The Douglas DC-3: The First (Successful) Commercial Plane



To get a 1 year supply of immune-supporting Vitamin D3K2 & 5 travel packs FREE with your first purchase! – go to https://athleticgreens.com/megaprojects

Got a beard? Good. I’ve got something for you: http://beardblaze.com

Simon’s Social Media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SimonWhistler
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/simonwhistler/

This video is #sponsored by Athletic Greens.

Love content? Check out Simon’s other YouTube Channels:

Biographics: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClnDI2sdehVm1zm_LmUHsjQ
Geographics: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHKRfxkMTqiiv4pF99qGKIw
Warographics: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9h8BDcXwkhZtnqoQJ7PggA
SideProjects: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Wn3dABlgESm8Bzn8Vamgg
Into The Shadows: https://www.youtube.com/c/IntotheShadows
TopTenz: https://www.youtube.com/user/toptenznet
Today I Found Out: https://www.youtube.com/user/TodayIFoundOut
Highlight History: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnb-VTwBHEV3gtiB9di9DZQ
Business Blaze: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYY5GWf7MHFJ6DZeHreoXgw
Casual Criminalist: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheCasualCriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZdWrz8pF6B5Y_c6Zi6pmdQ

source

32 thoughts on “The Douglas DC-3: The First (Successful) Commercial Plane”

  1. Had the pleasure of flying in a "Warbird" DC3 in Auckland New Zealand, in a scenic flight over the city, about 30 years ago. This aircraft, ZK-DAK, was manufactured in 1944 and is still flying.

    Reply
  2. Its wing was designed without a main spar, single point of failure. It has over thirty bolted joints that run the length of the winf so it can take a tremendous amount of damage. They were also used as gliders themselves. Loaded with fuel, ammunition and other aircraft spares they landed in temporary airfields in Normandy where they could be set up as fighter workshops and so service the aircragt locally and get them back in the air quicker.

    Reply
  3. Even today, major airline companies only make profit margins around 3-5%. Now, 3-5% of billions is still a decent chunk of change, but when in consideration to wanting to expand to keep your company fresh in the publics mind, it does eat into it pretty good. I’m comparison, Amazon clears almost 30%, last I checked (numbers may have changed by now). I find it interesting that airliners are not rolling in the cash like most people think.

    Reply
  4. SIR, WOULD YOU PLEASE MAKE AVIDEO ON INDIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAMME?……..A VERY DARING PROJECT TAKEN BY INDIAN SCIENTISTS AMID THE FEAR OF SANCTIONS AND ALSO GLOBAL ISOLATION. I KNOW YOU WILL GET HELL LOT OF INFORMATION ON THAT TOPIC.

    Reply
  5. SAD TO CORRECT YOU BUT THE DC 3 DID NOT START OUT IT'S LIFE WITH TURBO-PROP ENGINES. TURBO=PROPS CAME INTO USE IN THE EARLY 1950s. ALSO, DOUGLAS MANUFACTURED IN CALIFORNIA. ARE YOU SURE THAT THE MAIDEN FLIGHT OF THE DC-3 WAS IN KITTYHAWK? KITTYHAWK IN ON THE EAST COAST OF THE USA!

    Reply
  6. Please cover The Thunderwell!? Nuclear steam piston concept launch system/weapon for launching cargo into orbit, destroying asteroids, lol and aggressive Alien Spaceship! https://youtu.be/VonfewfNNfI 😆👍
    —  The steam accelerated Jules Verne capsule, which was suggested by the speed of at least 6 times earth’s escape velocity, achieved by the 10-cm thick, 1.2 m diameter steel cover blown off the top of the 152 m shaft of the 0.3 kt Plumbbob-Pascal B underground Nevada test on 27 August 1957. In that test, a 1.5 m thick 2 ton concrete plug immediately over the bomb was pushed up the shaft by the detonation, knocking the welded steel lid upward. This was a preliminary experiment by Dr Robert Brownlee which ultimately aimed to launch spacecraft using the steam pressure from deep shafts filled with water, with a nuclear explosion at the bottom; an improvement of Jules Verne’s cannon-fired projectile described in De la Terre à la Lune, 1865, where steam pressure would give a more survivable gentle acceleration than Verne’s direct impulse from an explosion. Some 90% of the radioactivity would be trapped underground!

    Reply
  7. Just so you know, it wasn’t a turboprop as you said at 4:33. A turboprop is a jet turbine with a shaft that drives a propeller. Because this has cylinders not turbines, it’s simply a piston powered propeller aircraft. The engines were in the radial configuration. Recently there have been some turboprop conversions, but those aren’t factory planes.

    Reply
  8. They are pretty exciting to skydive out of as well, you go out behind that huge prop and in front of the tail plane, the prop gives you quite a kick. Plus you fly in a DC-3 what more could you ask for.

    Reply
  9. In 2017, I had the chance to fly as a passenger in planes at a little…well, "air show" would be a but generous, but it effectively was one from the Commemorative Air Force. They brought in four historic planes to show off on the ground, and for not an insignificant amount, you can be taken up in the air in them for about 30 minutes at a time.

    The first plane they did flights in was a C-47. I was almost shocked at just how smooth every bit of the flight was, and it became shock upon reflection after going up in the other planes: a B-25, a B-17, and finally the only still-flying SB2C. The C-47 was a truly remarkable plane to fly in.

    That said, it might not have helped that just weeks prior to the flights, my great uncle, shortly before he passed away, gave me his M1 Garand that was issued to him during WW2. During my flight in the C-47, I kept finding myself almost instinctively checking to see if the Garand was still slung across my body (I obviously did not take it with me to the show), if I was secured to a parachute, and if there was a going to be a red light near the door turning on before someone opened the door mid-air. Yeah, I know the whole thing was silly, but I have always been a big military history buff, so I couldn't help but imagine what it was like being a crewmember of the B-25s in the Doolittle Raid, or the nearly countless B-17s shadows passing over the ground on their way to France or Germany (I recorded a stretch of the B-17's shadow after takeoff), or the rear gunners in SB2Cs (because that was how you went up as a passenger at that show) having to watch out for Japanese fighters trying to shoot them down.

    If you ever get the chance to fly in a DC-3 or any of its variants, I highly recommend it.

    Reply
  10. 4:34 Nice underside view. You may notice one engine closer to the fuselage. That difference is there to offset engine torque on take-off.
    The Dak (for Dakota in Canada and U.K.) is the epitome of the expression "If it looks right, it will fly right."
    It's a beautiful piece of work.

    Reply
  11. 4:35 The DC-3 utilised two air-cooled radial engines, not two turboprops. Turboprops would not exist for another 15 years. All DC-3s equipped with turboprops would be experimental or aftermarket conversions.

    Reply
  12. I had a few privalages to see the DC-3 live. At the time, I was attempting to get my pilots licence, so I was "allowed" onto the air-side of an airport (FAGM). Before one of my flights, I managed to watch the majestic aircraft do a take-off.
    Back at home, It was my favourite aircraft in Flight Simulator X.

    Reply

Leave a Comment