Could you define the difference between a “major war” and a “non major war”????, it, in my opinion doesn’t matter if you are actually fighting a war, the bombs, bullets and artillery are just as deadly to the personnel involved. Whether that be land, sea or air it is all dangerous and deadly, the wars and conflicts you quoted were simply wars where people fought and died. Sorry Simon but you dropped the ball on this video, you presented the show in your same concise and professional manner but the script was not up to the standard usually provided to you, it is not that you should not criticise anything or that your facts and figures were wrong but, in my opinion the wording was wrong for this particular show. The point that you made about Britain’s “slow stuttering decline as a major power” is the most on point remark you made, if only the political leadership of the country would see that as well, since the end of WWII the British military has been systematically reduced to the point where we couldn’t even fight our way out of a soggy paper bag, during my 24 years service we were constantly being tasked to do more with less and less, whether it was manpower,equipment or money we were so undervalued, not just by the political leadership but by the civilian population as well, it was the happiest time of my life and I was proud to serve but overall we were let down time and time again by people who only told us what to do but wouldn’t provide us the tools to do it with, and that is shameful and disrespectful.
the AI host is better now, but the beard still doesn't look quite right it moves like a solid object, not "hair" pretty good, though the voice is a bit wanky
Put a single tail on the sea Vixen and maybe two angled tails and look at the f22 Raptor. They were on to something. There are others y'all designed that were odd. Mostly after WW1. Same with France. Or Italy. Or the US.
Although I predominantly flew Buccaneers I did do a conversion onto the Vixen. It was a beast but once airborne flew like a thoroughbred. It was a Fleet interceptor and was not intended to "dog fight" although it could turn well. It certainly was not terrible as the title suggests.
The statistics dont lie, de Havilland made jets with appalling loss rates and mediocre performance, the company became infamous for its jets breaking up in mid-flight.. not just one but all of its jet types.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Most western jets are made by multi-national consortiums now. What is true is the UK has retained some cutting edge technologies -- 15-20% of the F35 is made by BAE Systems. And we all know Rolls Royce is among the very best engine makers today. Eurofighter Typhoon is probably the only non US one you could say is in production even if that is made by a consortium. The Tempest is in development and when all is said and done what will emerge will likely involve UK, Spain, Italy, Japan. I have no doubt it will be a true 6th Gen aircraft. I truly doubt Russia will ever manage to catch up after it has finished destroying economy. Of course there will be lots of prototypes wilth absurd claims made about their capabilities.
I have seen one of these at the fleet air arm museum. I was with my father a former RN aircraft mechanic. When my father saw it he took a good look and then went over to the museums book stall. He proceeded to find a book about the aircraft on display and flipped to the back of the book. "I told them it would never fly again and I was right. They brought it here on a lorry."
@@GaudiaCertaminisGaming He had got it airworthy for the base open day. So they could put on a jet display. He got it flying in time but made it clear that it would be its last flight. He was correct but was posted elsewhere so never knew what happened until we came across it in the museum.
To my mind the Sea Vixen is no stranger than the Gloster Javelin. Being 'all weather' the aircraft had to carry a big radar. A radar far bigger than the 'fire control' 'intercept' radar of interceptors like the Lightning. It was not the only British aircraft with an offset pilot cockpit, variants of the Canberra also had them. It showed a visual lineage from the early Swallow prototypes, with additions of a tail. Offset cockpits allowed a better view of the deck in landing. It was never intended for dog-fighting.
Always thought they were a strange choice for the RAF to adopt a few, as static, ground crew technical training aircraft? Until I was posted to Wyton and had to fit ejection seats to Canberra PR9's. Different positioning of the seats but many similarities especially with both 'Nav' seats.
Ironically all of the Swallows crashed.. de Havilland jets had an absolutely appalling loss rate which was the death nail of the company that didn't survive to see this plane enter service!
@@WilhelmKarsten Yeah, weird how that it had poor low speed handling... like the Komet it was copying. edit: de Havillands crash rate did lead to Martin-Baker making excellent ejection seats
I actually like the looks of both the Javelin and Sea Vixen. I wish I could have been at one of the airshows that the Vulcan and Sea Vixen flew at together. Both sound amazing!
@@smalltime0 The Komet was introduced into service 15 years earlier!!! Ejection seats saved many pilots but weren't enough to save de Havilland... they went tits-up there year before the sea b!tch entered service!!!
The Sea Vixen was the product of a Royal Navy requirement for a all weather day/night jet fighter first proposed in 1946 . The lack of forward firing armament was probably a mistake , but they were not alone with that thinking . It took another war for the Americans to realize that with the F4-Phantom , yet another two crew fighter . The reason behind the navigator/radar operator being enclosed in a concealed compartment was quite simply for better reading of the radar scopes and nav aids. Unlike the Americans and French , the British from conception to service took a long time , so frequently good ideas or designs were outdated when ready for active service. The top speed of the Vixen of 690 mph was impressive for its period. Regarding the accident rate , it was nothing out of the ordinary for early jets . An acquaintance who flew Meteors and Vampires said of the latter . When you are diving at nearly 600 mph and the realization that all that separates you from the outside air is Plywood , does not give a feeling of confidence . A further note upon that subject , The Lockheed F-80 Shooting Star had its baptism of war in Korea . 80% of all of those built were lost in that conflict and nearly half to accidents. Simon has a supercilious attitude that doesn't go down well with me . Unlike he , I am of an age who knew many personally of those who experienced first hand ,what he derides as crap.
I don't think that Simon was unnecessarily harsh in his commentary. And the Sea Vixen was nearly obsolescent when delivered, especially that lack of speed or fuel for loiter time.
I can’t say I agree with you 100% about Simon and his presentation but I do agree that he did do the aviation industry of the era a disservice with the maligning of the Sea Vixen, the fact is that during the era the number of successful British aircraft produced far outweighs the ones that were not quite up to the mark in terms of being almost obsolete by the time they entered service, but aircraft like the Vulcan and stable companions Victor and to a lesser extent the Valiant were not only groundbreaking but extremely long lived, the most significant advances in aviation usually occurred during combat and, as you pointed out, all the world’s manufacturers had aircraft that were more deadly to the crews than the enemy. Who knows what could have resulted in being designed and manufactured here in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 IF the government’s of the time hadn’t systematically destroyed the companies that had proven to be world leaders in aviation, insisting that the industry amalgamated most of the leading names into one company was the death nell for the industry, something I can never forgive or forget, buying almost exclusively from the United States 🇺🇸 and collaboration with European companies is not how it should have turned out.
@@williestyle35I don’t disagree with you 100% but I do think his criticism of the aircraft industry and the Sea Vixen was a bit off, I agree that the Sea Vixen was almost obsolete when it first entered service but the fact is that every new aircraft of the era was to a certain extent experimental and still in the infancy of jet powered aircraft, British 🇬🇧 aviation of the era produced more successful aircraft than unsuccessful ones and yet Simon has decided to pick on the Sea Vixen for maligning, perhaps because it is one of the few that lent itself to being criticised.
A video about Eric 'winkle' Brown RN/FAA would be a great tribute. His take off and landings from aircraft carriers has never been beaten, flew more aircraft types (Including the Me163) than any other pilot.
@paulqueripel3493 Way too biased, they didn't cover the dark side of Brown's career at all... like his involvement in the Miles M.52 embezzlement scandal and why he was denied his nomination for Knighthood.
It would be interesting to hear about why Brown never received his Knighthood... the later parts of his career seem to have been whitewashed by the mainstream British narrative.
As a USAF brat whose Dad was stationed at RAF Wethersfield in Essex from 1955 to 1958, he used to take me to a model shop on Halstead's High Street. One of the many plastic aircraft models I bought and put together was a DH 110 by FROG. I was always impressed by its off-center cockpit. JJS
Fighter jets have long been a fascination for me, fond memories growing up in the 90's building AirFix models with my father. Love watching these videos
I saw the same aircraft a few years later when it was returned to its fleet air arm livery practicing for the Bournemouth air show but over Boscombe. It was fantastic, hard to believe it was as old as it was.
Same here, saw it display over Rockingham circuit years ago. Sadly it also managed to 'crash' in 2017, it was belly landed after a display as a hydraulic failure prevented the landing gear from being deployed
As has been told to me by various RAF types: How-to take off in a Buccaneer- accelerate to take off speed, raise landing gear, decent to operating mission height 😎
@@garethsheppard240 Story goes that a Bucc groundcrew bod was sipping coffee on the balcony of his third storey flat in Germany not far from the base. He heard the Bucc and then saw it scream between his block and the one adjacent with a green between the two BELOW him. The pilot had decided he'd prove he could fly hands off because the Bucc would fly on the pressure wave and took every opportunity to prove his theory..this was one of those times!
@@jakubznojemsky4936 You also must consider that comparable aircraft of this timeframe could fly Mach 2+... while this poor excuse for a plane struggled to stay airborne yet was unable to reach supersonic at all... a shameful and humiliating example of how and why the UK aircraft industry died.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes. Despite falling victim to canon-less fashion of the time, losing valuable highly trained personel during crashes and getting slowed down to stop breaking apart while airborne it still had some qualities since it might help with development of modern aircraft systems. Still with it's shortcommings I would expect limiting production to few dozen planes and keeping it only experimental for development of better succesor. But considering it was somewhat sufficient lets say it was close enough for time being.
@@jakubznojemsky4936 The Sea B!tch was a very costly blunder... it entered operational service for no other reason than britain had nothing better to replace it with, and buying foreign aircraft was seen as a shameful humiliation... thet would eventually happen anyway as the UK aircraft industry imploded before dying out completely.
In some ways, this aircraft reminds me of one of the early American naval fighters, the Vought F7U Cutlass--it too had a high accident rate (but it was also appalling underpowered).
Indeed. This was when turbojets and associated airframes were going through a period of rapid discovery and development. The Gloster Javelin was not the easiest plane to fly.
@@Auldpharte This was also a period when de havilland attempted (unsuccessfully) to transition from building jets from wood and fabric to modern construction methods... an attempt that failed spectacularly
My father was an army ambulance driver that day at Farnborough. He's 91 now and the aftermath of what he had to see and deal with has haunted him all his life. He told me in detail what he saw that day and what he had to do. It was truly awful.
