He 162 - Germany's Desperation Fighter

The Heinkel He 162 "Volksjäger" was a last ditch effort by the Luftwaffe to field a large number of jet fighters to stem the tide in the air. Join me as I explore this history, was this plan ever going to work?
- Mortons Books Recommendations -
10% off with "MAH10" at www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/
- Dan Sharp, Messerschmitt Me 262 www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/produc...
- Dan Sharp, Heinkel He 172 www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/produc...
- Calum Douglas, The Secret Horsepower Race www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/produc...
- Bertie Simmonds, F-16 Fighting Falcon www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/produc...
- Check out my books -
Ju 87 Stuka - stukabook.com
STG-44 Assault Platoon - sturmzug.com
German Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com/
Achtung Panzer? Zur Panzerwaffe der Wehrmacht - panzerkonferenz.de/
- Support -
Patreon: / milavhistory
Channel Memberships: / @militaryaviationhistory
PayPal: www.paypal.me/MilAvHis
- Partner Discounts -
Naval Institute Press: 25% off with "MILAVHIS" at www.usni.org/press/books
Mortons: 10% off with "MAH10" at www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/
AK Interactive: 10% off with "AK10MAH" at www.ak-interactive.com/ (ALL categories except 'LEGO/AK Deals')
- Museum -
RAF Museum, London, United Kingdom: www.rafmuseum.org.uk/
Deutsches Museum, Munich, Germany: www.deutsches-museum.de/en
- Social Media -
Twitter: / milavhistory
Instagram: / milaviationhistory
- Sources -
Antony L. Kay (2002), German Jet Engine and Gas Turbine Development 1930-45, Crowood.
Dan Sharp (2020) Heinkel He 162, Tempest Books.
Hermione Giffard (2016), Making Jet Engines in World War II, The University of Chicago Press.
Heinz J. Nowarra (1993), Die Deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1945, Bernard Greafe Verlag.
Richard Franks (2018), The Heinkel He 162, Airframe Album No. 13.
Willy Radinger & Walter Schick (1996), Me 262 - Entwicklung, Erprobung und Fertigung des ersten einsatzfähigen Düsenjägers der Welt, 3rd Ed., Aviatic Verlag.
Wolfgang Wollenweber (2012), Thunder Over the Reich - Flying the Luftwaffe’s He 162 Jet Fighter, Hikoki Publications.
- Timecodes -
00:00 - Heinkel He 162
00:33 - The "People's Fighter"
01:15 - Me 262 vs He 162
02:38 - The Urgency
04:20 - The Costs
08:01 - Sponsored segment
08:44 - The Impact
09:29 - Operational Strength
10:28 - Maintenance
11:45 - "Easy to Fly"
13:36 - Wunderwaffle
14:55 - Downfall
- Audio -
Music and Sfx from Epidemic Sound

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

During the making of this video, for some reason my brain decided that every time I want to say/write He 162 (as in, the jet), it will be He 172 (as in, the biplane). I think I fixed it when it happened, but in case you find a stray prototype biplane, please return it to Heinkel.

[@johnculver2519]

Thanks for making another one of your great 'what was this really' videos, it's so good to see a realistic view on what something amounts to.

[@ondrejdobrota7344]

By the way, was Me 262 Schwalbe officially called Zerstorer as it clearly was this concept?

[@peterruiz6117]

L O L 😅

[@brokeandtired]

The rational decision would have been to surrender to the West after DDay, but failing that the He 162 was a valid choice let down due to poor engines and the pace of Germany's defeat.

[@babboon5764]

@@ondrejdobrota7344 If so it would have been confusing because in 1940 the Me 110 was often refered to as 'Zerstorer'.

[@terryrogers6232]

It's the best jet fighter ever designed in two weeks and a slide rule.

[@egay86292]

exactly. one wonders why the stargazers of the Dritte Reich didn't fixate on cheap, easy, multitudinous in 1933---e.g., the Volkswagen. let's ask Marx and Freud why.

[@nevisstkitts8264]

Proposals in mid September, first kill of an Allied aircraft mid April. The problem is that desperation was a year too late to influence outcomes. Not well documented (in terms of assessment) are the He 162 gun runs on allied ground units traveling in road columns. The glue factory would have been available for early production... In the existing program, the greatest waste IMO was development and production of modified aircraft assets for youth training, resulting in zero pilots trained prior to war's end.

[@HeroesNights]

I remember seeing a Salamander at a museum when I was a child and being fascinated. Such a beautiful aircraft, that thankfully was never put to much use by the Luftwaffe. I recall Eric Brown being particularly fond of it's handling characteristics, but ironically saying it would be unforgiving for inexperienced pilots.

[@daszieher]

a good fighter follows the inputs of its pilots and is thus, by nature, unforgiving to mistakes or ham-fisted handling.

[@daszieher]

As a former glider pilot, I obviously love the 162. I think it would have inherited the Bf 109's position as mainstay front-line single-engine fighter, despite its very short legs, if - and only if - its problematic engine could have developed its potential. And potential, the engine surely had, if one looks at its "offspring"; the SNECMA Atar family of engines. However, luckily for the free world (including us Germans), the Nazis misjudged their chances at the game of war and it all came to an end shortly after.

[@jimdavison4077]

I have a real problem with many of Browns quotes and comments. He like Galland simply sold themselves to any media willing to give them money for a few minutes of air time later in life. Also Brown has relatively little combat experience making his views less skilled than many others in that one aspect. However he did fly more types than just about anyone else having one of the most prolific flying careers possibly in history.

[@TheAtomicEwok]

I wouldn't say he had relatively little combat experience. The guy served on a jury rigged aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean prior to the allies achieving air superiority and earned a medal for his success. I think he also flew a few bomber escort missions as well.

[@jimdavison4077]

@@TheAtomicEwok He didn't serve a full tour of duty in a combat role. That's an important distinction. Jury rigged aircraft carrier? Many merchant ships were converted to escort carriers and the US even used two paddle wheelers converted to flattops to qualify just about all naval aviators on the safety of Lake Michigan.

