The First Fighter Planes of WW1 | A Not-So-Brief History Of Military Aviation #2

No aircraft existed at the outbreak of WW1 equipped with a gun of any sort. That would change by April of 1915. The opening months of WW1 saw radical changes in military aviation, the first weapons equipped on service aircraft, the birth of true aerial surveillance, and the first dogfights between two planes.
They key development in this early stage of the war was the fitting of a synchronisation gear, which allowed aircraft to fire forward facing guns without the risk of damaging their propeller. This allowed for the development of new aircraft like Moraine-Sauliner L and the Fokker E1 monoplanes, the first true combat aircraft.
****
Producing these videos is a hobby of mine. I have a passion for history, and personally own a large collection of books, journals and other texts, and endeavor to do as much research as possible. However if there are any mistakes, please don't hesitate to reach out and correct anything :)

[@Dr_Jebus]

The good old days of gentlemanly air combat. Where you *bludgeoned the other guy to death with your landing gear*...

[@5peciesunkn0wn]

Could you imagine that being part of a flight sim? Sounds like a hilariously dumb time.

[@mxcherryblue5943]

@@5peciesunkn0wn there's a guy who does similar stuff in War Thunder.

[@lakrids-pibe]

Ah, this brings back memories of my school days.....

[@nedludd7622]

Those days in general had already been put paid to in the coalition of the US, European countries and Japan in their attack on China during the Boxer Rebellion, and by the US in its subjugation of the Philippines.

[@bostonrailfan2427]

laugh as you will, but that took epic aerial skill to actually do it, not damage your plane, then return home

[@socotroquito2007]

The first air naval confrontation happened in Mexico in March,1914 in Topolobampo there were damages to a Mexico Federal Gunboat by a biplane , the gun boat had to speed away as it was not prepared to repel an Air attack

[@russkinter3000]

Unfortunately, your part on pusher aircraft was a little premature and misleading by choosing the F.E. 2. It's very well known that this later pusher design along with another pusher design the DH 2 were responsible for ending the "Fokker scourge", at least for the British. The French had the Nieuport 11 to end it.

[@elennapointer701]

There was a BBC TV series in the 1980s called "Wings" that was (more or less) about the Fokker Scourge era. The first series was about a fictitious Royal Flying Corps squadron and their Be2c aircraft trying to do an impossible job: photograph German lines and stay alive. The aircraft they used were all real (no CGI in the 80s) so it was full of flying Be2c's (or, at least, the same aircraft with different markings!) and Fokker Eindeckers. Also being the 80s, there was a lot of soap-opera rubbish as well, but it featured a good cast and pretty high production values, for the time. The second series stank, though.

[@Rincypoopoo]

The aircraft were radio controlled and were built and flown by the late great David Boddington. There was a 504 flying at that time which they used too.

[@elennapointer701]

@@Rincypoopoo They were models? I honestly didn't know that. I thought they had a replica Be.2c. Thanks for putting me straight :)

[@jonathansteadman7935]

I remember that, Timothy wotsisname who played James Herriot was in it. Also liked The Pathfinders about Lancaster crews.

[@elennapointer701]

@@jonathansteadman7935 The actor you're talking about is Christopher Timothy, but he wasn't in 'Wings'. I think you're confusing him with Tim Woodward, the actor who played the main character, Alan Farmer.

[@alanmorgan8647]

For anyone who's interested, the full series of Wings is on You Tube.

[@skipstalforce]

This was not an airforce it was more a motley collection of bed sheets and closet poles.

[@digitaal_boog]

Those magnificent men in their flying machines

[@womble321]

Say that when accurate artillery fires landing on your head. Guided in by one of those be2s.

[@blxtothis]

I knew a closet Pole once, he never came out in public!

[@johncashwell1024]

...and the 1st lawn mower engines

[@skipstalforce]

@@womble321 Tell that to James Doolittle, he said it first.

[@tommis1985]

Definitely a great series! Looking forward to more installments!

[@Farweasel]

Garros was the first Scout (ie Fighter) Pilot to successfully use a forward firing machine gun to down enemy aircraft ...... *but* ..... He *didn't*, at least initaily, use synchronisation gear. He fitted metal wedges (sharp end toward the pilot) on the propeller where any bullet which co-incided with it would hit. It was effective, but the downside was the shocks damaged the propeller shaft's bearings.

[@leenewton885]

What a fabulous video. Really learned a lot with some great footage and diagrams - especially loved the information about the synchronisation gear that I didn’t know. Fab - well done! I will now be looking for more of your work on WW1 aircraft.

[@davidmackie8552]

Wonderful series. Thankyou!

[@iraholden3606]

Love the longer videos, big fan of the likes of Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles, perhaps SO this channel at the end of your main channel videos also

[@RexsHangar]

A few people have recommended that channel to me now, must go and check it out!