Yes I agree…. not remotely as crap as the presenter tried to make out. Everything in its design and development was done for a reason, it was a sophisticated combat aircraft and it operated in demanding and unforgiving environments. He also skipped right through the preceding DH Venom and Sea Venom aircraft which were successful or at least satisfactory and a big interim jump from the tiny largely wood constructed Vampire. The DH Comet had a similar history… started out very ambitious but flawed, redesigned and improved into an effective and popular aircraft, but ultimately overtaken by other designs an technology and experience quickly moved on.
@@johnmoruzzi7236 Not really, the Sea Vixen couldnt even fly supersonic! All of de Havillands jets were poorly designed and had similar problems with mid-air break-ups and high rates of crashes. The according to official Mod records the RAF lost 82 Vampires in a single year! The Comet Disaster is the single worst engineering failure in jet aviation history. Comet 1 was so fatally flawed that 6 crashed before being grounded, its Certificate of Airworthiness was permanently revoked... later Comets didn't perform much better, a total of 39 hull loss accidents out of 114 built and only 76 in revenue service. de Havilland had a well-earned and notorious reputation from building unsafe aircraft that crashed with shocking regularity... so much so that operators stopped buying them and the company became completely insolvent in 1958
@@johnmoruzzi7236 De Havilland was a deeply troubled company with an appalling history of making unreliable aircraft with staggeringly high loss rates, the Sea Btch was no exception, absolute upon arrival into service it has a horrible safety record.
@@johnmoruzzi7236Far worse than the video depicts... the Sea Vixen was a very disappointing deathtrap and was crowning feat of shame for de Havilland as its long reputation for building unsafe aircraft finally caught up to them, after a series of jets that were epic failures d-H became completely insolvent in 1958, the UK courts seized the company and placed it into administrative receivership before selling off its remaining assets. Please name a single British company that still makes British jet aircraft today???
@@WilhelmKarsten We feel we can clear up some common false myths, misunderstandings & misconceptions. It's always very important to note the relevant facts obviously. *_Of course it is indeed a great pity & great shame that British military forces had to occupy a large part of Germany for decades after 1945. It would have been so much nicer if that hadn't been necessary wouldn't it._* *Russia had to occupy a large part of Germany after 1945 for decades.* _Russia still posseses a large chunk of land that was once part of Germany._ *Russia & the UK produce Nukes.* Germany does not produce Nukes. *_Regarding the UK Aerospace Sector._* *WHY IS IT THEY CAN'T ANSWER VERY SIMPLE QUESTIONS* ⁉️ 😅 *A very simple question indeed.* *_Which airline recently ordered 60 RR Trent XWB Engines?_* *_Also name a single Germany company that makes German jet aircraft in Germany & name a single German Company that makes German gas turbine aero engines suitable for widebody airliners._* That's correct, Brazil makes very good airliners & Brazil is 100th down the list along with Indonesia for wealth per capita. *Norway Holland Denmark Ireland Belgium - Top 20 wealth per capita - Don't make airliners - its as simple as that.* Agreed, that is correct of course, clearly there are many countries that could easily produce airliners of better quality than Bow-wing (see b-47 wing folding & wing collapse incidents) but don't for some very good reasons. Bow-wing being a result of the size of the US, the large protected domestic market & great ease of testing new types due to the equator to arctic geography & a few other reasons related to production scale capability, politics & economics. Obviously there really is nothing special about Bow-wing, having more than 50 years design / build experience on the type means they have no excuses for the horrendous max incidents for example. Indeed BAe Systems & Rolls Royce combined now do more Airbus work than Germany on an absolute basis & significantly more work than that on a per capita basis. Agreed, Per capita for the home nation BAe Systems is the world's largest defence contractor. _Correct, BAe systems announced the recent £4 Billion takeover of Colorado based US based Ball Aerospace._ *It's definitely the case that BAE systems now does a significantly higher value of work for Airbus than it did when it was a major Airbus shareholder before 2005.* *_Obviously RR now owns US Engine maker Allison for example which does classified Aerospace work for the US Govt._* *Yes, that's right of course, Anybody currently flying on a widebody airliner stands a good chance of being on an aircraft powered by RR gas turbine aero engines built in the UK.* *_A typical but small glimpse of what goes on in the very internationally orientated British aerospace sector._* Boeing Apache Attack Helicopter. AH-64: *75 UK suppliers,* 7% UK content, global fleet of 1280+ aircraft. *F35B more than 130 UK Suppliers, more than 30% UK content.* *_F35A & F35C more than 130 UK Suppliers, more than 15% UK content._* *There is no doubt that an airline has just ordered* *60 RR England Trent XWB Engines* Obviously the UK has the *World's Highest Combined Per Capita* *Nuclear / Defence / Aerospace Sector Activity.* Rolls Royce Holdings UK Subsidiaries - Rolls-Royce plc - Rolls-Royce North America (Allison etc Classified Military stuff) - Rolls-Royce AB - Rolls-Royce Deutschland - Rolls-Royce India Private Limited - Rolls-Royce Marine Power Operations - Vinters Engineering Limited - Rolls-Royce Controls and Data Services - Rolls-Royce Power Systems - Bergen Marine Joint ventures include: - Rolls-Royce Turbomeca - MTU Turbomeca - Trent Family The MT30 (Marine Turbine) Industrial Trent 60 Gas Turbine Trent 7000 Trent XWB Airbus A330neo. Trent 1500 Trent 1000 Trent 500 Trent 600 Trent 700 Trent 800 Trent 8100 Trent 900 RR wholly owned subsidiaries in Germany handle smaller 2 shaft RR gas turbine aero engine work. We hope this helps of course as always. Cheers & 😎👍 indeed. *_O B V I O U S L Y_* . ..... ..... ...... .... .... .. .. . Clearly the line above this line is not blank.
@@milanondrak5564 Performance was dismal... this engineering disaster had a loss rate as high as the "Aluminium Death Tube" but couldn't even reach Mach 1 in a dive... it would crash!
Naval aviation, especially on the small RN carriers, as jets got bigger and heavier, was extremely dangerous. The Sea Vixen had a 38% loss rate. The Supermarine Scimitar lost 51%.
When I joined the RAF in 1980, we used Sea Vixens as training aircraft to teach how to fit Ejection Seats, as the system was so complicated the instructor said "If you can fit a set of seats to this aircraft every other will be easy" :)
Oh Simon, Airplane nerds unite! Yes the Sea Vixen was an underwhelming deathtrap, however across the world as designers were faced with many new challenges...the sound barrier, swept wing technology, early giant radar sets, and really terrible early jet engines it was no worse than the underpowered Vought F7U Cutlass, the deadly stall spin of the MiG 15, or the North American F100 and it's fatal Sabre Dance. Not pretty, but not terrible...I do like the name!
I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode with Grandpa's flashback to being in the USAF in the 1950s: The test pilot complains to his CO that the new aircraft is a deathtrap, and his CO replies "This is the 1950s. EVERYTHING is a death trap! Now go have three martinis, a pack of cigarettes, and get that crate in the air!"
de Havilland specialized in underwhelming deathtraps... and cornered the market for jets that had a notoriously bad reputation for safety. All of Swallows crashed, 82 Vampires crashed in a single year and the Comet Disaster remains the worst engineering failure in commercial aviation history... No surprise that the Sea Vixen was a deathtrap... or that de-Havilland would not last long enough to see the Vixen enter service!
@@KenB-db5veThere is an important distinction between American jets and British jets...Britain's jets were so bad that operators refused to buy them anymore and today there are no longer any British companies left that make a British jet aircraft
I think the intro does a big disservice to the UK air industry. Before the Vixen we had the Vampire, Venom, Javelin and Hunter. The Vixen was a blip. If we're talking about bad starts the US had the Airacomet
de Havilland did much to tarnish the reputation of the UK industry... the Vampire and Venom,,, still made from wood and linen fabric with high loss rates... the catastrophic in-flight structural failures of the Comet and the Swallow destroyed d-H and devasted the UK aircraft industry when they became insolvent in 1958.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke you make some good points but the demise of Britains aircraft manufacturing was probably in part due to the fact we had too many manufacturers competing for too few customers, in some cases it would be just one, either the RAF or the Royal Navy, both of which were beginning to down size, even in the nineteen fifties, as Britain's former colonies gained independence. The other thing that you have omitted is the fact that following WW2 Britain as a country was broke. D H already had experience of building a high performance piston engined aircraft, and probably thought that they might be able to save money by applying the experience they had gained to jet propelled aircraft instead of starting from scratch on designing an aircraft made from very expensive materials. The D H factory where I grew up survives to this day and is owned by Airbus Industries (UK) and is considerably larger and a major employer in the area. It is still occasionally referred to by older residents as De Havilands, or DeHavs.
Oh dear. Wrong. If the vampire and venom were so bad why did they sell so well abroad? And have USAF officers be amazed how much more manoeuvrable than any American jet? They were cheap too. However in some ways you are right. Management of British Aircraft Companies was appalling.
Just to be pedantic when you say its unladen weight was 14 tons that should be American Tons (or short tons in Imperial), for Imperial Tons it was around 12.5.
@@georgesheffield1580 The Cutlass and the Sea Vixen are not contemporaries. The Cutlass first flew in 1948 and was retired before the Sea Vixen entered service.. the F-4 Phantom is its closest contemporary.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, The Vought F7U Cutlass first flew in 1948, the Sea Vixen first flew in 1951 and the F4 first flew in 1958. Clearly the Vixen was a closer contemporary of the Cutlass. Sums clearly aren't your strong point.
I saw the last flight of the Sea Vixen. Displayed at Duxford then did a wheels up landing back at Yeovilton. It was decided it was uneconomical to repair.
@@smalltime0 Was far from being a crash. It was a controlled belly landing that the pilot walked away from, so a good landing in difficult circumstances.
In fairness to de Havilland, at the time of its introduction a lot of jets and naval jet fighters had very abysmal low speed performance and safety de Havilland just happened to never improve its safety record.
I get wanting to have a darkened area for the radar operator, but That would still have easily been possible with a tandem or sideby side cockpit layout, that would have gone a long way to fixing what I reckon is the real reason why they never even tried to fix the Vixen. Other planes have had worse accident rates yet were fixed over time, but not the Vixen.
