Planes of the Graf Zeppelin - Germany's Aircraft Carrier of World War 2

Germany never finished the Graf Zeppelin, an Aircraft Carrier intended for the Kriegsmarine. But had it done so, these planes would have been part of the likely loadout.
⚜ Support My Work ⚜
- You can support my Channel with Patreon: / milavhistory
⚜ Find Me On Social Media ⚜
- Twitter: / milavhistory
⚜ Sources ⚜
Breyer, Siegfried; Flugzeugträger Graf Zeppelin
Creek, Eddie J.; Junkers Ju 87 - From Dive-bomber to Tank-Buster 1939 - 1945
Griehl, Manfred; Junkers Ju-87 Stuka - Part 1 - the Early Variants A B C and R of the Luftwaffe
Haynes, Messerschmitt Bf 109 - 1935 onwards (all marks)
Radinger, Willy; Messerschmitt Me 109 - Das meistgebaute Jagdflugzeug der Welt,
Nowarra, Die Deutsche Luftruestung 1933 - 1945
Stammer, Dieter; Stuka Junkers Ju-87 - Das erfolgreichste Sturzkampfflugzeug des Zweiten Weltkriegs
Smith, Peter C.; Stuka Volume One Luftwaffe Ju 87 Dive-Bomber Units 1939-1941

[@paulchirica7890]

"For once the Germans made a choice that helped logistics" :D

[@barry4302]

:D

[@dabuddhaman8908]

:D

[@chooyongming110]

But did that result in the operations of Graf Zapplin? Nah.

[@VersusARCH]

Probably the consequence of the fact that the Navy had the least resources of the three armed branches of thr German military.

[@cloroxbleach9222]

And they did that for something that didn't even become combat operational.

[@varovaro1967]

A battle group formed by Scharnhorst, Bismarck, Prinz Eugen, Graf Spee and Graf von Zeppelin, plus four destroyers and several U- Booten would have been terrifying for Allied convoys....

[@m1garand903]

It wouldn’t have

[@kingdomofvinland8827]

and those i boats are type 21s with albrech coating

[@user-bd3ds4ev5f]

Graf Spee can’t because she sank early in the war.

[@gmnotyet]

A naval kampfgruppen.

[@jamesricker3997]

It would have attracted even more firepower

[@barleysixseventwo6665]

The first and most obvious choice for a high level dive bomber for the Graf Zepplin was the Graf Zepplin. This would have given the Graf Zepplin a strike range greater than any other. But if used the Graf Zepplin would've blocked the Graf Zepplin from launching any more aircraft. ...also it's a huge-ass airship and they didn't have any helium :P.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Well that confused me for a second :D

[@Sealimperialpictures]

GRAF ZEPPTION

[@leodoz1016]

But what if the Graf Zepplin carried smaller Graf Zepplin?

[@AinKrab]

Fieseler made their own fairey swordfish I see

[@mikeycraig8970]

A cross between a stuka and swordfish. Look at the tail and nose, that's stuka.

[@neniAAinen]

To be fair, more of fairey albacore done right...at least, as far as we can tell of a plane never used in its primary role.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

I hope all of you enjoy this look at the planes that could have entered service on the Graf Zeppelin had it been finished. It's been interesting to research this small part of aviation history but had quite some challenges. Especially the literature on the Ju-87 and it's different (later) models (D-1/D-4/E) is interesting to sift through, as there seems to be no clear consensus with different torpedos/models and equipment quoted in different literature. This is also why I am a bit careful with giving a definite loadout, since this was apparently never really decided upon! One little note on the Fi-167. As mentioned in the video, the wheels could be dropped manually. Sadly, I do not know where and what exactly drops. I presume a larger part of the gear will drop to make the underside of the plane as smooth as possible, but could not find any details. That is why I only colour the wheels red to draw attention to this fact, not to show that only the wheel will drop. As always, check out my sources in the description and have a great day!

[@edwardfleming6257]

Its always great to see such a video, especially since its such a little known topic. Love the channel and Keep up the good work!

