Germany's Missed Opportunity | Focke Wulf FW 187

Today's video was made with the help of my friend Alex from @aviationdeepdive who shares my passion for all things aircraft / aviation :)
Today we look at the Focke Wulf FW 187.
Looking for aviation-themed art? → ikarusart.net/
Want to join the community? Visit our Discord - / discord
Want to support the channel? I have a Patreon here - / rexshangar
Recommended Reading:
amzn.to/48ou93r [Focke-Wulf Fw 187: An Illustrated History]
Sources:
Flugzeug Classic 2005-10. Dietmar Hermann. Der verhinderte Rekordversuch
Flugzeug Classic 2012-01-02. Herbert Ringlstetter. Top-Jager in Wartestellung
uftArchiv.de. Focke-Wulf Fw 187 Falke
Bernard & Graefe. Heinz J. Nowarra. Die Deutsche Luftruestung 1933-1945 Vol.2.
Erla-Heinkel

[@ME262MKI]

For someone with the last name "TANK", Kurt was a genius in the aviation world

[@MaticTheProto]

Tank means… tank in german. Not the vehicle, the storage unit

[@stop-the-greed]

@@MaticTheProto tank means tank in English ..🤘 the British titled any paperwork for their land ships as water tank to keep them secret..glad the name stuck ...land ship is just silly

[@MaticTheProto]

@@stop-the-greed the Germans were like: „Hmm this is like a shell… like on a turtle… or armor… yes let’s just name it like that!“ And that’s how the Panzer got its name

[@stop-the-greed]

@@MaticTheProtoIndeed

[@gehtdichnixan3200]

@@MaticTheProto infact they called it panzerkampfwagen ... but the real german engeneering genius is make extreme long words than short them down as much as possible and forgett that they where redicolus long in the first place

[@Xubor]

The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well

[@dallesamllhals9161]

Yeah! And it ain't a 87 - it's a 187 😛 Hey! It's just numbers!.I didn't write Ju or Fw...

[@FirstDagger]

The Pe-2 and Me 410 also had transparent floors.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

@@FirstDagger ..both later - ain't they?

[@FirstDagger]

@@dallesamllhals9161 ; Didn't realize we were having a competition about introduction date. You can keep that goalpost.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

@@FirstDagger ..erh..thanks? (FIRST-Dagger) 🙃

[@teklarmeeps7338]

Evidently Goering had his Mosquito equivalent all along. Good thing he was stupid and high as a kite. A most excellent video, Rex.

[@therealspeedwagon1451]

It’s a good thing that Hitler was more obsessed with megalomaniac projects and untested but groundbreaking technology than with actually realistic projects like this one.

[@EneTheGene]

​@@therealspeedwagon1451How did you draw Hitler to this?

[@Farweasel]

@@EneTheGene Yeah .... What did he have to do with WW2 & Germany's armmament policies eh? Oh, hang on.......

[@EneTheGene]

@@Farweasel Hitler didn't have much impact on the development of single types of aircraft. His effect has been played up by designers who survived the war and wanted to bury/downplay their own mistakes.

[@thebaronofsd6293]

@@EneTheGene oh he absolutely did impact designs. two famous ones would be the Me262 which he insisted required bombs. then there is the STG44 which had to be developed as a machine pistol as Hitler had banned any more self loading rifle projects. however his nonsense pales in comparison to Goering and Erhard Milch's meddling.

[@tinglydingle]

The twin engined Focke Wulf fighters are my favourite German designs; the 57, the 187, the 189, and the 154 are such cool aeroplanes and so often forgotten.

[@Cuccos19]

I read Hungarian pilots' stories how they made fool of the Soviet fighter pilots in tight maneuvering in the Fw-189 'Uhu' at the Eastern Front. It was a quite well turning aircraft in experienced hands.

[@Talon3000]

The FW-154 is such a beautiful aircraft. German Mosquito, therefore called Moskito.

[@fockewulf2352]

Kurt Tank was just a visionary in the design of his aircraft, not all were perfect, but they were still better than anything Willie Messerschmitt designed

[@juanaq]

@@fockewulf2352 the plane somehow prefigures the lines of the argentine's pucará. i wonder if the argentinian design owes some genes to kurt tank, who was a designer in argentina's airplanes industries post ww2.

[@fockewulf2352]

@@juanaq well he moved to Argentina in 1946 to work for Fábrica Argentina de Aviones "Brigadier San Martín" S.A. and he only worked on a version of the Fw Ta183 called the IAe Pulqui II. he lived there until 1955 when he moved to India and worked for Madras Institute of Technology and later joined Hindustan Aeronautics where he designed the Hindustan Marut fighter-bomber, he left that company in 1967 and moved back to Germany in the early 70's and became a consultant for MBB until his death 5 june 1983 he was 85

[@Splattle101]

At 7.30, the test pilot's name was Hans SANDER, not Safer. He's one third of a remarkable team: Kurt Tank, Rudi Blaser & Hans Sander. Blaser was fully qualified as a test pilot (and Tank famously did a lot of his own test flying), while Sander was a qualified aero engineer. These three were cross skilled, and were central to the development of the FW-190 and Ta-152.