@@WilhelmKarsten True - not the best-looking aircraft but I've always has a soft spot for the Gannet. I love the innovative tandem dual engine design. A real work horse, kept in service right up to the RN scrapping of its conventional carriers.
There was one other British aircraft that had the side mounted cockpit. That was the original English electric Canberra. The McDonnell Douglas version had a standard cockpit.
Too bad XP924 (featured in this film) was recently grounded. A chap I flew with ejected from one during his days in some Navy aero team. He got wake turb from the one ahead and punched out- I think his radar op didn't make it. Charley Beilby- where are you now? Edit to add- still ticking- and 80 last year!😃
The Sea Vixen was the most beautiful aircraft I've seen since the post-Piston Engined fighters. I watched it flying at an RAF Base in England while I was doing a Gliding Course at RAF Kirkton in Lindsey back in 1965. I flew in at zero feet & the build-up of the sound barrier was amazing. It may have had troubles but I'll never forget the sight.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes it did in a shallow dive just as the Hunter did but that didn't stop it creating the build up around itself at nearly that speed. The Aura around it was spectacular that day, I'll never forget the thrill of seeing it. Here is another Video about it breaking the barrier.
@@macdodd Thats a bald-faced lie, the Vixen could not fly supersonic in dive either. its straight horizontal tail element prevented it from safely reaching Mach 1 in a dive.
@@macdodd The Facts are irrefutable, the Vixen WAS NOT capable of supersonic flight. To any qualified aerospace engineer this is instantly recognizable at the first glance
A 38% loss rate was not very different from some contemporary aircraft such as the Starfighter and Supersabre, and they didn't fly from aircraft carriers.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeThe Boeing 737 Max has killed more people than the early DH106 accidents did. The later DH Comets were excellent. The DH108 was a test aircraft. You sound like a complete fool.
@Begeye-bh5ux Germany is the largest manufacturer of jet aircraft in Europe... please name a british company that is still making british jet aircraft in the UK???
@Begeye-bh5ux No one cares... about british jets, at least the folks who buy jets, they stopped buying them and all the british manufacturers wents tits-up.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, by your own standard a british company that is still making British jet aircraft in the UK would be BAE Systems. In the same way that Germany doesn't build any jets of their own neither does Britain. As you know old fashioned autarky so favoured by WW2 Germany has been replaced by international co-operation which is why for instance BAE Systems is a principle partner in the F35 project that Germany has lately and desperately bought themselves into after getting the wind up about the Russians. As you know the British BAE Systems also has the largest national share of the Eurofighter at 33% followed by Leonardo of Italy at 21% with France, Spain and Germany sharing the rest. Britain is also the largest procurer and therefore builder of Eurofighters. As you will be aware, it is this model of co-operation that allowed Britain to develop the world's second largest aerospace industry after the US and for BAE Systems to become Europe's biggest defence contractor and Rolls Royce to be the biggest European jet engine producer. Of course as you know Germany in WW2 failed signally to co-operate with its partners in this manner whereas the Allies benefited significantly by such co-operation by for instance the Tizard Mission. As you know, the British were able to significantly support the US with their early jet engine development (this following on from the famous sharing of the technology of the Merlin engine) leading to the US license building several British engines. One very ironic product of this co-operative model is, you'll recall that Rolls Royce will be supplying F130 (BR 725) engines for the B52 which will be built at Rolls Royce's Indianapolis plant that it acquired by buying Allison Engines the makers of the engine the Merlin replaced in the P51 Mustang. The further irony being that the Rolls Royce BR 725 is part of a series developed by Rolls Royce to help BMW get back into jet engine production in a Rolls Royce BMW international partnership (BMW having been the makers of the rather inconsequential BMW003 in WW2). Sadly as you know BMW couldn't hack it and now the company is a wholly owned Rolls Royce German subsidiary.
I was about to rush to the defence of the Sea Vixen, it was always a great aircraft to catch at Yeovilton air show. Then remembered it's fairly recent wheels down landing so fair play.
It was far from “Crap”, of its time it was precisely what was ordered, the radar could only be read in the dark because all radars of that era could only be read in the dark (check out some videos of the London Air Traffic Control Centre LATCC West Drayton, rows of dark radar operators in a dark room with only red light) as for the accident rate, totally normal for the time particularly when you consider that sticking a supersonic jet on an aircraft carrier that just a few years earlier had only seen single engine piston aircraft and as you said but I notice didn’t elaborate on, the vast majority of the incidents were when the catapult launcher failed and was unable to give the aircraft enough airspeed to avoid an instant stall into the sea. In short it provided the Fleet Air Arm an interim jet fighter before technology moved on at a pace. Also it’s a great looking aircraft.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, as you know all jets have their dangers, you will no doubt be aware of the appalling crash rate of the F104G in German operation. As you know de Havilland is a famous and greatly admired mark with such historically important and iconic aircraft as the Mosquito and the Vampire and de Havilland now has its place as a legacy company of BAE Systems, Europe's largest defence contractor.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeMe163 had worse loss rates, and all German jets built just a. Few years before had 100% loss rates but I’m sure you think Messerschmitt was absolutely brilliant.
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 The Me-163 shot down Allied planes... something that Allied jet-propelled aircraft could never do. Messerschmitt did in fact build the first operational jet fighter and rocket interceptor. Both were the fastest aircraft in their class and the fastest in the world during WW2. Absolutely brilliant in anyone's book lad!!
Such a pity, I always thought it was a quite beautiful looking aircraft. You are correct about being able to view one in Australia, the air museum at Caloundra in Queensland has one and I managed to sit in the coal hole in one of their open cockpit days.
"If you wanted to see one now you can rest assured that it won't be flying" Red Bull would have something to say about that, too bad it was flying until a wheels up landing a few years ago
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke but let's not forget most early jets were flying with British designed engines. The German jets had lifespans of hours. And the first russian jets were just parade planes.
@@poweredbypies Lets not forget that German jets were the only ones effective in combat. The british centrifugal turbojet was an evolutionary dead-end and completely obsolete on arrival... they wouldn't have axial engines until the 1950s. All fighters of this era had engine lifespans of hours, a typical TBO for a Merlin engine was 5 hours in combat, Allied jet engines were not much better. All the Allied jets were parade planes, they never saw aerial combat, the Lockheed P-80 and the Gloster _"Meatbox"_ only killed Allied pilots! any questions?
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke have to say it's actually nice to debate with someone with knowledge beyond what they learn from war thunder. Shall we just agree that early jets were just a bit naff and it wasn't til second gen jets started to appear til things started to get going properly.
Sea Vixen was the only supersonic aircraft built with a swept wing and straight tail surface. This created two different shaped shock waves in close proximity, just aft of the trailing edge. This caused cruel and unusual stresses to form in the wing, tail booms and engine bay, which engineers never really got hold of. In operational service the pilots were given very stringent flight parameters in speed, bank and climb to mitigate the stresses. This made it a very poor interceptor, and still very prone to crash. However the record for Royal Navy fast jet crashes is the Supermarine Scimitar that came out just before the Sea Vixen. Of the 76 built 39 were lost in accidents, a 51% loss rate. Compared to Sea Vixen's 145 built and 55 lost in accidents, a 38% loss rate.
@@WilhelmKarsten The DH110 was designed as a supersonic all weather fighter. It was in fact the first British production fighter to fly supersonically and the first two seat supersonic fighter in the world to fly. It crashed at Farnborough in 1952 while putting out sonic booms to the delight of the crowds. Until it broke apart and killed dozens of spectators. After that FAW.1 was limited to subsonic speeds by pilots notes. FAW.2 was limited to M0.91 by the addition of the dorsal fuel tanks and heavier fuselage members. But it was designed as a supersonic aircraft - with swept wing and straight tail.
@@WilhelmKarstenIt was supersonic. It went supersonic speeds. Just because it’s limited doesn’t mean it can’t, or can a Mustang GRT (or whatever they’re called, not a car person) only go 70mph because that’s what they’re limited to? The Sea VIXEN (thank you) was a good aircraft. You’re just mad that the commentator was wrong.
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 You are a total FAKE! The Sea Vixen could not fly supersonic in level flight... and would crash if taken supersonic in a full power dive. Any real aerospace engineer can take one look at this plane and tell you why it could not fly Mach 1... it plainly obvious.
@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke My dad wasn't one to tell porkies. He loved his career in the Fleet Air Arm. I was a little boy and only heard him speak with great passion about his time in the RN.
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 The Sea Vixen was not only obsolete upon arrive it could not fly supersonic and had a staggering 46% crash rate. This pile of junk was so "Good" that de Havilland didn't even stay in business long enough to see it enter service!
5:10 "Despite early setbacks from the Royal Navy changing its mind about what sort of aircraft it wanted, opting instead to refit an existing aircraft that was drifting towards obsolecence..." My first thought was that I'd never heard of the RN fitting a jet engine to a biplane. :D
The Sea Vixen shows an obvious lineage from the earlier twin boom De Havilland jet fighters, the Vampire and Venom. However, by the time the Sea Vixen entered service, this configuration had become very much outmoded. Still at least it could be launched from a level position with all its wheels on the deck, unlike the more conventional looking Supermarine Scimitar, which was launched at a high angle of attack with its nose wheel in the air.
Says, "RAF went for the Gloster Javelin"... and shows a Blackburn Buccaneer which only flew with the RAF once the RN had retired its steam catapult aircraft carriers, in the late 1970's, and gifted Navy Buccaneers and Phantom II's to them.
They're similar looking but not the same. That's a Javelin, the elevator structure is all the way at the top on that plane. A Buccaneer has it's a little lower.
I saw these flying over the eastern end of Portsmouth Hampshire in the early 1970's. I seem to recall they were radar targets. Last time I saw one was at a Bournemouth air show in the summer of 2015.
I've seen pictures of the Sea Vixen and assumed that the 'coal hole'was some kind of photographic equipment ,never thought that there was a man in there!
de Havilland made appallingly bad jets... the DH-100, DH-106, DH-108 and DH-110 all had catastrophic inflight structural failures and staggering loss rates... the highest in the industry.