[@kylegendreau1801]

Where do you get the images of the planes like at 5:32?

[@nicklong4291]

TheSecretGerman I believe he does them like MHV, ie digitally draws them :)

[@kylegendreau1801]

Who's MHV and i don't think he digitally draws them, because they look to perfect to be.

[@badnade4886]

I think Military History Visualized makes them. He uses cross sections and design drawings, and the ol Mk. I eyeball to make clear, distinct silhouettes. I'm not certain, but I think they are both pooling resources to support each other's channel. They can share books, digital resources, social networks, even viewer bases. I much enjoy the collaborative streams. Keep working together guys. It's working.

[@ysbrandvdvelde4352]

3:41 Gunner: Pilot we're being strafed!!! Pilot: I 'm already deploying the shields!!!

[@undyingUmbrage]

Nice

[@alicainmauna7249]

*Anxious click* noice

[@brandonproductions8401]

Shields up

[@kayraaa2646]

>Designs wheels that can be dropped in case of ditching I don't want to say it, but *_KRAUT SPACE MAGIC_*

[@propyne6188]

Cmon. Not that hard. Just a little shaped charge that blows off the strut.

[@kayraaa2646]

propyne The fact that they were thoughtful enough to design such a feature bamboozles me.

[@VictorLepanto]

@Pixel Dust When it comes to German engineers, more is more better.

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

I have always found the Fieseler 167 to be an interesting aircraft as I understand it had some very interesting handling characteristics.

[@derptank3308]

Am I the only one who wants the Fi-167 and the Ju-87C to be added to warthunder, even thought the Graf Zeppelin was never in combat

[@wabawoooIII]

We already have a Hs 123, so little need for the Fi-167. But I do want more torpedo bombers.

[@z3r0_35]

Considering Germany's lack of torpedo bombers, I could see them being added in response to ships. Personally, I'd like to see a Bf 109T myself, as the larger wings would provide a lower wing loading, making an already quite nimble aircraft even more agile.

[@derptank3308]

The reason why is because the Fiesler is a Torpedo bomber. The planes for the Germans that can carry Torpedo are all large targets. The fi-167 may also be more agile than those in the German tech tree:

[@tnix80]

Derptank hell yeah! Germany needs torpedo planes desperately

[@satchmo1991]

I'd love to see that happen, especially with the release of naval battle in the future.

[@Alemikkola]

Knowing Germanys love for unrealistic plans, I find it odd that there were no plans to somehow use Me 262 from the Graf... :D

[@timber_wulf5775]

Aleksi Mikkola the Me 262 and Ho 229 would've been terrible carrier jets. The Me 262 needed a very high amount of maintenance and the Ho 229 was only a prototype. Not to mention how vulnerable planes are when landing the Me 262 would've been even worse when landing

[@Alemikkola]

Timber_Wulf I didn't mean that 262 would have been good at it.

[@beavisbutt-headson3223]

At the time the Me 262 became operational the Graf Zeppelin project had long been shelved

[@Alemikkola]

Beavis Butt-Headson Yeees. I know that. Still my point stands. I'd expect some plans for Me 262 T-1 :D. When has reality come in the ways of some German engineering?

[@propyne6188]

Doesnt the 262 also need a pretty damn long runway? Like, I know the Heimatschützer I/II (planned?) variants had RATO, but still.

[@jasonmcmillan4373]

The Graf Zeppelin is an Easter egg in Birds Of Steel. When you fly an axis custom mission through the mission editor on the Battle Of Britain map, from time to time an option to take off & land will appear & if selected you will start your mission on the Graf Zeppelin off the coast of Britain.

[@Dexterplayz-qj1vm]

That is the aircraft carrier H.M.S Victorious

[@solsolsolomon]

hi

[@ConfusedAdmiral]

hi

[@thomasholl9176]

Hi

[@luckypuss2304]

*NOT HI YOU FUCKING NIGGA*

[@solsolsolomon]

@@luckypuss2304 hello

[@Straswa]

Nice vid, lots of useful information on the proposed aircraft on the Graf Zeppelin. Good on you to use IL2 1946.