[@Parocha]

Considering the HUGE numbers of BF-109s that were lost due to their narrow-track landing gear, the higher cost and longer manufacture time of the FW-187 would have been non-issues, had it being chosen

[@johncmitchell4941]

Point made, as they may have rivaled F100 for unfortunate landing attempts. In regard to FW-197 and many others one thing the BF-109 always had going for it was that as among the 'muscle car'-type fighters it inspired it was very economical to produce. Willy knew how to leverage that.

[@janmale7767]

That story of 'huge numbers' of 109s lost due to narrow landing gear is a 109' bashers favorite argument, the only problem with it is that it is almost completely false, the Spitfire had marginally narrower gear, the Wildcat also had narrow landing gear, you never hear that those aircraft suffered huge losses due to norrow landing gear!? 🤣

[@SheepInACart]

Ratio of 1,500 BF109 losses in the first two years of ww2 is around 10% takeoff and landing losses, spitfires numbers where all over the place, just over 10% early on, almost 20% in mid 1940, but lower during the late war. This mirrors training time (9months >100hours in type early, 6months >20hrs in type mid, 12months >150hours in time late) without any real reflection of aircraft type... hurricanes had simlar rates to spitfires, BF109's to FW190's, despite widely different wheel arrangements, technological maturity and pilot visibility,

[@Parocha]

@@janmale7767 1. 10% lost out of over 30K produced is not an insubstantial number for you to be air-quoting “huge”. 2. My comment is in the scope of the video (Fw-187 vs Bf-109), I don’t understand why you mix other airplanes into the discussion, as it has no bearing on my point. 3. I was not bashing on the 109, I consider it to be a great airplane, but the intentional design feature of having the landing gear be outward-retracting and connected to the fuselage had negative consequences, despite its benefits; that’s fact, not opinion. I’m not saying cons outweighed pros, just stating a fact. 4. As long as you bring up other airplanes, adding the Wildcat into the mix is misleading, as it was designed from the beginning as a naval fighter, meant to be flown from the heaving deck of an aircraft carrier; this means that the landing gear assembly was built to withstand harder landings than land-based planes. Moreover, the Wildcat had experience and pedigree behind it, as Grumman had long been building fighters for that purpose. Messerschmitt had never built a high-performance fighter before, and based his plane on the Bf-108, a lighter airframe, designed for a totally different purpose, and much of his experience before that had been designing gliders… aircraft without landing gear, so there is that. I wouldn’t know about the Spitfire, but Reginald Mitchell had a lot more experience building military aircraft than Willy Messerschmitt by the mid-1930s, and maybe (and I know I’m guessing on this particular point) he had a better grasp on how strong a landing gear had to be to endure the mostly grass airfields of the day. 5. I’m aware the numbers of 109s lost to undercarriage failure improved 1942-onwards, but the point stands.

[@janmale7767]

@@SheepInACart i love when somebody comes up with the cold hard stats, rather than parroting some propaganda based BS just to be able to say something, if you cannot comment on something you do not have in deph knowledge on, rather don't comment at all!

[@petegarnett7731]

Willy Messerschmitt had the ear of major figures in the 3rd Reich, so his aircraft were often preferred over others. This was almost certainly a factor in this case.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Messerschmitt aircraft were also preferred because they were significantly better than others..

[@charlesfaure1189]

And cheaper. Me's were a good buy. @@sandervanderkammen9230

[@jlv2335]

Yes and General Milch the only high rank opponent to WM was driven to suicide ...

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@jlv2335 A very intertaining anecdote but when the technical specifications of competing Heinkel and Messerschmitt aircraft Projekts are compared, Messerschmitt's aircraft consistently proved to be significantly better. The case of the Projekt 1065, the He-280 v Me-262 is an excellent example. While the He-280 did outperform every Allied aircraft, the Me-262 was an exceptional design with stellar performance that completely overshadowed the He-280.

[@timothydraper6626]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Being a person who likes detail, is that trend consistent throughout all aircraft proposed by the two companies for specific roles?

[@mikehipperson]

The RML wasn't the only procurement team to get it wrong. The British equivalent did exactly the same with the Westland Whirlwind, a single seat, twin engined heavy fighter. It too was lumbered with a poor engine choice as all the RR Merlin's were earmarked for the Spitfire and Hurricane production lines. At least it did see service, mainly as a 'back stop' defence fighter to mop up the German bombers that did get through and was later relegated to training units for converting pilots to multi engined aircraft. Eventually some Merlin's were found and the aircraft showed what it could have done if equipped from inception but by then the airframe was dated and needed too many upgrades to make it viable in its original role so they were withdrawn and scrapped before the invasion of Europe.

