Nazi Blunders | Technical Wonders & Strategic Failures of the Luftwaffe: A Historical Examination

Some of the reasons behind the death of the Luftwaffe, from the appointment of Ernst Udet to his demise and the many strategic errors made by Nazi Germany.
Learn About The First Jet Fighter. Heinkel 280, Messerschmitt Me 262, and Heinkel He 162.
Learn what led to the Luftwaffe's defeat and the mistakes that prevented these wonder weapons from making a difference at the end of WWII.
During World War II, the German air force, the Luftwaffe, suffered a significant decline and eventual demise as the war progressed. Initially, it emerged as a formidable force, displaying impressive technological advancements and tactical superiority. Led by skilled commanders such as Hermann Göring, the Luftwaffe played a crucial role in the early victories of the German war machine.
During the early stages of the war, the Luftwaffe's Blitzkrieg strategy demonstrated devastating effectiveness. A combination of dive bombers, fighters, and tactical bombers wreaked havoc on enemy forces and infrastructure. This dominance was most notable during the invasion of Poland, the Battle of France, and the early phases of the war on the Eastern Front.
However, the tide began to turn against the Luftwaffe as the war progressed. Several factors contributed to its decline. The first was the inability to sustain its initial technological edge. While the Luftwaffe initially possessed superior aircraft, including the renowned Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the versatile Junkers Ju 87 Stuka, technological advancements by the Allies gradually narrowed the gap. Allied forces developed more advanced aircraft, such as the British Supermarine Spitfire and the American P-51 Mustang, surpassing their German counterparts in speed, range, and firepower.
Another critical factor was the depletion of experienced pilots. The relentless air battles and high casualties took a heavy toll on the Luftwaffe's pilot ranks. The German pilots, who were initially highly skilled and experienced, were gradually replaced by less experienced and inadequately trained recruits. This loss of skilled manpower diminished the Luftwaffe's effectiveness in combat.
Furthermore, the strategic bombing campaign by the Allies severely hampered the Luftwaffe's ability to project air superiority. Bombing raids targeted German airfields, production facilities, and infrastructure, resulting in the destruction of aircraft and key logistical support. The famous Battle of Britain fought primarily in the skies over England in 1940, was a turning point, as the Royal Air Force successfully defended against the Luftwaffe attacks, ultimately preventing the planned German invasion.
The Luftwaffe's decline also resulted from the failure of the German military's overall strategy. Hitler's decision to engage in a two-front war by invading the Soviet Union while still fighting the Allies in the West stretched the Luftwaffe's resources and capabilities to their limits. The vast distances and harsh conditions of the Eastern Front presented enormous logistical challenges, forcing the Luftwaffe to divide its forces and focus on multiple theaters simultaneously. This dispersion of resources weakened the Luftwaffe's ability to concentrate overwhelming force in any one area.
By the later stages of the war, the Luftwaffe was further crippled by fuel shortages, limited production capabilities, and a lack of strategic vision. The air force struggled to adapt to changing circumstances, and its diminished operational capabilities could not counter the Allies' overwhelming air superiority.
Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ / @dronescapes
To support/join the channel ➤ / @dronescapes
IG ➤ / dronescapesvideos
FB ➤ / dronescapesvideos
➤ X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.vi...
➤ THREADS: www.threads.ne...
#luftwaffe #aircraft #airplane

[@Dronescapes]

Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes To support/join the channel ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes/join IG ➤ instagram.com/dronescapesvideos FB ➤ facebook.com/Dronescapesvideos ➤ X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.video/2p89vedj ➤ THREADS: www.threads.net/@dronescapesvideos

[@NikoletaGogo]

Uhph

[@clij5202]

The Me-262 is one of my all-time-favorite aircrafts. Beautiful design. Very esthetic.

[@thethoughtfulconservative]

Agreed!

[@gprich82]

The A10 is my favorite. Colossally un-esthetic lol.

[@clij5202]

@@gprich82 A-10 in on my list too with SR-71, Corsair F4 from WW2, F14, F15, F22

[@brucegibbins3792]

Old School, me. Propeller or Turboprop are the the aircraft I call favorites. Those are the types that flew over our house on their journey to other destinations. Mostly these were DC3, Bristol Freighter, Vickers Viscount and Lochead E10. Occasionally an airforce Vampire would be seen. Around that time we're ex-airforce Sunderland and TEAL Solent Flying Boats.

[@brucegibbins3792]

Old School, me. Propeller or Turboprop are the the aircraft I call favorites. Those are the types that flew over our house on their journey to other destinations. Mostly these were DC3, Bristol Freighter, Vickers Viscount and Lochead E10. Occasionally an airforce Vampire would be seen. Around that time we're ex-airforce Sunderland and TEAL Solent Flying Boats.

[@hamishdunbar5836]

Capt Brown is probably the luckiest man out there with the amount of different aircraft he has flown So Jelly Thank you Sir

[@hamishdunbar5836]

@@heywhatsthatsmell So true M8t

[@julianmhall]

Winkle Brown flew over 400 different types. Only ever refused to fly one.. the Natter - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349_Natter He said it was a death trap. When a guy of his experience says that, one should probably listen.. :)

[@lesterbuckman5493]

@@hamishdunbar5836 I never have been a believer of luck as we make our own with skill dedication to understanding systems and characteristics of each of the planes he flew. I think we tend to make our own luck by being as best prepared and understanding potential issues that can arise and the correct course to take when they do. That’s not to say very skilled pilots that have done everything right and have still died because of things beyond their control, unlucky ? I think the saying shit happens characterises better

[@shaunmcclory8117]

​@@lesterbuckman5493yes, when asked about his apparent 'luck' Gary Player said " yes,it's funny, the more i practice the luckier i get"!