My great uncle was an Air Observer (radar man) and had the misfortune to be in a Sea Vixen 'coal hole' when the pilot fumbled a deck landing. Neither of them made it out.
I have put off watching any of these Megaprojects aviation videos because I didn’t think Simon’s style and tone would lend itself well to aviation oddities… this is the first I have watched and I think you’re right… the script feels far too subjective and technical detail is lost
He was better in the beginning if you watch his first videos. It was more of a personal learning journey he was on, and we came along with. It wasn’t as grating. Over time, it seems to have landed on a unique combo of pretentious and “know-it-all”. I can’t watch any more, unfortunately.
When I did my trade training as a weapons engineer in the RAF this was the aircraft i did my ejection seat removal and fitting on. But not the pilot seat, OH NO, it was the Nav's seat and it was a bugger to get to bits as it was so cramped and you could only work on the starboard side for obvious reasons.
No, it was practical. The pilot got an excellent view for deck landings and the navigator/ radar operator got to see his CRT display. It was designed for purpose and was not stupid, unlike your comment.
In the same time frame as the sea vixen was the f8 crusader, uk should have bought that. The french operated them off there smaller carriers, Eagle and Ark Royal could have had mach 2 jets in the late 50s early 60s
Crusader was alright in the Pacific and Med but you needed two seats and long legs to fight an air war in the Artic and North Atlantic. Whilst it was not Supersonic in level flight in the Red Top trials it showed it could intercept with ease Supersonic Lightnings and it was superior to the Lightning and Javelin in intercepting V Bombers and Crusaders along with the Century fighters were shown to be ineffective against high flying Victor B2 and Vulcan B2, lacking either avionics, ceiling and range.
@@jeffdroog10/10 response. I’m an aircraft enthusiast and I’ve gotta say this was about an 8.5/10 video on the entire history and impact of this aircraft. That’s a very high score by my standard by the way.
@TheArtofFugue Considering the original poster had zero corrections to make,nor any specifics on the failings if the video,I'm going to assume they have no idea what they're talking about lol When it comes to usage,and opinions of any vehicle,of any kind,there is always going to be differences of opinions,but as far as the factual information in this video,yeah,its pretty spot on
I love aircraft design in the 40s and 50s. Technology was advancing so fast, but no one really knew how to use it yet. The wild experiments and they tried to figure it out where fascinating. Whatever you think of their performance and lethality, looking at the F-35 or Su-57 is yawn inducing as they are just variations on a them of their predecessors.
Its also why the plane could not fly supersonic... in terms of high-speed aerodynamics de Havilland remained in the dark ages right up until the company went bankrupt.
I think that the Sea Vixen is a wonderful aircraft, it has always been one of my favourites since I first saw one in the 1960s! The experience of modern test pilots backs up my opinion of this very powerful aircraft which obviously lacks the refinements of modern 'fly by wire' systems which if retrofitted to this classic early jet fighter would undoubtedly iron out tricky aspects of the Sea Vixen's handling!
de Havilland had a very troubling history of building aircraft with fatal design flaws and appalling loss rates... the Sea B!tch was no exception, all of de Havillands jets crashed with stunning regularity right up until the company was bankrupted by the Comet Disaster.,, the worst engineering failure in aviation history!
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke the Comet - an outstanding innovative aircraft way ahead of it's time, but sadly pushed the boundaries of material science.
de Havilland had an appalling reputation for catastrophic in-flight structural failures, the Comet and the Swallow are great examples of this bad design and construction.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkewhat are you on about? The swallow? It was only ever an experimental air craft. And the comet, was extremely successful and was the pioneer in high altitude passenger aircraft. Metal fatigue due to pressurised cockpits wasn’t known about so much back then. Someone had to be first to learn from it. To say it’s a bad design shows you have no idea what you’re talking about. And please detail what part of the construction are ‘bad’? Bad would imply shoddy workmanship and corner cutting. I await your examples
@@cornellkirk8946 You really don't have a clue what you are talking about do you lad??? All of de Havilland's jets had appalling loss rates and a common mode of failure... catastrophic in-flight structural failures and fatal design flaws. ALL 3 Swallows crashed killing their pilots. the Comet was the worst engineering failure in the history of commercial jet aviation and destroyed D-H. All of the major manufactures already had pressurized cabins, none had a problem with mid-air break ups. The real tragedy of the Comet Disaster was that it could have been easily prevented if d-H had simply followed well known and understood industry standards for the design and construction of pressure cabins made from rivetted aluminum alloys. The Comet 1 had so many fatal design flaws that its airworthiness certification was permanently revoked, and the Comet 4 required a total redesign to pass safety standards.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/SIMON to get a special offer. Individual results may vary
video 2 days ago, comment pinned 3 days ago
Could you define the difference between a “major war” and a “non major war”????, it, in my opinion doesn’t matter if you are actually fighting a war, the bombs, bullets and artillery are just as deadly to the personnel involved. Whether that be land, sea or air it is all dangerous and deadly, the wars and conflicts you quoted were simply wars where people fought and died. Sorry Simon but you dropped the ball on this video, you presented the show in your same concise and professional manner but the script was not up to the standard usually provided to you, it is not that you should not criticise anything or that your facts and figures were wrong but, in my opinion the wording was wrong for this particular show.
The point that you made about Britain’s “slow stuttering decline as a major power” is the most on point remark you made, if only the political leadership of the country would see that as well, since the end of WWII the British military has been systematically reduced to the point where we couldn’t even fight our way out of a soggy paper bag, during my 24 years service we were constantly being tasked to do more with less and less, whether it was manpower,equipment or money we were so undervalued, not just by the political leadership but by the civilian population as well, it was the happiest time of my life and I was proud to serve but overall we were let down time and time again by people who only told us what to do but wouldn’t provide us the tools to do it with, and that is shameful and disrespectful.
the AI host is better now, but the beard still doesn't look quite right
it moves like a solid object, not "hair"
pretty good, though
the voice is a bit wanky
Put a single tail on the sea Vixen and maybe two angled tails and look at the f22 Raptor. They were on to something. There are others y'all designed that were odd. Mostly after WW1. Same with France. Or Italy. Or the US.
Although I predominantly flew Buccaneers I did do a conversion onto the Vixen. It was a beast but once airborne flew like a thoroughbred. It was a Fleet interceptor and was not intended to "dog fight" although it could turn well. It certainly was not terrible as the title suggests.
The statistics dont lie, de Havilland made jets with appalling loss rates and mediocre performance, the company became infamous for its jets breaking up in mid-flight.. not just one but all of its jet types.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeshoo russian, back to your troll farm
@@yakymua Tell me the name of a british jet still in production in the UK?
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Most western jets are made by multi-national consortiums now. What is true is the UK has retained some cutting edge technologies -- 15-20% of the F35 is made by BAE Systems. And we all know Rolls Royce is among the very best engine makers today. Eurofighter Typhoon is probably the only non US one you could say is in production even if that is made by a consortium. The Tempest is in development and when all is said and done what will emerge will likely involve UK, Spain, Italy, Japan. I have no doubt it will be a true 6th Gen aircraft. I truly doubt Russia will ever manage to catch up after it has finished destroying economy. Of course there will be lots of prototypes wilth absurd claims made about their capabilities.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke All early jets suffered such losses. De Havilland weren't unique.
I have seen one of these at the fleet air arm museum. I was with my father a former RN aircraft mechanic. When my father saw it he took a good look and then went over to the museums book stall. He proceeded to find a book about the aircraft on display and flipped to the back of the book.
"I told them it would never fly again and I was right. They brought it here on a lorry."
Why would they get it in flying condition just to take it to a museum? I’d stick it on a lorry.
@@GaudiaCertaminisGaming He had got it airworthy for the base open day. So they could put on a jet display. He got it flying in time but made it clear that it would be its last flight. He was correct but was posted elsewhere so never knew what happened until we came across it in the museum.
To my mind the Sea Vixen is no stranger than the Gloster Javelin. Being 'all weather' the aircraft had to carry a big radar. A radar far bigger than the 'fire control' 'intercept' radar of interceptors like the Lightning. It was not the only British aircraft with an offset pilot cockpit, variants of the Canberra also had them. It showed a visual lineage from the early Swallow prototypes, with additions of a tail. Offset cockpits allowed a better view of the deck in landing. It was never intended for dog-fighting.
Always thought they were a strange choice for the RAF to adopt a few, as static, ground crew technical training aircraft? Until I was posted to Wyton and had to fit ejection seats to Canberra PR9's. Different positioning of the seats but many similarities especially with both 'Nav' seats.
Ironically all of the Swallows crashed..
de Havilland jets had an absolutely appalling loss rate which was the death nail of the company that didn't survive to see this plane enter service!
@@WilhelmKarsten Yeah, weird how that it had poor low speed handling... like the Komet it was copying.
edit: de Havillands crash rate did lead to Martin-Baker making excellent ejection seats
I actually like the looks of both the Javelin and Sea Vixen. I wish I could have been at one of the airshows that the Vulcan and Sea Vixen flew at together. Both sound amazing!
@@smalltime0 The Komet was introduced into service 15 years earlier!!!
Ejection seats saved many pilots but weren't enough to save de Havilland... they went tits-up there year before the sea b!tch entered service!!!
The Sea Vixen was the product of a Royal Navy requirement for a all weather day/night jet fighter first proposed in 1946 . The lack of forward firing armament was probably a mistake , but they were not alone with that thinking . It took another war for the Americans to realize that with the F4-Phantom , yet another two crew fighter .
The reason behind the navigator/radar operator being enclosed in a concealed compartment was quite simply for better reading of the radar scopes and nav aids.
Unlike the Americans and French , the British from conception to service took a long time , so frequently good ideas or designs were outdated when ready for active service. The top speed of the Vixen of 690 mph was impressive for its period.
Regarding the accident rate , it was nothing out of the ordinary for early jets . An acquaintance who flew Meteors and Vampires said of the latter . When you are diving at nearly 600 mph and the realization that all that separates you from the outside air is Plywood , does not give a feeling of confidence . A further note upon that subject , The Lockheed F-80 Shooting Star had its baptism of war in Korea . 80% of all of those built were lost in that conflict and nearly half to accidents.