[@michaelporzio7384]

All things considered, the HE 162 had an excellent advanced designed canopy, it had a tricycle landing gear, an ejection seat (for obvious reasons) and winglets (common on modern jetliners). For a desperate last gasp aircraft it wasn't all that bad. Didn't the Arado 234 use 4 BMW 003 engines vs two Junkers Jumo 004s?

[@MrCenturion13]

Yes, the Ar 232C.

[@phoenix211245]

It also had absolutely despicable construction built by slave labor, and performance worse than the me 262. And when you have 1 plane against 15 enemy ones, as Germany did at the end of the war, an extra 150 mph on the enemy planes become irrelevant, you are going down. Nothing Germany could have done would have removed the Soviet juggernaut coming at it, regardless of the allies, which, don't get me wrong, played a crucial, indispensable part in the victory. Like cogs in a watch, take one out, it doesn't run, so as all the allies in WW2.

[@MaticTheProto]

@@phoenix211245 so to sum it up the plane was surprisingly good and all you said is irrelevant? :)

[@phoenix211245]

@@MaticTheProto Nope, the plane was a cheapo version of the me 262. With the build quality and materials proposed quite a few of them would have disintegrated in the air. So no, it's your comment that is irrelevant. The plane was a POS.

[@williamzk9083]

@@phoenix211245 first of all you haven’t studied the matter. 1. The He 162 used less than half the fuel than the Me 262 per mission. THIS WAS THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE SPEER MINISTRY PUSHING THE He 162. There simply wasn’t going to be enough fuel to run Me 262. 2. The sea level full thrust endurance of the He 162 was barely 30 minutes but this equates to 2 1/2 hours at 33,000 feet 10,000 m. Increases in fuel tank age in wings and fuselage Increased the sea level full thrust during to 40 minutes. So the He 162 was not too short ranged. 3 The speed of the He 162 was 522mph with the BMW 003E at its thrust setting of 800kg but this engine had a 32nd over speed that delivered a thrust of 900 kg and could get the aircraft to 560 mph. The 003A version of the Ar 234 did not have this feature as far as I know. 4 The use of forced labour of the He 162 that’s saw Service is doubtful. Early versions are usually assembled by normal labour. 5 162 should’ve been built by the Tegofilm moulded plywood. This was a hit curing process that produced three-dimensional shapes. Bombing of the Togo film factory led to a chemically cured glue being used. Not only was this less strong, but sometimes corrosive to the wood. The loss of the film production facilities is actually caused the cancellation of the TA154. Apart from those construction floors, the aircraft blacked and major vices

[@kilianortmann9979]

Converting to jet engines immediately solved two problems for Germany. Jet engines don't rely on (not available) high octane fuel and require a lot less man hours to built than piston engines. And by that I mean A LOT, remember that 500-600 number for the BMW 003, the DB 605 of the Bf-109G required 2500-3000 man hours, and I don't know if the supercharger, gearbox and variable pitch propeller are included in this number. And considering the lifespan of a German fighter in 1945 a short engine life might not even be that much of a problem.

[@shaider1982]

Very true. The problem for the Germans was that they did not have access to high temperature alloys hence the high failure rate.

[@MaticTheProto]

@@shaider1982yup. Unfortunately many (mostly American) armchair historians only seem to be aware of the short life span and as usual they aren’t asking any deeper questions as to why

[@mangalores-x_x]

also as a gun platform the Me262 brought four heavy cannons to the fight while being capable to run away from most fighters with decent success rate. Given the strategic problem were the bombers and normal fighters could get entangled by the Allied fighters along most of the way Germany needed a weapons platform capable to wreck 4 engine bombers while avoiding getting into dogfights with escorts. The main problem Germany started to have by 42/42 is that on the production and manpower side they would lose, hence the refuge into tech as force multipliers was the only option if you are a genocidal regime and do not or in case of the Soviet Union cannot sue for peace.

[@keithdurose7057]

The He 172 was possibly the first aircraft to be fitted with an ejector seat. Rather rudimentary. Just like the entire airplane. It was a 30mm cannon cartridge sighted under the pilots seat. This was a priority due to the engine intake being directly above and behind the cockpit. A good-looking aircraft with a lot of potential. Excellent presentation as always. Thank you.

[@egay86292]

German gearheadedness Achilles foot: always bigger, always more complex---"Look, Ma, see what I've spent 6 months building this time!" meanwhile, on the other side of the Urals...

[@MissKay1994]

Very cool hearing the historical context behind the He 162. I never really knew much about it before

[@FlyinBrian777]

They need to make a spec-reproduction of the He 162, like they did with the 262. The Volksjager is just as important in aviation history as everything else from that era. You did an excellent job with your presentation here, as with all of your videos. Well done.

[@warrentaylor5131]

Will said great video

[@raypurchase801]

Agreed 100%, but the 162 was very difficult to fly and killed experienced test pilots. It would require modifications for greater stability: Maybe a lengthened fuselage and wingspan, which would change its appearance. A better choice might be to fit a small jet engine to a Me 163. This aircraft had excellent flying characteristics, all the way from 500mph to landing.

[@MrAndyBearJr]

I wonder if modern CAD and computerized mathematical simulations could crunch the numbers, and be accurate enough to give us some insight into the possible capabilities of the He-162, had it been fully realized to the design specifications and numbers that Germany had envisioned? With the required engines, skilled pilots, fuel availability, and such.

[@raypurchase801]

@@MrAndyBearJr Somebody ought to make a modern reproduction! Class it under the US "experimental" category. Cheapest way into the warbird fraternity.

[@MrAndyBearJr]

@@raypurchase801 Now that is one aircraft I would love to see fly.😀👍🏻

[@brennus57]

Thank you very, very much Chris. Do you remember when the He 162 Voljsjäger expansion pack for Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffee came out in 1992? I think it immediately became my favorite plan in the game. I loved that my "cockpit" had exposed wires here and there and holes in the instrument panel with no instruments or switches. I recall that limited ammo and a less than robust airframe were interesting challenges. I think that (in that game) the throttle was a bit more responsive than the Me-262 or perhaps I'd adjusted after flying the 262 and the P-80 Shooting Star. Thanks for jogging my memory.

