5 Luftwaffe 'Ideas' That Worked...Sort of

You'll find many strange and 'wonderful' ideas in the repertoire of the Luftwaffe, many of which never worked. So, let's check out five that did actually work...just that they had no real use.
You can support my Channel with Patreon: / milavhistory
⚜ Find Me On Social Media ⚜
Twitter: / milavhistory
Facebook: / militaryaviationhistory
⚜ Sources ⚜
Forschungsanstalt Graf Zeppelin, Erprobung SG 113 A, Brf. Nr. 107 gKdos
Forschungsanstalt Graf Zeppelin, Brief an Chefing, Temme, 3.1.45
SG 116 Zellendusche, Unt. 177 WKW
Munitionsbericht WKWm 12/43 | 64/43 | 142/43 | 163/43 | 165/43 | 198/44 | 218/44 | 245/44 | 271/44 | 299/44 | 307/44 | 360/44 | 368/44 | 406/45
⚜ Music ⚜
Music and Sfx from Epidemic Sound

[@BoarVessel-BCEtruscanCer-xy7et]

"The Germans weren't the only ones to put flamethrowers on aircraft, buts that another story " *TELL US THE STORY*

[@LupusAries]

JAWOLL! BISMARCK MACH HINNE! ;)

[@klausmuller4555]

LupusAries Da fehlt ein Alter

[@DaviLu]

@Boar Vessel lmao is this a general meme or are you from SPQR-Posting?

[@BoarVessel-BCEtruscanCer-xy7et]

Davi Lu just a general meme. Never heard of SPQR posting but I shall investigate.

[@iforgotmyusername0]

@The King lol

[@EdMcF1]

So why didn't they call it 'Spitfire'?

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

I guess they didn't want to get sued for copyright infringement...

[@gunnerr8476]

The Luftwaffe don't want to be a laughing stock from the Army and Navy since they lost Battle of Britain. :P

[@sebbe617]

You mean Spit-fire right?

[@last_methbender6306]

OI MATE YOU GOT A LOOICENCE FOR THAT NAME.

[@mortwastaken]

FEUERSCHPUCKER

[@wiggumesquilax9480]

THANK YOU for mentioning the logistical requirements of replacing established kit. So many comments and videos deride the use of existing gear, demanding without ever understanding the upheaval brought about by genuinely new technology.

[@grahvis]

Wiggum Esquilax I have heard it said that the German pilots who used the anti ship guided bomb, were reluctant to report how successful it was because they knew the upheaval that might follow.

[@mikep3180]

Goering: we need ideas for our bombers defense Hans: *grabs ze flamenwerfer*

[@Fearless1247]

Gets the Nebelwerfer

[@tgzzr]

Hans jump on the plane! Japanese hans version

[@andrewbirdsell2638]

Commits aerodynamic heresy Space marine intensifies

[@HistoryGameV]

Flying bricks!

[@sar_ptolemy]

METAL BAWKES

[@JackIsMe1993]

Get me closer I want to purge them with my Flamer!!!

[@andrewbirdsell2638]

jackisme 1993 the flamer attached to your plane?

[@JackIsMe1993]

Andrew Birdsell well it's either that or a really big chainsword attached to each wing of my Thunderhawk :)

[@artificernathaniel3287]

@Military_Aviation_History I wouldn't call the 6 tube rocket magazine a gatling gun, but rather a revolver, a good old-fashion Texan 6-shooter!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

True that, would have been a better analogy

[@LupusAries]

Nathaniel you mean an RBFRR=Really Big Fucking Rocket Revolver? ;)

[@gusd913]

Yeehaw lol

[@orkhepaj]

gatling gun ahahaha total fail

[@akarsiaman5141]

@Military Aviation History would've surely been :)) lel :]

[@mikeromney4712]