Simon has a supercilious attitude that doesn't go down well with me . Unlike he , I am of an age who knew many personally of those who experienced first hand ,what he derides as crap.
I don't think that Simon was unnecessarily harsh in his commentary. And the Sea Vixen was nearly obsolescent when delivered, especially that lack of speed or fuel for loiter time.
I can’t say I agree with you 100% about Simon and his presentation but I do agree that he did do the aviation industry of the era a disservice with the maligning of the Sea Vixen, the fact is that during the era the number of successful British aircraft produced far outweighs the ones that were not quite up to the mark in terms of being almost obsolete by the time they entered service, but aircraft like the Vulcan and stable companions Victor and to a lesser extent the Valiant were not only groundbreaking but extremely long lived, the most significant advances in aviation usually occurred during combat and, as you pointed out, all the world’s manufacturers had aircraft that were more deadly to the crews than the enemy. Who knows what could have resulted in being designed and manufactured here in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 IF the government’s of the time hadn’t systematically destroyed the companies that had proven to be world leaders in aviation, insisting that the industry amalgamated most of the leading names into one company was the death nell for the industry, something I can never forgive or forget, buying almost exclusively from the United States 🇺🇸 and collaboration with European companies is not how it should have turned out.
@@williestyle35I don’t disagree with you 100% but I do think his criticism of the aircraft industry and the Sea Vixen was a bit off, I agree that the Sea Vixen was almost obsolete when it first entered service but the fact is that every new aircraft of the era was to a certain extent experimental and still in the infancy of jet powered aircraft, British 🇬🇧 aviation of the era produced more successful aircraft than unsuccessful ones and yet Simon has decided to pick on the Sea Vixen for maligning, perhaps because it is one of the few that lent itself to being criticised.
@@allandavis8201 and let's not forget the E.E. Canberra - so good Martin built them under licence as the B-57
@@richardeames808 Absolutely 💯 % agree. 👍, thanks for the reply.
A video about Eric 'winkle' Brown RN/FAA would be a great tribute. His take off and landings from aircraft carriers has never been beaten, flew more aircraft types (Including the Me163) than any other pilot.
Agreed but that should be on the Biographics channel
I think the BBC 4 documentary with his interviews is on RUclips. He told his life story.
Probably better than anything they'd do here.
@paulqueripel3493 Way too biased, they didn't cover the dark side of Brown's career at all... like his involvement in the Miles M.52 embezzlement scandal and why he was denied his nomination for Knighthood.
It would be interesting to hear about why Brown never received his Knighthood... the later parts of his career seem to have been whitewashed by the mainstream British narrative.
As a USAF brat whose Dad was stationed at RAF Wethersfield in Essex from 1955 to 1958, he used to take me to a model shop on Halstead's High Street. One of the many plastic aircraft models I bought and put together was a DH 110 by FROG. I was always impressed by its off-center cockpit. JJS
It's hardly a weird looking plane!!!
I think it looks gorgeous! Too bad it didn't pan out!
Yeah, I've always thought it looks really cool, but sadly looking good isn't as important as BEING good.
It held down the fort till better planes came along. I love it
Its a cracking looking plane to my eyes, along with the vampire
I like it as well.
Yeah, I think it looks a lot better than most jets of its time. From certain angles, it has a similar profile to the Phantom, which I've always loved
I don't think the Sea Vixen weird looking. I find it to be a rather beautiful aircraft. Not that I'm in a hurry to go up and crash in one.
I mean, weird doesn't mean it can't be beautiful. The Sea Vixen is super weird looking but also beautiful.
It wasn’t as bad as he made it sound in the introduction either. It held down the fort till better planes came along and replaced it.
@@guaporeturns9472 Comparable aircraft of the period could fly Mach 2!!! while this flying coffin couldnt fly supersonic!!!
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know.
@@guaporeturns9472 Simon was very kind to this dismal failure...
Fighter jets have long been a fascination for me, fond memories growing up in the 90's building AirFix models with my father. Love watching these videos
There’s one in the Wings museum in Southampton and another at the Gatwick aviation museum. An impressive machine to inspect up close!
I was lucky enough to see the last flying Sea Vixen at an airshow, even if by then it still had Red Bull livery
I saw the same aircraft a few years later when it was returned to its fleet air arm livery practicing for the Bournemouth air show but over Boscombe.
It was fantastic, hard to believe it was as old as it was.
Same here, saw it display over Rockingham circuit years ago. Sadly it also managed to 'crash' in 2017, it was belly landed after a display as a hydraulic failure prevented the landing gear from being deployed
If nothing else, I think it's an aesthetically pleasing airplane.
Certainly not aerodynamic looking... because its wasn't
Great looking, reminds me of British race cars of the era.
I agree I had a model of the vixen and it was one of my favourites
Also it wasnt as bad as the worst jet in history, the Gloster Meteor :D
@@hernerweisenberg7052 😮. I would take a Meteor over a He-162 or F-104 any day.
Simon, we want to see a (historic) picture of you with a full hair!
What style do you think he had ? 😂
@@chickenspoonful I'll bet he tried a mullet back in the day. Imagine that.
@@chickenspoonful Definitely a mullet .
He should get a tattoo of a rabbit on his head and tell anyone who asks about it "it's my hares"
Turn your screen upside down !
The blackburn bucaneer would be a good episode 🤞
its airbrake is certainly something
Absolutely! The finest strike bomber ever.. Probably. Especially a feature about Redflag 77...Now THAT is a story.
As has been told to me by various RAF types:
How-to take off in a Buccaneer- accelerate to take off speed, raise landing gear, decent to operating mission height 😎
@@garethsheppard240 Story goes that a Bucc groundcrew bod was sipping coffee on the balcony of his third storey flat in Germany not far from the base. He heard the Bucc and then saw it scream between his block and the one adjacent with a green between the two BELOW him. The pilot had decided he'd prove he could fly hands off because the Bucc would fly on the pressure wave and took every opportunity to prove his theory..this was one of those times!
The Buccaneer would be an excellent choice for a video! Though there wouldn't be much for Simon to indulge in his favourite pastime, "Brit-bashing."
"Then that future would have to involve an aircraft, that, simply, wasn't this one..." Cold
The future of aircraft wasnt de Haviland either.. they went tits-up before production started.
Yes it is cold but if you consider crash and death rate of the aircraft future WITH it would be abysmal.
@@jakubznojemsky4936 You also must consider that comparable aircraft of this timeframe could fly Mach 2+... while this poor excuse for a plane struggled to stay airborne yet was unable to reach supersonic at all... a shameful and humiliating example of how and why the UK aircraft industry died.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes. Despite falling victim to canon-less fashion of the time, losing valuable highly trained personel during crashes and getting slowed down to stop breaking apart while airborne it still had some qualities since it might help with development of modern aircraft systems. Still with it's shortcommings I would expect limiting production to few dozen planes and keeping it only experimental for development of better succesor. But considering it was somewhat sufficient lets say it was close enough for time being.
@@jakubznojemsky4936 The Sea B!tch was a very costly blunder... it entered operational service for no other reason than britain had nothing better to replace it with, and buying foreign aircraft was seen as a shameful humiliation... thet would eventually happen anyway as the UK aircraft industry imploded before dying out completely.
I remember that old adage "Never buy hair restorer from a bald Barber."
In some ways, this aircraft reminds me of one of the early American naval fighters, the Vought F7U Cutlass--it too had a high accident rate (but it was also appalling underpowered).
Indeed. This was when turbojets and associated airframes were going through a period of rapid discovery and development. The Gloster Javelin was not the easiest plane to fly.
@@Auldpharte This was also a period when de havilland attempted (unsuccessfully) to transition from building jets from wood and fabric to modern construction methods... an attempt that failed spectacularly
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke DH 125.
My father was an army ambulance driver that day at Farnborough. He's 91 now and the aftermath of what he had to see and deal with has haunted him all his life. He told me in detail what he saw that day and what he had to do. It was truly awful.
I was at the show the day before in company with my dad. The news of the disaster the following day caused some sober anxiety on my parents’ part.
Stunning plane and one of my many favs
Yes I agree…. not remotely as crap as the presenter tried to make out. Everything in its design and development was done for a reason, it was a sophisticated combat aircraft and it operated in demanding and unforgiving environments.
He also skipped right through the preceding DH Venom and Sea Venom aircraft which were successful or at least satisfactory and a big interim jump from the tiny largely wood constructed Vampire.
The DH Comet had a similar history… started out very ambitious but flawed, redesigned and improved into an effective and popular aircraft, but ultimately overtaken by other designs an technology and experience quickly moved on.
@@johnmoruzzi7236 Not really, the Sea Vixen couldnt even fly supersonic!
All of de Havillands jets were poorly designed and had similar problems with mid-air break-ups and high rates of crashes.
The according to official Mod records the RAF lost 82 Vampires in a single year!
The Comet Disaster is the single worst engineering failure in jet aviation history.
Comet 1 was so fatally flawed that 6 crashed before being grounded, its Certificate of Airworthiness was permanently revoked...
later Comets didn't perform much better, a total of 39 hull loss accidents out of 114 built and only 76 in revenue service.
de Havilland had a well-earned and notorious reputation from building unsafe aircraft that crashed with shocking regularity... so much so that operators stopped buying them and the company became completely insolvent in 1958
@@johnmoruzzi7236 De Havilland was a deeply troubled company with an appalling history of making unreliable aircraft with staggeringly high loss rates, the Sea Btch was no exception, absolute upon arrival into service it has a horrible safety record.
@@johnmoruzzi7236Far worse than the video depicts... the Sea Vixen was a very disappointing deathtrap and was crowning feat of shame for de Havilland as its long reputation for building unsafe aircraft finally caught up to them, after a series of jets that were epic failures d-H became completely insolvent in 1958, the UK courts seized the company and placed it into administrative receivership before selling off its remaining assets.
Please name a single British company that still makes British jet aircraft today???
@@WilhelmKarsten
We feel we can clear up some common false myths, misunderstandings & misconceptions.
It's always very important to note the relevant facts obviously.