[@wlewisiii]

Oh yeah, it and the P-80 were my favs in that game :D

[@RoBlackW]

Oh that brings back memories... played that game up and down, although I prefered the Horten IX/Go 229 for its futuristic design. 1992... now I feel old. P(

[@VenlyssPnorr]

What a game. That dynamic campaign in which you could set flight groups and assign your own pilots to fly the AI planes was so far ahead of its time!

[@brennus57]

@@RoBlackW Oh yeah! The Gotha! That was huge fun to fly! Really fast and so silky smooth.

[@brennus57]

@@VenlyssPnorr I loved the campaign. Twice I managed to an Me-163 pilot through 24 missions. Then on the final mission I settle onto the field and go bumping along until the right wing tip gently drifted to the ground as I came to a stop and... BOOM!!! The plane exploded and I was killed. I suppose it beats being dissolved inside your flight suit.

[@hadtopicausername]

As with so many German technical developments from the war, if the circumstances surrounding it had just been completely different, it might have made an impact. But then again, had the circumstances indeed been completely different, they would probably never have developed a plane like this at all.

[@barthoving2053]

That's the difference with the allied cutting edge technology. The Germans were desperate and willing to run the risk of pushing unmatured technology into servicento find an edge. While the Allies had the time and resources to develop systems into maturedom or leave them be as what that had would be good enough for the job. Plus the fact the German design did not have it's original government anymore to guard it as a state secret, while the Allied projects did have it.

[@solreaver83]

@@barthoving2053 agreed. The Brits imo are largely forgotten or ignored but were just as advanced as Germany in jets though didn't feel the Need to use them on the front. Even then the MK3 meteor was in service, not Mk1 or mk2 but mk3 and the mk4 was close to coming off the assembly line which was even better wing and engine design so faster and capable of doing those speeds and manouvers.

[@solreaver83]

@@mitchellcouchman6589 the meteor was in service a month after the 262 and again it was a mk3 not a Mk1 or mk2. The engine design though not used today was a design that was actually very good for the era. It could produce more power with a less complex construction. The reason it's not used today is it was technologicaly limited in how far it could be improved apon while the German engine design got better and overtook the Whittle engine later

[@solreaver83]

@@mitchellcouchman6589 total output technically yes but the power generation for thrust and energy retention was far better. Meaning it could maintain speed better at all altitudes and regain it in a fight

[@solreaver83]

@@mitchellcouchman6589 no it's nothing like that at all. Live in your delusional German delusion mate. You've got plenty of company

[@Majima_Nowhere]

I just love the look of what's badically a glider with a spare jet engine glued on top. Many early jets looked janky, the Yak-15 for instance being a Yak-3 with the propeller replaced by a jet. But the 162 is just something else.

[@davidcox3076]

We sometimes forget that those were truly pioneering days for jets. They were making it up as they went.

[@williamzk9083]

The Germans considered integrating the engine to the centre of the fuselage but this would need a long intake duct and exhaust duct. Both were heavy and the intake duct it was feared would cause instability for the engine. Eventually long intake ducts were tested in flight with extensions on me 262 proving that the concept could work. On the 162, They also wanted to keep the exhaust and intake well away from the ground for safety reasons and reasons of runway injestion.

[@Schlipperschlopper]

The outline was later copied by the A10

[@hertzair1186]

It was actually a brilliant design…British test pilot Eric Brown, who was charged with testing the captured German aircraft…praised its performance, though cautioned that it had some structural weaknesses.

[@kosmokat111]

I've always loved Alice from WTYP's description of the 162 "You can see how well it worked because it's sitting here in a british air museum" Edit: My mistake, I mixed this up in my head with Alice's quote about the Maus heavy tank, "You can see how well it worked because here it has Russian drawn all over it"

[@Ramzi1944]

Does WTYP mean: "Well there's your problem"?

[@kosmokat111]

yup @@Ramzi1944

[@Ramzi1944]

@@kosmokat111 Thank you

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Like who owns the only running Tiger I?

[@MaticTheProto]

That means literally nothing

[@himwo.]

My favorite detail of the 162 are the "Lippisch-Ohren" wingtip devices!

[@sablatnic8030]

As far as I know they were added to reduce stability because of a Dutch rolling problem.

I have really grown to love cut away models at museums. They help a lot in showing how things work and are a great illustrative tool for youtubers :) Nice Video, as always

[@decimated550]

The proper term would be musea the Latin plural for museum. Stadium, stadia same thing

[@thomasherbig]

Ignoring for a moment the insanity of last-ditch weapons, this plane is one of my favorites from the entire period. It’s so cute-looking (don’t look at the dorky engine, though), especially with its red arrow pointing forward. It also looks inherently modern - the A-6 comes to mind - with its rounded nose, bubble canopy, and thin wings.

[@egay86292]

watch "Brazil."

[@zenlizard1850]

Love the care you take with sources & accuracy in your videos.

[@Calatriste54]

Any records of pilots ejecting, or otherwise exiting the plane during a flight? The proximity of the air intake shivers me timbers..

[@Anlushac11]

Due to the engine intake location the HE-162 used one of the first ejection seats. Unlike earlier attempts like the Do-335 the HE-162 used a explosive cartridge to blow the seat and pilot clear of the aircraft.

[@herptek]

​@@Anlushac11If the plane is supposed to be expendable then pilot survivability comes up as something of a concern.

[@roykliffen9674]

It's not as weird as you think. The Americans developed the F-107 with the inlet right behind the cockpit too, although the engine was in the fuselage. It was highly advanced at the time (1956) but lost out (just) in a fly-off to the F-105 "Thunder Chief" and never was taken into production. BTW. "Shivers me timbers"?? Shouldn't you be watching Drachinifel?🤣🤣🤣

[@fus149hammer5]

​@herptek with their reputation, somehow I don't think crew survivability was high on the nazi's list of priorities especially when things got desperate.

