Eric 'Winkle' Brown | 'Why the 262 was five years ahead of the US and Britain'

[@A-world-of-My-Own]

Another outstanding interview with Eric 'Winkle' Brown. What a legend.

[@jeanfrancoishernandez3657]

Hello 😉 quel belle avion M262 premier avion à réaction opérationnelle au monde 😉 les z'ailes du haut doubs 👏

[@marknelson5929]

I had the great honour a good few years back to sit in Eric's lounge room with another researcher and discuss his time with carrier landings, including the Mosquito. He was a real gentleman and gave us all the time we needed.

[@TheBaron481]

The US Navy, never to be outdone - put one of its top pilots on a special duty to break Erics record of most carrier landings (2,407). The poor bugger got to around 1,800 and had a nervous breakdown ! That record has never been broken and is unlikely ever to be. As is Erics record of most aircraft types flown - 487. I had the pleasure of meeting him when I was flying for Loganair. I was only in my 20's but noticed he had "The Caterpillar Club" lapel badge. I asked why he was going to Barra to which he replied "I've never landed on a beach dear boy". He was the only passenger going to Barra so with the skippers permission I gave him my seat. I had no idea who he was - he only told me he flew for the Royal Navy. Later the skipper explained who he was. Such modesty and a sad loss.

[@firekrueger3987]

Nothing like meeting a humble legend.. im just a history lover feom the caribbean

[@alanwilkin8869]

He was an amazing guy, His stories are all incredible, there’s ah link by an American fellow on one of his you tube stories Why American planes were no good in 42, It’s not anti U S bias just facts and how they changed it, the link itself is an incredible story of a U S fighter jock who flew spitfires with U S markings about 1942 until the Mustang came of age

[@uha6477]

Were you flying the Twin Otter? I'd love to make that trip one day. To think Winkle Brown did it as well is now extra special.

[@KillrMillr7]

@@alanwilkin8869 American here, the SuperMarine Spitfire has always been my favorite fighter from that era, fantastic engineering, I’m partial to Sparrows and Swallows and their aerobatics, lol. I lost an uncle in 43 flying F4U’s in pacific USN. Hopefully we won’t be losing any of our boys anytime soon, God willing.

[@nickdanger3802]

Source?

[@martentrudeau6948]

Eric Brown, was far more than a great pilot, he was an analytical mind and very well spoken and commands the attention of the listeners.

[@RaySpainPlayer]

A product of the Scottish education system of that era.

[@simonbrierly5530]

Reminds me of the time Clarkson went to interview Yeager and Winkle Brown. Both great men. There was Yeager standing in his flight jacket , loads of medals sown into his jacket. Then he went to meet Winkle, out in his garden pruning his roses 😂😂😂😂

[@Omnihil777]

I'm a huge fan, have read his writings etc and I love the late tapes of him. He gradually loses his british restraint sometimes, says "this is utterly nonsense" or "that is just plain awesome", very human superlatives. People become young again in a sense when they get older. Gotta love that guy. I'm sure he still flies his favorite aircraft, the DeHavilland Hornet, somewhere in test pilot heaven. Never rest, Captain Brown, you'd be bored.

[@glenmoss02]

Whenever I see photos and videos of the tail-dragger 262s, it always reminds me of how fast technology can accelerate during war. WWII started with horse mounted cavalry and biplanes and ended, just six years later, with jet engines, ballistic missiles, and atom bombs.

[@leneanderthalien]

No biplanes in ww2 except the British torpedo aircraft

[@terrystevens5261]

@@leneanderthalien Fairey Swordfish, Gloster Gladiator, Tiger Moth trainer, Supermarine Walrus, Hawker Hart trainer, De Havilland Rapide, De Havilland Dragonfly all saw service with the R.A.F. in the second world war. there are more but to long to list here.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

@@leneanderthalien Bullshit!

[@albertschultz7151]

R.I.P. In my opinion one of the Greatest pilots ever.

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

In everybody's opinion, surely?

[@moreheff]

Arguably THE Greatest.

[@michellebrown4903]

Well Jaeger apparently hated him . Probably professional jealousy, because Brown had the equivalent of a Masters in aerodynamics and aero engines . Instead of going to the pub after pushing the envelope, he went and spoke at great length , to the engineers and scientists . He attributed it partly , to his longevity .

[@stuartpeacock8257]

The words of one of the very few true aeronautical experts with unique experience

[@MartinMcAvoy]

I could listen to Captain Brown talk all day long and I would, if all the recordings existed 😀😀

[@jockmctavish1549]

I agree a total legend of a man....what Eric doesn't know about aircraft of that era and way beyond isn't worth knowing....glad he was on our side....

[@anthonyxuereb792]

Thanks for the rare footage (priceless stuff) and acknowledgement of the German work on axial flow jet engines and swept wings that led to their total acceptance. A feature not widely known is the twin cylinder petrol engine mounted to the front of the jet engine for self starting.

[@pakkelly]

Fascinating video footage of the 262 and others both flying and post defeat abandoned on the ground. Winkle Brown’s expert narration adda to the education. What a great channel. Thank you.

[@HarryJamesBooks]

Had the great great honour to meet him once. Lovely, modest and charming man.

[@davesherry5384]

What can I say but "what a gentlemen, what a man".

[@Simon_Nonymous]

Interesting to see the opening of the video shows what I think is the maiden flight of the V3 Me 262 PC UC still in its tail dragger configuration. Having read Mano Ziegler's book on this plane, apparently this caused issues during take off as the plane wouldn't rotate to a horizontal attitude; the remedy was supposed to be a quick dab on the brakes to lower the nose/lift the tail. Also, I think Allied photo reconnaissance had captured the dual scorch marks on the tarmac burnt by the engines on the tail dragging prototype(s). My apologies if any of this is misremembered or wrong!

[@rednaughtstudios]

Adolf Galland mentions the dab on the brakes in his book too

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

As much as I love to nitpick, you are 100% correct 😁I might want to add that the V1 had an emergency piston engine mounted in the nose - just in case the JUMOs might cause trouble in flight. Which of course they did, so a great part of the maiden flight happened on an underpowered piston ... The scorch marks you've mentioned was a confirmation for the Allies that Germany was doing "something" with jet engines. IIRC - you correct me if I'm wrong - somebody coincidentally saw the recon photos and thought that these marks looked very similar to the scorch marks left by British jet engine tests. Again I stand to be corrected, "burning tarmac" was one reason why 262 operated from concrete runways, i.e. the Autobahn.

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

@@rednaughtstudios He forgot to mention that he was officially forbidden to fly ANYTHING himself. But he gave a sh**. According to the records, many 262 pilots found the transition from their "old" propeller aircraft to 262 easier than from one propeller aircraft to another. That said, most of them were already highly experienced fighter or bomber pilots as in Gallands own JV 44 where the knights cross was the inofficial squadron enblem.