[@paulnutter1713]

What!!!!!

[@katana1430]

Ironically, the DH Hornet and Sea Hornet proved the concept about two years too late. When you have that much power, maneuverability is simply unbelievable.

[@tz8785]

And the Mosquito was essentially pushed through by the persistence of Geoffrey de Havilland.

[@malcolmstonebridge7933]

Whirlwind was way to small for Merlins - high altitude version (Welkin) had merlins.

[@papalegba6796]

Whirlwind was uneconomic. Could make 2 spitfire or hurricanes for the price of 1 whirlwind, maintenance also costlier, performance similar, so no point in it existing.

[@darrellid]

Many of Tank's designs boasted clean lines and relatively excellent performance. Fortunately, I don't think anything could have changed the ultimate outcome of the war, but a capable craft such as this could've made things that much more difficult.

[@scullystie4389]

This thing may have given allied bomber formations hell, but I think you're right, Germany never had the juice to achieve a total victory.

[@ricardobeltranmonribot3182]

Imagine this long range aircraft as the bomber escort during the battle of london (an aircraft that for what I read before, the Fw 187 could fight the Bf 109 in similar performance), instead of the Bf 110, maybe the outcome of that battle could had been diferent, but like other bad decitions the RLM was one ot the best allied to the british, americans and soviet during the war

[@fockewulf2352]

greed over country is all it was, and a lesson our political and Military industrial leaders learned very well.

[@darrellid]

@@fockewulf2352 Username checks out. LoL

[@urgo224]

@@scullystie4389 The fact Germany didn't develop proximity fuses really hurt their ability to prevent allied air superiority.

[@michaeltelson9798]

I first saw pictures of this aircraft in the 1960’s . There was a board game based on the TV show “12 O’clock High” that had cards with aircraft pictures and this was one. I wished that I would have been able to keep those cards.

[@1joshjosh1]

Cool.

[@johncmitchell4941]

The WWII TV show “12 O’clock High” was a total favorite of mine back in those days, as were "Combat" and "The Gallant Men". Anyway, IMO it'd be something indeed to have the whole game set and play it.

[@fonesrphunny7242]

I found an eBay auction for a cardgame that does indeed have the 187, but it's called 'Ground Support'. I wonder if they mistook it with the Hs-129, but sadly that card isn't in the the foreground and you can only see the 'header'. Such old board / card games are really interesting time capsules.

[@michaeltelson9798]

@@fonesrphunny7242 I have several old board games. Including one from Avalon Hill game company “Starship Troopers” that was endorsed by Robert Heinlein and closely based on the book.

[@christopherkroussoratsky2014]

You forgot to mention the phenomenal performance of the FW-187 V6 when it was finally fitted with the originally intended Daimler Benz 600A engines. It achieved 394.5 MPH in October 1939.

[@jameslawrie3807]

I can't think of what an early war German P-38 Lightning would have done to the opposition

[@RoamingAdhocrat]

replace double the number of Bf 109s perhaps

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

@@RoamingAdhocrat Nope. Replace a slightly lower number of less capable Bf110s without affecting the number of Bf109s.

[@paulnutter1713]

Same as an actual p38......not a lot

[@richardmeyeroff7397]

@@paulnutter1713 The P-38 did a great deal especially in the pacific theater. Also it suffered many of the same problems FW-187 encountered. It had a rather slow development cycle because the AAF felt that they could build 2 P-51's for the same cost as a P-38

[@treyhelms5282]

@@paulnutter1713 The P-38 that slaughtered Zeros in the Pacific. And did well in the ETO as well. especially the Med?

[@avnrulz8587]

10:55 twin engined, not single engined. Excellent video for a little known aircraft.

[@reinbeers5322]

I believe he meant if the 187 became a single-engined craft due to engine failure.

[@christophermurphy7113]

@@reinbeers5322 , it's clear from the rest of the text that he did not mean that.

[@lookythat2]

Does anyone notice a resemblance between this aircraft and the FMA IA 58 Pucará? Interesting since Kurt Tank was working in Argentina postwar. Also the Pucara has a T-tail, which Tank had also been exploring.

[@kwharrison6668]

Hilariously I made the same comment before seeing you had already made this comment. They are VERY similar.

[@mothmagic1]

It shows a greater resemblance to the Hs129

[@majorbloodnok6659]

Thank you for covering this aircraft, I have long admired it for its racy looks.