[@Oscuros]

Thanks, this is useful reference, since I've only ever seen any of this in my books and this means doing a lot of imagining.

[@KorbinX]

You always have great videos Bismark, Thank you ^-^

[@RemusKingOfRome]

Great video, love your work, very informative

[@paulflak2823]

As per our chat, your research is tells me of your desire to provide knowledge that most people would not be able to gain access to. Keep up the good work.

[@Lixn1337]

what a great video, just the right amount of detail

[@Orangefan77]

Great video and lots of information that I had actually never heard before in all my WWII history reading. You need some noise dampening/ anti-echo foam padding material behind your microphone though, Bis.

[@shermansquires3979]

Great video, I had no idea about the German carrier program!

[@JasperFromMS]

excellent video. This is material that I've never heard before.

[@user-ki3yn6ef7e]

Your german spelling is a real pleasure for ears. Thank you for that!

[@imyellow3881]

You should make some videos of German ww2 mysteries. Things like the bell or other experimental dark things of the war that nobody is sure existed

[@tbwpiper189]

Well done docuvlog, Bis.

[@marrioman13]

I had always assumed graf was some shorthand for naval, as if it were a naval airship. I feel a bit dense now, too dense to float at least

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Graf is an aristocratic title, I think the English equivalent is Earl or Count.

[@vanguard-vv7iu]

Bismarck isn't von a Prussian junker title as well ?

[@Moorbote]

sean sarfas No, very much not. "von" is a generic thing to add between the Name of a noble and him land, just like the english "of". Otto von Bismarck = Otto of Bismarck.

[@WildBillCox13]

Naval Worship is the concept of contemplating one's naval before marine enlightenment can occur. Scented candles (or op art cuttlefish in a large, well lit, tank) help some, but a useful system serum level of Soma (the real stuff, not that modern gobbledygook) does make the scenery of the seekers' inner journey more interesting.

[@danteardenz2670]

@ur mom If your referring to the Graf Spee ,that literally meant Count Spee , an Admiral in WW1.

[@smigoltime]

Ooooh zes, Il-2 1946 in the background brings awesome memories :)

[@Mishadedogist]

Tip: If you set IL-2 1946 to run in OpenGL, the water wont look so awful. Great vid as usual!

[@justinpyke1756]

Good stuff!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Danke :)

[@ivanboston8582]

I am amazed they never considered the HE-112 as the carrier fighter.. better spacing on landing gear and slightly better range

[@trauko1388]

Heinkel offered. the LW passed

[@georgedistel1203]

I personally wondered why they didn't consider the fw190 as their carrier fighter. First radial engine more robust airframe and more stable and rugged landing gear.

[@Deevo037]

For those that would dismiss the Fieseler 167 as being a primitive biplane have a look at what HMS Ark Royal's Fairey Swordfish biplanes did to the Bismark.

[@Cybermat47]

Great video, I didn't know that the Stuka was considered as a torpedo bomber!

[@EpicThe112]

Nice video and I do have a Ju-87 Stuka book by osprey publishing it stated that TgGr 186 redesignated as III Stg I as the Ju-87C with the landing gear having the ability to jettison the landing gear for floating sea landing

[@Hadrexus]

Funny how I never heard of the Fieseler 167 but I've heard a lot about the 166

[@chiliprepper7678]

F-190 Wulfe with strong frame and Prat Whitney radial engine and wide stance landing gear would been a good start to develop a carrier based aircraft from.

[@joespeciale5875]

Fascinating: So much info on an overlooked area (naval aviation and carrier craft) that the Germans went into only half-heartedly.

[@HauntedXXXPancake]

They might have padded the 109 Seat, to soften impacts from the inevitable landing gear collapse :'D . I seem to remember, that its skinny, awkwardly arranged legs weren't exactly too rugged for use on Terra Firma.