[@dovidell]

The legend speaks !! , and we are well advised to listen

[@roybennett9284]

We Will miss him and his likes ,never to be forgotten.. kind regards Roy Bennett from Wollongong Australia other

[@richardvernon317]

British had an Axial flow engine project going at the same time as Whittle's project was running, run by the RAE and Metrovick. The engine was first run in 1941, flown in the back of a Wellington in 1943 and was fitted to one of the Meteor Prototypes in late 1943. In April 1944, one of the engines in the Meteor suffered a compressor blade failure that resulted in the loss of the aircraft and the pilot. Those engines had already passed the 100 hour running test which was the bare minimum which would allow it to be fitted to a British Aircraft. Main delay on the Me-262 entering service was not Hitler making it a fighter Bomber, it was the Engines were nowhere near ready for service use until mid 1944. Same problem as the Meteor.

[@rob5944]

Interesting point, it seems that the Allies had the luxury of waiting for certain technologies to mature while obviously (and thankfully) the Nazis didn't. However I did read that the Americans had continual problems in bringing the Hispano 20mm to mass-production, never mind 30mm! It might explain why they stuck to .50 all the way into the Korean War? Notwithstanding all this, German engineering must be admired on purely technical terms.

[@eze8970]

A main reason was the Luftwaffe had a serious lack of test pilots. They had many good pilots, but not the special breed required for test flying with analytical & methodical skills. Not helped by potential test pilots being killed in combat, or the high test pilot loss rate of flying aircraft at the performance envelope. An example in the book I have, with regard to a Luftwaffe vertical interceptor at the end of the war. The first test pilot took off & came back quickly saying the plane was dangerous. Another pilot with bravado said he'd tame the plane & show him how it's done. The second pilot took off & lost control quickly, the plane crashed, destroying it & killing him.

[@rob5944]

@@eze8970 I can believe it, to encapsulate the whole situation the Germans weren't in a position to conduct proper research and development whereas the Allies were. Aircraft like the Meteor needed work as regards of performance, the 262 in regards of safety. The Japanese were largely out of the picture as far as I can see. Of course, although behind, the US one had the money, space and technology from bought from Britain and taken from the Nazis to carry things in with. Your thoughts please?

[@eze8970]

@@rob5944 Sounds about right. Axis did suffer from lacking rare metals/resources. German Me262 engines didn't last long, which made their supply issues even worse. With hindsight, Hitler concentrated on conventional weapons for too long, as after France fell in 1940, he believed war would be over shortly, either by peace treaty with Britain, or at worst when Russia was defeated (by end of 1941). He would fulfil his 'manifest destiny', so no need to develop more higher tech modern weapons & take production away from current production lines. Some Allied technology was better, so it wasn't all one way.

[@rob5944]

@@eze8970 yes of course. There are many variables at play. I reckon it was a close run thing. How about these questions though? Chamberlain wanted to increase social spending rather than on the armed forces, and why don't other British prime ministers who were in power during the 1930s get the flak he does? Hitler is derided as being a maniac, but seeing as he conquered continental Europe surely he must of had something about him? We seem to be suffering from sheep mentality these days...

[@gordonhall9871]

super video --I could listen to him all day talking about aircraft

[@paul-we2gf]

The British and American Air forces didn't push the jet as a possible weapon. The German s developed the He 280 then the Me 262. But politic interference kept its development slow. It might have been interesting to see a Gloster. Meteor vs a Me262. Of course it didn't happen. The RAF didn't want the Germsns to see the Germslans were being politically challenged.

[@raymondyee2008]

Brown's review of the ME-262 speaks volumes of its potential.

[@jaman878]

Chuck Yeager was pretty dismissive. “I saw an ME-262 once and I shot is down. “. In his first book he says the ME-262’s performance envelope was very similar the that of the P-80.

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

@@jaman878 Chuck Yeager's statement is factually correct, he did see an ME-262 and he did shoot it down. What it omits is that the ME-262 in question was on final approach, under carriage down and doing about 200 mph (speed from his own report). So, a little more to it than may first appear.

[@jaman878]

@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 For the record, I'm not challenging Gen. Yeager's veracity. Brown and Yeager were contemporary's and both test pilots. I find the contrast of Brown's assessment against Yeager's assessment, interesting.

[@Rudeljaeger]

Yeager didnt "assess" the Me262 in the same way Brown did. Brown flew it, he knew how it handled. Yeager shot a landing Me 262 that was flown by an 18 year old kid with 2 weeks of training.

[@Bialy_1]

@@Rudeljaeger And Soviets used German jet engines and they were so amazing that they made decision to steal design of British RR engine... that unlicensed copy got crapy efficiency and it was heavy in comparison to the RR oryginal but Soviets left German jet engines behind and never look at them again. They were coping anything that was good and Me-262 was simply not one of those things... Just because one person liked it or disliked do not say much, but fact that Soviets did not wanted it says a loot.

[@iancarr8682]

Really interesting information and a valuable service to us in repairing defective audio of Eric 'Winkle' Brown.

[@asullivan4047]

Informative/interesting/entertaining. Excellent photography job enabling viewers to better understand what/whom the orator/guest speaker pilot was describing. Class A research project!!!

[@davidb6576]

Quite interesting video, many thanks for it!

[@robertsessoms]

The after war collection and testing of these aircraft is worth a movie

[@bigblue6917]

Much as I admire Eric Brown he did not know that the fighter bomber Me 262 was widely accepted within the Luftwaffe. So it was not Hitler alone who wanted it and his decision was widely accepted. Also though the Germans had carried out research into the sweptwing the original 262 had a straight wing. The sweptwing came about because the jet engines turned out to be longer then originally planned which altered the aircrafts centre of gravity and having a sweptwing solved this problem without any major redesign of the aircraft.

[@michaelpielorz9283]

The germans could swept the wings back because they know it worked. what a lousy way to not give the germans credit because Mr Brown made every british heart bleeding. and he did not mentioned how the british ignored the "german invention" supersonic wind tunnel for years unti they were overtaken by their mightiest adversary : the americans - the americans (:-) And the Luftwaffe staff was strictly against a FB please read the basics before writing a comment,will make you look better..

[@lukasethan6429]

Not longer…much heavier. Approximately 250 pounds heavier, which affected the center of gravity on the craft. The length wasn’t so much of a factor.

[@cpuuk]

Hitler wanted a bomber to oppose the invading forces, to slow them down- that's a direct statement from Herman Goering (post WW2). A fighter would have been for home defence (shooting down bombers). The Germans lost the war due to attrition (it's a numbers game), the bombing of their factories eventually did them in. Put simply they have no munitions left to fight with. A fighter might have helped in that respect. A better bomber might have slowed the allies. All semantics really.