[@discordia013]

There's a lot of similarities to the HS129 in the overall fuselage shape and the original wing/engine design (@ 3:09). Tank was really 5-10 years ahead of everyone else in that game. Even the FW190 had some very clever kit for it's time.

[@sebastianucero7535]

The Henschel Hs 129 Panzerknacker looks a lot like this. So the design lives on! Very good video thank you

[@ZachariahJ]

I thought I'd seen something very similar before! The description didn't match my memories, and now I understand why. ;-)

[@zappa79]

Was thinking exactly the same! I love the Duck!

[@NareshSinghOctagon]

Hs 129 is the fat duck and the FW 187 is the slim swan.

[@paulfrantizek102]

This is closer to the German version of the Westland Whirlwind, even down to the engine issues and cost concerns.

[@robertwilloughby8050]

Now, I know the Hs129 as the Battlebus - so it had two other nicknames?

[@mrrolandlawrence]

Tank was a legend. We in England were lucky he didn't get too many types into service. Also get well soon buddy. A Bob Fleming clip to make you chuckle: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g6fYdIeDZ9Rge7s

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

Dude even made a jet fighter for india in his old years, really was build like a tank.

[@marckyle5895]

It was A Very Good Thing that the RLM was so corrupt.

[@bruceday6799]

Top quality stuff. Kurt Tank aircraft could have been very difficult for the Allies. Willie Messerschmitt may have been a really good thing for the Allies.

[@wbertie2604]

In, say, 1934, your fighter was even a little faster than the bombers it might not help. With standing patrols you might be 5 miles away from the bombers when spotting them and even if your margin of speed was theoretically 10mph in your favour the fighter would be out of fuel before you got close enough to fire given the fuel consumption at full power. This happened in war games.

[@MrHws5mp]

Also, time-to-climb. The bombers could cruise-climb from the moment they took off, but from a scramble-on-visual-warning, the fighters didn't have time to get up to their altitude. This is why radar was so vital in the Battle Of Britain: it gave enough advance warning time for the fighters to get up to the bombers' altitude and be waiting for them.

[@wbertie2604]

@@MrHws5mp where fighter twins had an advantage was the potential for loiter time at altitude, provided you had the engine power. That gave us the P-61 but in A and B versions it wasn't considered to be fast enough. For efficient interception they considered more like 50mph to be the margin required. It's also about manoeuvre - if a 10 mph advantage in a tail chase is all you have as a fighter then something like a G4M with a 20mm cannon in the tail is doom. If you try a head on, you might only get one pass before you turn round and are back to a tail chase.

[@MrHws5mp]

@@wbertie2604 Indeed, but you still had to get up to that altitude to loiter there. Maintaining relays of standing combat air patrols would mean fewer fighters in the air at the time the bombers arrived and so more would get through. Yes, maneuver matters in all sorts of ways. The wider the turn radius of a fighter, the more time and fuel it takes to turn onto the tail of a bomber having intercpted it.

[@wbertie2604]

@@MrHws5mp all true. From 1937 onwards the RAF wanted to concentrate on cannon-armed fighters to maximize the effectiveness of even single squadron attacks, starting with two but rapidly moving to a requirement for four

[@mirrorblue100]

Its a mistake to believe the FW 187 would have cleared the sky during the BoB - the fighters speed would have been tied to that of the bombers - no advantage there. Once the Luftwaffe went to night bombing there would have been no role for the 187.

[@sergeipohkerova7211]

Th Fw187 looks a lot like am F7F Tigercat! It could have probably been modified to have a second crewman and a radar to be a nightfighter, too. It makes the Bf110 look like a pile of wolfturd. Or wulfturd.

[@wbertie2604]

It would have been too small to add the extra equipment, as I subsequently see, Rex noted.

[@sebastianucero7535]

The F7F Tigercat was built 13 years later and its cabin is further back

[@MrHws5mp]

@@wbertie2604 And a back-seater and a radar would have made it as heavy as a Bf 110, and on the same engines, there goes the performance.

[@wbertie2604]

@@MrHws5mp you'd hope it could have been made SLIGHTLY lighter than a 110 with the same kit. But yes, a performance hit and hard to see where the Schrage Musik would go

[@wbertie2604]

For all the praise of Tank, in WW2 only the 190 made any impact, and both twin engined fighters were failures. Yet no one much talks about Camm who managed three solid designs in the same period.

[@MiKeMiDNiTe-77]

It was faster than a BF109B imagine if it had wooden components ie wooden tail and wings. The Germans had a habit of neglecting good aircraft or putting them aside and dithering until the last minute when they realized they actually needed them.

[@Fizwalker]

The idea of the "A Bomber will always get through" was also a principle that the US Strategic Air Command followed post WWII too

[@RoamingAdhocrat]

It was the groupthink across most of the world ~1920-1940. And true, if not for the invention of radar… which not all nations had the scientific and industrial oomph to invent and implement.

