's issue with America?
It wasn't the first jet however. There were others before it. One of the first jet fighters maybe, but thats not the overall point.
He's british, and... he's british.
Hasn't Clarkson heard of British Aerospace. They now have the most advanced planes in the World.
amazing soundtrack!
Whats the song at 45:48 called??
Jacko458 All Saints - Pure Shores ☺️
What's that Hollywood song?
Why did we stop Concorde? We should bring it back or develop a new version.
The Americans didn’t invent it, so they complained about the noise it made when breaking the sound barrier. You can bet your life if they had made Concorde it would have had a different story.
One crash happened in all of it’s time in service, and that was a convenient excuse to wrap it all up.
The world is a different place now, and mass transport numbers seems to be the way to go.
the sonic boom was so loud & dangerous that pretty much every government on earth banned overland supersonic flight. This pretty much killed Concorde's (and SSTs in general) market potential, since there are vastly many overland long-haul high-demand routes than there are oceanic ones.
Plus, they deemed it uneconomical to operate (because even though the plane was pretty efficient while it was in cruise, the afterburners -- which were needed to take it up to cruise -- drank fuel like there was no tomorrow. And they were very noisy at takeoff and landing).
Google tells us that Concorde "burned approximately 25,629 liters (6,770 gallons) of fuel per hour. For comparison, a Boeing 747-400 burns about 12,700 liters (3,350 gallons) of fuel per hour." That isn't entirely fair, because Concorde could cover much more distance in that period of time than a 747 could, however it carried much fewer passengers than a 747 did. So let's fit both these considerations in our calculations:
- Concorde flew at Mach 2.4, while the 747-400 flew at Mach 0.85. So concorde flew 2.4 times faster, aka covering 2.4 times more distance in that hour than the 747 would. So we can divide the Concorde's fuel consumption by 2.4. We get 2820 gallons.
- The 747-400 carried 4.16 times as many people as Concorde in a typical configuration (416 passengers in the 747, vs only 100 in Concorde). So we can divide the 747's fuel consumption by 4.16. We get 805 gallons.
2820/805=3.5.
So, the Concorde burned about 3.5 times more fuel per passenger per mile flown than the 747, which itself was infamous for being a gas-guzzling plane. This, and the sonic boom, are the main reasons why Concorde was retired. We can fix the latter since we now have much more advanced & efficient ways of developing planes, such as software wind tunnels, CAD, precision manufacturing using robots, carbon fiber + other advanced materials, better engines, advanced technology (such as cameras, which eliminate the need for the heavy droop snoot), and more. But the sonic boom will be tricky to get rid of.
Why was Jezzer walking in New York in the pouring rain with bare feet?
Japans MITI did the research and that was their findings, that 54% of modern inventions were British. Unless you've got evidence to suggest otherwise I'm all ears. However, just saying that the "Romans/italians and Germans" invented the most, without any evidence is a bit like saying, "I discovered time travel, but only i can see and do it"...
The internet was initially a U.S. military invention in order to communicate in a manner that would make it difficult to be cut off in the case of an invasion. The protocol we use to browse as civilians was created by an Englishman though ..
Gordon welchman is the British man who practically invented the Internet. It stemmed from his work in Bletchley Park during ww2
Has anyone figured out where Meeeuureee actually is?
Shame that couldn’t fly direct from Los Angeles to southern New Zealand to experience a temperature change from 35°C to 0°C
47:00 ok lol like that would ever happen tho say ….18 years after this was filmed ?
Miss those days.
Or 'Erase and Rewind' by 'The Cardigans'
Controversial perhaps. All Henri Coandă did was to design an aircraft using a 4-cylinder petrol engine (NOT any kind of 'jet') that (instead of using a propeller) sucked air in at the front, and blew it out the back. Needless to say, it never flew. It was only later in the 1950's that he started making wild claims that he had invented a 'motorjet' Sad old git.
I can see clearly now, on his way to LA. That is what I call foreshadowing.
Human powered flight has been achieved. :)
music at 33:52 please?
what is the song at the start called?
Hello Jams
@Lucky Waleson - Whittle filed and received his patent before Schmidt did.
Watching this during the SARS2 pandemic in the middle of the air raid alert makes me feel so strange....
My 1st flight 1980 ish Vancouver Canada to Cairns Queensland Australia. Can't remember how long but looooonnnngggg. Especially as a 10 yr old.
34:20 "If it weren't for the fact the wings would rip of while it turned over, the 747 could in theory fly upside down."
Possibly not just in theory, mr. Clarkson. I thought they said that on the unveiling flight, the test pilots had both Boeiing's and Pan Am's top brass crap their pants by preforming a barrel roll in Mr. Trip's new bird.
The hump reminds me a bit of the Boeiing B-17 Flying Fortress. That too was designed with a hump and a partial "double deck" fuselage. Be it for other reasons than being able to fit a front loading door.
That was in the B707 prototype.
"*in theory*"
China Airlines 006: allow me to introduce myself
The GPWS callouts at approx 39 minutes while landing (30, 20, 10) are from an Airbus yet Clarkson said he was on a 747?
he said the same thing about gate one in the grand tour
“When the SARS virus caused a worldwide epidemic...”
*clears throat* ahem...
50:35 "Im Gay, I'm gay, I'm gay'
for starship point-to-point rocket travel - spiral/shuffle everyone in with window seats, flight attendants buckle you back in after your zero-g experience )
40.55 - lieutenant Cook
Anyone know the music playing at 1.23 (lyric I wonder)
Singer : Madonna
Title : ray of light
47:00 (±) sars... Remember them...
Wait? was that 20 ago already?
Jeremy mistakes a Comet for a Meteor.
no on rewatching it he didn’t he said it’s best known for becoming a meteor he didn’t mistake it for that
"Beatboys in the Jet Age." - The a Lambrettas. 1979. 🎵😉🇬🇧