[@benwilson6145]

What is your source to say that Winkle didn't know that the Me 262 was widely accepted by the Nazi's ?

[@lukasethan6429]

@@cpuuk the sheer amount of times, they would have to relocate factories and subsidiaries to continue production and still do as well as they did is incredible

[@arefkr]

I was lucky enough to see a ME 262 in Deutsches Technik Meuseum in Berlin. This aircraft used many new technologies that one can’t see from outside, such as the first electronic fly by wire system. Also ME 62 wasn’t the only jet that Germans made. Other manufacturers also built prototypes of jet fighters.

[@Jean-Pierre-Villard]

H9

[@leneanderthalien]

Bullshit no fly by wire

[@richardcaves3601]

And each and every one of them were inferior to the meteors and vampires that were being produced just weeks after the war ended. Like all the German supposed wonder weapons, too much hype and not enough substance.

[@BasementEngineer]

@@richardcaves3601 It's easy to be dismissive. It only took the entire capitalist and communist world almost 6 years to destroy a brilliant people with brilliant ideas on how to run a country for the benefit of the workers and NOT the bankers as in Britain and the USA. Trust you enjoy the benefits of your "victory".

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

@@leneanderthalien The Me-262 was equipped with a standard FLY-BY-WIRE HORIZONTAL STABILATOR... a design copied by modern jet aircraft

[@foxbat888]

Also a fearless Navy pilot, attacking long range Condors head on

[@larryfroot]

This wonderful man was featured on BBC's Desert Island Discs. An unforgettable listen.

[@johnsummers2822]

Always great content on this channel. Excellent 👌

[@doughart2720]

I can't believe the number of people here who either haven't watched the video, or have hearing problems or just hear what they want to hear and not what Brown actually said. When I was at school we had to do reading comprehension, seems like hearing comprehension would have been a good idea too!

[@i-a-g-r-e-e-----f-----jo--b]

I'm glad Winkle wasn't inside the Marauder that was turned into confetti!

[@Franz.Isler497]

Achilles heel of the Me262 were the Junker Jumo 004B-1 axial-flow turbojet engines,, where the fan blades were made w/ inferior metals that couldn't resist heat the way they should, hence the limited life average of 25 hours as stated by Winkle Brown. Some engines couldn't even reach 25 operational hours and last only 10 hours. Germany could no longer access cobalt, nickel and molybdenum at the late stage of the war. All the hot metal parts, including the combustion chamber, were changed to mild steel protected by an aluminum coating, and the hollow turbine blades were produced from folded and welded Cromadur alloy (12% chromium, 18% manganese, and 70% iron) developed by Krupp, and cooled by compressed air "bled" from the compressor. So if the pilot throttled forward too quickly, heat would build up too quickly and melt the blades. It won't always kill the pilot operating but it will kill the next guy. The blades would cool and crack after engine cool down but on the next flight the blades would be primed to shatter resulting in catastrophic eng. failure, not to mention the high risk of compressor stall and if throttle movements were too rapid, the engine(s) could suffer a flameout. Of the 1,400 planes produced, less than a hundred Me 262s were in combat-ready condition at any one time. But that was apparently enough for the model...for German pilots claimed 542 Allied aircraft shot down, although higher claims have sometimes been made. In the end the Me 262 had little effect because of its late introduction and the small numbers that entered service.

[@Franz.Isler497]

@@WilhelmKarsten There are many variants of theJunkers Jumo 004...and statements I made were generalized since some variants were certainly well made (and were copied in E. Europe and the USSR).but many LATER variants certainly have shortcomings due to material shortages esp. in metal alloys required during the last stages of the war. So specifically what "ridiculous false myths" did I state?

[@Franz.Isler497]

@@WilhelmKarsten The 004 used an eight-stage axial-flow compressor, with six straight-through combustion chambers (made from sheet steel), and a one-stage turbine with hollow blades with the turbine blades produced from folded and welded Cromadur alloy The engine's operational lifespan was shortened, but on the plus side it became easier to construct. Jumo (Junkers Motorenwerke) tried a variety of compressor blades, beginning with solid steel, later hollow sheet metal ones, welded on the taper, So first prod. model 004B weighed 100 kg less than the 004A, In '43 passed several 100-hour tests, with a time between overhauls of 50 hours achieved. But later in 1943 the 004B version suffered turbine blade failures which were not understood by the Junkers team. They focused on areas such as material defects, grain size and surface roughness. Eventually, in December, blade-vibration specialist Max Bentele (1909 - 2006) working on turbine blade design with Heinkel-Hirth) once again brought in during a meeting at RLM and explained that failures were caused by one of the blades' natural frequencies being in the engine running range. His solution? raise the frequency, by increasing blade taper & shorten them by 1 mm, and reduce oper speed from 9,000 to 8,700 rpm.These sort of engineering DETAIL challenges for the 109-004-series formed setbacks that were principal factor delaying Luftwaffe's introduction of Me 262 into squadron service. Hence I cited in my orig post engines the Achilles heel of 262 program. With lower-quality steels used in the 004B, had a service life of only 10-25 hours, perhaps twice this in the hands of a careful pilot. Franz Stigler (and other Luftwaffe pilots cited this # of hours in several publications, principally in the Stigler/Makos book "A Higher Call.") Although the metallurgy was understood at the time, the alloys just weren't available in sufficient quantities. These alloys were scarce and mild steel (SAE 1010) was substituted in series production engines. The turbine and stator blades on the 004A were of solid material, but the production blades on the 004B were hollow. Two types of hollow blades were produced; a Krupp alloy Tindur, (which you cited) deep drawn blade of 30% nickel, and a nickel free Cromadur blade, made of folded sheet metal that was welded at trailing edge. Cromadur blade was a bit more reliable & easier to produce and used less than 5 lbs. of chromium. The turbine blades were cooled by bleed-air from the 4th and last stage of the compressor. Another shortcoming of engine, common to all early turbojets--sluggish throttle response. Worse, too much fuel injected into combustion chambers moving the throttle too quickly, causing the temperature to rise too fast/far before the airflow increases to match the increased fuel...w/c overheats the turbine blades, and major cause for engine failures. Nevertheless, it made jet power for combat aircraft a reality for first time. Jumo 004 also proved cheaper (RM10,000 for materials) than the competing BMW 003 (RM12,000). Jet engs. used lower-skill labor and needed only 375 hours to complete (including manufacture, assembly, and shipping), compared to 1,400 hours for BMW 801. Hence with cost cutting and cutting corners, engine svc life were greatly diminished to 10-25 hours. This is not a myth but substantiated by numerous Luftwaffe air and ground crews. (cited also in German Aircraft of the Second World War. London: Putnam, 1985 by J.R. Smith, Antony L. Kay, E.J. Creek). The Me 262's top ace Hauptmann Franz Schall (17 vics on the 262--overall 137 aerial victories) made mention of engine shortcomings before being killed when his aircraft rolled into a bomb crater and exploded during an attempted emergency landing (April 1945).Combustors required maintenance every twenty hours, and replacement at 200. Production and maintenance of the 004 was done at Junkers works at Magdeburg, under the supervision of Otto Hartkopf. but still earned a reputation for unreliability. Time between major overhauls was thirty to fifty hours, and may have been as low as ten, though a skilled flyer could double the interval...The competing BMW 003's was about fifty where.process maintenance involved replacing compressor blades, (which suffered the most operational damage).