*_Of course it is indeed a great pity & great shame that British military forces had to occupy a large part of Germany for decades after 1945. It would have been so much nicer if that hadn't been necessary wouldn't it._*
*Russia had to occupy a large part of Germany after 1945 for decades.*
_Russia still posseses a large chunk of land that was once part of Germany._
*Russia & the UK produce Nukes.*
Germany does not produce Nukes.
*_Regarding the UK Aerospace Sector._*
*WHY IS IT THEY CAN'T ANSWER VERY SIMPLE QUESTIONS* ⁉️ 😅
*A very simple question indeed.*
*_Which airline recently ordered 60 RR Trent XWB Engines?_*
*_Also name a single Germany company that makes German jet aircraft in Germany & name a single German Company that makes German gas turbine aero engines suitable for widebody airliners._*
That's correct, Brazil makes very good airliners & Brazil is 100th down the list along with Indonesia for wealth per capita.
*Norway Holland Denmark Ireland Belgium - Top 20 wealth per capita - Don't make airliners - its as simple as that.*
Agreed, that is correct of course, clearly there are many countries that could easily produce airliners of better quality than Bow-wing (see b-47 wing folding & wing collapse incidents) but don't for some very good reasons. Bow-wing being a result of the size of the US, the large protected domestic market & great ease of testing new types due to the equator to arctic geography & a few other reasons related to production scale capability, politics & economics.
Obviously there really is nothing special about Bow-wing, having more than 50 years design / build experience on the type means they have no excuses for the horrendous max incidents for example.
Indeed BAe Systems & Rolls Royce combined now do more Airbus work than Germany on an absolute basis & significantly more work than that on a per capita basis.
Agreed, Per capita for the home nation BAe Systems is the world's largest defence contractor.
_Correct, BAe systems announced the recent £4 Billion takeover of Colorado based US based Ball Aerospace._
*It's definitely the case that BAE systems now does a significantly higher value of work for Airbus than it did when it was a major Airbus shareholder before 2005.*
*_Obviously RR now owns US Engine maker Allison for example which does classified Aerospace work for the US Govt._*
*Yes, that's right of course, Anybody currently flying on a widebody airliner stands a good chance of being on an aircraft powered by RR gas turbine aero engines built in the UK.*
*_A typical but small glimpse of what goes on in the very internationally orientated British aerospace sector._*
Boeing Apache Attack Helicopter.
AH-64: *75 UK suppliers,* 7% UK content, global fleet of 1280+ aircraft.
*F35B more than 130 UK Suppliers, more than 30% UK content.*
*_F35A & F35C more than 130 UK Suppliers, more than 15% UK content._*
*There is no doubt that an airline has just ordered*
*60 RR England Trent XWB Engines*
Obviously the UK has the
*World's Highest Combined Per Capita*
*Nuclear / Defence / Aerospace Sector Activity.*
Rolls Royce Holdings UK
Subsidiaries
- Rolls-Royce plc
- Rolls-Royce North America (Allison etc Classified Military stuff)
- Rolls-Royce AB
- Rolls-Royce Deutschland
- Rolls-Royce India Private Limited
- Rolls-Royce Marine Power Operations
- Vinters Engineering Limited
- Rolls-Royce Controls and Data Services
- Rolls-Royce Power Systems
- Bergen Marine
Joint ventures include:
- Rolls-Royce Turbomeca
- MTU Turbomeca -
Trent Family
The MT30 (Marine Turbine)
Industrial Trent 60 Gas Turbine
Trent 7000
Trent XWB Airbus A330neo.
Trent 1500
Trent 1000
Trent 500
Trent 600
Trent 700
Trent 800
Trent 8100
Trent 900
RR wholly owned subsidiaries in Germany handle smaller 2 shaft RR gas turbine aero engine work.
We hope this helps of course as always. Cheers & 😎👍 indeed.
*_O B V I O U S L Y_*
. ..... ..... ...... ....
.... .. .. .
Clearly the line above this line is not blank.
The coolest thing about the Sea Vixen is it looks like something that belongs in the TV programme Thunderbirds.
That's exactly where it belonged
Certainly would have been much safer if it was suspended from wires and flown by a puppeteer.
I think it looks awesome, even today!
@@Classicgamer73 Looks awesome performs average.
@@milanondrak5564 Performance was dismal... this engineering disaster had a loss rate as high as the "Aluminium Death Tube" but couldn't even reach Mach 1 in a dive... it would crash!
Naval aviation, especially on the small RN carriers, as jets got bigger and heavier, was extremely dangerous. The Sea Vixen had a 38% loss rate. The Supermarine Scimitar lost 51%.
Who needs enemy fire when the planes regularly self-destruct?
The Sea Vixen and the Scimatar were some of the most effective aircraft ever used _against_ British pilots!
When I joined the RAF in 1980, we used Sea Vixens as training aircraft to teach how to fit Ejection Seats, as the system was so complicated the instructor said "If you can fit a set of seats to this aircraft every other will be easy" :)
And that is why Britain no longer makes its own jets..
Oh Simon, Airplane nerds unite! Yes the Sea Vixen was an underwhelming deathtrap, however across the world as designers were faced with many new challenges...the sound barrier, swept wing technology, early giant radar sets, and really terrible early jet engines it was no worse than the underpowered Vought F7U Cutlass, the deadly stall spin of the MiG 15, or the North American F100 and it's fatal Sabre Dance. Not pretty, but not terrible...I do like the name!
I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode with Grandpa's flashback to being in the USAF in the 1950s: The test pilot complains to his CO that the new aircraft is a deathtrap, and his CO replies "This is the 1950s. EVERYTHING is a death trap! Now go have three martinis, a pack of cigarettes, and get that crate in the air!"
de Havilland specialized in underwhelming deathtraps... and cornered the market for jets that had a notoriously bad reputation for safety.
All of Swallows crashed, 82 Vampires crashed in a single year and the Comet Disaster remains the worst engineering failure in commercial aviation history...
No surprise that the Sea Vixen was a deathtrap... or that de-Havilland would not last long enough to see the Vixen enter service!
@@KenB-db5veThere is an important distinction between American jets and British jets...Britain's jets were so bad that operators refused to buy them anymore and today there are no longer any British companies left that make a British jet aircraft
I think the intro does a big disservice to the UK air industry. Before the Vixen we had the Vampire, Venom, Javelin and Hunter. The Vixen was a blip.
If we're talking about bad starts the US had the Airacomet
de Havilland did much to tarnish the reputation of the UK industry... the Vampire and Venom,,, still made from wood and linen fabric with high loss rates... the catastrophic in-flight structural failures of the Comet and the Swallow destroyed d-H and devasted the UK aircraft industry when they became insolvent in 1958.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke you make some good points but the demise of Britains aircraft manufacturing was probably in part due to the fact we had too many manufacturers competing for too few customers, in some cases it would be just one, either the RAF or the Royal Navy, both of which were beginning to down size, even in the nineteen fifties, as Britain's former colonies gained independence. The other thing that you have omitted is the fact that following WW2 Britain as a country was broke. D H already had experience of building a high performance piston engined aircraft, and probably thought that they might be able to save money by applying the experience they had gained to jet propelled aircraft instead of starting from scratch on designing an aircraft made from very expensive materials. The D H factory where I grew up survives to this day and is owned by Airbus Industries (UK) and is considerably larger and a major employer in the area. It is still occasionally referred to by older residents as De Havilands, or DeHavs.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke nope !
Oh dear. Wrong.
If the vampire and venom were so bad why did they sell so well abroad?
And have USAF officers be amazed how much more manoeuvrable than any American jet?
They were cheap too.
However in some ways you are right. Management of British Aircraft Companies was appalling.
Don't forget the Canberra bomber as well which was a beautiful airship even bought by the Americans!
Just to be pedantic when you say its unladen weight was 14 tons that should be American Tons (or short tons in Imperial), for Imperial Tons it was around 12.5.
Canadian tons 😂
@@RUclips_user3333 The great advantage of the Imperial Long Ton is that it's almost the same as the Metric Tonne ( there's only 36lb in it)
The US Navy had something very similar looking and performing around that time called the Gutless Cutlass or F7-U1 Cutlass.
The Mach 2+ F-4 Phantom appeared about the same time as the Sea B!tch... the Cutlass was years earlier.
Similar but the cutlass had terrible powerplants ,the sea vixen had a week airfare and excellent power
@@georgesheffield1580 The Cutlass and the Sea Vixen are not contemporaries. The Cutlass first flew in 1948 and was retired before the Sea Vixen entered service.. the F-4 Phantom is its closest contemporary.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, The Vought F7U Cutlass first flew in 1948, the Sea Vixen first flew in 1951 and the F4 first flew in 1958. Clearly the Vixen was a closer contemporary of the Cutlass. Sums clearly aren't your strong point.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeThe F-4 made its MAIDEN flight 7 years later than the Sea Vixen, nice lie buddy.
I saw the last flight of the Sea Vixen. Displayed at Duxford then did a wheels up landing back at Yeovilton. It was decided it was uneconomical to repair.
oh i was there too!
Wheels up landing on an airframe is a essentially a crash...
@@smalltime0 yeah it was
@@smalltime0 Was far from being a crash. It was a controlled belly landing that the pilot walked away from, so a good landing in difficult circumstances.
@@Groovy-Train atemlos durch die Nacht...
Its a crash
In fairness to de Havilland, at the time of its introduction a lot of jets and naval jet fighters had very abysmal low speed performance and safety
de Havilland just happened to never improve its safety record.
I get wanting to have a darkened area for the radar operator, but That would still have easily been possible with a tandem or sideby side cockpit layout, that would have gone a long way to fixing what I reckon is the real reason why they never even tried to fix the Vixen. Other planes have had worse accident rates yet were fixed over time, but not the Vixen.
I mean it’s no Osprey but the track record is pretty bad…
1950s display technology.
It’s essentially a side by side cockpit, just without the bubble canopy of the pilot.
The weirdest looking british jet? "Hrm, hrm... the Javelin clears its throat and looks pleasantly suprised."
the timing of this vid. i just finished making a revell model of a sea vixen on my twitch channel lol
I like learning stuff. That's why I watch all your channels
Simon should do an episode about the Fairy Gannet.
Simon should do a whole British ugly planes series.
@@WilhelmKarsten True - not the best-looking aircraft but I've always has a soft spot for the Gannet. I love the innovative tandem dual engine design. A real work horse, kept in service right up to the RN scrapping of its conventional carriers.