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

@@roykliffen9674 Various Navies fly aircraft too. Just saying :-)

[@jeffyoung60]

Allied and Soviet post-war examination and test-flights of the Heinkel 162 confirmed what its German test pilots already knew. While not exactly a death trap to fly, the 162 was not a good jet plane to fly. The Jumo 004 jet engine mounted over the fuselage for ease of manufacture and ease of maintenance. It sounded like a great idea. But as a result of the weight being on top of the fuselage and not centered within the fuselage, the 162 was not well-balanced. Sudden tight movements to left or right could throw the aircraft into spin, difficult to recover from and deadly at low altitude. The flexible rubber fuel cell contained enough fuel for only 30 minutes of flight. Given the need for at least ten minutes return flight, the pilot had very little actual flying time available to him. If he was not careful, he would run out of fuel and crash. The stubby wing He-162 did not fly well as an unpowered glider, although interestingly, glider versions of the 162 were constructed as trainers. Armament comprised typically two, MG151 20mm cannons. Heinkel intended the 162 to carry two MK108 30mm cannons and reputedly a number were fitted with 30mm cannons. Information is scant but reportedly the 162 frame was not strong or rugged enough for two 30mm cannon. That said, the 162, despite its diminutive size, possessed ample room for the pilot due to its circular cross section, widest at the cockpit. An acrylic molded bubble canopy provided excellent vision although lacking armored glass protection. Best of all, the 162 featured an ejection seat, crucial for pilot survival given the large jet engine was right behind him. Combat reports of the He-162 remain sketchy and unverified to this day. It is highly possible that a He-162 shot down a British Tempest fighter bomber in late April 1945. Another vague report has a He-162 confronting an American P-51D Mustang in an inconclusive encounter. The He-162 remains an interesting near-end of war Luftwaffe combat entrant and one can only guess at, "What if?" had the 162 been introduced into combat perhaps three or four months earlier. And if the 162 could have been introduced in the autumn of 1944, could it have made any meaningful contribution against the Allied bombing offensive against Germany? The German RLM (Reichsluftsfahrtministerium) crafted 162 production on the basis of a consumer mass-produced disposable product, to be manufactured in large quantities as fast as possible and as cheaply as possible manned by remaining Luftwaffe pilots and possibly large numbers of 17-year old German young men gathered up and hastily trained on glider versions in mere weeks and then thrown in the crucible of fire high in the skies over Germany.

[@robertpalma7946]

Excellent and interesting video and you handled the concept very well!

[@MrBeugh]

I was visiting the Planes of Fame museum in Chino, CA ad had the privilege of meeting an elder Germane gentleman named Harold Bauer. He was there to see their Henkel 162. He said he was part of a squad ferrying 162s to a Scandinavian country (I don’t remember, I believe it was Finland) to hand over to Luftwaffe pilots already stationed there. He as shot down by several Mustangs as he was taking off. He said the planes flew beautifully, it was fast and handled very well. He pointed out that, with the engine on top just behind the cockpit, making ejecting impossible. He also said that many of them crashed, not so much because they were challenging to fly, but because they were sabotaged by the slave labor that built them! Missing screws, improper amount of glue, etc. means these planes had a tendency to fly apart in flight.

[@Tugela60]

Probably not sabotage, but just idiot SS overseeing the operation imposing unrealistic quotas and timelines.

[@danmcdonald9117]

Great video! I must say, that is the smoothest transition to channel sponsor I've ever seen, well done!!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Thanks :)

[@jonbutzfiscina1307]

The French used them for several years after the war to introduce pilots to jet aircraft. The main gear and tires were from the me 109. The nose wheel was the tailwheel from a ju-88. Several years ago, a fuselage was restored in France with the gear retract mechanism operational. It was on you tube. I think one should be made flyable.

[@williamzk9083]

I remember reading that the undercarriag retraction mechanism was hydraulic, but extension was by spring

[@andywells397]

Maybe make a copy like someone did with the 262

[@johncrispin2118]

Excellent summary again Chris Thankyou .Gives a valuable insight into this very interesting machine.

[@MiKeMiDNiTe-77]

Its incredible that from design to prototype to mass production in a matter of months for a totally new radical jet fighter with 300 produced is a pretty amazing feat.

[@andrewpinner3181]

Thanks Chris, just saw this, great overview, thanks also for all your great work !

[@bamspam23]

I read Wollenwaber's (JG1) autobiog, who flew the 162. He quite liked it, but said it had a fatal flaw. At lower speeds, if you turned too much using the rudders, the plane would just flip over suddenly & dive, needing a lot of height to recover. This flaw was due to jet flow interacting with rudder & turbulence during turns. It killed many pilots. It was due to the rushed development: not enough wind tunnel testing that would have spotted this design flaw, & possibly allowed a solution to be engineered (maybe the butterfly tail..?) Wollenwaber was a skilled & experienced pilot who got early access to the 162 & mastered it. He showed its aerobatics to sceptical JG1 pilots who were terrified of it's death-rate, to try & convince them it was airworthy! It needed very careful & skillful handling, & thus was a failure in its designed role. It wouldn't have helped Luftwaffe 46...

[@Carstuff111]

Ok, if I may say so, I have been watching this channel for a long while now. I found this channel and was hooked on the history and the details you add for context. That said, I find Bo Time Gaming, found that channel funny and relaxing.... Then you join in and now when I watch your channel, I hear can't help but chuckle every time. Thank you for the history, and thank you for the great laughs with Bo and the guys there too.

[@andrewthomas695]

Great content, format and presentation. Love it.

[@paultraynorbsc627]

Thanks for sharing Chris 👍

[@shawns0762]

Aerodynamically it was seriously great. It was the first aircraft to utilize the "area rule" principal. When the prototype did 562 mph luftwaffe officials were stunned. It was faster than the ME-262 and it had just one weaker engine. The second generation 162 would have been seriously great. It would have had engines with 50% more thrust, swept wings, v-tail and probably the revolutionary Mauser 213 rotary cannon

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

Germany had lost the war before the first generation 162 reached service in any number that could have made a difference. It was also recognised as difficult to fly for novice pilots, which, realistically, was all Germany had left. A second generation162 was cloud cuckoo land. Nice idea, never going to happen.

