Rendered at 18:16:16 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
bajard 7 hours ago [-]
A 737 fuselage is made of aluminum, which will corrode with rain, salts, and sulfates present in most soils.
cannonpalms 7 hours ago [-]
Which is why these installs usually involve all sorts of external waterproofing, concrete encasement, galvanic/cathodic protections & sacrificial anodes, drainage systems, and interior climate control. They don't just bury the expensive fuselage and call it a day.
arethuza 6 hours ago [-]
Serious question - is burying a plane fuselage to create an underground bunker a common enough thing that there is a usual way of doing it?
throwup238 6 hours ago [-]
No, but the aluminum in the fuselage requires all these mitigations and it’s a well known problem. Without them, galvanic corrosion weakens both the aluminum and the concrete.
bluGill 6 hours ago [-]
I wouldn't call it common. It is a time consuming hobby at best. However I expect a lot of people spend time daydreaming about their future bunker that they never build and I would expect a plane to come up with something to bury quite often. Many of those are enough of engineers to figure out details like this.
Even this is the first time someone actually does it.
throw8383930977 6 hours ago [-]
No, it is stupid idea.
pyrale 6 hours ago [-]
The video says the guys wants to put the hull under a 3 inch fiber-reinforced concrete vault, which would be supported by the plane. The guy's word: "I'm hoping the plane can take that sort of weight". Then another thicker layer of concrete this time reinforced with mesh.
I for sure hope the guy hires good engineers to do the actual calculation and the whole "I don't know what I'm doing" is just for the show.
6 hours ago [-]
rskeens 7 hours ago [-]
Wanted to check how long the process would take buried naked and cursory search is maybe 5 to 15 years. Sooner with wet weather.
sschueller 7 hours ago [-]
It's sitting on a concrete base and will have concrete pours around it.
SoMomentary 6 hours ago [-]
You can see the rebar in the photos so that checks out, and I would think without it a plane wouldn't be designed to withstand force from above like you would need to be able to bury it safely. If I buried something like this in my yard it would need to be able to withstand a utility truck driving over it at least once in a blue moon.
Which is only a problem if it’s in contact with the soil.
moron4hire 6 hours ago [-]
Concrete is not very water proof on its own. It's also quite hard to prevent cracks from forming, even with reinforcement.
There is a lot you could do, like neoprene barriers on the skin of the fuselage, sacrificial anodes, spray sealant on the poured concrete. But at that point, you might as well not even have the fuselage and just build a regular, ol' concrete bunker.
bajard 5 hours ago [-]
Concrete is used as a moisture barrier inside walls if it is specifically built for that purpose. Without it, soil moisture damages the walls. Yet concrete is still electrically conductive and can cause galvanic corrosion, although not as bad as direct contact with soil.
It depends on how it is built and whether the constructors are aware of the problem.
moron4hire 4 hours ago [-]
I guess, to be fair, £4000 he spent on the fuselage is a lot less than he'd spend on building the arch and other scaffolding to just build a concrete bunker from scratch.
defrost 7 hours ago [-]
He aims to apply for retrospective planning permission on the project, which he hopes to have finished by February.
Ouch - I hope he's got a few channel fans on local council and doesn't get bitten on the regs.
xnorswap 7 hours ago [-]
It's often easier to get retroactive planning permission, and I suspect an underground bunker isn't as likely to get denied as something more visible.
defrost 7 hours ago [-]
It doesn't look dense urban, things are very often more relaxed in semi rural areas and low density zones; further he has existing underground structures that I would guess have already been approved.
If I had to, I'd bet he's had a conversation with a local planner and had a nod and a wink already.
bluGill 6 hours ago [-]
It also helps that he has a fairly popular YouTube channel. I expect the locals are aware of that and so they're even less likely to do something because they know that there will be a public outcry.
sharpshadow 7 hours ago [-]
Probably so in foresight that burrowing an airplane would be quite a long dispute to start with.
walthamstow 6 hours ago [-]
> He aims to apply for retrospective planning permission on the project, which he hopes to have finished by February.