10. April 1945 110 Lancasters attacked in the evening the outer districts of Leipzig. Leutnant Kelb started his Me 163, armed with Korffs vertical armament. Feldwebel Höver from the Funkleitstelle was watching Kelbs attack with a strong FlaK telescope. He vouch, how Kelb bypassed the leading bomber underneath at verry close range. At this moment, the bomber dispersed in a cloud of fire and smoke. A nearby flying Lancasters looked like they got also suffered damage. Kelb first climbed and than steered his aircraft in a steep dive towards the range of the own anti aircraft defense of Brandis airport, chased by a pair of P-51- and landed safley. His plane was litterd at the tail with small holes from the debris of the exploded Lancaster. After his own words, he bypassed the bomber at 10m or 20m underneath and all 8 tubes fired their 5cm grenades after the sensor detected the shadow of the bomber. His Me 163 got a "slap" at the tail and turned into a climb, but was shortly after at Kelbs full control. This was the one and only fight with this weapon. Also on it was, like many other things, the motto: To less - to late..... Wolfgang Späthe "Der streng geheime Vogel" page 292/293

[@kurumi394]

"True enough, throw enough rockets at the Yankees and something is bound to go up like it's the 4th of July" Oh my god this is my new favorite quote lol

[@GlowingSpamraam]

gatling 210 mm rocket launcher on a plane yes where do i buy one the a10 of ww2

[@Riceball01]

More like a 210mm rocket revolver since each barrel holds a rocket.

[@MidnightSt]

who else clicked on this video primarily because of the "flamethrower on a plane" thumbnail?

[@shorelockhomes943]

MidnightSt me.

[@zaney3728]

happened to me too, idk why it keeps bringing me to this shit video

[@IronWarhorsesFun]

LUFTFLAMMEWURFER!

[@pippi2285]

@@zaney3728 It's not a shit video tho

[@feartheghus]

I didn’t read the title so I thought that was the only reason.

[@kayraaa2646]

5:58 ...Nigel had not cleared leather when a rocket fairly ripped And the kraut's aim was deadly, with the big iron on his hip, Big iron on his hip...

[@user-ve8ry1xw8v]

Kayraaa2 but the real question is if he heard the masters call.

[@kittyhawk348]

Marty Robbins would be proud.

[@Sammie1053]

...And the notches on his cockpit numbered one and nineteen more

[@mykolaskumpis236]

Amazing video as always Bis! Your videos perfectly fit my interests, thank you! Keep it up!

[@frankwhite3406]

The Me 410 with the 6 tube rotating 21 cm Rocket launcher (Gatling Style) neatly installed in the forward weapons bay is my Favourite!

[@jossiehoogwerffie624]

yeah that was badass its flying nebelwerfer i had no idea

[@quatro_quatro]

Can you elaborate on that "private fleet" of He-100's a bit more? Were they part of the Luftwaffe or did ol' Heinkel just say "F this. I'm starting my own little air campaign!"?

[@Slahinki]

Probably used them for the industry protection squadron.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

He used a few of them to protect his own factories.

[@quatro_quatro]

Military Aviation History Thanks for the answer. Did other factories have this too, Dornier or Messerschmitt for example?

[@Slahinki]

Yes, most aircraft factories operated dedicated industry protection sqadrons manned by factory staff. In the Focke Wulf ISS for instance the planes were piloted by the factory test pilots, some scoring kills against B-17s.

[@quatro_quatro]

Thanks man! Although i consider myself well versed with WW2 planes, this was news to me!

[@isaiahwatrous7706]

Now that’s how you get someone to click on a video

[@project-xn5ld]

Wat click bait

[@jetspeedstudios431]

your profile pic looks like it saying that

[@samw5644]

Blunderwaffe?

[@clippedwings225]

Dude.

[@aarosundvall]

Dunderwaffe?

[@kylieadams5414]

NICE.

[@sightflimmer3278]

Bluffwaffe?