[@wirelessone2986]

The cool thing about the FI 167 is that it used the DB 601 so just like the BF 109 it would have been able to be upgraded with DB603,DB605 etc.

[@Ofotherworlds]

As a young man Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin served with the Union army in the American Civil War, taking a leave of absence from the army of Wurttemberg to do so. The United States Balloon Corps was his first encounter with air balloons.

[@CZ350tuner]

The first and only plane to actually land & take off against from the Graf Zeppelin was a Czechoslovakian Avia B-534 T bi-plane fighter. It was the only Trager version built and was used to test the arrestor wire system being employed on the ship.

[@bradfordmiller7987]

very good vid...

[@ciphowler8370]

Question about the Carrier Air Wing (Trägergeschwader), what would be the acronym for it? As in, Jagdgeschwaders are sometimes referred to as JGs (like JG.1, 2, 3 and 5 and so on), so in the case of Trägergeschwader, does it have one too? Cause the best I can come up with is TG, however I'm not certain of this as I've found no sources of Trägergeschwader 186 referred to as something like TG.186 Just curious as all

[@trauko1388]

It was TrGr 186, TrägerGruppe 186.

[@skullwhip7910]

i have watched some of your adventures on bo time gaming and they are hilarious swashbucklingly brave but i laugh my bollocks off at the banter

[@kurumi394]

4:58 That tail looks like it would touch the deck lol

[@brachio1000]

Very interesting.

[@janjasclanmember123]

Can you do a video on camfoge and how it work on planes please

[@kastro4460]

The camera on the first person view on the IL2:1946 clips is so smooth, how do you operate it? do you have any kind of headtracker?

[@johngibson2884]

Fiesler Storch was the best light recon plane ever ..single wing short takeoff. Overloaded it saved Mussolini and Skorzeny

[@neniAAinen]

Fi-167 during trials exhibited much the same habits on a much heavier plane...test pilot showed landings w/o significant forward motion, and later on, those advantages were even used in combat. WW2 is dusk of biplanes, but 167 was quite impressive in its own right.

[@antonmortolovan4891]

I have started a fictional German Aircraft Carrier that uses 2 squadrons of FW-190 for torpedoes, two squadrons JU-87 as a dive bomber, and four squadrons BF-109 as Air Superiority and secondary bomber, a fifth squadron of BF-109's as recon/fighter.

[@Leptospirosi]

Some more data about the Bf109T: 2 version were tested, the first with wing airbrake installed on the upper wing, and the other without. The airbrake design was not successful and the plane had tendencies to drop out of the sky like a brick. The later T2 was never fitted with the hook but became operational in the Liftwaffe. Also some concerns were raised about the auto slat system in case one should pop up or down during the delicate approach to the carrier. In the end the aircraft was never really deemed fit for naval operation and while the RM Aquila was still considered for completion (borrowing the Graaf Zeppelin catapult systems), both the German and the Italians agreed the Re2001 would have been a much better option then the beleaguered Bf-109T. The messerschmit had a long operation career, first in Norway, where if was located near Trondheim and after 1944, the remaining aircrafts were based on the Helgoland base, where they served as interceptors against the British Fast bombers attacking the Kiel facilities.

[@orlandonostagiafever1964]

great show of the graf zeppelin .

[@PotatoBearRawr]

I like the start, me just sitting here yelling STUKA at the screen, like wtf is wrong with people :D And then it come up right after. Great video, and great structure :p

[@trauko1388]

The 109Ts also operated out of Helgoland, teh unit even shot down a B-17.

[@LegoClone17]

I feel like the 190 would've been a superior choice later on due to its smaller profile, but the landing gears would've definitely been a problem since its slope would simply make landing a nightmare.

[@jirikajzar3247]

Germans also tested Czechoslovak Avia B.534 eqiupped with landing hook. However it often got ripped out during landings...

[@Cyberboi]

Seeing how advanced standard aircraft designs were nearing the end of the war, imagine what they might have came up with for the Graf Zeppelin. Perhaps a Ho 229T? The standard version had incredible glide capabilities as well as good top speed, bomb load and range (designed for the 3x1000 program), a naval variant would be unparalleled. Or maybe a Me 163 with RATO launched within vertical frameworks.