[@rittmeister3659]

@@WilhelmKarsten He cited some books where he got the info he's trying to get across to prove his point. I myself have made contributions to wiki and contributors are supposed to cite their sources otherwise if one doesn't, it will show a note "citation needed". why don't you cite where u got ur info, besides the fact the the Jumo has several variants---it's not just one engine model/

[@rittmeister3659]

@@WilhelmKarsten "Context is key to revealing the truth." lol And your source besides Op. Lusty?

[@rittmeister3659]

@@WilhelmKarsten Yes, Franz was part of Operation Paperclip. Do you know of a Helmut Schelp?

[@andrewclayton4181]

Why the Germans pushed for fast aircraft at the end of the war is that their radar screen had been compromised by the Normandy invasion. They weren't getting advanced information of aerial attacks. They were desperate for a fast response aircraft. Another problem with these fast aircraft was the lack of manoeuvrability. They couldn't twist and turn dogfight style like a conventional aeroplane. One swift pass was their only option. A lot of the film in the video shows the 262 with the earlier tailwheel, as can be seen, this arrangement angles the jet exhaust's downwards which damaged the runway surfaces. Putting a nose wheel on made the engines parallel to the ground, it was as part of this reconfiguration that the swept wings were introduced, to maintain the balance of the plane. It pushed the main wheels back

[@pcka12]

The first time that I have seen the 'variable geometry' of this aircraft's wings demonstrated, but no airbrakes so far as I can see?

[@sameagle988]

I love that guy.

[@DNModels]

Contrary to what it said, Frank Whittle was not the man who delivered the first functional jet engine.

[@friedlhochhaeuser6707]

He really was a GENTLEMAN!

[@aw34565]

I thought that the problem with the Me262 was that it's engines were rather fragile where as the Allies' nearest equivalent, the Gloster Meteor, is still flying today and being used for example by Martin Baker to test ejector seats.

[@Rudeljaeger]

Half and Half. The Me262 engines were very well designed turbi-jet engines. BUT because of lack of materials most engines were equipped with sub-par parts. However modern replicas show that the proper M262 turbines actually were very well designed jet engines

[@legoeasycompany]

@@jacktattis It was like the comment said above, the subparts had to be erstaz'd to make the small amount of stockpiled material last. The Compressor in particular needed to be made of a certain alloy but the dwindling stock of the material and the lack of getting more of it basically meant they made it of steel and they spray coated it with said alloy. Which meant a short engine life due to that "short cut".

[@legoeasycompany]

@@jacktattis Indeed, outside of it not being able to kill more Allies it's only a shame outside of Czechoslovakia and repros we don't see more examples of Me-262s fly or Arado's.

[@mattbite]

They designed the engines quite well. First they produced prototypes that used high quality materials, especially alloys - and they lasted well. But having ruined economy, no access to certain metals and rushed production cycles - they worked on to produce variant that used cheaper, more accessible materials. Read about Jumo 004 development if you want to investigate the topic :)

[@HellStr82]

when your country is in ruins and your factories are bombed every day it is expected to have problems in building things. Imagine if they had the resources to improve the engines . Good thing they did not get the chance but for a bombed out country with no resources at the end and still produce this thing is a miracle

[@muss8587]

This guy is a National treasure trove with the knowledge he possessed from actually flying most of the aircraft he talks about😎🇦🇺🙏👌

[@robinsonsstudios]

I´ve come to realise sth: When it comes to critizising german aircraft, Eric Brown is often quoted (he 177 ,he 219 for example) but when he speaks positive about them, comments point out that he´s wrong. Smh

[@iamrichrocker]

by gosh..it does look like a shark..i could listen to Mr.Brown all day..but may he rest in peace..a life well lived and experienced..

[@jlvfr]

Ooo wow actual footage of the 262 prototype with the tail wheel!

[@JackF99]

I've read that due to the shortage of advanced metals in Germany by 1943-44, the 262 airframes were prone to early fatigue failure under the hard climb and turn loads for which originally designed, so in addition to the throttle sensitivity problems pilots had to avoid typical high-g combat manuevers.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

Never happened, the Me-262 could turn and maneuver at speeds that Allied aircraft could not achieve in straight and level flight. Throttles were not a problem in combat as the Me-262 has a continuous cruising speed of 465 mph...

[@mirrorblue100]

Part of the German advantage was we produced more engineers than the British in the pre-war period - remember this was the pre-computer era so manpower was a large factor.

[@smb328i]

Remind me exactly how that worked out for Germany.

[@mirrorblue100]

@@smb328i Germany was fighting all Europe and the USA; but design remained in the forefront in many fields.

[@eze8970]

@@mirrorblue100 Axis got further ahead in some fields, Allies in others. The Germans did have the advantage of a controlled economy, but then suffered regarding access to rare materials & fuel.

[@eze8970]

@@WilhelmKarsten That's over simplified. Germany wasn't 10 years ahead generally. Even the video is saying '5 years' ahead for one plane. In jet engines & rockets perhaps, but what about atomic weapons, acoustic torpedoes, sonar, penicillin etc. There will always be areas where one side has an advantage. Britain & USA didn't nationalise their industries, there was still privatisation & costs not set by the Government. Take the Cromwell tank, it was rivetted construction because it was cheaper than cast. Britain was bankrupt by mid 1940, due to the costs of WW1. It hadn't recovered financially. Hitler bankrupted Germany by 1939, but then forced all it's debt onto conquered territories. Germany didn't pay back proper reparations for either WW1 or 2 to Britain or any other country, leaving them saddled with debt. Germany in no way paid for the damage caused. Britain has only just paid the USA back for its WW1 debt! Britain also had a collapsing empire, but world commitments, so difficult to control it's economy. That said, I'd agree with you that neither Germany's or Britain's forms of Socialism have worked, & that Britain got complacent after WW2 (in the 1960s & 70s), & there was (& still is) bad management.