[@IncogNito-gg6uh]

They had to learn the lesson all over again over Korea. To be fair, they didn't anticipate the Mig-15, though during earlier practice B-29 "attacks" on England RAF Meteors shredded their formations.

[@lonelyone69]

Black Thursday rings a bell

[@pedrotrivelatoferreira2776]

The fact they lost the opportunity to have their own lightning is a pretty massive "we are lucky they are so fucking stupid" moment

[@patrickcassells2735]

despite the reich being full of intelligent and educated people it’s pretty crazy to look back with hindsight at all the decisions they made that were clearly stupid.

[@RedXlV]

Fortunately, the Nazis frequently screwed themselves over by being Nazis.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

But why they need one? If they had a lighting instead, it will be a disaster, as it will be usless at any point later in war. That shit cant even mount radar!

[@marckyle5895]

@@RedXlV That's what Fascists do. Even today, they haven't changed.

[@mpetersen6]

Costing twice as much as a single engine is a no brainer. Twice as much cost in engines, more material costs in the airframe and man hours in construction. While this would likely be better than the Bf-110 in daylight operation the Bf-110 probably had more growth potential as a night fighter

[@akritasdigenis4548]

Yeah, as FW187 would undoubtely have been better suited for assaulting the GB, it could not match the versatility of BF110.

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

Like a DH Hornet, but 7 years earlier!

[@HaVoC117X]

Or F7F Tigercat

[@androidemulator6952]

Note the triangular shark-like body shape , same as ME262 jet .. ;)

[@malcolmcarter1726]

What a beautiful looking fighter! Professor Tank was a pretty amazing chap. I remember reading about him flying a Ta 152C-0 prototype, and being pursued by "Indians at the garden gate" in the form of two P 51s, and hitting the MW 50 tit for full WEP and leaving the Mustangs standing! But such an important man doing standing patrols? Like I said, he was quite the laddy. As always a terrific video. Thank you.

[@rumpstatefiasco]

An exquisitely excellent presentation, thank you!

[@stephenremington8448]

Very interesting, and reminds me a bit of the Mosquito. Also, a quick fact, Mick Taylor who was The Rolling Stones guitarist, his dad worked for De Havilland.

[@58fury45]

As the 20 yr old singer in a classic-esque rock band, and fellow military machinery/history enjoyer, i find that fascinating and super awesome. thanks for sharing.

[@MattnessLP]

Never heard about this plane, thanks for the video! The audio quality is great, no hint of a cough or sudden cuts. Wishing you a speedy recovery!

[@airmakay1961]

Another beautiful Kurt Tank design.

[@sheepFP5]

Great video yet again Rex, I've always had a thing for the 187 and the even weirder 189, Tank was a mad genius! Minor errata regarding engines: at 6:42 you show a DB600 engine upside down, they were an inverted V12 like all German designs of the period as mandated by the RLM in 1928. At 6:59 when you mention the Jumo 210, Jumo should be pronounced with the the same J sound as Junkers since it is just short for "Junkers Motorenwerke"

[@galier2]

Yes, and the drawing behind on 6:42 is not a FW-187 but and Arado 240.

[@GunsmithSid]

10:52 he mistakenly refers to the 187 as a single engine design.

[@bgl11]

Another outstanding video, love the channel.

[@CounterClaws]

It looks like a combination of th Ta 154 and Me 410

[@dallesamllhals9161]

de Havilland DH.88 Comet

[@joeobyrne3189]

Good luck with the move, just moved house a few months ago myself. Thanks for all the great vids, looking forward to the next one.

[@mauriciomorais7818]

10:51 Mistake "...as it was a *TWIN* engine aircraft..."

[@christophgrottke6045]

well, the 187 had one big flaw: it wasnt from Messerschmitt, same procedure as with the Heinkel He 280 wich was superior to the Me 262

[@MrIwan18]

Thanks very much from a prop enthousiast, these were the times! Keep up your great work, greetz from 🇳🇱!!

[@crazymazzei2]

What a gorgeous plane

[@chrishartley4553]

I wonder why when building the Ta 154 Kurt Tank didn't ape this low wing design more. In the later fighter the position of the engines seriously hampered visibility. The Fw 187 is a tidy little design, but the foward opening design of the cockpit canopy in the pre-preduction models would have been so difficult to open of the piolot needed to bail out.

[@patjohnson3100]

Another interesting aircraft, well researched. I was unaware of this plane. Thanks

[@aquilamario8300]

The audio was perfect !

[@Vikingdescendent]

5:42 Beautiful aircraft. Ahead of it's time!

[@MakotoAtava]

Waiting for this bird so long, thank you for this great video. 🙂👍

[@FirstLast_Nba]

Never heard of it, an excellent video, really enjoyed it

[@user-vl5tx6je5u]

The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well. The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

Yeah, these thing are very helpful when you pilot stuka from cabine.