[@shawns0762]

@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 They lost the war way before that, they were doomed when Roosevelt decided to arm the Russians

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Funny every other opinion holds that it was much slower and where do you get Area Ruling from? it looks like it was anti-area ruled. From the front of the canopy to mid chord of the wing the cross sectional area is all over the place. Was there some gamer’s _expert opinion_ voiced somewhere?

[@shawns0762]

@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 The prototype did 562 mph, the top speed of the ME-262 was 540 mph. The production 162 was a little slower because it had the wingtip extensions and cannons. The benefits of "area rule" was discovered in Germany in 1944. The fuselage of the 162 thinned out between the wings therefore it was "area ruled"

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

@@shawns0762 Where did you read this? It looks like nonsense, where is the fuselage tapered, it plainly is not. Is this from some wehraboo fantasy factual fabrication?

[@rodrigoquiroga8590]

Many congrats !! Your channel is by far the best in english for WWII Air Forces and battles

[@lqr824]

@Gregs Airplanes is excellent too--far more in-depth, goes into endless detail.

[@spinnetti]

I have a flying model of this, and the pitch change on throttle change is crazy.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Consider twins flying on one engine, far bigger moment and no big deal, I didn’t even use rudder trim (🦵did mountain cycling).

[@DC.409]

Fascinating video, to be fair to Winkle I recall him saying it wasn’t easy to fly, and that a test pilot colleague who failed to follow the technical instructions determined for the aircraft was killed. Also his biggest complaint about all the new jet fighters including meteor and vampire was they didn’t have air brakes to slow combat speed for engagement, a flaw of the 262 against the Flying Fortress, the high closing speed for accurate gunfire. The Heinkel 162 was too little and too late, possibly a realisation that the biggest mistake by the Luftwaffe, was not putting the Heinkel He 280 into production arguably having a jet fighter 12 months ahead of the Messerschmitt 262. The Heinkel He 280 available in numbers in 1943, would have possibly changed or limited the CBO strategy which was mandated to reduce the ability of the Luftwaffe to fly and fight ready for overlord. Consequently, big week may never have happened or the outcome would have been different irrespective of the availability of the Mustang there by delaying overlord though not stopping it.

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

He-280 had about the same range as Me-163 - none ! Besides, if the jet engines weren't available in numbers in 1944 - which was the ONLY reason that delayed 262 - how would you think they had these engines available in 1943 ?

[@DC.409]

@@ottovonbismarck2443 recommend “Making Jet Engines in World War II Britain, Germany, and the United States, Dr Hermione Giffard, it is considered the foremost work on the subject and details the timelines for the progress of all jet engines. The Heinkel first flew 22 September 1940. Yes the Jet engines were difficult but again that was due to Luftwaffe and Wehrmacht incompetence, dogma, cronyism and poor use of resources and technical manpower. Sending your best technicians to fight on the Russian front and not mobilising German women for the manufacture of engines, like the Allies was strategically stupid. Consequently wasting time simplifying the design so they could be manufactured by slave labour, with the inevitability of poor quality.

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

@@DC.409 I don't disagree, but this is all from hindsight. Would you bet all your chips on a still largely unproven concept - and divert valuable resources - when you are winning a war ? Remember, until proven otherwise by the Russians, Germany was still winning the war in 1941, if I might say so. The whole German mindset was on winning the war. For similar reasons, the Allies didn't put more effort in their jet programs: simply because they couldn't afford like the British in 1939/40 or because it wasn't needed any more as in 1944/45. Not introducing women into the war economy is another matter and was indeed a waste of a huge workforce, albeit an untrained one.

[@DC.409]

@@ottovonbismarck2443 Even Hitler knew Barbarossa was blown by the 18th August 1941, when he seriously considered with the OKW obtaining an armistice with the Russians. The Heinkel was successfully combat tested against a FW190 outperforming it, but despite that Milch cancelled it for the Messerschmitt. Given before the war BMW had the Herbitus testing Plant costing several million marks they were able to progress faster. The BMW 003 engine was superior to the Junkers 004 the biggest issue was 50% of the Messerschmitt engines failed because of foreign material entering the intake and damaging the compressor only 2% was damage to the turbine blades they were quoting 30-35 hours between service overhauls, then the engines were bench tested for 30 minutes, this was accomplished with unskilled slave labour and women, Fedden Mission. The Junkers 004 A-0 ran 1939/40 the BMW 003. A-0 ran 1940.

[@nuts4ships]

Another excellent video Chris. Keep up the outstanding work!

[@williamhigdon8728]

I read a article written by a young test pilot of the He-162 which recounted some of his experiences. As I remember he was to young to be a fighter pilot. Later on he emigrated to the USA & became a pilot in the US Navy flying the EC-121 radar aircraft

[@MaticTheProto]

So what did he say

[@danskeroonie6303]

Was it a rational choice? - Yes. A cheap means of sudden air superiority would assist the ground forces considerably. The 3rd Reich still loses but not in May ‘45. Was it too late? - Yes, but worth a try. Was it a pipe dream? - No. The Me 163 rocket showed what German technology could achieve. Was it a disgraceful waste of resources? - No. It’s not in the same class as the Maus Tank or V-3 super gun. Good video! 😊

[@wadejustanamerican1201]

Thanks for the video and the book recommendation.

[@hughmarloweverest1684]

I read Eric Brown and his critique of the Salamander. Yes, he liked it. I do think he was aware that the tail control services would disintegrate in certain twisty turns scenarios, and in fact happened to another pilot at an air show in the Forties despite his counsel to be careful with it.

[@warrentaylor5131]

Thank you for the great video this is really helpful as I wondered how many were flown. Have you done a video on people who may have flown the plane.

[@rowbags3017]

The He 162 could never have regained air superiority with the inexperienced pilots who were expected to fly it. It would have been a death trap for them - but the same would have been true, whatever aircraft they'd been issued with.