[@dubsy1026]

229 and all early jets (ESPECIALLY German) suffer from immense reliability problems, as well as long takeoff runs and high landing speed. The massive wings would also make for difficult storage. 229 really isn't well suited. And the 163 is even worse, the fuel would be immensely dangerous to store on a ship, and the range is unacceptable. Remember aircraft need to be able to operate in formations, which means loitering after takeoff and before landing as the formation members go through this one by one

[@WillieWonka928D]

Is there any info out there of FW190s being evaluated for carrier use? When I was more into IL-2 1946 someone had a great mod of 3 different FW190"T" versions (I believe the A-4/5?, A-8, and D-9). It made me think think how a carrier version of the 190 would've been so much cooler and possibly better than the 109, since it could've taken the role of bomber, torpedo plane, and fighter.

[@trauko1388]

It had a very high landing speed, 160 Km/h stall on landing configuration alone... funny thing, couple years later jets would be landing a lot faster...

[@Brumbieman]

Could have simplified everything by just using only the FW 190. Add a folding wing design and it's the perfect plane. The exact same plane could either carry a drop tank and 6 x 8inch rockets (light cruiser broadside in firepower) for longer range convoy work, a 1000kg bomb for short range dive bombing missions, no bombs or rockets but a drop tank so it's a pure fighter escort and I think they even tested a torpedo from it as well. Plus the four 20mm cannons for general strafing work, though i'd have simplified that more with two MK108 cannons with a longer barrel/higher muzzle velocity. Those 30mm shells were lethal but the ballistics were shit. Two high-velocity 30mm cannons would achieve more than four 20mm. Mount them in front of the cockpit so convergence range is avoided, and then there is much more space in the wings for internal fuel tanks before needing a drop tank. Better ballistics for longer range engagement, longer range and more lethal firepower even with the lower rate of fire. 1-2 of those 30mm shells would take down anything but a heavy bomber and a semi AP round would be devastating to anything smaller than a light cruiser in a strafing run so rate of fire isn't that crucial if the ballistics are good - you only need 2-3 rounds to land to kill with the 30mm. Add to that it's design nature of hugely strong landing gear and airframe, great visibility, amazing handling and speed at medium to low altitudes, armour and easy to repair design philosophy and you wouldn't need any other type of plane. A single aircraft could literally be decked out as a fighter escort, reconnaissance plane, long range convoy marauder, dive bomber or torpedo bomber depending on their target for that mission and carry something completely different that afternoon. Logistically a dream as every single plane is exactly the same so parts fit everything, everything is standardised and interchangeable for quick repairs, all the tools and spares are the same and would even be standardised to the land based versions. In fact other than the tail hook there's no reason even the land based squadrons couldn't just use the folding wing version and make production even simpler. It would make them easier to hide and transport, even easier to service in the field eg if wing tip was badly damaged but the rest of the plane was fine, the naval version you just replace the wing tip but the land based one you're fucked. Imagine three squadrons of FW190's with two high velocity 30mm cannons, extra range, decked out with either 8 inch rockets and/or 1000kg bombs, dive bombing a convoy/target from out of the sun - it's basically the A-10 until it drops it's payload, then immediately it's a lethal, agile fighter again.

[@lilslav7078]

hey, I'm thinking of getting Il-2 Sturmovik but I'm just wondering which version is the best

[@comrade-princesscelestia4907]

1946 is cheap and has a few wonder waffles, BOS is newer and has multiplayer but no wonderwaffles

[@joshfritz5345]

imagining a carrier worthy He-100... okay, so it wouldn't be the most practical endeavor, but it sure would be interesting...