[@lesterbuckman5493]

@@shaunmcclory8117 That was what I was getting at. I am not a fan of the term. Brown ever honing his craft doing his homework and leaving little to chance. Night before test flights on a new aircraft he’s going over all systems and information, not at the bar having whiskeys and beer that was the norm for the time. Things can go wrong sure I think the term shit happens sums it up better than he was unlucky.

[@jondeere5638]

The Lockheed L-133 was an exotic design started in 1939 which was proposed to be the first jet fighter of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) during World War II. The radical design was to be powered by two axial-flow turbojets with an unusual blended wing-body canard design capable of 612 mph (985 km/h) in level flight. A model of this plane can sometimes be found on line.

[@theworldwariioldtimeradioc8676]

It is fascinating that when the war started in 1939 many countries, including the U.S., had bi-planes in front line service and when the war ended in 1945 the Germans had jets, rocket planes, and missiles. Imagine if the V-2 came out in 1943 with the range to reach the US East Coast.

[@melgross]

Meh! Their main fighter, the 109 was obsolete early in the war. The 262 had plenty of problems. Their rocket plane was far more dangerous to the pilot than the enemy. Minor problem, there was no way to actually land. And the V-2 was so inaccurate that it could land several miles from its target. One large enough to reach us would have been an entirely different program, and would have cost far too much. Additionally, it wouldn’t have been worth it. Same thing with the planned Amerika bomber. A vast amount of money to produce planes that could just drop leaflets or a few small bombs, just enough to hopefully instill fear, but not real damage.

[@JohnShuba]

The inability of the Germans to make a breakout with their new weapons was rooted in the fact that there were so many competing designs. The Third Reich was an administrative nightmare since Hitler set up overlapping and competing agencies (headed by ruthlessly ambitious Nazis) to work on the same problems. He believed that a "Darwinian struggle" would produce the best results. He also kept all final decisions in his hands. The Germans could have had the Me-262 in production in 1942 or 1943, except that Hitler interceded and insisted that the revolutionary jet be developed as a bomber. This set it back two years. There were also competing jet plans tying down valuable resources.

[@Marc-Mcloud]

Hitler was so impressed with the Mosquito, that he wanted Germany to have its own version. The US had the Lightning and he wanted the ME262 to be Germanys

[@Mastermechanicman]

As did the English and Americans, you might not know but the leaders of the world fund both sides of every war since the beginning of renaissance it’s known. The Rothschild, Rockefeller, Bush, Clinton, DuPont and the rest of the 10 families of the “fallen angels!” Their words not mine. This isn’t real common knowledge but they want a new world order and it’s written that three world wars must happen first because they are supposed to not force it upon us but rather we have to ask for it. Which is why you see the ignorance of the world, attention span only 60 seconds or less! That’s why they assassinate any president who isn’t aligned with their agenda or ideology! It’s actually worse than what I speak of and nobody cares until it’s too late just like when they funded the first and second world wars!

[@andymurphy4393]

​@@Marc-Mcloudmj n😅hin7777

[@spiderknight9893]

They vastly underestimated the Soviets and started a war they could never win.

[@Bigsky1991]

Astounding that the Brits were flight testing their Jet fighter before Pearl Harbor in 41' ! I spoke to one of Browns project leads in the 80s and he commented about the weak thrust, massive amounts of fuel used, and Turbine parts that were " brittle like crackers" he said. Look how far we have come today.

[@thethoughtfulconservative]

The Luftwaffe's Erprobungstelle or E-stelle (for short) was the arm dedicated to experimental aircraft. They were responsible for a lot of the wacky (but sometimes brilliant) ideas the Germans came up with. Funnily enough, the German Airforce continued to use the (Nazi) name until the 80's. Eventually, the military high command changed the program's name to "Wehrtechnische Dienststellen" or Military Technical Test Centers (perhaps to avoid scandal, who knows). Even during the 50's they continued to use innovations and standards set by the old Luftwaffe, in bases such as Ingolstadt/Manching (founded after the war) where they worked on projects like WTD 61. The Luftewaffe's primary experimental aircraft-testing bases of operation during WW2 were E-Stelle Rechlin, E-Stelle Tarnewitz and E-Stelle Travemünde near Lubeck.

[@TheAneewAony]

The 262 @05:39 is V1+AD HG I test airframe with the low-profile Rennkabine racing-canopy which achieved 606 mph in 1944 with standard engines

[@Imnotyourdoormat]

*No disrespect to **_"Winkle"_** love the guy but ... *The Vought F4U Corsair had a top-speed of 446 mph.

[@garydownes2111]

post war sure the Corsair did but not during ww2

[@Imnotyourdoormat]

@@garydownes2111 *_Google lists F4-U WW2 speed at 446 but the P-47-M was WW2's fastest single engine prop plane..._*

[@garydownes2111]

@@Imnotyourdoormatin 1945 sure, still slower than the jets though. and all of the jets & their engines had development room to get faster/ more powerful. Also jets cruised faster and spent more of their normal flight conditions at higher speeds than even the fastest ww2 piston fighters except maybe for the Do-335.. I’m not sure of your point tbh

[@Imnotyourdoormat]

@@garydownes2111 *Being British "Winkle" kinda acted like the Tempest was the marker pinnacle point for WW2 piston/prop speed when it just wasn't.... **_thats all._*

[@garydownes2111]

@@Imnotyourdoormat tbf he was a British navy pilot so was probably most familiar with seafires, earlier cosairs & seafurys as a reference to compare jets to, he flew many aircraft but maybe had less access to the last generation of American super props. 460mph is pretty fast tbf for the Fury and close to 475mph of the P47m. I have a feeling the Do-335 may have cruised faster and been the hotter aircraft with the max speed apparently of 474mph. it’s not top trumps just based on speed tbh, both the P47m & Sea Fury in practice would be carrying fuel tanks and rockets etc probably while the Do-335 would theoretically have been cleaner but still carrying heavy loads of fuel and ammunition etc. in reality the me-262, meteors and P80s were significantly faster, cruised faster etc.