[@Sacto1654]

But ironically, in the hands of an _experienced_ pilot, the He 162A was actually a really good airplane to fly. I believe Eric "Winkle" Brown, called by many the British equivalent of Charles "Chuck" Yeager, said the He 162A in the hands of an experienced pilot could have been a formidable fighter.

[@rowbags3017]

While Eric Brown remembered the He 162 fondly, he described it thus: "... it was no aeroplane to let embryo pilots loose on, and it would have demanded more than simply a good pilot to operate it out of a small airfield".@@Sacto1654

[@scrumpydrinker]

@@Sacto1654 that’s as maybe, but how many pilots would have had the rare skills of Eric Brown or Chuck Yeager, precious few I would have thought. Apparently Albert Speer was of the opinion that it would have caused the wholesale slaughter of the inexperienced pilots who would have had to fly the thing

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

@@Sacto1654 Not wishing to get into a bunfight here, but Winkle Brown was flying combat missions off HMS Audacity, the Royal Navies first escort carrier while Chuck Yeager was still serving as a mechanic. Winkle Brown, as a test pilot, flew more aircraft types than any one else in history, and performed more carrier landings than anyone else in history, essentially he showed how to do it. No insult intended to Chuck Yeager here, rather suggesting that Chuck Yeager could be considered the US equivalent of Winkle Brown, rather than the other way round 🙂

[@AlthewizardofOz]

Awesome video! The small little sound effects for the subject transitions were a nice touch. What sound library did you use to achieve that?

[@dr.frankenphoon6254]

Well done! Very informative. Thank you for shedding light on this little known mystery jet. Danke!

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

Great video, Chris...👍

[@stephenoneill245]

What about the acidic plywood adhesive they used that caused mid-air, catastrophic falling apart? 1st Grp JG 1 at Rostock lost 13 aircraft of which only 3 were shot down. With a flying time of only 30 minutes, deadstick landings also caused fatalities. 120 were delivered, 200 were awaiting delivery and 600 were half-built by the end of hostilities.

[@Donmusicman]

I recall hearing that the adhesive that was used was not the intended one. The Allies had destroyed the manufacturing source for the original adhesive.

[@robertpullen3726]

The glue never failed in any of planes it was used in. The crashes were caused by poor construction by slave workers.Most of the pilots that few it loved it.

[@egay86292]

whoops.

[@peterthomas5792]

Excellent analysis of an unusual machine, thanks.

[@watchfordpilot]

Thanks for highlighting one of my favourite WW2 aircraft (I still have the t shirt 😜). I don't know what it is that has kept my interest and fascination for this aircraft going since childhood. Despite the problems with manufacture, airworthiness and handling issues, if it were possible, I'd love to see one fly, but realistically, unlikely. Two years earlier and I believe it would have had a much greater effect. Great video

[@richardordoyne6232]

Really great reading about the two jet engines toward the end of WW! First time I have discovered the history of the H162. Thanks for your presentation,

[@peerfunk]

damn 2 weeks to plan something like this is just crazy

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

They do have a head start with the P.1078 but that only goes back to July 1944 as well, barely two additional months

[@rerd6614]

Just by optics it looks lile a miniture version of an A10. In comparison to the ME262 the concept looks like the F16 compared with F15. Iike the Salamander for its design features (Area Rule, Canopy, tricycle landing gear, ejection seat, jet) But it had serious quality issues and limitations from its building material (wood). Fine for a Mosquito, but with jet powered panic fighter? It had potential, but came far too late to make a difference.

[@vinnyganzano1930]

Desperation led to innovation and lots of them. I just wish the Horten could have flown because that looks like an amazing aircraft.

[@ianharper6015]

Thank you for a very informative and professional video.

[@jamesd3472]

The problem that the Luftwaffe faced was not that they ran out of aircraft, but that they ran out of pilots and fuel. Fuel shortages limited pilot training and created a compounding effect that meant that even if the He162 had been a true technological marvel it would have made little difference. The fact that it was often built with slave labour and low quality materials - I believe that the glue was a particular concern - alongside being far from beginner friendly meant that the aircraft could never succeed

[@fritztheblitz1061]

Great video, thank you.

[@TKSubDude]

Had the 162 been concived and built a year before it might have had a significant effect on the war. It's still one of the most advanced aero designs of the war and my favorite fighter, even if it didn't contribute much if anything to the war effort. With modern manufacturing methonds and a little CAD/CAM modeling to make it a touch more docile, it would make a fantastic light sport jet.

[@gibbousmoon35]

Ignoring hindsight, at that stage it was worth a try. The choices boiled down to accepting defeat was inevitable, or grasping for something extraordinary. Most times the latter won't save you, but on rare occasions it might.

[@JessWLStuart]

Well presented.

[@danditto6145]

Awesome video, the forerunner of our F-16, a simple jet with a single engine.

[@grumpyboomer61]

It was an interesting approach to a problem that was not going to be solved at that point in time. A year or two earlier, and there would have been time to develop the aircraft properly. And even then it likely wouldn't have changed the outcome of the war.

[@Salesman9001]

It's the same with most things Germany did during the war, too little too late. Like how "peoples rifle" concept of arming your second line troops with automatic weapons was a good idea; just came too late, in far too limited numbers and could never solve the Tiger in the room: the manpower shortage

[@user-kd2ij7te5v]

@@Salesman9001too little, too late late and to many crazy things all at same time.