[@eze8970]

@@WilhelmKarsten Thank you for your reply & interesting points from another perspective. Aerospace technology, possibly (note there is a huge difference between prototype to actually operational), but as stated, in others the Germans were behind, but that's natural for all countries. The Nazis also went down several 'blind alleys', which hampered other parts of their war effort. Yes, Germany has done very well by not paying for it's wartime actions, aided by weak British/French & US politicians during & post WW1. Britain was still trying to get over WW1 as I said. However, like WW1, Britain had assets to sell, & in the capitalist economy, the US was willing to buy (at knock down rates, & the US made sure Britain would always be a bad loser in the deals it did, but that's 'business'). So long as Britain got loans, or altered it's empire economy, it could have kept going, surrender wasn't inevitable. What was inevitable was the lack of oil/fuel for the Axis armies, & it's long term strategic plans. I'd agree defeating Nazism & then the Cold War made Britain's bad finances even worse. I agree Britain had to go to the US (as did the Soviets in WW2), & the US became the next superpower. All of western Europe had to go to the US after WW2, & became 'puppets' of a sort. Britain's overseas colonies were already making moves for independence. There's a irony about the Americans not liking Imperialism, whilst carrying out their own, but that's power politics. I agree though, lack of money, & bad management hasn't helped Britain post war - the advantages it had until the 1960's were squandered. Britain isn't occupied by US forces. Germany still has US bases, I wouldn't call them occupied by the US either.

[@johnhehir508]

The Germans being 5 years ahead was why they were recruited to the American space 🚀 project

[@imperialinquisition6006]

Only in rocketry. In terms of aircraft, even jet aircraft, the German lead likely wouldn’t have lasted. Both the UK and US were coming up with their own jet aircraft designs at the time.

[@bobsakamanos4469]

Very true. The planned successor for the Me262 was a true swept wing transonic version. Adolf Busemann had lobbied for 35 deg swept wings for the 262 in 1941, but his own designs, HGII & III were later accepted as the way of the future. The Brits were not far behind, but the US was very behind.

[@TheAneewAony]

@@imperialinquisition6006 Not just rockets. Operation Paperclip changed everything in aerodynamics and propulsion. Recall that the Allies had zero high speed research until they obtained German supersonic wind tunnels

[@ABrit-bt6ce]

11:26 Gigant gliders here. OT but very interesting.

[@keithammleter3824]

This video does not give the full story on swept back wings. It shows that sweep back increases the critical speed (M crit) by lessening the orthogonal air speed over the top surface, but neglects to say that also reduces lift. You can get the same effect on Mcrit and lift by adopting a thinner flatter wing. But in WW2, that brought in a problem - a thin wing has less strength. When the USA solved that, non-swept wings reappeared. There is another factor, important in WW2 - it is vital the pilot gets warning of an immanent stall, and a stall develops progressively, so the pilot still has effective control surfaces with which he can correct and recover from the stall. This was the great advantage of the non-swept wing of the Spitfire. While the Spitfire's top speed was a tad below what could have been achieved, a pilot could ALWAYS recover from a stall - so he could fly it right to edge of performance in complete confidence. It's no good being fast if it will kill you without any warning - you are forced to not approach the limits and leave a margin of safety. Not something you want to have to worry about in a dog fight.

[@misarthim6538]

The sweep in Me262s wing had actually almost nothing to do with aerodynamics - 18degs isn't enough to meaningfully distinguish it from non-swept wing designs. The main reason for the sweep was to alter the center of gravity due to weight distribution of the engines. Me262 was actually pretty severely affected by compressibility and only that prompted Germans to seriously consider the swept wing design but it was too late to incorporate it into the Me262. It manifested only in later designs that never left the prototype stage such as Me P.1101 or Ta 183. For example, consider that aerodynamically, Spitfire's critical Mach number was around M0.86-M0.89 (sources vary) and Me262s similarly M0.86. That's within the ballpark of other straight wing designs - Tempest 0.83, P51 0.84, etc... For comparison, both Mig 15 and F86 had critical Mach number of about M0.92 - a significant improvement due to their true swept wing design.

[@keithammleter3824]

@@misarthim6538 : It is true that the Me262 wings were swept back slightly to shift the centre of lift (NOT the centre of gravity). it is also true that the amount of sweep back is too small to make it a true swept wing - the trailing edge remained straight. However, that doe sot mean it didn't produce a slight but worthwhile increase in critical mach number. Nor does equal performance in this respect by other aircraft mean that the small amount of sweep didn't improve the Me262's critical mach number. An analogy: I eat carrots because they taste good and I like the crunchiness. I don't eat them because they are good for me. But they never the less are, being metabolized to Vitamin A. It happens that I have poor night vision, which is indicative of low vitamin A, but low Vit A isn't my problem. That doesn't mean eating carrots isn't working.

[@misarthim6538]

@@keithammleter3824 Well, that's all true but I didn't say that it had no impact on performance. I just said they didn't chose it to improve performance and/or the performance improvement wasn't enough to meaningfully distinguish it from contemporary straight wing designs.

[@TheDkeeler]

Apparently, the Germans couldn't get their hands on any titanium for their 262 engines so they had to use steel which couldn't take the high temperatures so naturally these jet engines wore out as fast as they did.

[@appaho9tel]

Nickel was missing

[@michaelpielorz9283]

Titanium was used much much later . even the most exotic alloys at that time could not stand the heat for hours.The germans had to use spare metals and simple steel sheets so they invented the interior air coolin,g a method indespensableuntil today!!

[@TheDkeeler]

@@michaelpielorz9283 Interesting . Thanks

[@melissasmith5109]

Chromium is what was missing from the engines.

[@louisavondart9178]

Steel... with a spray coating of aluminium. It worked for a while....

[@MrAvant123]

The 262 was fantastic but the only fly in the ointment was a lack of the materials and material technologies to build jet engines with endurance and reliability.

[@BasementEngineer]

The technology and knowledge were there. High performance piston engines require very similar metallurgy in their exhaust valves.

[@robrob9050]

0:37 Looks good, must be good.

[@jarikinnunen1718]

The designer did swept wing by accidentally. They made some changes in fuselage which required move central gravity. Easiest way do that was change wing angle and it gave handling improvement.

[@wanderschlosser1857]

Well that's a fairytale to dismiss German design and engineering capabilities. They didn't sweep the wings accidentally. The main purpose was indeed the shifted CoG due to heavier engines. But they could have done that with a rearwards shifted main wing as well. They chose a lightly swept wing because it had well understood advantages for high speed flights. Germany was very advanced in high speed wing profiles and shapes. They had the best wind tunnels, even including a supersonic wind tunnel and high speed research institutions in the world. Later designs like the Ta183, P.1101 or the 262 HG designs show that swept wings were certainly not coincidences or even accidents. Btw. the Me163, built parallel to the 262 had swept wings, too.