[@panther105]

At 40:00 that's pretty much the whole story.. so much energy into imprisoning and killing Jews, slave labour and a crazy leader ... No mystery why they were doomed..

[@constantreader7944]

Glad you raised this issue. Is there a documentary about this? I’ve always wondered about all the human effort the Nazis put into the eradication and murder of the Jews and others (he murdered 12 million, and 6 million of those were Jewish people). Could they quantify that and apply that to the other options they had? And why didn’t Hitler wait until he’d succeeded in the East against the Soviets before he amped up the killing machines and camps? And another wasted opportunity is Hitler’s non-use of women. He didn’t believe women should have a role in the war except to make babies. In the US and UK, we put women to work; they manufactured the material for war and transport, so the men could go fight the war. Had Hitler done that too? Where is the documentary about how Hitler blew it? Thank God he blew it, but this war was his to win or lose. And he chose to lose.

[@garydownes2111]

The Heinkel He-280 was doomed as it was designed to fit under powered and underdeveloped Heinkel jet engines never suited for mass production. it then lacked the ability to take the bigger heavier jumo engines or the fuel for them. the he-280 required complete redesign to incorporate those changes plus a move to a single tail to eliminate stability issues. basically the he-280 was unsuitable for mass production within tight deadlines unlike the me-262..

[@TheAneewAony]

The 280 was 60 mph faster than the fastest wartime Meteor, still, it was 50 mph slower than the 262

[@garydownes2111]

@@TheAneewAony the light unequipped prototype 280s with minimal fuel were that fast, god knows how fast a much heavier equipped ‘production’ aircraft with heavier engines, more fuel & different tail would have been as that never flew. also 3x 20mm cannons wasn’t a great bomber destroyer armament compared to the 262’s 4x 30mm MK-108s..

[@coodudeman]

OMG!!! The narrator said the name Uranus correctly! You just got a like and a sub!

[@reginaldmcnab3265]

49:27 because German Air Force was not intend to fight offensive war like the British empire’s Air Force. The German Air Force was intend to defend Germany

[@stevewhalen6973]

Thanks!

[@Dronescapes]

Thank you so much!

[@pashakdescilly7517]

Mr Brown, you seem to have forgotten that the British also had a jet fighter plane, the Gloster Meteor. It entered RAF service a month after the Me-262, and was nearly as fast as the German plane.

[@Dronescapes]

Watch: Gloster Meteor - The First Jet That Chased And Downed A Nazi V-1 Flying Bomb [WWII DOCUMENTARY] kzbin.info/www/bejne/f5Cqe4p-Zd2Xm68 Available publicly in a few hours. You will learn how Brown learned about the existence of the Gloster Meteor, and his role in developing the aircraft 😉

[@JONNIE8OY]

He said that. Listen more closely.

[@billcallahan9303]

Is the 12 hour overhaul time on the 262s Jumo engines fact?

[@shebbs1]

12-15, yes.

[@Dronescapes]

It was dreadful, and it made it operationally useless, also needing to be completely scrapped, not overhauled. After the war it took the French eight endless years to make it work, and to do so they put 120 Nazi engineers to work, and had to radically modify those engines. They also entered a partnership with a U.S. company.

[@melgross]

All of the videos here have been shown elsewhere. I’ve seen them a couple of years ago, but it’s always nice seeing them again. I have several books on the Luffwaffe, and I don’t see any errors here. But even at almost two hours, it doesn’t give us a lot of important details. Still, it’s enough to give us the gist.

[@timschmid4125]

Last week I was in this plane (and the concorde). Very much worth it if you're in southern Germany!

[@Dronescapes]

The legendary Technik Museums!

[@garydownes2111]

@@timschmid4125 I was there a couple of years ago, got fantastic picture :)

[@TarpeianRock]

As if the Luftwaffe was this vastly superior Air Force…yes, it won victories against very, very weak air forces in the beginning of the war but once it came up against a well equipped air force, the RAF, it was soundly beaten.

[@kkteutsch6416]

What defeat Luftwaffe - as germans at all - was the quantity, not Quality and final lack of fuel ...

[@biernut8723]

Not true. During the Battle of Britain, the 109 had a kill/loss ratio of 2:1 against British fighters. For the following two years it was over 4:1. The RAF was absolutely routed by a better opposition. The Brits were lucky America stepped in when they did.

[@TarpeianRock]

@@biernut8723 what are you talking about ? The Battle of Britain was won by the British more than year before the US was in the war. Check your basic facts mate. Btw : are you saying the Germans won the Battle of Britain ? Really?

[@melgross]

@@kkteutsch6416no. The 109 was obsolete by the time the war was in its middle phase. The RAF beat them. The Soviets beat them, and we beat them. It was quality as well as quantity. But the quantity problem occurred because the Germans were losing rapidly. Their hopes that their expansion would provide them with more material and oil were dashed. The corruption in Nazi germany was substantial. Everything played a part.

[@melgross]

@@biernut8723do you have something to back those numbers up?