[@thomasryan6545]

You're videos have always been excellent, but your recent videos have been especially good. Would you consider doing a video on the do335? It's been an aircraft that interested me since I first saw it as a kid, the unique design and curved cockpit reminded me of something out if Star Wars.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Thanks very much, really happy to hear it. I will have a look at the Do 335, probably Q3/4 2024

[@thomasryan6545]

@@MilitaryAviationHistory Thanks so much I'll be looking forward to it, and to every video in-between👍🏻

[@PORRRIDGE_GUN]

I have sat in the cockpit of the Volksjager featured in your video. I don't know what happened to the ejector seat, as it is missing from that example. The cockpit was very basic, like a glider but with engine temp guages. As for the nosewheel position indicator, there was also a red spigot in front of the cockpit that popped up when the undercarriage was down and locked. The widow through to the cockpit from the wheel well was often obscured with mud when operating off grass airfields. The undercarriage components were from a Stuka, iirc. Could you do a video about early ejector seats? The He162, He219 and Do335 had ejector seats but Ive been unable to find any reliable information about 5heir design, use and effectiveness

[@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188]

I remember seeing the Heinkel 162 in the Imp. War Museum in London, many years ago, during my one actual visit to London, except transfer in Heathrow, to go north to Newcastle

[@MGB-learning]

Great video

[@nikbear]

I love it, because it's absolutely bonkers!😂 I made a kit of one when I was a kid and there is just something about it 👍 great video 😉

[@paulbeesley8283]

One thing you never mentioned was that, over the winter of '44 to '45, those pilots who tested it were no older than 18. Most died. As to the utility of the aircraft, it was what America, would call a "point defense," fighter - intended for use in the immediate area into which it was launched. It's soeed and short endurance would have suited it for this role (if enough could have been be made.) I sometimes wonder if, had the Anericans had such an aircraft, if I could be based on escourt carriers to defend against Japanese, suicide pilots and boats.

[@cesartapiacueto]

Thank you very much, love you videos, greetings from Mexico

[@harryspeakup8452]

"Useless or Too Late"? It's not an either-or question...

[@gort8203]

Agreed, it's a poorly formulated question on the topic.

[@Topo842]

"Yes"

[@greghanson5696]

Great Vid!

[@delta5297]

If you haven't done a video on the subject already, I'd like to know how they turned the P-51 into a long-range escort fighter. Was it aerodynamics? Or just cramming more fuel tanks onto it? Did it pay a price in combat performance for its long range?

[@Pablo668]

Great vid as always. I really like the aircraft. It has a modern look that has aged well. This is all skin deep though. Pain in the arse to manufacture and field and I think the most serious problem was that it was very difficult to fly, and it was slated to be used by young inexperienced pilots thrown in as a last ditch effort to try and turn around an already lost war. Like the other German jet designs, they were perhaps a bit ahead of their time, but let down in reality by the situation in which they were built. A collapsing state with manufacturing and material supply problems.

[@georgewolfiii1170]

Very good video!

[@mugsnvicki]

Hello from London Ontario. I watch your channel with great interest and delight. Within driving distance of my city is Hamilton home to the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, Brampton, which has the Great War Flying Museum and of course Ottawa which has the Canadian Space and Aviation Museum. Also, my city is home to a fantastic airshow called SkyDrive...and 530 kms to Dayton, Ohio. You should know what is there...Great video!!!

[@kimrnhof107]

As usual you got most right (not that I mean you have got anything wrong) the basic problem with the plane, was the political environment, Hitler did not consider that germany could lose the war, before it was far to late, these projects should have been put ind place much earlier. This was an area where the allies, har a much more realistic awareness. Supermarine developed the Spitfire mark 4 (the first prototype Spitfire with a Griffon engine - it had if I remember correct a top speed of 756 km in 1942 (ok with out guns and all that stuff)) but at the time the max speed of the Spitfire was 657 km and that was the brand new mark 9. The English decided not set it into production, as the plane they had could do the job, and the new engine (the Griffon) was untested. (They changed their mindes later but that another story) . What's on paper is not always the best ! - I would love to hear your assessment of the rumour that I have heard, that the british secret service, was ordered to stop all attempts to kill Hitler, as he was considered better alive than dead to the allied war effort !!!

[@stephengardiner9867]

This aircraft was intended as a bomber interceptor, not a "dogfighter". It was fast, small and well armed for its size BUT it was not structurally strong enough to endure any violent maneuvering as one would expect if it was pitted against contemporary prop-driven single seat fighters. Too late? Absolutely! Useless? Yes, because it WAS too late. It needed a well trained pilot to handle it and they were in very short supply. Properly training new pilots would have required bases and airspace that were safe from Allied fighters. Those were basically non-existent. Lack of fuel alone would have severely limited operations. These aircraft would have ended up killing more minimally trained Hitler Youth pilots than Allied fighters would. An interesting design though and a good deal "saner" than some other last ditch German aircraft designs.

[@RalphTempleton-vr6xs]

The same was true of some of the late-war aircraft the Japanese developed, technologically advanced but rushed into service as desperation measures, hoping to stem the tide of the allied advance. In both the German and Japanese situations, the arrogance and intransigence of their leaders resulted in it being a case of too little, too late. In Germany's case, it was the insistence that the ME-262 be capable of bombing, thus delaying its operational debut by almost a year that kept it from being a true game-changer. On the Japanese side, if they had concentrated their efforts earlier on some of the fantastic fighter designs, before the material shortages made it impossible to field these aircraft in any meaningful numbers, it would have been more difficult for the Pacific campaign, and the special attack units might not have been formed at all

[@lesliereissner4711]

A very good and succinct analysis. Certainly too little and too late but interesting nonetheless. And my local air museum (2.5 km walk away) has a very nice example on display!

[@bertkoerts3991]

You refer quite a lot to other videos, apartfrom that, very infrmative! 👍😊

[@d675ose7]

Vielen dank Christoph aus Grossbritanien - deine videos sind echt toll und deine einsicht und begeisterung für die thema ist 🎯 Fwiw - ich wohnte in Wesel (Flüren) als Englisher kind in 86-91 und ein video über varisty/die zerstörung Von Wesel wäre sehr interresant und auch sehr traurig 🥺 Deine Geshichte ist “on par” mit drachinifel und “we have ways of making you talk” - James Holland 👍🏻

[@johnevans4867]

Thanks!

[@Yot-001]

...could have been tricky to handle, but resulted a genial device.

[@Brok.]

I'm really not a fan of many jets out there, but I will say this is perhaps the only one from WW2 that I could agree actually looks good.