[@Mishn0]

@@RexsHangar Here's another recommendation.

[@Tlyt.]

@@Mishn0 what’s the recommendation?

[@Mishn0]

@@Tlyt. I was seconding Mr. Holden's recommendation.

[@davidcroft9320]

Metal deflector plates were also used to protect the prop.

[@leifvejby8023]

Shown at 09:34

[@mirrorblue100]

Great series - thanks. Those vintage photos are fascinating.

[@aviatorsandastronauts]

Thank you for sharing this wonderful presentation.

[@timweather3847]

My father (b1891) was in Rio at the start of WW1, came back and joined the RFC. He only once told me anything about it, but I think that he must have been flying the F.E.2, as he said it was a pusher and he had an observer with a gun in a position forward and lower than his. On his last flight his observer was hit by ground fire and shot my father and the engine with his gun. He was able to glide back to our side of the lines and landed relatively safely. His injuries were not too severe, but he was on office duties for the remainder of the war, which may well be why I exist.

[@agustin3710]

It's fascinating that your father fought in WW1 and you're commenting about it in KZbin in 2023, my great grandfather fought in it as well but he died 30 years before I was born. How old are you, if you don't mind me asking?

[@direktorpresident]

Clearly, his father's injuries were not below the belt ;-)@@agustin3710

[@larrydavis3645]

Thank you for your hard work on this and other videos. You do a great job!

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

The synchronization gear of this era is not well understood by most. Calling it interrupter mechanism actually makes it worse as it was not an interrupter at all. It might help if we thought of the machine gun more as an automatic rifle connected to, and operated by the aircraft's engine. I really want War Thunder to create a separate game mode that starts in 1915/16 and ends in 1935. Some people think that this wouldn't work because if various unimaginative excuses. I said a *_SEPERATE_* game mode. I'm talking about a new game that launches from the same platform, but doesn't intermingle vehicles with the original game.

[@amychan811]

Very interesting idea I would wish to play aircraft from that era too

[@CptinHowdy]

@@amychan811 Ive had the same thoughts as you both... They could have a special Battle Rating of 0.1-1.0 I almost gave up hope but i just found out the game IL-2: Battle of Stalingrad has ww1 dlc called The Flying Circus.... 130 dollars but I am currently 15 mins away from flying ww1 Aircraft

[@amychan811]

@@CptinHowdy wow that actually nice be sure the soar high to the sky my friend

[@gavinjenkins899]

It's not any different than just reserve aircraft but slower and more boring and fewer available objectives due to lack of bombing as part of the match

[@ToreDL87]

@@gavinjenkins899 WW1 sims are so much more than that, and War Thunder can never do it justice, obviously not your cup of tea either so might as well stick with the fast stuff.

[@doctoronishispsychosislab1474]

Excellent. Loads of stuff i never even thought about. Subbed ^^

[@jimkalfakis9893]

I love the sound of the radial at start up

[@jasonz7788]

Awesome work Sir thank you

[@SirWilliamKidney]

On the great war channel--way back in 2014--they told a story of "the first dogfight" being a similar pistol affair in the air over one of the foreign concessions in China in the very beginning of the war. It's the only place I've heard the story but I assume it's true. Lovely work by the way I really like your channel and in particular this series. Keep up the good work!

[@dave8599]

Very nice video, thank you.

[@jimskelton8197]

Another good one mate.

[@andik.4235]

Great video. Not to long, but packed with information. A small note about the "unrelaible synchronisation effort of Lewis guns due to their open breech / or firing cycle". The Lewis gun fired from closed breech block (but was an open bolt design), but its timing was difficult due to it was very sensitive to the settings made to her clock-style recoil spring, as the youtube channel C&Rsenal coverd in great detail in their primer series and in project Lightening. The maxim gun with its more conventional coil spring was a much easier beast to tame. Anyway, keep up the good work.

[@singleproppilot]

He must have gotten that mixed up. The Austrian made Schwarzlose machinegun was fitted to to some German made fighters used in the Austro-Hungarian air force. It used an open bolt mechanism, which made the synchronization not as reliable as it was with the Maxim-derived guns.

[@jeremypnet]

The critical thing is open bolt versus closed bolt. In an open bolt design, the breech is held open with the bolt at the rear and pulling the trigger releases the bolt forward, feeds a cartridge and fires the gun in one movement. The length of time this takes is too unpredictable for synchronisation gears. Recoil or gas then resets the mechanism so the bolt is at the back again. In closed bolt designs, the breech is held closed with a cartridge in the chamber and the bolt locked forward. Pulling the trigger immediately fires the round. In this case, it’s just a matter of pushing the firing pin forward. Recoil or gas then cycles the mechanism. The Lewis gun was an open bolt design so I don’t think he got it mixed up.