[@literalantifaterrorist4673]

1274627 26e66262 Wunderwaffle

[@MisteriosGloriosos922]

*Thank you for posting all of your videos. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!*

[@LupusAries]

You know the flamethrower could actually work in a similar way to that trick that Galland pulled once while being chased down in a dive. He fired all his guns, and the tracers made the enemy think they were shot at from behind which then made them pull out. (It's an anecdote in Fighter Combat Tacttics and Maneuvering.) You could use the flamethrower similarly, light it up, push over into a dive, and dive away, make the enemy think you are damaged. Or combine it with a roll. However that is me thinking creatively on how to use that piece of equipment instead of them having that intention.

[@thethirdman225]

Except it didn't. The pilots reported that it attracted unwanted attention from British fighters and they went for it because they thought it was already in trouble.

[@LupusAries]

@@thethirdman225 A bomber flying straight or a fighter diving and rolling, simulating an out of control damaged aircraft? Just for clarification.

[@thethirdman225]

@@LupusAries Oh, you meant a fighter equipped with this? Sorry, I didn't realise. No, I was talking about the Do-17, which was a bomber.

[@LupusAries]

@@thethirdman225 Yeah, that was me trying to hypothesize a possible scenario where you could use this. Or how to make it possibly work. As for Bombers in level flight, yeah agreed, everyone would go for the easy kill. I'm nit sure any bomber bar the stuka would have the structural speed and the reactivity to pull that off. P.S. no worries, I got that, no offense taken.

[@MrSinny]

From what I read the revolver rocket launcher was also dropped because it caused heavy structural damages on the Me-410

[@RedcoatT]

One of the major problems of the flamethrower fitted to a bomber as defence was at altitude the flame admitted was not impressive, and it had the effect of making enemy fighter pilots think the plane was in trouble, therefore attracting them to the bomber instead of driving them away. This is what happened when it was tested operationally on a Do 17 during the Battle Of Britain.

[@jwenting]

plus the British had a tendency to not do as the Germans anticipated, instead attacking from the rear, front, and top rather than getting into a chase.

[@skyscall]

When you explained that the evaporation cooling system required a large area, I felt it would have been significantly better to have shown the X-ray view of the He 100 in War Thunder, which shows some of the internals of the aircraft, including the evaporation cooling system. This would have helped new viewers visualize the problem; the cooling system took the area of the entire wing and even parts of the waist and tail area.

[@spindash64]

Anyone else think the YB-40 would make a fun Rank IV premium for the US tree in war thunder?

[@elixir4487]

Sir, you are nasty...

[@spindash64]

hey, unlike the skywhale, this thing actually saw combat a few times. also, I think it lost most of its bomb load, if not all of it

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

I suggested Old 666 for it. Which is kiiiinda like the YB-40, just without the second dorsal turret. And has a fixed MG for the pilot to use. dakkadakkadakkadakka. And yeah, no bomb-load. A superheavy fighter. XD

[@lefr33man]

hearing him saying 6:03 - 6:07 with that accent made me smile. That wouldn't out of place in a war movie.

[@SpudEater]

God, I love War Thunder and History so much and you managed to mesh together two of my favorite things into one channel. Never in my life has a game been more frustrating to master yet so fulfilling knowing that I am playing against PC players

[@s.irvine4159]

I love the video's you post Bismarck, it teaches me the technological geniuses and failures of the Second World War, keep up your fantastic stuff buddy. It's truly brilliant!

[@dowekeller]

i love the look of those interwar racers with their surface radiators giving them such smooth lines.

[@Xenomorthian]

Me 2

[@Enthropical_Thunder]

Yeah, the germans...., we either love them for their crazy projects or their good engineering capabilities :D.

[@LupusAries]

Tse germans, the living proof to the idiom, that there is a fine line between genius and madness.

[@fakshen1973]

WWII Germans made equipment that could out-perform anything under ideal conditions. But in WWII, there were no ideal conditions.

[@Neuttah]

"Ideal conditions," only ever happen in a lab. And even then, something's gonna fuck up.