[@brucegibbins3792]

Wasn't the V1 "Flying Bomb" rocket powered rather than by a Jet engine? There was also the British Glouster Whittle early in the development of the Jet fighter

[@Dronescapes]

The V1 was a pulse jet, and the first turbojet in history was Whittle's in April 1937

[@4thllamaofthealpacolypse712]

The V1 was a pulse-jet. The V-2 was rocket powered.

[@rickhenson660]

It was a pulse jet engine! It was not a rocket, but it used pulses of fuel in short bursts to generate power. It's not as simple as I've tried to make it, but it's close.

[@neilfoss8406]

The V1 was a pulse jet engine that's why some called it a buzz bomb. It makes as much noise as thrust it seems. A pulse jet engine has no moving parts, the length and shape creates thrust the way it burns back and forth with fuel introduced in the right place at the right time making the thrust from the pulse action.

[@markredgrave6282]

The V-1 wasn't powered by a rocket motor but a pulse jet engine. The Messerschmitt Komet was a rocket powered fighter.

[@johnzehrbach820]

The only potentially achievable difference would have been to develop hot sections that were rapidly replaceable. (the parts that wore out in 15 hours in the Jumo), the other jet engines were not mass produced.

[@WilhelmSallsten]

Goering was WW1 fighter ace but in 1940, fortunately for the allies, he was an ignorant narcissistic buffoon. The Bf109 was very effective when used in four finger fighter sweeps but when restricted to the speed and altitude of bombers it could barely hold its own against Hurricanes and was in serious trouble if there were Spitfires that had altitude advantage.

[@ケッケラ-コッフ]

Me262シュワルベ搭載のユンカース・ユモ004Bヱンヂン耐久性は非常に低く、当時の持続稼働時間は僅か24時間しか有りませんでした(白目)

[@Dronescapes]

More or less 20 hours if handles by expert pilots and aces, otherwise those German engines lasted even less, sometimes less than 10 hours, making them absolutely useless in operational terms. It was just another Nazi stunt, good for short lived propaganda, but nothing more. It took the French and a team of 120 (ex) Nazi engineers a staggering eight years to make them work properly after the end of WWII. In order to do so they also had to radically modify them, and seek assistance from both Britain and the United States. Both countries, needless to say, had both proper centrifugal and axial turbojets by then, as the British had been working on the turbojet since the late 1920s. Deployments of the German turbojet in late 1944 proved to be yet again a waste of time and resources. If Britain had supported Whittle, the inventor of the turbojet, they could have had an easy to develop and very reliable centrifugal turbojet before the beginning of the war, and years ahead of the Germans, but unfortunately, thanks to A.A. Griffith (one of the fathers of the axial turbojet), Whittle was ostracized, and ridiculed in 1929. He was able to finalize his invention only after mid 1935, when a group of private investors gave him a small sum of money. It took Whittle, despite the meager funding, less than two years to build the first turbojet in history. Considering that Heinkel, BMW, Junkers and Daimler, despite their might, could not create a proper engine in five years, that says a lot about how brilliant the British inventor was. In 1929 he also predicted that it would take decades to develop a proper axial turbojet, also something that the likes of Griffith, or all those German Companies and Hans Von Ohain, failed to realize.

[@eagleeye8920]

In the ww2, Germany had all factors to succeed except the most important thing, intelligent leadership.

[@LBlazer169]

They didn't have oil

[@Alwaysfishing2024]

Maybe someone sober anyways, guy was high as a kite on meth. Rambling on for hours about nothing. I'm very glad he was a f u c k i n g junkie. My grandparents were kids at beginning of the war in Poland.

[@erikschultz7166]

Eric Brown _ greatest test pilot

[@becketmariner]

lesson is don't give drug addicts the keys to the multibillion dollar airforce ministry. Geroing

[@afzaalkhan.m]

Amazing developments in jet aircraft at the time

[@jondeere5638]

Sir Frank Whittle was an English aviation engineer and pilot invented the jet engine. The British government was not interested but the Germans were.

[@charliejohnston1978]

The bottom line, is that Hitler screwed up everything he touched. His pride was his biggest enemy, especially in Russia where he blundered very badly. Hitler was within 50 miles of Moscow in 1942 and decided to divert much of his forces to Stalin's favorite city instead of taking Moscow. GE's turbine blades helped England greatly and in general all parts and food shipped to England saved their butts starting in 1942. England created some decent early designs, but they had to ask America to produce the components in our mass production programs. By 1944, England had become America's island air craft carrier. Pres. Roosevelt's bad health and friendship with Churchill was making America's self defense harder than necessary, which left the Pacific defense on the back burner until after Pearl Harbor's knee jerk reaction... Even then England demanded that we prioritize England's war over our own war in the Pacific with Japan.

[@petergraves2085]

Adolf Galland's "autobiography" (The First and the Last) has extensive details about the ME 262 and its production. Or not - by orders of Hitler. It's worth reading, though it seems to be a job application for favour amingst the post World War 2 allied and West German authorities. He always seems to propose strategies that were rejected by his higher officers (mainly Goering) - that would have turned out to have been right, in combatting Allied airpower.

[@kennethwiggins4396]

I saw an actual 262 in an aircraft museum. It was in perfect condition. I understand with some fuel it would still fly. I admit it was a pretty cool 😎 looking aircraft!

[@SJBW196]

You do realize they restore them for museums to look "perfect condition" don't you!?!

[@MonkeeVoodoo]

@@SJBW196 you do realize that it’s on the case by case basis. Some of them they repair, some of them are original.

[@SJBW196]

@@MonkeeVoodoo You do realize that the perfect one the poster describes has been restored? No aircraft was ever perfect when it left the factory!! A museum restoration however is very different!