[@bluefox9436]

@@Crashed131963 the 109 would've been a perfect short range strike plane and also a perfect defense for the Carrier because it was one of the best planes during the whole war (except the G 6) but yes they would've need a long range Strike Plane

[@bluefox9436]

@@Crashed131963 Nah... actually the japanese planes had a larger combat radius than the American ones and they lost because of many different reasons (I cannot explane 1:30 hours of a tactical review in this comment *-*) but I think you missunderstood me a bit: I didn't mean that they should just use 109s, they should use them as defensive aircrafts like the japanese used their Zeros as defense they can be started very quickly and so it would've been a good deal because what do you want: risking to refuel your planes partly or losing all your defensive planes because they are bad at air to air combat (sounds dump but thesewould've been the only options the Kriegsmarine would've had). For a longer range The Bf 110, the Ju 88 or the Hs 123 in carrier versions would've been the only options because they hadn't had the Fw 190 at this time - but also my options aren't very good. The best choice would've been to develope a completely new plane for the carrier forces with good fighting characteristics and a good amount of fuel.

[@GT-he4jt]

How should I equip my carriers in hearts of iron 4.

[@HughMyron372]

Would the 109T have been a better turner than the Emil thanks to the far larger wing area?

[@BoarhideGaming]

Not sure, at low speeds it most certainly would've handled better, but longer wings generally heavily reduce roll-rate, so that might've been a hinderence in dogfights. Edit: My bad, the naval 109 would've gotten broader wings, not longer ones. So yes, way better in low speed operations

[@Atesz222]

As an aircraft mechanic I assume it was to give a slight bonus in lift, an important factor with carrier based aircraft :D But to answer your question, I think it would've had a slight advantage compared to the Emil

[@trauko1388]

It did have a slightly shorter turn radius, it also had a wing spoiler to allow for power-on approaches and avoid floating.

[@trauko1388]

They were both, wider and longer.

[@90demo90]

I doubt it, takin in account that they add a lot more wheight to carrier planes

[@andrewlekkas]

Wouldn't early variants of Fw-190 be suitable for carrier fighters, due to their short wingspan and small fuselage?

[@VersusARCH]

Given the Bf 109s track record of crashes on landings even on solid ground due to the narrow undercarriage (as opposed to the short and rocking deck of an aircraft carrier in the North Atlantic) I wonder why they even bother to add the tailhook...

[@Cockitupsuh]

*Awards IRON CROSS!!!*...( -____-) *Hails and Goose-steps away*

[@dearleader6789]

The fieseler 167 looks like someone slapped a second set of wings on a Stuka and flattened out the original wings Edit: as soon as I saw the 3D model I realized I was mistaken

[@anthonyivanaglugubjr.2645]

What about FW 190 Aircraft in Graf Zeppelin?

[@TheEulerID]

Trying to land a BF-109 on an aircraft carrier with that very narrow undercarriage would have been a bit of a challenge...

[@GamePlayWithNolan]

4:02 that is fucking amazing!

[@skullwhip7910]

i have read that the BF 109 was prone to take off and landing accidents so would that have been a major problem with carrier operations ???

[@dubsy1026]

Yes

[@rickmorgan3930]

Why no close views from the air looking down on the flight deck? Along with waterline photos the aerial photos give a better feeling for the look and feel of an aircraft carrier (or any ship for that matter). Kinda missed an opportunity here.

[@jamesdavid.1638]

Fw190 series fighters adapted for carrier use would have been the best choice...

[@Cinnabun]

Channel blowing up Bismarck, nice.

[@cobalt2361]

The Fi.167 looks like a biplane Stuka

[@patrickbrennan1317]

cobalT exactly what I was thinking

[@BCSchmerker]

+Bis18marck70 *I suspect that a carrier-strengthened version of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 would have been the best **_Jäger_** option.* The Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke Ju 87 was already known inferior to the exactly contemporary USN-USMC/Douglas AIrcraft SBD in performance, but no requirement for a naval _Kämpfer_ designed around the Bayerische Motorenwerke 801T (a 41.8L 14-cylinder radial in a complete modular installation) was ever published. Neither a requirement for a similarly-powered _Fischbomber_ for effective antiship/antisubmarine warfare using torpedoes. (British and American naval submariners, along with their surface and air counterparts, hunted the _Kriegsmarine_ 24/7: However, the Focke-Wulf Fw 200 was constrained to land bases, unlike the USN/Consolidated Vultee PBY and PB2Y, the USN/Glenn L. Martin Co. PBM, and the RN-FAA/Short Bros. Ltd. Sunderland.) To satisfy the _Fischbomber_ mission, the Fiesler Fi 167 could potentially have been modified for the BMW 801T; but no evidence of such a mod has surfaced.