[@jarikinnunen1718]

@@wanderschlosser1857 Yes, they had world first wind tunnel for test all new airplanes, before manned flight for safety. Many designer started with gliders and it was mostly try and error style. Horten brother did they work in that way and results was nearly succesful (stealth) flying swept wing jet.

[@timbuxton8977]

Just like the Douglas Dakota: the wings of which had an even greater sweep. When you think about it a swept wing is hardly mysterious: the reason allied designers didn't work on it was that at the time engines weren't powerful enough to gain any benefit from it - by the end of the war they still weren't; the Germans therefore wasted a lot of time for the benefit of allied aircraft designers@@wanderschlosser1857

[@whitewittock]

13.52 seems a bit of an incoherent point, whittle told him a very good reason why we didn't build 'axial' engines like the Germans -25 hours service life

[@MrGeneralPB]

well... the first British swept back wing that i recall was introduced in 53 or 54... so Germany was about 10 years ahead of the British, the us had the sabre but i can't remember if that was their first or not but at least i think it was their first sweptback wing fighter they had in korea

[@garrington120]

RUBBISH !!! The 262 did NOT have swept back wings to any more degree than 18.5% necessitated to balance the craft due to the heavy ( and unreliable engines ) The Gloster Meteor Mk 4 ( 1945 ) the DH Vampire which should have been available in 1944 but was held back because the damn yanks used and ruined the only 2 Halford engines being used for development of the Vampire to be used on the Lockheed P 80 prototypes because the damn yanks had no decent engines of their own , were BOTH capable of giving the 262 a run for its money only 2 years . I do not agree that the 262 was 5 or 10 years ahead of UK jet aircraft !!!

[@imperialinquisition6006]

Not really relevant. The Me-262s swept wing wasn’t hugely relevant to transonic/supersonic flight. Comparing the Me-262 to something like the Hawker Hunter is complete insanity, so no, you cannot say that they were anything near 10 years ahead.

[@paulmurgatroyd6372]

I love the bombastic music they used to put on everything in the 40's.

[@andrewhotston983]

Very interesting indeed.

[@EASYTIGER10]

I don't understand that swept wing explanation. 3:50 The air molecules travelling over the wing don't know the angle of sweep and are not effected by it. They just continue over the wing parallel to the fuselage like any aircraft. The difference is they have to go a FURTHER distance to get over the wing. Swept wings allow you to increase the CHORD of the wing - thus giving the wing longer contact with the air - without increasing the size and therefore the drag and weight of the wing. I'm no physicist, so please correct what I've misunderstood.

[@robinwells8879]

Must’ve been terrible to taxi as a tail dragger. So beautiful though and an axial flow turbine jet to boot. Remarkable.

[@leneanderthalien]

The problem was not the taxi but the extremly long acceleration roll during take off

[@mikehoy4238]

When Winkle says that the 262 was the best aircraft of WW2 you know that must be so.

[@chaoscarl8414]

Not sure I can agree with the title. I honestly can't see any scenario where the 262 could have won the war for Germany. The engines were too unreliable and required too much material that Germany had a hard time to get, especially in the later parts of the war. Even if they had gone all-in on jet fighters earlier in the war, I don't think they would have had enough time to work out all the issues. And even if they had managed to make the engines more reliable, there was still that pesky problem of actually sourcing the materials to build them.

[@ricardokowalski1579]

Agreed.

[@TheDkeeler]

Apparently , they could not get titanium for their 262 jet engine so that is why they burnt out so fast.

[@mattbowden4996]

@@TheDkeeler The problem was Tungsten, not Titanium. Titanium was not used at all in WW2 aircraft.

[@keithammleter3824]

The problem with the wartime jets in both Britain and Germany was very excessive fuel consumption. Late in the War, that didn't matter to Germany as they were attacking bomber flights over their own territory. But to win a war you have to take the fight to inside the enemy's borders and hit them, and this the early jets could not do. For this reason the Me262 was never a war winner - even if it had gone into service earlier. In any case, Germany was cut off from petroleum supplies, so could not afford to put many jets in the air.

[@mattbowden4996]

@@keithammleter3824 jets don't run on petroleum so widespread adoption of the 262 could have slightly alleviated Germany's fuel shortages, although it would undoubtedly have been too little, too late...

[@paulgush]

Good pilot, but not an engineer. The Me 262 had a swept wing, just like the DC-3 had a swept wing. Not nearly enough sweep to make a difference to transgenic performance.

[@dumptrump3788]

The Me262 had advances that Allied aircraft didn't have, but it's a mistake to look at it in such a narrow way. No weapon exists in isolation, it is merely the tip of the spear & Germany's lack of industrial capacity meant they were never going to make enough of these. They were fast, but often so fast that pilots couldn't hit anything. Landing gear frequently collapsed, engines didn't last more than a few hours & you had to be VERY careful when opening the throttle. Worst of all they were easy prey when taking off & landing. WW2 was always a war of production & Germany simply didn't have the capacity to produce what they needed & that was without the manpower shortages, too.

[@michaelpielorz9283]

Booh it`s german,something had to break down frequently (:-)

[@javiergilvidal1558]

"They were fast, but often so fast that pilots couldn't hit anything". That is seldom said when extolling the allegedly "marvelous" qualities of the Schwalbe. What good is it being able to fly at 900 km/h, when you´re supposed to bring down Libs & Forts plodding at 450? I don´t see the advantage of pursuing a Ford T with a Ferrari!

[@gort8203]

@@javiergilvidal1558 First of all it's not true that they "couldn't hit anything", but how can you not understand the value of speed in air combat? You don't understand that every fighter designed back then was trying to be faster than the enemy? Nobody ever said "this plane is going to have to shoot at slow bombers, so let's make it slower then the enemy fighters". If you can't understand how the speed of the 262 was an advantage in combat why do you think jets were even invented?

[@appaho9tel]

With great respect for Mr. Winkle, history shows his opinions to not be fully accurate. "At the end of the war the top allied fighter was the spitfire at 446 MPH." Really? A Meteor went 600 in 45. I get the impression this channel is using his quotes not to be accurate, to get clicks. Same as with calling 'P47 useless.' The editing choices here are suspect. Good point about not having speed brakes. 1937 sweep wing meeting, the British had no use for the sweep wing pre 1945. 'In 1945 the Germans were far more advanced than us,' please give us the exact examples of this Mr. Eric.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

The Meteor didn't reach 600 MPH until late 1945. The Meteor III reached 490 MPH in the war - fast, but not quite there. The Germans were far ahead in high speed research - allied scientists all agreed on that.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

Context: He said the safe Critical Mach numbers (before control surface effectiveness was lost) of the Thunderbolt and Lightning was significantly lower than that of the 109 and 190 at very high altitudes, making them "useless" as diving 'top cover' for B-17 formations. He then goes on to describe how both aircraft were excellent in "normal" combat conditions.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

@@ArmouredCarriers Did he really say that about the P-47 as well?