[@Matthew-j3b]

Storm over Hawaii prevent Japan's from stopping war That storm changed history

[@Byepolarchaos]

Great Britain also let egos affect the development of the check as a matter of fact they were ahead of Germany in the mid-30s

[@Outlier999]

Did the Allies also make mistakes either their aircraft.

[@mopar215swp]

😮... No. ☆ Almost one time, probably. 🇺🇸 but nha. 😮

[@LBlazer169]

Struggling with the English language?

[@gaynlfarmer_55]

Imagine thinking that a propeller plane was better...

[@traianliviudanciu8665]

Who and when was invented jet Fly ?

[@Dronescapes]

the first Turbojet in history was created by Frank Whittle in April 1937. He accomplished that despite having been ignored, ridiculed and ostracized by his peers. Because of that he spent years, and years in desperation (1929 to 1935), until in mid 1935 a group of private investors gave his a small sum of money and in less than two years he built the first turbojet in history, which later became Britain first operational turbojet, the U.S. first turbojet (both as a research project and operational), and of course the heart of the formidable MiG-15, as the Soviets copied it. It became G.E.'s first turbojet, but also Pratt & Whitney's. It also powered the early versions of the first jet airliner in history (D.H. Comet.) As for the faithful first German jet powered flight in 1939, not only Hans Von Ohain has had access to Whittle's work since the mid 30s, as his work had been copied and distributed in Germany, but the He 178 flight was in fact mix-powered, conveniently incorporation Whittle's invention. After the end of WWII, virtually everyone, except France, ignored all variants of the German turbojets. Britain had been also working on an axial turbojet since the late 20s, and eventually had a proper one. In the arly 40s they also had one (Metrovick), but it was discarded as useless at the time because of all the issues it had. the Germans simply chose to power aircraft with equally flawed engines, not fit for operational purposes, but good enough for a useless Nazi propaganda. The deployment of the Me 262 in late 1944, months before their total defeat, was pointless and those flawed engines not only lasted a few hours before needing to be completely scrapped, but ere also prone to deadly flame-outs. Obviously their propaganda still lives to this day, as all they did was deploy a pointless prototype of an engine that was completely ignored going forward, and that others built better than them, despite investing less time and resources than they did.

[@supergeek0177]

This is just like watching CASG / Canberra and their terrible Defence procurement policies hahaha

[@ezo4]

Germans make cool stuff 🙂

[@baka-bomb7186]

A great lesson that even if you're high-tech and bossy, it's meaningless if the leader is a dick.

[@amyjojinkerson-b6o]

lack of organization and arguing with the Nazi's

[@jamesricker3997]

Their biggest failure was the Bf-109. It was an interceptor. It lacked the range and ammunition load to do the job required of it. What Germany needed was to be judified in a superiority fighter.They did not get one of those until 1944 with the FW-190D,but by then it was to late.

[@r.p.vanloon6403]

Sorry, but the Me 262 was there before the Gloster Meteor. Fact. And it baffled the Spitfire pilots when they first encountered it.

[@Dronescapes]

Sorry, but let me complete the information. Other facts: when deployed in late 1944 the Me 262 had disastrous and operationally useless engines. Deploying an operationally useless aircraft was both an act of desperation, and quite frankly a stupid move at the same time. Britain was too busy winning the war and defeating a psychotic Nazi regime rather than deploying novel, still flawed technologies that would have not made a difference at the time. What you consider an achievement was actually nothing more than a short lived Nazi show. After the war virtually everyone, except the French, ignored those German flawed engines, they were too busy working on proper ones developed in the previous 20 years, both axial and centrifugal. The French, despite having 120 Nazi engineers at their disposal and government funding, took eight endless years to make them finally work, but not before radically modifying them and seeking external help from a U.S. company… That is the measure of the failure of the German turbojet, despite years spent developing one by a multitude of German companies (BMW, Heinkel, Junkers and Daimler)

[@r.p.vanloon6403]

@@Dronescapes Britain was too busy winning the war and defeating a psychotic Nazi regime rather than deploying novel, still flawed technologies that would have not made a difference at the time. That sentence says it all.

[@Dronescapes]

I could have also gone into more complex and lengthy explanations, but you can already find them in prior comments. You might wonder how copying Whittle work and distributing it across German universities benefited German engineers such as Hans Von Ohain. The 1939 Heinkel/Von Ohain was in fact mix powered, also incorporating Whittle’s work. You can also listen to Von Ohain’s exclusive and very rate to come by interviews we have on the channel, and compare them to the ones we have with Whittle. The comparison is quite revealing, and it is impossible not to notice how the German engineer was a million miles behind a true visionary such as Whittle. The main difference is that Von Ohain was pampered, nurtured and had all the money he possibly needed, on the other hand Whittle was delayed, broke and ignored. Had Whittle been treated even remotely similarly to Von Ohain, Britain would have had an operationally proper and reliable turbojet before the beginning of the war. Whittle’s true nemesis was Griffith, the author of a seminal paper on axial compressors as early as 1926, more than a decade before a German turbojet fired up. Whittle’s political mistake was to ignore the axial compressor, precisely because he understood how long it would take to develop a proper turbojet with that solution. Griffith obviously was faced with a blatant conflict of interests, and chose to ruin the young genius’s life, depriving his country of the most intelligent solution at the time.