[@pteppig]

@@Neuttah conditions that were not ideal like "being constantly carpet bombed" while being short on materials, labour and fuel. Under ideal conditions German technology got people into space instead of just one way rockets to London

[@Neuttah]

Hoo boy, this'll take a while. Allrighty, first off, when I meant "Ideal conditions," I meant conditions for actual use, not production. (See also: Fucking mud-frozen interleaved roadwheels). Second off, even under ideal conditions, as Germany was at its relative peak and about to set the world aflame (So, you know, 1939, if it's not obvious): -At least two other countries had superior small arms technology (M1 Garand, and also the SVT-38 was also up for mass-adoption until...shit happened. G-41 will be a stillbirth until German designers get their hands on the SVT-40) -Just about everyone short of Italy, Japan*, and the US* had technologically superior tanks in one way or another, even when doctrine impeded on their specifications. *And they're islands, why would they? -Aviation, at last, a field where they were somewhat decent. Their tactical bombing is either 1st or 2nd best in the world, and their fighters are about equal to the ones belonging to the countries that can afford to develop their own. And their Strategic bombers? No. -Navally...look, their submarines weren't strictly the best, they were just the best that the Kriegsmarine had to offer. *And now, for the grand finale of the rockets you so conveniently brought up.* Wernher took patents from an American engineer, scaled them up with a big wad of resources from a desperate industrialised regime that had severely underrated its opponents, and made, at best, a third-rate alternative to a strategic bomber that killed more workers than targets. As it was, German dabbling with rocketry did help kick-start the major superpowers' rocket programs, but at best it made a few things happen a few years earlier. I'd say JFK's martyrdom was a bigger factor in the Moon landing than Von Braun's tinkering with potato rockets. And even then, that's under the assumption that the war didn't actually set large liquid-fuel rocket development back because most countries had more important things to do.

[@__qux4705]

0:50 Star Wars Death Star trench run anyone?

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

He got it \o/

[@__qux4705]

Military Aviation History “Yaahooo You’re all clear kid”

[@LupusAries]

Let's cut across the axis to draw some fire! ;) :P

[@chaplainjamesthicc305]

George Corbett "Great shot kid that was one in a million!"

[@erictaylor5462]

The Me-323 was an idea that the USAF saw through to a viable weapon with the AC-47 and later the AC-130. There were/are very good weapons systems. That AC-47 was just Spooky.

[@stevemorton2015]

Thanks for the video. I love hearing about strange things during WW2.

[@palaius]

"True enough, throw enough rockets at the Yankees and something is bound to go up like it's the 4th of July." Perfect description.

[@michaeldailey7103]

This is one of the best military aircraft channels out there !!!

[@thethirdman225]

That's because Chris does proper academic-grade research. He doesn't just watch a few KZbin videos and then make his own. Also, like any good historian, he doesn't let things like personal preferences cloud his judgement. He doesn't indulge in "what ifs" and he seeks authoritative sources and interviews them instead of just spouting information and opinion. Best of all, he sees history as an ongoing thing, rather than something which has an absolute framework and he doesn't see simple answers to complex problems. There are shit tons of "history" channels out there. Chris, Bernhard Kast and one or two others, like Tank Chats guys to a lesser extent, are the only ones I trust.

[@michaeldailey7103]

TheThirdMan Thanks for the input brother !!

[@thewatchloungechris]

Enjoy your channel great content. Just found it and subscribed. Love military history .

[@DodgerRoger]

Nice work as per usual, I'd heard of a few of these already; but more information is more information and this video provides that in abundance! :)

[@Miata822]

So exactly right that many people underestimate the difficulty of starting a factory and building things. We see that all around us today on Kickstarter campaigns that have no possibility of ever producing a working product affordably.

[@Scuttle.]

I am so happy you are using war thunder for visuals now!

[@diederickschothans1701]

Yaass! These sort of vids keep me going, great work. Keep it up!