[@sabre0smile]

The engine problems being not part of the aircraft's design, I think it's an impressive aircraft for how absurdly low-tech it all is. It's also adorable and I love it even though I'd never dare attempt to fly one in reality

[@thelandofnod123]

Imagine if they had focused on centrifugal flow rather than axial flow engines.

[@seegurke93]

Nice Wunderwaffel :D Grüße

[@salmonella6744]

I see the Cirrus Vision Jet took some cues from this.

[@billyhouse1943]

Thank you..

[@luigiaqua2263]

You might get an eye on the System Rott, construction by Waffen Union (former Versuchsanstalt für Strahtriebwerke Grossendorf)in late 44 early 45, a rocket plane with an additional 2- stroke engine to gain longer loitering time once in air. Unknown if even one was made, but all parts were already in place, probably in the Eschenlohe tunnel as last station of this branch of Waffen Union was stationed in wars end in Oberau Kartonnagen Fabrik.

[@Kettleman1.0]

It looks like an early jet fighter, not a last resort vehicle!

[@javiergilvidal1558]

It was both!

[@mytube001]

Every jet fighter during WW2 was an early jet fighter! :D

[@Kettleman1.0]

for ww2 jet airplanes it looks like an early ww2 jet airplane, not a last resort one.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

Lockheed put the engine in the fuselage, they got the low loss jet pipe pretty good. De Havilland got stuck in an unnecessary twin boom rut.

[@TheThingAndTheOtherThing]

Watching this and waiting with baited breath to get to the "Easy to Fly" section. One look at this thing and I thought "there's absolutely no way this thing is stable and easy to fly."

[@britts9215]

I see it more as a design choice between an interceptor role, where the 262 was designed for the fighter role, but limited to the interceptor role becuase of range. I think the jet technology was not developed up to support the fighter role yet, If the goal is to drop the bomber rather than to maintain air superiority, the 162 is a much better design. I think this was Germany finally recognizing reality too late, which they did in many of their programs. A major advantage for the jets was the much greater availibility of fuel as with refining technologies at the time, much easier to mass produce the jetfuel than aviation fuel. If the goal was to contest airspace with escorts, the 262 is superior, but if you decide to just drop the bombers, then the 162 can perform that role nearly as well at greatly reduced cost in everything but the pilot. The Germans put lots of efforts into deploying technologies which were about 5 years ahead of development, which generally had massive issues, or were outright failures. They tried a desiel electric heavy tank, and built many tanks which were designed beyound their material science, so they had extremely short use lifetimes. Considering how quickly they wre expending equipment, I guess they were in the process of deplying "barely good enough" by 1944.

[@gonzalobures7312]

I understand the BMW engine made it a handful. I have a scale RC model of the HE 162 with a good turbine engine and its performance is outstanding. I do not really know how a scale/exact model of the HE 162 can be compared to the full size, but mine flies awesome and its very manureable while been also very stable. Only the rudder use can be naughty if tired at high speed. I only use it to creect jaw going into landing. Your documentary was good, only we disagree in the flying portion of the plane.

[@petermuller608]

What are the big red arrows on the front if the aircraft for?

[@michaelkeller5008]

Minute 14:30 - ist die Beschriftung nachträglich von den Allierten angebracht worden? "kortrallieren"?

[@leroycharles9751]

I don't know it's handling characteristics but it looks pretty cool.

[@cedhome7945]

Is there a computer program where we can see the projected handling and performance by putting the shape power and weight dimensions in to get a feeling of how this airframe performed ? As no genuine or replica are airworthy

[@messinberver4683]

Well, if you have good flight test data and pilot manuals, you could absolutely calculate a reasonable estimate for the turn performance. Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles has a good YT video (P-47 Part 5--Maneuverability) that teaches hpw to do those calculations

[@mytube001]

@@messinberver4683 The obvious question then is what kind of Gs it could handle. Considering the cheap and basic production, perhaps it was much more limited by structural integrity than aerodynamic performance?

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

@@mytube001 The master race of the thousand year reich couldn’t quite get wood glue right. The structure weakened.

[@MakerBoyOldBoy]

Very informative presentation. Good issues which resembled Japanese advanced designs same time period. The issues discussion were inevitable. The Me-262 success was irrelevant to Allied offensive. The desperate origin of He-162 was the logical answer but, again, could not overcome the same issues of the Me-262. Extremely important aviation airframes in the midst of carnage.

[@pedenharley6266]

Thanks for the encouragement to “visit your local museum” at the end!

[@josephstabile9154]

A rational choice in that it tried to a hasten game-changing fighter in meaningful numbers into squadron service. Perhaps a world record time from specification to delivery, especially given the collapsing infrastructure. What wasn't anticipated, and acknowledgement of which would not have been countenanced, was the rate of chaotic collapse. Working up to squadron readiness with a completely new type in time to scramble in significant numbers in April '45 was to be a bridge too far--totally not the plane's fault. Actually, even a simple, but new plane will have lots of details needing ironing out. Collapsing infrastructure, woleful fuel shortages, working up a new type with a lot of new pilots--Germany's clock had run out!

[@paulforder591]

Informative video.The Heinkel He-162 was too little too late in WW2, and, for a jet fighter, had a lot of teething problems, being difficult to fly.

[@whiskeybrown262]

162 was my favorite to fly in il2 1946, but after this knowledge...

[@AlthewizardofOz]

Since you asked 'what do you think?' I figured I'd indulge: seems like a typically incoherent attempt by late-war Germany to create more boutique platforms that are supposedly novel and high-impact, but in fact dilute the mass production of existing models that are more mature, sustainable, and have proven combat effectiveness. The very low production numbers and few recorded combat stories imply the impact of this aircraft was negligible, and likely Germany would have been better off never having started this program and could have allocated the resources towards the me262. Thankfully this pattern of German production program incoherence shortened the war.

[@douglasfur3808]

A day late and a dollar short. "If only" someone in the Air Force in 1939 could have made an emphatic decision on the jet program without worrying about second guessing from above it might have made a difference. Considering the needed technical development and lack of time, high temperature alloys and fuel that "might" had fairly low odds.