[@r.p.vanloon6403]

@@Dronescapes Clearly you know a lot more about this subject than me, and you seem to have a solid case. But the fact remains that - we could have had it - means you did not have it. The same argument can be applied for the Germans. If Hitler wouldn't have slowed down the production of the ME 262 with his preference for a bomber instead of a fighter jet, they could have had it earlier in the war, and wouldn't have suffered the later inferior building materials. In greater numbers they could have inflicted serious damage to the allied bombers.But like I said, this is all theory.

[@Dronescapes]

Not really, besides copying (I only mentioned Germans copying Whittle’s work, and not them also having access to Griffith’s work), and what it could have been if Whittle had not been delayed, let me also add that Britain also had an axial turbojet in the early 40s, so could have used both Whittle’s and Metrovick, but unlike Germany, Britain regarded deploying a completely novel and full of issues technology as a waste of time and a practically stupid move. You are celebrating Nazi Germany’s idiotic decisions, rather than acknowledging how useless it was to waste so many resources on engines that proved to be completely inconsequential during WW2, as they were anything but ready for the operational theater. Just so you know, the U.S. also deployed a few turbojet powered aircraft in Italy. The Lockheed YP-80 Shooting Star was sent in the war theater mostly for testing purposes. Ironically it was powered by a G.E. Variant of Whittle’s engine, sent to the U.S. as early as 1941, three years before the deployment of the Me 262 with the flawed and useless Jumo engine. Once again, it would have been idiotic for the U.S. to deploy en masse a rather new technology into a war theater, but that is exactly what the Germans did. It was a simple matter of intelligence and opportunity, not being more advanced. The true advantage the Germans had was aerodynamics, as they had exceptional supersonic wind tunnels, highly regarded by the Brits, but when it comes to turbojet engines, you need to tone down the usual Nazi hype. Britain was quite advanced, despite all the time lost (I forgot to mention they also issued a moratorium on turbojet R&D in the 30s). They spent a lot less than Germany did, they delayed research, dismissed Whittle for too many years, and yet they ended up dominating the field, and the German engines ended up forgotten, and vastly ignored. The conclusions are quite obvious, although then Nazi Germany hype over flawed and useless wonder weapons still lives strong, but it is nothing more than non objective hype, and often the result of stupid, useless and suicidal decisions. The turbojet is a perfect example of decades of that misplaced hype.

[@jakenbagra3394]

German aircraft next level aircraft in ww 2

[@lesterbuckman5493]

Gallant was hesitant to institute onboard communication radios into the 109! Let alone introducing a new propulsion technology. He was also well renowned as being a dick and thought his 💩didn’t stink. So it would have been a disaster to envolved him until it was able to prove itself in action

[@nigelkhan9278]

P-51 was faster 487 mph.

[@jimrich4192]

Did Aliens help the Nazis develop their WONDER WEAPONS??? If YES...why? 😮

[@MonkeeVoodoo]

Aliens, huh? You’ve been smoking that shit again ain’t you?

[@israellopez959]

It's funny how they modify history the English to show they were ahead in jet technology than the Germans. The real story is they were behind in many areas not only in jet technology, Rockets, Battle Tanks, Guns, Assault Machine guns, etc.

[@Dronescapes]

That is because Germany was not ahead in jet technology, they simply rushed into service an utterly flawed turbojet, one that would be largely be ignored after the end of WWII (with the exception of France, but that another story). Britain had both axial and centrifugal turbojets in the early 40s, but unlike the Germans, they were not desperate enough to deploy novel and unproven technology. Germans needed to boost morale with their notorious propaganda, so in late 1944 they deployed a great airframe with a practically useless turbojet, but one that was good enough to put up a show. Britain had no resources, nor time to waste, they were too busy defeating Nazi Germany. By the way, the turbojet was invented by Whittle in April 1937, and if anything we know that Von Ohain had access to his work, as he reluctantly admitted later. That is also why the German inventor rightfully credited the British Genius with the invention of the turbojet. The He 178 was mix powered, also including what the German learned from the work and f Whittle, which had been copied and distributed across German universities. When it comes to the turbojet, if anything, the Germans copied, at least in part, from the Brits, and that happened mostly because Whittle was ignored for at least 6 years.

[@Byepolarchaos]

Great Britain also let egos affect the development of the check as a matter of fact they were ahead of Germany in the mid-30s. and the US was experimenting with rocket ribbon planes that would take off conventionally they would have three separate rockets that could be fired independent of each other to avoid or two actually attack I win that rocket burned out or when all three were spent, the plan would return to. I’m flying with the conventional engine and return and land on base. They were able to accelerate from 327 miles an hour up to answer passing 500 miles an hour but issues with True integrity and the safety of the pilot. It was pretty much quickly no longer experimented with.

[@ExploreTechniques95]

The British tested their jet fighters before the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

[@Dronescapes]

And the U.S. flew the British powered F-80 Shooting Star, designed by Kelly Johnson, in Italy during WW2. Britain gave Whittle’s turbojet to General Electric as early as 1941. They also sent the British inventor to the U.S. in great secrecy.

[@RealTylerBell]

the american shot the me 262 down all the time, poor british have to make these edited docs to seem like they did something to them. the had the comet and refuse to use them even thou it came out a year before the 262

[@Dronescapes]

Using a turbojet powered aircraft that had engines that lasted only a few hours and needed an ace pilot to be piloted was a simple act of pathetic desperation (and the Nazis were both desperate and pathetic, especially at the end of 1944 when the Me262 was deployed). Range was also a fundamental issue. It would have been idiotic for Britain to deploy a turbojet aircraft at that stage of the war, which is exactly what the Germans did. They would have eventually run out of their highly flawed and utterly unreliable engines (they had to be completely scrapped after only a few hours), or they would have run out of proper pilots, and then flame-outs, another Jumo flaw, would have added to the mess.