[@DemoNC]

What about Ar-197? I heard that was also considered.

[@MohamedAli-cz1gu]

Cool

[@derpynerdy6294]

4:25 it looks similar to the VAL dive bombers

[@chuckhaynes6458]

I would think that the narrow landing gear on the BF-109 would be a problem.

[@michaelmckinnon1591]

Arado Ar 95 or Ar 96 would have been more likely for the Graf Zeppelin carrier as the recon aircraft considering the floatplane version was carried on German warships in WWII.

[@anonymousstout4759]

Anyone know what the small propeller in stuka landing gear do??

[@trauko1388]

"Jericho trumpet", the siren that made that famous diving sound

[@Handle423]

I could actually imagine that the ME-262 would actually be in service on the Graf Zeppelin

[@dubsy1026]

Too long takeoff run, too high landing speed, and unreliable engines. Definitely not

[@napi94naza15]

mybe it take time to takeoff..then what if they were actually keep a Flettner 282(chopper) as ground-attack,anti submarine,or anti ship carries torpedo.then resized the zappelin's deck turn a runway as well as Shinano carriers?and so...made bismark cappable launch v1?what it would be?

[@joebfnl1079]

So why does the carrier that you are showing look like a Royal Navy Illustrious carrier???.

[@alfredopotatogaming7033]

Wouldn't it have He59's for pilot recovery, or would they be sent by coastal wings?

[@trauko1388]

Not amphibious, the He 59 was floats only so limited to coastal operations. On the other hand, they could have easily used an early helicopter.

[@LostParadise_]

Wanna know something funny, before this video was posted I wondered if Germany had any aircraft carriers during WWII.

[@timber_wulf5775]

LostParadise you sir are an Completely right person to think that because the Graf Zeppelin was only a fairly new concept due to it only being rumored about after its second time being sunk by the Russians and plans were far and few but when it's discovery in 2006 people became more interested in her

[@Wombat1916]

+Timber_Wulf My understanding of the lack of progress was that Reichsmarschall Göring "disliked" the idea of the Kriegsmarine having frontline aircraft outside of his control so "he saw to it that so many obstacles were placed in the way of the air group assigned to her that she would not be ready until the end of 1943" from "The Great Ships Pass" by Peter C Smith published 1977. The info was there.

[@jebise1126]

that was for planes only... but it was more that priorities changed since initially german navy thought it would need carrier but after defeat of france they figure it out it was kind if useless to them...

[@GaryArmstrongmacgh]

Given the FW 190s wider landing gear, surprised it was never adapted to the Graf Zeppelin project.

[@patrickbrennan1317]

Gary Armstrong exactly of course Herman Goering was in charge of aircraft production as well as the Luftwaffe and he was not known for sharing glory an operational aircraft carrier would have taken glory from the Luftwaffe and therefore from the reichsmarshall completely unacceptable to fat Herman oh and the Nazis were socialists by the way

[@hvymtal8566]

It's pretty hilarious, the USA, Britain, and Japan were at least initially married to the idea of the three aircraft complement, the Torpedo/Level bomber, the Scout/Dive bomber, and the Fighter, while the Germans of all people abandoned the very concept of naval level bombing and just went with a two plane loadout, which eventually everyone else would do too.

[@roysankar8501]

Which game are u taking the visuals from?

[@ryanchan2302]

nice

[@habitualbabyeater2445]

I'm surprised you didn't cover the Me 155, which was a fighter design created for carrier use in 1942 and later converted into a high altitude interceptor.