[@ArmouredCarriers]

@@TTTT-oc4eb He explains ths himself in the video. He describes the P-47's Critical Mach characteristics.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

@@TTTT-oc4eb Sorry, he describes this in the other video in this series - kzbin.info/www/bejne/jILdhISLhphmhbM

[@blacktiger974]

Eric Brown was of course an outstanding pilot, however he does seem to hold some misconceptions - including the reason behind Me 262's swept wings, Hitler's claimed involvement in the program, and ignorance of British wartime axial jet engine development (Metropolitan-Vickers F.2)

[@hughgordon6435]

He was pops CO at Lossiemouth, as dad said. Not only a great CO but a genuinely nice guy😊

[@inyobill]

the tail draggers were early models? I saw the 262 at the German Museum of Technology in Munich. I was surprised haw small it was.

[@robinsonsstudios]

only the prototype had the taildragger desing. Because of lack of airflow over the control surfaces, this needed to be changed to the tricycle layout we all know and love

[@inyobill]

@@Eric-kn4yn I set myself up as no expert. Merely stated my surprise. I seem to recall the ME109 being even smaller, per your comment.

[@mikevolante7663]

Me too in 1978

[@mrofnocnon]

Gotta love the music!

[@wolfganghuhn7747]

Early all of the video is from the tailwheel Me 262 prototype? Why

[@HarborLockRoad]

Easy way to remember who made what jet engine, the axis had the axial!!! 👍

[@scopex2749]

For many reasons I joined the RAF as an aircraft engineer. My heroes are people like Frank Wittle, Eric Brown, Barnes Wallace, Guy Gibson and Dougas Bader. At one stage in my life i helped my new Managing Director by decorating her house - it turned out to be Dougas Baders old house! In the basement we found old photos of him which we passed on to his family. These were the pathfinders and the WORLD LEADERS in jet engine and aircraft design way ahead of the rest of the world! But as Eric says - in some ways we DIDNT go for the 'steep sweep' as he called it, which put us behind again. When we finally go the EE Lighning THEN that was probably one of the best in the world at that time. WE HAD the awesome TSR2 which the awful labour goverment AXED and it was never produced??? That put the RAF back by decades!

[@markhugo8270]

Yeager in his Autobiography harks to having a chance to fly some "war booty" M262's during the 1950's. He offers his opinion (and he was, as you recall, an honored TEST PILOT for almost 20 years!!!) that England and the USA did not have any military jets that behaved and handled as well as the 262, until the 1970's!!!!

[@jimfarmer7811]

You must have read a different Yeager biography. He flew both the me 262 and p-80. He said the performance of the two were comparable.

[@Fauxbra]

Never dawned on me that these advanced aircraft were rushed into combat without being thoroughly tested, but it makes perfect sense.

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

What caused the ragged patchwork paint finish squares?

[@osvaldoschilling9129]

The German advances in airplanes and rockets are proportional to the lack of interest in the atomic bomb research.

[@GARDENER42]

I wonder why they didn't take full advantage of the design by placing the cockpit ever further forward.

[@MrM1729]

Prolly constrained by volume requirement for the cannon and ammo.

[@wolframsobotta4350]

Wie lange hielten denn die englischen Radialtriebwerke?

[@BasementEngineer]

Indefinitely because they never saw real world type work, as in war time fighting an enemy. The British are great t propaganda.

[@MrSkid1970]

The godfather, of all fighter's!

[@derf9465]

When my grandad came back from ww2, like many he didn't say much about it. But once he said that the Germans were a decade ahead of the allies with what they had compared to us. Of course if it wasn't for the SS/Nazis the usa would have never made it to the moon or the Russians going to space.

[@TheSaturnV]

Yet the majority of German artillery was moved around the battlefield with horses, whereas the US Army was 100% motorized except the rare situations where mules were the only way to move supplies. US had superior vehicle radios, the handy talkie, better tank transporter/recovery vehicles, the semiautomatic M1 Garand vs the 1934 designed bolt action Kar98K and above all an almost endless supply of the excellent Deuce and a Half to get soldiers and their supplies to the fight. Decades ahead? I just don't know about that one.....

[@timbuxton8977]

well I'm afraid he was wrong: in some areas they were ahead; in most they weren't.

[@BasementEngineer]

@@TheSaturnV Ah yes, all that American superiority! That's why it took the allies including the communists almost 6 years to destroy a small European country!

[@QuizmasterLaw]

18:43 his (i hope its not a person) canopy does not appear to have fully deployed, right?

[@paul-we2gf]

The Me262 still looks like a great aircraft. It did need better engines,better materials in construction. This aircraft was the better part of a decade ahead of everyone else. The American P80 and the UKs Gloster Meteor were straight wings.

[@jakubl8271]

Yet P-80 achieved similar (some say even better) performance as Me 262.The only Me 262 superpower was The Look.

[@superelectic45]

ME 262 isn't a swept back wing either

[@juancarlosvillazon8163]

What a question. It was the only one with that technology. No matter what the other countries would claim.

[@geordiedog1749]

Oh dear. It’s all getting dangerously close to physics for me!:)

[@Seminal_Ideas]

A great man who should have been knighted. He could've been the first to have broken the sound barrier if the Miles M-52 hadn't been cancelled.

[@quattrotobi]

Why is the autotranslation even with a british speaker so bad? 🤔

[@unclejessiesrodshop8432]

This is nothing against Mr. Brown, but holy crap it's weird how much people almost worship the guy. He may be a legend, but he is not without any faults.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

He is famous because he flew more aircraft types than any man in history...

[@duartesimoes508]

​@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeand made more Carrier landings than any other pilot.

[@terrystevens5261]

Survived two torpedo sinkings, took part in the Nuremberg trials, developed the M52 all moving tailplane on a Spitfire which we gave to the U.S. Enabling Yeager to get through the sound barrier. demonstrated the steam catapult to the Americans. piloted the first jet landing on a carrier. and much more, the man was a legend.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

Unfortunately, Brown was denied his Knighthood because of his financial involvement with Dennis Bancroft in the M.52 embezzlement scandal... Bancroft, Brown and two other test pilots received cash dividends in the form of Miles Aircraft stock just before the company seized by the Crown and placed under administrative receivership. Miles Aircraft was charged with 24 counts of fraud and embezzlement of the company and the M.52 program. a truly shameful and humiliating chapter in British aviation history.

[@Wuei108]

Yes is was. And i am so glad that this was not the case in nuklear weapons.