[@GreenStuffConsumer]

How I'd imagine a flamethrower on a plane. Fighter: *gets a little ballsy* Bomber: SUCK MY FIRE

[@Kumimono]

Just a random thought. Suppose you have a small explosive attached to the tail of your fighter, sort of a claymore-like design. When chased by another fighter, the pilot detonates this, and a cloud of shrapnel puffs out at the path of the chaser. A shotgun blast, even.

[@rurushu8094]

Bismarck playing war thunder? What universe am I in?

[@Lv-sl3rm]

In all fairness to it it has some of the aircraft he was talking about and he doesn't really loose much by playing it quickly for the sake of footage.

[@fatmanicy4292]

Your in a universe where tanks write comments

[@comethiburs2326]

well, huh, he didnt play it. war thunder is a grindfest, would take ages to get to any plane.

[@therandombros5601]

tank, you mean tank. the planes are a pathetically quick and easy grind compared to them.

[@SosoTheCircusBear]

@@fatmanicy4292 not only tanks but bears as well

[@subswithnovideos-nf1ub]

wow the flamethrower planes are LIT literally

[@Collateral0]

Im surprised the Japanese didn’t put bayonets on there aircraft.

[@Xenomorthian]

There was a German anti zeppelin plane with a huge bayonet you can find on Wikipedia I think In the wunderwaffen page

[@nathanishungryanimations7206]

I didn’t know any of these! I’m learning! Thanks!

[@mikeqigong4050]

Thank you for the all of history that you share.

[@mandolinic]

Rear facing flame throwers were used to great effect by James Bond in "You Only Live Twice", where they were fitted to a Wallis autogyro.

[@monstrok]

Great video and research! Really enjoyed this one.

[@sar_ptolemy]

ROCKET REVOLVER

[@shorelockhomes943]

Sar Ptolemy sounds fun.

[@titansguilddre]

Anyone else confused on why nobody in WW2 put 1 or two flak cannons in a plane. I feel like that would be very effective vs bombers

[@Schwarzvogel1]

You do know that those bombers tended to be accompanied by fighters, right? And those fighter pilots love nothing more than slow, lumbering heavy fighters that can't climb, dive, or outturn them. Also, look up how much a "flak cannon" (I presume you are referring to the FlaK 36, the famous "88") weighs, and you'll see why nobody thought of putting something like that on a plane. There _were_ some attempts to fit 7.5 cm and even 8.8 cm cannons on aircraft for tank-busting, but this was generally a bad idea because it made the aircraft extremely slow, difficult to handle, and easy prey for any fighters and even ground defenses. (I do believe that the Germans considered putting an 8.8 cm cannon in the Ju-88 bomber, but they wisely never pursued that idea after seeing how badly the version with a 7.5 cm cannon performed.) The best weapon against bombers in WWII would have been proximity fuzes, which the Germans failed to develop for some mysterious reason. Now, _that_ fact confuses me given their other remarkable technological advancements during the war.

[@normancomeau371]

Very creative ideas from scientists who had family as hostages.

[@Jamie-kg8ig]

Hey Bismarck what, if any, mods do you use for IL-2 1946 to gather that footage?

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

I use SAS/UP in IL-1946

[@throwback19841]

Check out BAT too of youre into il2 '46. I think ive been playing the il2 series for more than half my life now!

[@Jamie-kg8ig]

@@MilitaryAviationHistory Oh cool. I tried BAT fairly recently. I think it's the largest mod I've ever seen.

[@keithbaker3405]

You got to love the thoughts of Hermann Göring, Mad as a box of frogs!

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Finally a list that is not the same thing over and over!

[@old_guard2431]

Well done - have seen a few "wonder weapons" and you have come up with some that i have not seen before. And efficiently presented. ("Efficient?" Of course it's efficient. It's Bismarck trying to fool us with his new pseudonym.)

[@warhawkjah]

Using repurposed heavy AC as gunships actually did work out in the end but with cargo planes instead of bombers and used against ground targets. The AC-47 and AC-130 which is still in use.