My father was at Farnborough that day. He was working for BOAC at the time working on Argonauts and later Comets.
There was one flying from Bournemouth airport some years ago.
There was one other British aircraft that had the side mounted cockpit. That was the original English electric Canberra. The McDonnell Douglas version had a standard cockpit.
The american version, the B-57 had tandem seating and was built by Martin. The british Canberra with offset seating was the B(I)8 followed by the PR9.
@@bassetdad437 thank you. I don’t know why I was thinking McDonald’s Douglas.
Too bad XP924 (featured in this film) was recently grounded. A chap I flew with ejected from one during his days in some Navy aero team. He got wake turb from the one ahead and punched out- I think his radar op didn't make it. Charley Beilby- where are you now? Edit to add- still ticking- and 80 last year!😃
Stuff that ! That right hand seat ! No friken way...😮 Cheers from New Zealand
The Sea Vixen was the most beautiful aircraft I've seen since the post-Piston Engined fighters. I watched it flying at an RAF Base in England while I was doing a Gliding Course at RAF Kirkton in Lindsey back in 1965. I flew in at zero feet & the build-up of the sound barrier was amazing. It may have had troubles but I'll never forget the sight.
The Sea Vixen couldnt fly supersonic
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Yes it did in a shallow dive just as the Hunter did but that didn't stop it creating the build up around itself at nearly that speed. The Aura around it was spectacular that day, I'll never forget the thrill of seeing it.
Here is another Video about it breaking the barrier.
@@macdodd Thats a bald-faced lie, the Vixen could not fly supersonic in dive either.
its straight horizontal tail element prevented it from safely reaching Mach 1 in a dive.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Your opinion but facts don't lie. Ehd of discussion.
@@macdodd The Facts are irrefutable, the Vixen WAS NOT capable of supersonic flight.
To any qualified aerospace engineer this is instantly recognizable at the first glance
Id love to see a megaprojects video on the Douglas A-4 / Skyhawk
It had a great engine sound
@14:00 - "... that the plane's pilots l_ved". THIS is the fun of a cold read! Lol
Don't forget the fact that the Meteor and Vampire had equally bad crash/loss rates.
Sadly the last flying example crashed after the hydraulic pump failed a common problem.
A 38% loss rate was not very different from some contemporary aircraft such as the Starfighter and Supersabre, and they didn't fly from aircraft carriers.
De Havilland had the highest loss rate in the industry with some notable flying coffins like the DH-106 and DH-108
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeThe Boeing 737 Max has killed more people than the early DH106 accidents did. The later DH Comets were excellent. The DH108 was a test aircraft. You sound like a complete fool.
@Begeye-bh5ux Germany is the largest manufacturer of jet aircraft in Europe... please name a british company that is still making british jet aircraft in the UK???
@Begeye-bh5ux No one cares... about british jets, at least the folks who buy jets, they stopped buying them and all the british manufacturers wents tits-up.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, by your own standard a british company that is still making British jet aircraft in the UK would be BAE Systems.
In the same way that Germany doesn't build any jets of their own neither does Britain. As you know old fashioned autarky so favoured by WW2 Germany has been replaced by international co-operation which is why for instance BAE Systems is a principle partner in the F35 project that Germany has lately and desperately bought themselves into after getting the wind up about the Russians. As you know the British BAE Systems also has the largest national share of the Eurofighter at 33% followed by Leonardo of Italy at 21% with France, Spain and Germany sharing the rest. Britain is also the largest procurer and therefore builder of Eurofighters.
As you will be aware, it is this model of co-operation that allowed Britain to develop the world's second largest aerospace industry after the US and for BAE Systems to become Europe's biggest defence contractor and Rolls Royce to be the biggest European jet engine producer.
Of course as you know Germany in WW2 failed signally to co-operate with its partners in this manner whereas the Allies benefited significantly by such co-operation by for instance the Tizard Mission. As you know, the British were able to significantly support the US with their early jet engine development (this following on from the famous sharing of the technology of the Merlin engine) leading to the US license building several British engines. One very ironic product of this co-operative model is, you'll recall that Rolls Royce will be supplying F130 (BR 725) engines for the B52 which will be built at Rolls Royce's Indianapolis plant that it acquired by buying Allison Engines the makers of the engine the Merlin replaced in the P51 Mustang. The further irony being that the Rolls Royce BR 725 is part of a series developed by Rolls Royce to help BMW get back into jet engine production in a Rolls Royce BMW international partnership (BMW having been the makers of the rather inconsequential BMW003 in WW2). Sadly as you know BMW couldn't hack it and now the company is a wholly owned Rolls Royce German subsidiary.
I was about to rush to the defence of the Sea Vixen, it was always a great aircraft to catch at Yeovilton air show. Then remembered it's fairly recent wheels down landing so fair play.
I like the look of the Sea Vixen.
The sea vixen is my favourite aeroplane, beautiful with wings folded too!
Certainly doesn't look any stranger than that TSR2 shoe box!
1:25 - Mid roll ads
2:55 - Chapter 1 - Design & development
8:55 - Chapter 2 - Specs & capabilities
12:45 - Chapter 3 - A bumpy ride
Interesting plane, very cool looking.
It was far from “Crap”, of its time it was precisely what was ordered, the radar could only be read in the dark because all radars of that era could only be read in the dark (check out some videos of the London Air Traffic Control Centre LATCC West Drayton, rows of dark radar operators in a dark room with only red light) as for the accident rate, totally normal for the time particularly when you consider that sticking a supersonic jet on an aircraft carrier that just a few years earlier had only seen single engine piston aircraft and as you said but I notice didn’t elaborate on, the vast majority of the incidents were when the catapult launcher failed and was unable to give the aircraft enough airspeed to avoid an instant stall into the sea. In short it provided the Fleet Air Arm an interim jet fighter before technology moved on at a pace. Also it’s a great looking aircraft.
de Havilland became infamous for its staggering loss rates and catastrophic in-flight structural failures
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Hello Sandyboy, as you know all jets have their dangers, you will no doubt be aware of the appalling crash rate of the F104G in German operation. As you know de Havilland is a famous and greatly admired mark with such historically important and iconic aircraft as the Mosquito and the Vampire and de Havilland now has its place as a legacy company of BAE Systems, Europe's largest defence contractor.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeMe163 had worse loss rates, and all German jets built just a. Few years before had 100% loss rates but I’m sure you think Messerschmitt was absolutely brilliant.
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 The Me-163 shot down Allied planes... something that Allied jet-propelled aircraft could never do.
Messerschmitt did in fact build the first operational jet fighter and rocket interceptor. Both were the fastest aircraft in their class and the fastest in the world during WW2.
Absolutely brilliant in anyone's book lad!!
Such a pity, I always thought it was a quite beautiful looking aircraft. You are correct about being able to view one in Australia, the air museum at Caloundra in Queensland has one and I managed to sit in the coal hole in one of their open cockpit days.
Ah, the F-4 also called a flying brick. Love that aircraft.
The F-4 could fly Mach 2.23.... this POS turkey couldnt reach Mach 1!!!!
"If you wanted to see one now you can rest assured that it won't be flying" Red Bull would have something to say about that, too bad it was flying until a wheels up landing a few years ago
Bit harsh, a lot of early jet fighters were complete dogs.
It’s better to pick everything apart and then praise the merits. Otherwise the value is lost to time
brit jets in particular, especially those designed by de Havilland
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke but let's not forget most early jets were flying with British designed engines. The German jets had lifespans of hours. And the first russian jets were just parade planes.
@@poweredbypies Lets not forget that German jets were the only ones effective in combat.
The british centrifugal turbojet was an evolutionary dead-end and completely obsolete on arrival... they wouldn't have axial engines until the 1950s.
All fighters of this era had engine lifespans of hours, a typical TBO for a Merlin engine was 5 hours in combat, Allied jet engines were not much better.
All the Allied jets were parade planes, they never saw aerial combat, the Lockheed P-80 and the Gloster _"Meatbox"_
only killed Allied pilots!
any questions?
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke have to say it's actually nice to debate with someone with knowledge beyond what they learn from war thunder. Shall we just agree that early jets were just a bit naff and it wasn't til second gen jets started to appear til things started to get going properly.
This aircraft design was an unparalleled success... in how NOT to do it.
Sea Vixen was the only supersonic aircraft built with a swept wing and straight tail surface. This created two different shaped shock waves in close proximity, just aft of the trailing edge. This caused cruel and unusual stresses to form in the wing, tail booms and engine bay, which engineers never really got hold of.
In operational service the pilots were given very stringent flight parameters in speed, bank and climb to mitigate the stresses. This made it a very poor interceptor, and still very prone to crash.
However the record for Royal Navy fast jet crashes is the Supermarine Scimitar that came out just before the Sea Vixen. Of the 76 built 39 were lost in accidents, a 51% loss rate. Compared to Sea Vixen's 145 built and 55 lost in accidents, a 38% loss rate.
*The Sea Vixen was not supersonic.*
@@WilhelmKarsten The DH110 was designed as a supersonic all weather fighter. It was in fact the first British production fighter to fly supersonically and the first two seat supersonic fighter in the world to fly.
It crashed at Farnborough in 1952 while putting out sonic booms to the delight of the crowds. Until it broke apart and killed dozens of spectators.
After that FAW.1 was limited to subsonic speeds by pilots notes. FAW.2 was limited to M0.91 by the addition of the dorsal fuel tanks and heavier fuselage members.
But it was designed as a supersonic aircraft - with swept wing and straight tail.
@@davidrendall7195 *Thank you for proving my point.. the Sea B!tch was not supersonic.*
@@WilhelmKarstenIt was supersonic. It went supersonic speeds. Just because it’s limited doesn’t mean it can’t, or can a Mustang GRT (or whatever they’re called, not a car person) only go 70mph because that’s what they’re limited to?
The Sea VIXEN (thank you) was a good aircraft. You’re just mad that the commentator was wrong.
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 You are a total FAKE! The Sea Vixen could not fly supersonic in level flight... and would crash if taken supersonic in a full power dive.
Any real aerospace engineer can take one look at this plane and tell you why it could not fly Mach 1... it plainly obvious.