Isn't that a bit risky? Is the idea that his YouTube popularity will mean the council won't say no?
Also, Bmibaby, what a blast from the past
goodcanadian 5 hours ago [-]
It is a bit risky, but UK planning permission seems to be mostly (though not entirely) about impact on the neighbours, and something underground is not visible and unlikely to have much impact. Also, it is a rural area with no close neighbours.
flemhans 6 hours ago [-]
Could go the other way as well, the publicity causing them to do things the "right way".
cucumber3732842 4 hours ago [-]
It's less risky than the "right" way that the boot lickers will tell you to do it.
If you, a private individual not some megacorp with infinite money for concessions, show up in front of a permitting authority asking to do anything that isn't the most cookie cutter bog standard thing you're gonna get told (in plausibly deniable government speak of course) to fuck off a million different ways, they'll slow roll you, they'll force you to jump through expensive hoops hoping you'll quit, etc, etc.
Since this isn't some slimeball slumlord deal and is a "honest man doing reasonable, if odd, honest man things" just going for it and getting permission after the fact is absolutely the right way to do it.
It's a million times easier for the permitting authority to say "well we don't have any rules this fits into but clearly what you've built here is fine" after you've done it, there are no unbounded questions and it's clearly fine than to give you permission in advance.
Nashooo 7 hours ago [-]
He should talk to Colin furze
Maxion 7 hours ago [-]
Colin furze was there to help lower the plane
Milner08 7 hours ago [-]
Pretty sure they've done stuff together on YouTube.
Peroni 6 hours ago [-]
Yep. Furze also recommended the channel on his most recent video.
Lerc 6 hours ago [-]
Heh. My partner has to put up with my ideas of digging up the driveway into a trench laying down containers and then putting a new driveway on top.
bombcar 6 hours ago [-]
Don't use containers use large drainage pipes; they're designed for it.
(It's much cheaper to just build a parking garage-type structure or use precast covers, but concrete pipes can give you that hobbit-hole you need.)
There's also a bunch of other videos of other stages of the project up to this point.
hosteur 7 hours ago [-]
Few minutes in and he is mixing concrete: Too much water in this concrete mix. Wrong kind of sand as well... Luckily he seems to have had a professional mix the concrete for the walls, etc.
throwawaybackag 7 hours ago [-]
How do you protect against damp in this set-up?
Fluorescence 6 hours ago [-]
Ideally, tank your hole with a membrane and pump. Only a noob garden-plane-in-hole owner would crane it in without one! Bit late now.
On the up-side, it looks like it's going into a concrete clad hole so may have a cavity not be buried in soil. It won't be permeable like basement walls that suck water out of the ground. I guess it's aluminium/titanium so won't be red dust by spring but can still corrode in some fashion depending on ph/oxygen. Could there be steel in things like fasteners?
Oh, and it's a tube... no idea how they've sealed the ends.
bluGill 6 hours ago [-]
He has an old well on the property that's dry most of the year so we have reasonable assurance that the groundwater level is not hot that high.
amelius 7 hours ago [-]
With a large sheet of plastic I suppose. Which apparently they forgot to add.
DerDerDaIst 7 hours ago [-]
"The first friend he discussed the idea with told him it was "silly", so he went to his seven-year-old son for guidance."
This is the best feedback he could get to be sure it will run well you YT.
Smith-7831 7 hours ago [-]
The planning permission situation could end up being more interesting than the actual construction..
halflife 7 hours ago [-]
How long until someone in Reddit points out at asphyxiation hazard, fire hazard, and the fact that the plane used to transport dangerous chemicals?
azornathogron 7 hours ago [-]
Tbh I'm not entirely sure I'd trust a partial plane body to have the mechanical strength for the job. In flight the pressure is pushing out not in, and I assume that's what the thing is designed for.