[@petronius5931]

I had a guidebook to Luftwaffe aircraft designs that had a lot of design ideas that never made it off the drawing boards. One that I have always wanted to know more about was an idea for a ramjet fighter powered by coal. Ever heard of this one? If so, how about an episode on that idea?

[@rooseveltbrentwood9654]

Mark Felton has an episode about a british pilot who intercepted a flight of german bombers heading for buckingham palace. one of the bombers used a tail mounted flamethrower on him. it did not ignite but the oil from the flamethrower temporarily blinded the british pilot. However, he persevered and shot down two enemy aircraft and took out the remaining enemy by ramming.

[@thethirdman225]

Mark Felton's version of events is extremely coloured, as are many of his videos. He's almost turning into a modern day Franz Kurowski. If you want to find out about what happened in that exchange, read _"Battle of Britain Day: September 15 1940"_ by Dr Alfred Price. The German pilot of the Dornier was Fw. Rolf Heitsch and the British Pilot was Sgt Ray Holmes.

[@matsv201]

About evaporation cooling. Its also worth noting that by 1939 it was found out that using very warm cooling liquid in a smal space could make it give more thrust than it would give aerodynamic drag. Making the evaporation cooling totaly useless. Looking at the P51D having a very pronounced solution like this. But also most german planes did have it in late war.

[@malsypright]

Building on the flamethrower idea, did anybody ever try using such tools as well as ejection of scrap metal/spare parts to fool enemies into thinking the aircraft was destroyed? If damaged but still okay, you could release flames and scrap from some canisters in your plane and enter a spin-dive to trick the enemy into thinking he got you, then he moves on, you can pull back up and surprise him.

[@pteppig]

Yes, that trick was used by u boats . They sometimes created oil films by dumping waste oil and pushed out debris through a torpedo tube.

[@GModBMXer]

6:00 I don't know why but the way this was phrased was hilarious

[@kimepp2216]

The RAF put a 150mm howitzer on a Mosquito, think it had 8 rounds, and working air to ground rockets on a Typhoon. The Bleinheim had an up looking gun during the battle of Britain.

[@Deathbyreality1]

Flame thrower aircraft armament? Made me think of diesel punk straight away.

[@benbot1680]

FIRE ON THE LEFT WING!

[@pauleveritt3388]

Production considerations is why the Sherman tank stayed in service so long. Considerations mostly had to do with US railroads. How wide are the tunnels? How much could a bridge support?

[@tedtolentino4955]

Interesting information: there was probably no lack of imagination to invent technology that would give you an edge during war time. Indeed, one could argue that enemy combatants would "steal" ideas from the other by reverse engineering whatever was captured in battle to their advantage, spurring more ideas.. And in peacetime, some of those ideas would become cutting edge technology for peaceful uses, e.g. rocket technology for space exploration, satellites, weather forecasting, etc. Would like to see if you could put together a story of some of these inventions used in peacetime. Thanks.

[@edrosenquist6541]

Thank you for sharing your knowlege!

[@christopherconard2831]

Many years ago I read about an (I believe) American system that allowed planes to drop flak bombs. The idea was to fly above, and in front of, an enemy bomber formation. Then drop these, creating a screen of flak that would damage the bombers, or at least break up the formation. Apparently it was never introduced because it just wasn't practical late in the war when it got beyond the prototype stage. Does anyone know if it, with any nation, got beyond the experimental stage?

[@BrokenAngelWings]

So far I know was that a German tactic. Planes carried bombs and dropped the over a formation. The bombs exploded in a special altitude and harmed so the Bombers. I have readen that in the book ,, I flew for the Führer''

[@BrownFoxWarrior]

I guess the flame thrower idea could be some sort of make shift smoke screen, but even then it seems like a very poor idea after all ignoring the ground attack option. None the less, it is very impressive to see what out of the box solutions people can come up with.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

most of the weapons on this list show that they understood the problem, but due to technology limitations the ultimate result was something that failed to do what it was pitched as, telling pilots they give them an automatic gun trigger, but then put the system in such a way you had to make a very specific underside pass.