I saw a Sea Vixen flying at the Classic Jets meet at Kemble about 15 years ago.
It was very, very impressive!
My dad flew Sea Vixens, and he said that they wers great for their day.
either you, or your dad is telling porkies
@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke My dad wasn't one to tell porkies. He loved his career in the Fleet Air Arm. I was a little boy and only heard him speak with great passion about his time in the RN.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeOr it was actually good? Ohh, that’s an alien concept for you isn’t it? Being good?
@@funny_joke_goes_here4406 The Sea Vixen was not only obsolete upon arrive it could not fly supersonic and had a staggering 46% crash rate.
This pile of junk was so "Good" that de Havilland didn't even stay in business long enough to see it enter service!
5:10 "Despite early setbacks from the Royal Navy changing its mind about what sort of aircraft it wanted, opting instead to refit an existing aircraft that was drifting towards obsolecence..." My first thought was that I'd never heard of the RN fitting a jet engine to a biplane. :D
A refitted sopwith camel with a pair of jets fitted? 🤔
I’d love to see how the plywood and canvas skin would hold up close to Mach 1 lol
@@cornellkirk8946 Messersmit Me 163, Vampire, Venom all had wood in their construction and flew close to the sound barrier.
Triangular wings, triangular intakes, triangular landing gear arrangement.
_So many triangles._
Triangular pilots
It must have originally had a Rotary engine. No not that rotary... the aircraft one prop planes had... duh
@@derekspringer6448 huh? Rotary?
"so many Triangles".. So, "Illuminati Confirmed".. XD
Operation pawn sacrifice.
Great looking plane!
before or after the crash?
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke both
@@javierrflores I think the flaming wreckage is a marked improvement
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke yes
I think the Sea Vixen looks... interesting. Not terrible looking.
it is seriously one of the coolest early cold war jets imo i even have model of it lol
It's such a lovely looking aircraft in my opinion, saw it flying twice incredible sound.
Unfortunate that it turned out to be such a disappointment and a deathtrap
The Sea Vixen shows an obvious lineage from the earlier twin boom De Havilland jet fighters, the Vampire and Venom. However, by the time the Sea Vixen entered service, this configuration had become very much outmoded. Still at least it could be launched from a level position with all its wheels on the deck, unlike the more conventional looking Supermarine Scimitar, which was launched at a high angle of attack with its nose wheel in the air.
love another accident prone airplane, the mighty Scimitar
always one my favorite designs
Says, "RAF went for the Gloster Javelin"... and shows a Blackburn Buccaneer which only flew with the RAF once the RN had retired its steam catapult aircraft carriers, in the late 1970's, and gifted Navy Buccaneers and Phantom II's to them.
They're similar looking but not the same. That's a Javelin, the elevator structure is all the way at the top on that plane. A Buccaneer has it's a little lower.
Definitely a cool looking aircraft
That's a shame, I think it looks cool, I'm a sucker for Twin Booms like the Lightning and the Bronco
Oddly cool looking though
Keeping is about keeping Simon's beard around.
The British are the best a building terrible things that they are very proud of.
And that's why Britain no longer makes its own jet aircraft...
Personally, I think its not only beautiful, but cool af. I love the asymmetrical design of the front fuselage.
The funny thing is this is actually a pretty decent aircraft in War Thunder once you get used to it
That offset cockpit is fascinating. Weird as all get out, but intriguing. It has a Star Wars needs an iteration of this feel.
Does this channel now just lean on lazy roasting? What has happened to these scripts in the past few months?😅
I saw these flying over the eastern end of Portsmouth Hampshire in the early 1970's. I seem to recall they were radar targets. Last time I saw one was at a Bournemouth air show in the summer of 2015.
A thunderbirds inspiration or - Captain Scarlet 😏
Looks too much like a toy to be taken seriously.
I like how it's a British jet with the cockpit on the left side instead of the right....
I've seen pictures of the Sea Vixen and assumed that the 'coal hole'was some kind of photographic equipment ,never thought that there was a man in there!
de Havilland made appallingly bad jets... the DH-100, DH-106, DH-108 and DH-110 all had catastrophic inflight structural failures and staggering loss rates... the highest in the industry.
My great uncle was an Air Observer (radar man) and had the misfortune to be in a Sea Vixen 'coal hole' when the pilot fumbled a deck landing. Neither of them made it out.
Does anyone else find the audible sneer in the presentation unpleasant?
I have put off watching any of these Megaprojects aviation videos because I didn’t think Simon’s style and tone would lend itself well to aviation oddities… this is the first I have watched and I think you’re right… the script feels far too subjective and technical detail is lost
Thought that was only myself thanks for the clarification
Can't stand him. 😖
In Cockney rhyming slang, he's comes across as a "Merchant banker".
He was better in the beginning if you watch his first videos. It was more of a personal learning journey he was on, and we came along with. It wasn’t as grating. Over time, it seems to have landed on a unique combo of pretentious and “know-it-all”. I can’t watch any more, unfortunately.
Yes. The Sea Vixen might have been terrible but Fizzgog and his ghastly beard are worst.
When I did my trade training as a weapons engineer in the RAF this was the aircraft i did my ejection seat removal and fitting on. But not the pilot seat, OH NO, it was the Nav's seat and it was a bugger to get to bits as it was so cramped and you could only work on the starboard side for obvious reasons.
Stupidest cockpit design ever implemented.
No, it was practical. The pilot got an excellent view for deck landings and the navigator/ radar operator got to see his CRT display. It was designed for purpose and was not stupid, unlike your comment.
@@chrisknight6884 The entire plane was a stupid design. de Havilland didn't even stay in business long enough to see it enter service... epic fail.
In the same time frame as the sea vixen was the f8 crusader, uk should have bought that. The french operated them off there smaller carriers, Eagle and Ark Royal could have had mach 2 jets in the late 50s early 60s
Crusader was alright in the Pacific and Med but you needed two seats and long legs to fight an air war in the Artic and North Atlantic. Whilst it was not Supersonic in level flight in the Red Top trials it showed it could intercept with ease Supersonic Lightnings and it was superior to the Lightning and Javelin in intercepting V Bombers and Crusaders along with the Century fighters were shown to be ineffective against high flying Victor B2 and Vulcan B2, lacking either avionics, ceiling and range.
A shallow, ill-informed analysis presumably aimed at generating views rather than informing the viewer.
Are you describing your comment?
That one was good @@jeffdroog
@@jeffdroog10/10 response.
I’m an aircraft enthusiast and I’ve gotta say this was about an 8.5/10 video on the entire history and impact of this aircraft. That’s a very high score by my standard by the way.
It's just this channels S.O.P.
@TheArtofFugue Considering the original poster had zero corrections to make,nor any specifics on the failings if the video,I'm going to assume they have no idea what they're talking about lol When it comes to usage,and opinions of any vehicle,of any kind,there is always going to be differences of opinions,but as far as the factual information in this video,yeah,its pretty spot on
Hey thems fightning words factboi, I happen to love the look of the Vixen ^^
Sshh..! Don't praise the Sea Vixen, or you'll trigger "Dr. BMW" or "Herr Karst"! ;)
ok, but comparing it to the F-86 and MiG-15, the Sea Vixen definitely looks the coolest.
I love aircraft design in the 40s and 50s. Technology was advancing so fast, but no one really knew how to use it yet. The wild experiments and they tried to figure it out where fascinating. Whatever you think of their performance and lethality, looking at the F-35 or Su-57 is yawn inducing as they are just variations on a them of their predecessors.
I *LOVE* the offset cockpit
i think it looks neat. boom tail aircraft always have a good look to them.
Its also why the plane could not fly supersonic... in terms of high-speed aerodynamics de Havilland remained in the dark ages right up until the company went bankrupt.
Always chuckle when I spot someone actually flying one of these in war thunder.
I think that the Sea Vixen is a wonderful aircraft, it has always been one of my favourites since I first saw one in the 1960s!
The experience of modern test pilots backs up my opinion of this very powerful aircraft which obviously lacks the refinements of modern 'fly by wire' systems which if retrofitted to this classic early jet fighter would undoubtedly iron out tricky aspects of the Sea Vixen's handling!
de Havilland had a very troubling history of building aircraft with fatal design flaws and appalling loss rates... the Sea B!tch was no exception, all of de Havillands jets crashed with stunning regularity right up until the company was bankrupted by the Comet Disaster.,, the worst engineering failure in aviation history!
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke the Comet - an outstanding innovative aircraft way ahead of it's time, but sadly pushed the boundaries of material science.
@7:36 Wait, The buckling of the leading edge of its wings was the reason the tail broke off? That's wild right?
de Havilland had an appalling reputation for catastrophic in-flight structural failures, the Comet and the Swallow are great examples of this bad design and construction.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkewhat are you on about? The swallow? It was only ever an experimental air craft. And the comet, was extremely successful and was the pioneer in high altitude passenger aircraft. Metal fatigue due to pressurised cockpits wasn’t known about so much back then. Someone had to be first to learn from it.
To say it’s a bad design shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.
And please detail what part of the construction are ‘bad’? Bad would imply shoddy workmanship and corner cutting. I await your examples
@@cornellkirk8946 You really don't have a clue what you are talking about do you lad???
All of de Havilland's jets had appalling loss rates and a common mode of failure... catastrophic in-flight structural failures and fatal design flaws.
ALL 3 Swallows crashed killing their pilots.
the Comet was the worst engineering failure in the history of commercial jet aviation and destroyed D-H.
All of the major manufactures already had pressurized cabins, none had a problem with mid-air break ups. The real tragedy of the Comet Disaster was that it could have been easily prevented if d-H had simply followed well known and understood industry standards for the design and construction of pressure cabins made from rivetted aluminum alloys.
The Comet 1 had so many fatal design flaws that its airworthiness certification was permanently revoked, and the Comet 4 required a total redesign to pass safety standards.
I used to see a couple of those 'Vampire'jets out at the Reno Air races every year.
Termites love the D-H Vampire..
because the in-flight meals are always free!
I worked with a guy who used to be 'ground crew' on carriers... he said it was an absolute sod to work on
I think its beautiful and wish a modern version was made.
Why? It's a horrible design