Though the thing is only barely buried so I suppose it doesn't actually have much external pressure to deal with.
sschueller 7 hours ago [-]
He is pouring concrete re-enforcement around it. Biggest issue is during the pour which he seems to have planned in stages to not put too much pressure on it.
detectivestory 7 hours ago [-]
I think the planning permission issue is probably even more pressing
KolmogorovComp 6 hours ago [-]
I don't understand the idea, the hole seems vastly too shallow to protect effectively from for example, bombing.
SoMomentary 6 hours ago [-]
They have a YouTube channel, so I'm sure it is just as much for views as anything else.
lucideer 6 hours ago [-]
It's... the very first line of the article
> When asked why he had lifted a section of a former plane into the ground in his back garden, Dave Billings shrugged his shoulders and said: "Why not?"
rwmj 5 hours ago [-]
If someone carpet bombs every square inch of rural England then that would be the least of our problems.
notrustincloud 5 hours ago [-]
What an unecessary waste of valuable recyling. Further waste of materials to try and remediate the unfit for purpose nature of an airframe.
Quite literally the opposite of flying environment... in the ground.
So if the objective is a pure folly for youtube channel. Grand success. Any real utility as a useful structure? Just no.
nancyminusone 2 hours ago [-]
Not sure how "valuable" the recycling is if someone was willing to sell it for £4000.
morkalork 6 hours ago [-]
I was expecting something more like this from the title:
Even this is the first time someone actually does it.
I for sure hope the guy hires good engineers to do the actual calculation and the whole "I don't know what I'm doing" is just for the show.
There is a lot you could do, like neoprene barriers on the skin of the fuselage, sacrificial anodes, spray sealant on the poured concrete. But at that point, you might as well not even have the fuselage and just build a regular, ol' concrete bunker.
It depends on how it is built and whether the constructors are aware of the problem.
If I had to, I'd bet he's had a conversation with a local planner and had a nod and a wink already.
Isn't that a bit risky? Is the idea that his YouTube popularity will mean the council won't say no?
Also, Bmibaby, what a blast from the past
If you, a private individual not some megacorp with infinite money for concessions, show up in front of a permitting authority asking to do anything that isn't the most cookie cutter bog standard thing you're gonna get told (in plausibly deniable government speak of course) to fuck off a million different ways, they'll slow roll you, they'll force you to jump through expensive hoops hoping you'll quit, etc, etc.
Since this isn't some slimeball slumlord deal and is a "honest man doing reasonable, if odd, honest man things" just going for it and getting permission after the fact is absolutely the right way to do it.
It's a million times easier for the permitting authority to say "well we don't have any rules this fits into but clearly what you've built here is fine" after you've done it, there are no unbounded questions and it's clearly fine than to give you permission in advance.
(It's much cheaper to just build a parking garage-type structure or use precast covers, but concrete pipes can give you that hobbit-hole you need.)
https://www.countymaterials.com/pipe-and-underground-infrast...
Yes, I have spent way too much time on this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixh0KIackIk
On the up-side, it looks like it's going into a concrete clad hole so may have a cavity not be buried in soil. It won't be permeable like basement walls that suck water out of the ground. I guess it's aluminium/titanium so won't be red dust by spring but can still corrode in some fashion depending on ph/oxygen. Could there be steel in things like fasteners?
Oh, and it's a tube... no idea how they've sealed the ends.
This is the best feedback he could get to be sure it will run well you YT.
Though the thing is only barely buried so I suppose it doesn't actually have much external pressure to deal with.
> When asked why he had lifted a section of a former plane into the ground in his back garden, Dave Billings shrugged his shoulders and said: "Why not?"
Quite literally the opposite of flying environment... in the ground.
So if the objective is a pure folly for youtube channel. Grand success. Any real utility as a useful structure? Just no.
https://www.reddit.com/r/abandoned/comments/1x4yw6y/inside_t...
https://youtube.com/shorts/nqXgbLjW1ho?si=PmwapHh23zYmIXuh