[@BrokenAngelWings]

Schönes Video und ich habe etwas gelernt. Kannst mir sagen welche Bomber genau mit einem Flammenwerfer ausgerüstet waren ?

[@MGB-learning]

Great Job!

[@nates9536]

I've always thought a flamethrower/smokescreen combined with a steep dive would be a decent defense measure to make a trailing fighter believe your plane was out of the fight

[@explorer1968]

After being outclassed by your enemy, time is not on your side to test new weapons at all...

[@TheUncommonIdea]

Thanks for this video very well done!

[@davidhills703]

About the automatic triggers, is does that include the Zellduscher? (probably misspelled, my apologies). I've heard it mentioned in documentaries for night fighters of the era. Also, the Luftwaffe 46 is fun stuff, you're right about the practicality, but still fun history.

[@novak8851]

Great vid Bis

[@Imnotyourdoormat]

outstanding video...but what about one on Knoke bombing the bombers and "the fat mans" response.

[@hfar_in_the_sky]

1:15 Obscure anime fact: this plane was the inspiration for the troop/tank transports used by the antagonists in Miyazaki's _Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind._

[@hardlydank932]

I have a question not related to the video. Why did pilots prefer the bf109 more than the fw190 despite it being techinally more advanced and better armed?

[@michaelm9975]

Because the armament the FWs carried made them bulky, and impeded on flight performance. Mainly in terms of ability to gain altitude in a climb, and turn during combat. Keep in mind the FW was designed to be a fighter-bomber and not a dedicated fighter.

[@hardlydank932]

Michael Mao thx👍

[@dankboi8740]

Cant forget the legacy of the 109's as well

[@notsureyou]

In short each to their own. Some went from the 109 to the 190 and never looked back, and others whilst seeing the advantages of the 190 felt that the 109 was better. The 190 was a great aircraft but... it's engine didn't perform at altitude, it's higher wing loading gave it worse turning performance (at lower speeds), some didn't like not having centrally mounted guns, it's climb performance was inferior to the 109. So whilst the 190 had many things going for it, so did the 109. But then enter the D9 stage left!!!

[@datonecommieirongear2020]

@@michaelm9975 Fw190 was designed as a Fighter first, designed to be the perfect BnZ plane but as the war went it was strapped with more armor (sometime more or sometime less guns) and the ability to load bombs since germany was bleeding planes everywhere

[@vorticwatchcompany]

They worked, but had no use... Seems like a lot innovations are joining this trajectory in the present day! Thank you for the knowledge! Best, IC

[@themigmadmarine]

I seem to recall something about German attempts to mount flame throwers on two seaters for trench strafing in WWI, does that ring any bells or was I merely misinformed or had my wires crossed?

[@erictaylor5462]

7:50 It seems like this would work better if the put the fuel into some sort of tank and dropped it like a bomb. Add something that would cause the fuel to jell and become sticky, and add some kind of igniter that would light the whole thing off when it hit the ground. It will splash out effecting a large area. I imagine it would produce a smell the troops would come to associate with winning. It might even produce a movie line something like "I love the smell of (whatever you call it) in the morning. It smells like victory." Just make sure you call it something cool. Not "duck shit" or "nay palm" or some such stupid thing.

[@Dragon_master_56]

Duck shit 🤣😂🤣😂 imagine marines saying We have called in the duck shit danger close lol

[@erictaylor5462]

@@Dragon_master_56 Well, it makes sense, because ducks go in the air and drop little unpleasant bombs.

[@Batmack]

Flamethrowers on aircraft have always been there, as non self sealing fuel tanks. They might not have been all that practical though.

[@Magnus_Caramelo_55]

Me-323 Gunship: Spooky...I'm your cousin AC-130 Spooky Gunship series: HOLY CRAP

[@reagantumurbaatar9244]

more like im your great uncle

[@DaAsianJuan]

Whats your pc specs bismarck?