[@matzlangen6423]

Look in your own history 😂😂😂

[@DIDDYKONG916]

A real crime that the HE-280 NEVER got to production and even see combat. But also glad it wasn't. The nazis error on that. Would of turned around the war for them.

[@Dronescapes]

The German turbojets were a joke at the end of the war, and they were so flawed that they were ignored by virtually everyone, except the French. They took 120 Nazi (ex of course) engineers and put them to work. It took the eight endless years to make them finally work, but not before radically modifying them, and requiring external help. If everything went great, Nazi Germany would have required to protract the war into the 1950s to have proper turbojets… By the way, Britain had been developing both axial and centrifugal turbojets since the end of the 20s, but they had no interest whatsoever in deploying novel technologies. If anything Whittle’s engine could have been ready before the beginning of the war, but the British genius was dismissed and ignored for far too long, despite ending up making the first turbojet in history with his own meager private funds (April 1937). When Germany deployed the Me 262 at the end of 1944, it was fitted with a joke of an engine, and the only purpose was desperate propaganda. Those aircraft had engines lasting a few hours before needing to be completely scrapped, if you were lucky enough not to have the engine flame out and try to kill you.

[@garydownes2111]

@@DIDDYKONG916 to be honest the he-280 was more an experimental aircraft using experimental engines that even Heinkel himself didn’t see them able to mass produce until after a near total redesign and a number of years. The Me-262 simply won the race in relation to performance & development and due to a number of issues the earliest it could have gotten into limited use was early 1944. that would have been too late anyway. Also note how short range & duration the he-280 was with its limited fuel load. Hardly war winning and with full combat load etc its performance advantage over piston aircraft would have been far more marginal than say the Me262 was in the autumn of 1944.

[@garydownes2111]

@@Dronescapes to be fair axial turbojet designs were the future and the German engines definitely influenced first generation of these in Britain & the US as well as Atar in France.

[@Dronescapes]

@garydownes2111 they absolutely did not influence Britain, as they had been working on axial turbojets way before the Germans. Whittle, in 1929, purposely ditched an axial compressor solution, favored by Griffith. Whittle, being the genius he was, understood it would take decades to develop it into a proper engine. His solution, delayed by too many years because of Griffith himself, who was the sole judge of his project, was supposed to be what it became, an interim turbojet, until a proper axial turbojet could be developed. You can easily see why Griffith would ostracize Whittle. Between 1929 and mid 1935 Whittle, as a result, was virtually broke, so much he could not even renew his patent in 1934. Once he received a limited private funding, he made his first engine in less than 2 years (April 1937). Do not forget that Griffith, beside publishing a seminal paper on axial compressors in 1926, was also one of the fathers of the axial turbojet. Do not forget that Metrovick's axial turbojet was compared in the early 40s to Whittle's, but despite being more powerful, it had some of the very same issues that the Germans had, therefore it was (intelligently) discarded for the time being. Britain shared Whittle's invention with the U.S. in 1941, going as far as sending both the engine and the inventor to the United States, where his engine powered the first jet aircraft to fly on U.S. soil (1942). His engine went on to power the first U.S. fighter (F-80), the first jet airliner (Comet), it became G.E. first turbojet, and also Pratt & Whitney's. By 1945 a Gloster Meteor equipped with his engine could match the speed of the Me 262, setting the official world speed record of the time. The difference is that his engine was reliable, easy to maintain, easy to develop, exactly the opposite of the German engine that was falling apart, lasted a few hours, had to be completely scrapped and had the tendency to flame-out and possibly kill you in the process. Britain also shared their advanced research on axial turbojets (Metrovick, etc.), and that was the base for U.S. turbojets (and British of course). We all know that the Russians tried to use the German turbojets, but quickly trashed them, and chose to copy Whittle's engine instead (RR Nene/Klimov). As for the French, what they did was the living proof of the German disastrous turbojet. They gathered 120 Nazi engineers, put them to work, and it took them, while funded by the government, eight endless years to make them work (imagine what Whittle would have done in 1929 with 120 engineers at his disposal). Not only eight years was an eternity, but do achieve their goal they had to radically modify those engines, and seek a partnership with a U.S. company (turbines I believe). By the time the ex Nazi/French partnership achieved some meaningful results, the British engines worked perfectly, both axial, and centrifugal. They had been developed independently, and work started way before Von Ohain even thought about a turbojet (he was a teenager back in the 20s). It is also interesting to note that Whittle had a deep understanding of the benefits of turbojets as a student. His thesis is just brilliant, and goes as far as theorizing pressurization for high altitudes. On the other hand Von Ohain was totally clueless, and the best concept he could come up with was some benefits in terms of vibration and sound! You can hear it from the German inventor himself in his (ultra rare) interviews we have on the channel. You will also learn how he was pampered and had all the money he ever needed, on top of working with an aircraft manufacturer. On the other side of the channel Whittle had barely the money to eat, was completely ignored, ostracized, and ridiculed, yet he made the first turbojet in history, never giving up. I do not think there is even a remote comparison between the two engineers. David VS. Goliath comes to mind. Here are the interviews: PART 1 kzbin.info/www/bejne/jpfOkp1viJdsoqM PART 2 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z5CwqH5qZcmlrK8 There is no better proof than his own words. P.S. The Czech Air Force also tried to make some use of those German engines, as they had been assembling the Me 262 for Nazi Germany. They also gave up on them, and purchased the Soviet clones of Whittle's engine. which are the same engines, of course, that powered the lethal MiG-15 in Korea. Russia also sold thousands of copied engines to China.