[@ROBERTO-in2iq]

I've been looking forward to this

[@MM22966]

It's funny that with so many "What If" scenarios of WW2 featuring strange/unproduced aircraft designs, I have never seen this used.

[@deingewissen_official]

Awesome quality! Keep it up

[@wolfsoldner9029]

I think that the huge flexibility of the BF 110 in many different roles compensates its disadvantages to the FW 187.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

Yeah, even if it worse now-we can slap radar on it. And germans were second only to US in radars.

[@adamrodaway1074]

Jack of all trades, master in none.

[@Caseytify]

The narration sounds fine. I would say this is an excellent example of empire building among various factions in the bureaucracy.

[@Chezzers.]

Great video, had never heard of this design

[@demonicleek1378]

As much as I love the 109, the he 112 would’ve been a better early war fighter I think. Germany had a lot of missed opportunities

[@alexstahl284]

I didagree. The 112 was way harder to produce and thus, the outnumberd Luftwaffe would be at even more of a disadvantage

[@DrHundTF2]

True, but it was much more complicated to build due to its shapes and pieces. War is won by numbers. Even the He 113, really named He 100 (cuz unlucky number or whatever) was much better to produce with it’s straight wings and less unique pieces. Tho I don’t remember why it wasn’t taken… if anyone does…

[@alangordon3283]

Hindsight’s a marvellous thing.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

Well, if NO ONE shoot holes in your wings(cooling) i'd take the He 100 anyday 😛

[@DrHundTF2]

@@dallesamllhals9161 109 had wing cooling too?

[@jaws666]

Saturday just got so much better👍👍👍

[@peterjohnson6273]

Always interesting. Thanks.

[@benjaminrush4443]

Very Good Video. Thank you.

[@jasonz7788]

Cool thanks Rex great work Sir

[@masterofreality.o0o.535]

One of my absolute favourites.

[@chollythecrazycorgihesinsa6505]

Great video!

[@ericgrace9995]

There's something attractive about twin engined heavy fighters. For me, the late war British Hornet sits atop the list.

[@garyrunnalls7714]

Looks like the props both turned the same way instead of counter rotating which made a difference in the later P-38 models. Great vid as always❤❤❤❤❤

[@MrLBPug]

All P-38s had counter-rotating propellers from the outset. In the prototypes they did turn inward instead of outward. It was possible to fit the Allison V-1710 with propeller gearing that turned the prop clockwise or counter-clockwise independently of the driveshaft direction. That made it very easy to replace an engine as well.

[@garyrunnalls7714]

@@MrLBPug some models such as the P322 Lightning 2 had props that turned both props to starboard.

[@MrLBPug]

True, it's often overlooked due to its small production run compared to the other Lightning variants.

[@toxified3937]

Tbh honest, comparing this to a 109 is like comparing apples and pears. They both fly, but realistically they will both have strong points in different situations and be used for different things all together. (I feel you some what mention this with the bias but people have selective hearing with this topic around WwII era germany.)

[@kevindixon2645]

great looking aircraft

[@alexglanowski695]

That really was a good looking aircraft 😮

[@amerigo88]

At 6:50 the DB600 engine is shown upside down. As I recall, it was an inverted V-12 engine, looking like a capital letter A. This led to the low placement of the exhaust stacks on aircraft using the DB 6 series engines, such as the Bf-109.

[@hadoken8688]

Beautiful plane

[@RoamingAdhocrat]

Germany didn't have industrial capacity to set up new production lines for every vaguely promising design - they were flat out already, producing inadequate numbers of existing inadequate designs. They went to war on the understanding that France and Britain wouldn't actually honour their commitment to Poland just as they'd abandoned Czechoslovakia - easy in hindsight to recognise the merits of a fast fighter that can escort bombers across most of southern England!

[@AxelPoliti]

Great video. One of the very few German machines I did not know. Thank you

[@moxie_ST]

Audio is great 👍 Video is even better ❤

[@charlesmoss8119]

As others have said this resembles the Whirlwind - the more I learn about aviation the engines are just so utterly important - it’s so easy to assume a new set can be slapped on but bad engines have damed so many good designs to the also rans list

[@Splattle101]

Also, at 6.40, your piccie of the DB engine is upside down. It was an inverted V.

[@raymundovergararoman2473]

I love single seat version of the falke, looks very sporty, the me-110 wasn't something like that at all

[@carcharinus6367]

According to the rule: a beautiful bird flies beautifully. And it was a really beautiful plane!🐦

[@Omnihil777]

And again, great content, thank you! I got a proposal for a video: Jumo engines vs the Daimler Benz ones, what's the difference, technology-wise? I think that would be interesting. Keep up the good work, you got a fascinating thing running here!