[@trentxiiib8756]

So when are you going to do a video on WW2 German night fighters and the radar and other electronic equipment that was used on them???.

[@purplefood1]

Aerodynamic heresy was the name of my kite themed punk band in high school.

[@frederf3227]

A good term for such cooling systems is "phase change" since it relies upon a change of state (liquid-gas) to operate.

[@tracegatlin6307]

Flamethrowers on a plane 🤔 Speechless Lol

[@trymidsalarthun9915]

Why didnt they just nake the 162 into a fireball? Oh wait...

[@nathanishungryanimations7206]

It’d have been cool to use flamethrowers on Stuka’s during the Battle of Britain. They’d be running from the siren anyway.

[@agentolshki1690]

I love the smell of bordflammenwerfer in the morning. ..

[@Frisian_man]

quick question do you get free vehicles from war thunder for your videos? :edit i mean as a test drive

[@pieterfischer9638]

Question, would the HE100 (fastest propeller plane ever built by the Luftwaffe), not have been practical as a fast paced recon plane? Racing in and our for quick updates on the battlefield.

[@datonecommieirongear2020]

Complicated to build, cockpit view to limited for Recon and a single hole somewhere and the engine will die before it even got the chance to return.

[@AllisterCaine]

Always remember: people who have stupid ideads also have great ideas. People who don't have stupid ideas usually also don't have good ones.

[@notsureyou]

As the saying goes, there's a fine line between genius and insanity

[@hanswang7891]

small flame thrower on bombers hidden behind engines, pilot can trigger them by pushing a button when engaged by enemy fighters, fire the flame thrower and pretend to be falling out of the sky, fighters have very limited ammo pool and would likely to assume that you're going down and not engage you further when enemy fighter loses interest and start to engage other targets, turn off flame thrower and sneakily rejoin the formation

[@Schwarzvogel1]

Remember that aircraft engines need air intakes to function*, and that flames consume oxygen. Firing a flamethrower near your engine could turn your attempt to play possum into the real thing. Second, deliberately putting your aircraft into a flat spin is very risky: again, if you don't recover quickly enough, you'll crash for real. Finally, even if you could somehow engineer said flamethrower not to damage the engine or starve it of oxygen, your idea wouldn't work at all for two reasons: 1. The Allies outnumbered the Germans in the sky many times over. They had no shortage of fighters and men to fly them. When one side outnumbers the other 5:1 in the sky, the former's pilots can follow their opponents to the ground to confirm their kills. 2. People will catch on to your perfidious tactics, and they will likely be so offended that they'll keep shooting at any plane that looks like it is going down--again, the allied air forces had the planes, pilots, and ammo to spare. They may also start shooting your pilots in their parachutes as well... and they'd deserve it for using such underhanded tactics. What you suggest is equivalent to how the Japanese used to feign surrender then attack approaching Allied troops. *The exception would be the Me262's rocket engines, which had their own oxidizers. Given how scary N-stoff and T-stoff were to handle, however, I don't think that adding yet _another_ source of flames and explosions on top of the ammunition is a good idea.

[@mattybanks101]

The Bordflammenwerfer feels more like a lizard losing its tail. "Not sure what I did, but this bomber has burst into flames. I think I'll leave him alone."

[@jrmcc173]

In WW1 the Germans made an aircraft-mounted flamethrower. It was Patent 324694. According to the patent, it was mounted on two seaters, and the gunner operated it.

[@Tankofdarkness]

I’d still like to know what some of those designers were thinking especially with the flying flamethrower

[@igs_noblix486]

Bismark, I found a Place on the Island of Usedom where you might want to go, it's the Hangar 10, there some cool Restoratet ready to fly WW2 Planes such as a P-51

[@baronvonbluttheprotogen1712]

Now this is what I like to see

[@dmikulec]

My dad gave me a WWII era Ex-Acto Knife booklet on making model aircraft. The German fighter plans were for the HE 100. At the time I could not figure out why they didn't pick the ME 109.