[@garydownes2111]

@@Dronescapes thanks for the informative reply. to clarify by influence I didn’t mean they copied the technology or axial designs originated in Germany, rather some lessons were learnt on the practical aspects of the technology, what not to do etc. I think you are being a bit harsh on specific early German developers and recognize BMW & Jumos slightly later work on jet technology was quite separate in ways from Ohain’s, in fact the lack of joint up thinking is more of an indictment than any perceived lackadaisical efforts on the German side. There was also more of an industry and government supported R&D eco system in the UK while German activity was more separated into formally academic and private company research often unaware of each other and solutions already found for technical issues. That would be an interesting video in of itself, the approach, funding and support of engine development & particularly jets in 1930s into early 40s. while whittle was definitely a maverick in ways there was actually a base for development and progression into real tech rather than the shit show in Germany that ironically got there first but was unable to capitalize on it.

[@puttepalt6336]

History is written by the victors. Not a German voice. Contradicting them selfs if you listen.

[@audonmarj3470]

AIR. MARSHALL PWYESAVHZOF

[@shannmanahi5441]

Sceptical has about first combat kill with jet propulsion as the brittish claim that they downed a V.rocket...So tell how the hell dose a jet pilot with minimal training with a fighter jet manage that objective knowing full well of how fast that jet travel...maybe a rotor propelled engine...an that's a intercept not kill ..looks like England would take anything for a victorious victory...

[@Dronescapes]

Back then intercepting a rocket and downing it by using your wings would have been considered a difficult task, but perhaps it would be considered so even today. It is obviously a technicality, a word…Imagine, perhaps that action saved lives, and Imam sure the pilot could hardly imagine that someone on KZbin in 2024 would be discussing such trivial details and disputing words (which are going to have no effect at all on anyone’s life). I wonder if instead of pinpointing words you could/would have been discussing the event with the pilot if you were there at the time, perhaps returning from a dangerous mission as well. I am sure your focus would have been a different topic, and not a word.

[@garydownes2111]

@@shannmanahi5441 the British pilots were very well trained and the meteor was fast at low level where the V-1s came in. Also the Fi-103 (V-1) was a pulse jet not a rocket that while fast (390-400mph) was vulnerable from diving piston aircraft and meteors who could go faster and they were v vulnerability due to their delicate gyros and the highly explosive nose lol

[@alanadair4893]

Sucks 😢

[@rswpt]

hahaah so the RAF plane was afterall the 1st jet fighter? hahaha

[@Dronescapes]

The first to technically operate in the war theater. By the way, the Me 262 had such a pathetically flawed engine, one that was so bad that it was virtually ignored by everyone after the war, with the exception of France, and that is another interesting story, since despite being government backed, and having 120 Nazi repented engineers at their disposal, it took them eight endless years to make them work, but not before radically modifying them, and seeking assistance from both the U.S. and Britain. Needless to say, by then Britain had proper centrifugal turbojets, and of course axial ones as well, as they had been working on both since the late 1920. You are probably unaware that Britain sent Whittle, together with his invention (the turbojet that is), to the United States in 1941. General Electric, in charge of adapting it, fitted it in a Bell XP-59 in 1942, marking the very first turbojet powered flight on U.S. soil. Lockheed (and the legendary Kelly Johnson) used Whittle’s engine in the first operational U.S. jet fighter, the Lockheed F-80, which flew in Italy during WW2 (for testing purposes, although they were also ‘hoping’ to engage Me 262s). The F-80 was also initially deployed during the Korean War, but it proved to be largely inferior to the lethal MiG-15, which, I suspect you don’t know, was also powered by Whittle’s engine, duly copied by the Soviets after Rolls Royce sold them a few units. It also proved a great business for Russia, as they sold their cloned units to their allies, such as China. By the way, the Soviets opted to copy Whittle’s engine after testing every variant of German turbojet, and then discarding all of them as utterly flawed. Metrovick also tested an axial turbojet in the early 40s, but it was set aside as unreliable (just like the German engines) when compared to Whittle’s engine. As predicted by the brilliant British engineer in 1929, it would have taken decades to properly develop an axial turbojet, therefore he dropped that option. Unfortunately his sole judge, A.A. Griffith (the author of a secretive and rather famous seminal paper on axial compressors in 1926), dismissed Whittle’s brilliant solution, literally delaying his efforts by at least six crucial years, otherwise Britain could have had a proper turbojet, and the perfect one at the time, as it was not only very easy to develop, but it also proved to be reliable, unlike the Germans engines of late 1944, which only lasted a few hours before being literally trashed, and that if they did not flame out,which could be simply deadly for the few remaining German pilots. What you probably consider a great German achievement was in actuality none other than a rather pathetic act of desperation, one last propaganda effort before having to face total defeat. Britain did not have the time, nor the resources to invest in deploying novel technologies, they were too busy winning the war against a bunch of psychopaths. The only grave mistake that was made was ignoring Whittle for all those years, but that can be pinned on Griffith, not the Air Ministry. By the way, since Whittle could not even renew his patent in 1934, due to lack of money, Germany duly copied it and distributed it across German universities, conveniently landing on the desk of Hans Von Ohain, and his first famous flight had in fact a mix powered engine, which included Whittle’s work…What a surprise! Deploying the Me 262 months before the end of the war was just idiotic, as despite having a great airframe, it was nothing more than a prototype that only a deranged dictatorship could deploy operationally. It also had a very limited range, and as I am sure you know, never dared even crossing the channel. It was good for a very short live show, but nothing more, and it did not make a dent in the tides of war, just like so other many fabled wonder weapons.

[@farrukhhamid4455]

Not Failuers it genius