[@markturner3490]

Another great 'WhatIf...'. Makes you think about what would have happened if the production Whirlwinds had the same props as the evaluation one.

[@lewiswestfall2687]

Thanks Rex

[@Unfassbarer]

Danke!

[@pseudonym745]

I love how you can somehow recognise at first glance if an aircraft has 'it'

[@gort8203]

Kurt Tank was right. Single-seat is the way to configure a long range or heavy fighter, and Germany committed to the wrong path with the BF-110.

[@rodneypayne4827]

The 110 was a good aircraft. Just because it faced modern single seat single engine fighters of the RAF and lost doesn't mean anything. English always forget that the much vaunted Spitfire and Hurricane were out performed by the Japanese Fighters of the time, does that mean they were bad? Or how about the Mosquito and Beaufighter vs the 109 or 190? How about the 110s service on the Eastern Front where 110s were dominant at the start of the war until the Soviets designed more modern aircraft than it's design.What was the British equivalent to the 110 at the start of the war? The Blenheim fighter version out performed by everything.... enough said.

[@petergray2712]

​@rodneypayne4827 It was a terrible aircraft because the heavy fighter concept was a terrible idea. Besides lacking maneuverability compared to their single engined counterparts, heavy fighters were much bigger targets for enemy aircraft and antiaircraft guns. The USA was only able to develop successful twin engine fighters in the P38 Lightning and the F7F Tigercat, the UK in the De Haviland Mosquito and Hornet, and the Germans with the Dornier 338 Pfeil and (arguably) the Messerschmitt 410. This doesn't count all of the failed aircraft in those countries, plus Soviet, Japanese, French, and Italian aircraft. Edit: I should add one more British fighter to the successful list: Bristol Beaufighter.

[@gort8203]

@@rodneypayne4827 Just what are your criteria for a "good aircraft". Let's say a good aircraft is one that can perform its role well. You seem to misunderstand the primary purpose of the heavy twin-engine fighter as advocated by Kurt Tank and Benjamin Kelsey among others, which was speed with longer range and more firepower than single-engine fighters. A twin-engine fighter that can't face single-engine fighters when it gets deep into enemy territory can't do its job and is a waste of the resources allocated to fighter production. As early as the Battle of Britain the Bf-110 could not do its job without assistance from the Bf-109, which vitiated the contribution of the 110 in that campaign. The Luftwaffe would have been better equipped if it had more 109s in place of the 110s, whose poor performance hamstrung the escorted range of the German bombers. The P-38 on the other hand, while suffering from some technical issues, actually performed well as a fighter and didn’t need protection from enemy single-engine fighters. I’m sure Adolf Galland would have traded the Bf-110 for the P-38 given such a choice (or even better, the Dh Hornet). The preponderance of opinion is that the 110 was not good at its design role, and neither were the 210 and 410 that were supposed to replace it. How can all these airplanes be bad? The answer is in the design configuration. When you add the weight and drag of accommodating defensive guns and a gunner you don’t really have a fighter, you have a plane that is a target for a real fighter.

[@gort8203]

@@petergray2712 The heavy fighter was not a terrible concept, it was the execution of the concept here that was terrible. Benjamin Kelsey got it right with the P-38, and De Havilland got it very right with Hornet. Single seat is the key, not single engine. The Westland Whirlwind would probably have worked if the UK had stuck with it and given it better engines, but they didn't see the need for such a fighter given other priorities and no need to escort long range bombers in daylight. They did eventually get back to the twin engine fighter concept with the Hornet but too late. If that plane had seen action it would be the subject of uncountable KZbin videos today.

[@petergray2712]

@@gort8203 When I say terrible concept, I meant the original 1930s idea of it as either an escort fighter or a bomber destroyer. Unshackled and placed in the fast attack role, the heavy fighter excelled. But until they figured it out, the original concept destroyed a lot of aircraft designs, the Bf110 being the most egregious example.

[@malcolmjcullen]

Reminds me of the Bristol Beaufighter, probably my favourite WWII fighter/ bomber aircraft.

[@wadejustanamerican1201]

Quality was good as usual. Hope the move goes well.

[@morgananderson9647]

This is a great expose! Thanks for your research! Could you please share more details about the armament, and the glass floor? It sleek lines reminds me and feels like it has similar to the Grumman F-7 Tigercat...

[@garryferrington811]

Expose? (I don't know how to add the accent mark.) Usually that term is applied to uncovering dirty secrets. No secrets here.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

Costing twice as much as the Bf 109 isn't too bad, though, as the latter was one of the least expensive fighters of the war.

[@johannderjager4146]

A video on the Fw 189 Uhu would be appreciated.