[@trauko1388]

Napkinwaffe... almost...

[@habitualbabyeater2445]

No more than the Graf Zeppelin itself.

[@trauko1388]

The Graf Zeppelin was actually built, almost complete, the 155 was never built as a naval fighter, it never left the drawing board and the project was soon changed into a high altitude fighter. Thats the difference.

[@Moorbote]

Very cleverly made just when it's coming to World of warships ;)

[@zachboyd4749]

Since when are the Graf Zeppelin, JU-87T, BF-109T in IL2 1946?

[@comrade-princesscelestia4907]

100gb mods

[@Mau4ever2]

No Mention of the Arado-197 Biplane or the Me 155 Fighter.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Left them out intentionally since I focused on the aircraft that had actually made a tangiable advance towards being used operationally on the Graf Zeppelin

[@Karelwolfpup]

Hey Bis, do you think that if the Graf Zeppelin had ever been launched and made operational it would have eventually carried navalised Fw190s?

[@trauko1388]

The 190 had a very high landing speed, higher even than the F4Us, and a large radial with a low cockpit. Moreover, pilots were not allowed to open the cockpit in flight due to fear of inhaling exhaust gases... It wouldnt be pretty, the aircraft would have needed a profound redesign.

[@timber_wulf5775]

Karelwolfpup look no farther then the Blom&Voss BV 155

[@Karelwolfpup]

interesting aircraft ^w^ not sure how it would have performed though considering it was initially pretty much an Emil 109 with a few tweaks. Now if we're talking some of the other proposed designs for the BV155 with jet engines would be something very interesting to see, especially to see what sort of trager would carry it.

[@z3r0_35]

Only if it wasn't sunk first.

[@IrishCarney]

@@trauko1388 Good answer. I'd wondered for years why the Fw190 with its wider landing gear and more stable landings wasn't considered, plus its versatility in being able to do the fighter and attack roles. Your points about the length of runway and vision obscuring radial help explain that decision.

[@z3r0_35]

You missed an aircraft that was considered for Graf Zeppelin when the project was briefly revived: the Me 155. While a new design, it was intended to use as many components from the Bf 109 as possible to simplify logistics, and would've been both fast and heavily armed, at least on paper. This, of course, came to nothing when work on the carrier was abandoned again, but the work that had already been completed was handed over to Blohm Und Voss on the RLM's orders once it became clear that Messerschmitt was already over-committed with existing projects, but eventually the largely redesigned aircraft, redesignated Bv 155, was seen as a candidate for a high-altitude interceptor to counter the potential threat of the B-29 Superfortress. However, I'm led to believe that the Luftwaffe probably preferred the Ta 152H for the same role, so I doubt it would've made it into service under better conditions.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

I left it out on purpose since I focused on the aircraft that had actually made a tangiable advance towards being used operationally on the Graf Zeppelin

[@z3r0_35]

Ah, okay.

[@ZdrytchX]

Was the He 112 ever considered for carrier operations? Just curious. What gave me e idea is well, the fictional anime "Izetta the last witch" featured an 'ultimate' aircraft for the carrier which was a he 112

[@tnix80]

ZdrytchX -{Reference it's performance was underwhelming by WW2.

[@trauko1388]

Heinkel offered it, the LW passed

[@colebishoff1533]

Did the Germans have plans to implement a catapult system on the carrier then? If the ju87was able to be catapult launched?? Or was it more of the traditional catapult that would launch biplanes before they land and get craned up again?

[@delayed_control]

You might wanna set your water effects higher in the ini files

[@ethanperks372]

FYI: The CV shown is not the "Graf Zeppelin" but a UK Formidable CV in the "Bismark's" paint scheme.

[@x_atm_092]

I'd actually like to know more about the Fieseler Fi 167. There's so little information out there about this biplane, a plane that could have been great if the world just wasn't as it is... And let's be real, Wikipedia gets on your nerves fast. Anything to share, Mr. Bismarck?