[@duartesimoes508]

"There was that beautiful Marauder in the sky, and one moment later... _confetti!"_ Ah, Jesus, if the Scottish sense of humour is always like this I want to hear some more! 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@britishamerican4321]

I don't doubt anything Brown says here (how could I?), but I really don't think that the 262 was so untouchable by the fastest piston-engined fighters of the Allies. I think that a significant number were shot down, and I mean air-to-air, not just in the landing approach. Sure, the top speed of the 262, as pointed out by Brown, was over 100 mph faster than the Spitfire XIV (and the Mustang too presumably), which is a VERY significant superiority, but its TOP speed could not be sustained for very long at all. Also, Allied fighters flying "top cover" over bombers could catch the 262 by diving on them. Again, PLENTY were shot down in AIR-to-AIR engagements.

[@leneanderthalien]

Surprisigly was the most capable fighter against the me 262,the massive p47 who was able to reach very high speeds in dive without loss of controlll

[@britishamerican4321]

@@leneanderthalien I should have mentioned that about the "Jug." Good point.

[@glennhansel9411]

It was a numbers game. Numerous allied planes going after few 262s

[@britishamerican4321]

@@glennhansel9411 Yes, there was that too.

[@TotalCowage]

It doesn't matter how fast you fly, if you fly straight under the guns of an opponent, they can still get a shot off... You can't really take statements like Brown's as an absolute, only as a comparison of relative performance. In the same path, with the same awareness, no other plane is going to catch the 262, but give a P47 a harder dive, without total situational awareness of the 262, then yes it can and was caught. But that's really what Winkle means.

[@jankarlsson5358]

That the Me262 would be delayed by Hitler was not true... We know today that these were false words by Adolf Galland, a real Nazi pilot who tried to make the Nazis look better than they were... It is also established that there was a bomb-carrying possibility from the start.

[@timbuxton8977]

Legend though he was i do believe he's wrong on at least 2 points: Hitler's 'fighter bomber delay' had only 1or 2 months effect - it did not significantly impact the operational debut; an ME262 does not have swept wings anymore than a Douglas Dakota does, its wings were angled to accommodate the weight of the engines.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

Production delays were entirely due to shortages of Nickel and the switch to a different stainless-steel material. The Me-262 not only has swept wings, it has all swept control surfaces and the first jet with a fly-by-wire (analog) Horizontal Stabilator that was designed to counteract the effects of compressibility and "Mach Tuck" which killed many Allied pilots in a transonic dive. The Me-262 was test flown with 11 different engines from 7 manufactures, in 1, 2 and 3 engine configurations with NO CHANGE in wing sweep angle, the planes CoG is easily adjusted by moving the engine fore and aft on the wing.

[@rv6ejguy]

Much respect to Eric Brown but the ME 262 didn't have enough sweep back to raise it's critical Mach number much past straight wing designs like the P80, Meteor or Vampire- all of which were in production before the end of WW2. The ME262 was a few years ahead of those others initially but by early 1945, the Allies were just around the corner from introducing the P80 and Vampire to combat squadrons. These had comparable performance to the 262. The P80 was already in Italy well before the end of the war. The Vampire first flew in 1943. Had the Allies needed jets to turn the 262 tide, vast numbers would have been available by the end of '45 along with the much improved Meteor Mark IV, also already flying in July 1945.

[@richardcaves3601]

Definitely, as with all the German supposed wonder weapons, all hype and no substance.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

That is highly biased and completely false, The Me-262 was wind tunnel tested to Mach 1.4 and had all swept control surfaces and a fly-by-wire Horizontal Stabilator. It was the fastest production jet fighter in the world until the F-86 Sabre in 1947... The first 6 were built using parts salvaged from Me-262s.

[@bwtv147]

Chuck Yeager said "The first time I saw a jet I shot it down."

[@BasementEngineer]

He left out the part about this kill was an aircraft about to land.

[@grantm6514]

It boggles the mind that all this technology was developed using nothing more than slide rules.

[@marcuswardle3180]

So was the Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft! There are films of the drawing office for the design of the Saturn V and there are hundreds of rows of drawing boards with men drawing the individual components using slide rules to work out everything. I remember being taught how to use mine, which I still have!

[@superelectic45]

@@marcuswardle3180 It was Nazi technology that put man on the moon, basically a continuation of the work Von Braun was doing in Germany

[@lawrencefox563]

Amazed me British didn't put whittles on 262 when testing as German turbine suffered from development

[@timbuxton8977]

There's the clue : the 262 wasn't that good.

[@okshadowbannedjet7981]

the Thumbnail "Schwable" should be "Schwalbe"

[@timonsolus]

Nonsense. The Gloster Meteor was only 6 months behind the Me 262.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

It didn’t have swept wings. Which is what Eric is talking about in this video.

[@timonsolus]

@@ArmouredCarriers : The postwar Gloster Meteor F.4 variant had a top speed of 583 mph, 43 mph faster than the Messerschmitt Me 262, without having swept wings. This was due to having much more powerful engines. The Meteor F.4 entered operational service in early 1947. However, it first flew in August 1945 and could have been operational in early 1946 if WW2 had still been going on at that time - the 1 year delay was due to postwar lack of urgency.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

@@timonsolus But they still didn't grasp the importance of wing sweep-back in overcoming the impact of the sound barrier (tactical and critical mach). Which is where Winkle says they were 5 years behind.

[@timonsolus]

@@ArmouredCarriers : Breaking the sound barrier isn’t what the Me 262 was designed for. Wasn’t even considered at the time the airframe was designed back in 1941.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

@@timonsolus That's right. But it did take advantage of the lessons learned from wind tunnel technology to improve its tactical and critical mach numbers to give it an edge in high-speed controllability at high altitudes. As the video says, air flowing over the wing breaks the sound barrier before the aircraft does. And that differed for every aircraft design. For some aircraft, such as the P-38 and P-47, this could prove fatal when fighting Me 109s and Fw 190s up high among the Flying Fortresses. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jILdhISLhphmhbM

[@nomis777]

What KZbin was created for Cheers

[@stanislavferbar8613]

Protože použili Viktora Schraubergra.Pan Henschel ho použil v 1939 😮.To je celá sláva,Amerika spala😮

[@hughgordon6435]

Was the footage at the 11 min mark withe the american commentary actually american?. IF so why was/were there so many british aircraft? The yanks being behind again?

[@ArmouredCarriers]

Strangely enough, it was a Shell Oil documentary. There were two versions, one with a US commentator and one with a UK commentator. The British version was shorter.

[@Jakob_DK]

Then Winkle flew Ardo bombers with the same engines from Grove/Karup in Denmark to England he experienced problems with sabotage of the engines. In this video no comments are made on fuel consumption or quality of engines.