[@Irobert1115HD]

i have the theory that the luftwaffe was so agressively keeping the 110 around because it was likely the last fighter plane where goering could fit in the pilot seat. context: he actually was a ace of WWI but at WWII was to fat for most planes.

[@garryferrington811]

Sounds silly, but then...maybe? 😊

[@jamesharmer9293]

I've read that the cockpit of the 110 was actually quite a tight fit, even for an average sized pilot. The 109 was very tight. Goering would have needed something a bit larger.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_323_Gigant

[@Irobert1115HD]

@@jamesharmer9293 well i would file it under maybe given that he actually could fit in a fiseler storch spotter plane. so maybe they used shoehorns and a small crane to get him into a bf110.

[@Bird_Dog00]

@@Irobert1115HD You forget that the Storch had those side windows that flared outwards to allow downward visibility. Thay would also give more room for a better fed gentleman...

[@Irobert1115HD]

@@Bird_Dog00 good point.

[@TXGRunner]

Watching while in a restaurant in Berlin, makes this memorable.

[@kahumike]

Around 6:45 the line drawing you're showing is an Arado AR240, not the FW187. So how about a video on the AR 240 as a comparison?

[@fonesrphunny7242]

It reminded me of something ....the Henschel Hs-129. Possibly two completely different aircraft, but I can't help seeing a few similarities.

[@chrisloomis1489]

This is a beautiful design , and yes as commented the glazed floor of cockpit is a superb feature if you wish to dive down upon enemy aircraft. I opine the rear - gunner requirement is from " out dated " air combat theory. Imagine a ME 262 Jet with a rear facing gun pod , this was a fast aircraft and it's speed and maneuverability would be it's greatest defense and if it had gotten the original high output engines , would have been a terror to Spitfires and even P 40 thunderbolts ...with 2 cannon mounted underneath. Politics and cronyism destroyed many good ideas in the Luftwaffe , and encouraged absolute waste and folly in some heavy tank designs too. Elephant ...

[@Br1cht]

Audio was totally fine

[@Scott11078]

10:57 as the FW-187 was a single engined aircraft it was more survivable than the single engined 109's??

[@localbod]

I heard that as well. Clearly a mistake.

[@Novotny72]

noticed as well, was checking replies to see if it needed posting

[@PhantomLover007]

You can see the lineage of the Argentinian FMA IA 58 Pucará beginning in this aircraft and from the TA-152 and the TA-183 as well

[@theconfederacyofindependen7268]

Richtoffen was chief of the R.A.M but if the name doesn't ring a bell, you may know the name as the name of the Red Baron in WW1

[@wolfsoldner9029]

He was the Red Barons nephew.

[@marcusbraun8889]

As sleek as the Fw 187 looks I don't think the Luftwaffe had been better off with it. Replacing the 109? Yes, longer range, but going up against Spits and Hurricanes and later other single engined fighters? Not a good idea. Like the 110 it would have to look for a new role. Night fighter and ground attack? Not enough space for radar equipment, how about adding 'schraege Musik' on top of it? So it could do only one of those two roles, the 110 could do both. On top of that there's not all that much known about that Fw 187. Those single-seat protoypes, were they fully armed with 4MG and two cannons? Did they have armor plate, self fueling tanks? If not, how would a fully battle ready plane perform? And as above, what happens if you try to adapt it to other use - add second crew, armor, radar, etc, etc? It perhaps might have turned rather into a kind of a German Ki46 'Dinah' - sleek, fast, pretty, indeed - but rather limited in role.

[@wilsonli5642]

I wonder how much of the German acquisition decisions in the leadup to WWII was predicated on fighting a war on the Continent alone. I remember hearing somewhere that the Germans never invested in 4-engine bombers because they thought of their main enemy as France, not Britain, so the focus was on breaking through the front line. They never imagined that they would achieve such quick success in France!

[@gregb6469]

The Germans' lack of a long-range heavy bomber hurt them far more in the war with Russia than it did against Britain, because it left the them unable to reach the numerous Soviet tank and aircraft factories east of Moscow.

[@JohnSmith-gd2fg]

@@gregb6469 By the time they did have heavy bombers, the range because of retreats was go great the targets were out of reach.

[@gerardhogan3]

Chris loved the Douglas series . I enjoy each story yet would you consider adding the examples left in existence?

[@dallesamllhals9161]

5:37 Hey! That looks a bit like a Me 262 ;-)

[@mebeasensei]

I wish you would mention the parallel evolution of the Bf110 and how it compared at he various stages of its evolution. edit 11 minutes into the video it starts!

[@jamiebray8532]

It's a good looking aircraft, I'll give it that. I like that flat bottom fuselage look it has. Just like the ME 262. That look reminds me of a shark. I'm pretty sure that's what they were going for.

[@brucebaxter6923]

Look at dehavilland hornett