[@andik.4235]

Your reasoning fits perfect for one shot cycle. But in a machine gun, this cycle is repeated very often and for correct timing with the propeller it has to be consistent and matched to the propeller speed. A consistent shot cycle, which includes the loading of a new cartridge into the breach, could be achieved in my book no matter if the gun is a closed or open bolt design. But the Lewis gun was a tricky bit of kit in that regard, and so not perfect for this application. @@jeremypnet

[@jeremypnet]

@@andik.4235 the way synchronisation gears worked (at least in the early days) was usually via a cam on the propellor shaft that caused the trigger to be pulled. Effectively, the machine gun was operating in semi automatic mode. So you are in a one shot cycle.

[@woodrobin]

Bullet deflectors did have two major drawbacks (aside from the wasted bullets): the impacts could rattle the crankshaft and cause excessive engine wear, and the vibration could cause the glue joining the layers of laminated wooden propellers to loosen, potentially allowing the propeller to come apart in use (and definitely causing them to wear out more quickly). Still better than sticky tape, though.

[@andrewince8824]

The early SPADs were tractor(?) Aircraft with forward firing guns in a nacelle in front of the engine. The prop was basically in the middle of the plane. Just a bizarre and dangerous solution really. One gunner was killed when his scarf got caught in the prop and snapped his neck. Others were killed by being the crumple zone when planes tipped nosewards on landing and at least one fell from the sky when the struts holding his nacelle failed.

[@TheHypnogog]

Well done!

[@davedarling4316]

Two pronunciation details: The second part of Moraine Saulnier is pronounced "sol-knee-ay", not "sull-in-er". The French brothers were the Farman brothers, not the Farmer brothers. So the FE-2 is the "Farman (-type) Experimental, version two".

[@davidjones332]

The Farmans were actually British, though they lived in France.

[@mandoprince1]

@@davidjones332 All three brothers were born in Paris to British parents and had both French and British citizenship😎

[@loveofmangos001]

​@@mandoprince1 How is that in any way cool? Weird

[@jeffapplewhite5981]

Good info!

[@Banner_Bearer_of_Eternity]

A small correction. Russian "Grand" aircraft shown at 2.57 was actually flown in 1913 - before the start of the War.

[@mig-ij6mg]

Excellent

[@burningb2439]

Rex,s humour adds to the weight of his vids , and for every one I watch your guaranteed it.

[@nomadpi1]

I have taken AVIATION HISTORY for yrs, and have read a lot of history re: WWI aviation. As a 6'2", always over 200 .lbs, person, my primary question has always been, if the pilots ever thought about how flimsy these ACs were. Canvas, wood, and metal held together by glue isn't what I would leave the ground in. Human progress seems to always have a large share of adolescent male psychology involved.

[@Engie_Boi]

and then there’s the feminist that comes with "nO, wOmEn alSo fLeW plANeS iN wW1, wOmeN hElPEd aIrCraFt dEsIgn"

[@mikeholland1031]

@@Engie_Boi do you have issues with your cap lock?

[@streamofconsciousness5826]

Wood is not flimsy and these guys knew how to work with wood. Once we get past the Wright Brothers there are no more breaking wings and contraptions, the skeleton was solid, but the power plant still questionable, but even that, no real stories of engine failures ruining missions or killing aces. Aircraft manufacture was a pretty solid science by WW1, how no one thought of it as calvary in the Air beyond as reconnaissance is Bureaucracy at work.

[@johnhoney5089]

​@@Engie_BoiTo be fair, I have heard of those things happening. If true, then the facts should be laid out, rather than agenda-driven filters. Otherwise one might as well be getting their history from a Hollywood movie.

[@RoscoesRiffs]

Nice work! Thank you. 😎🖖

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

Well done. .

[@caeserromero3013]

I heard the Germans offered a fully customisable version of their E1 monoplane called 'Fokker yourself' 🤣

[@caeserromero3013]

Good afternoon sir, are you looking for a little Fokker? Or a big Fokker?

[@gregbolitho9775]

Love to have an E1 in my back shed opening on to the airfield thats over my back fence, alas. Nice 1 m8, thanks

[@darnick54]

Fascinating

[@jamesbugbee6812]

Always w/ the shooting down of Aviatiks; nice looking a/c of the period, built in Alsace, tho' the plant was moved after August 2 Bavaria (?) As well as a satellite in Austria. The a/c's aesthetic seems 2 well match the local taste, w/ a little of the stork lurking in it. 💜

[@ajasont]

Thank you for helping me relive my childhood playing Red Baron.

[@julian281198]

are sure about the synchronization gear on Garros fighter? To my knowledge he only had "armoured" propeller blades which resists damage. The germans testet them but found out that the armour is useless against their steel core ammunition

[@byronjensen-vb1xv]

you are bang on bro

[@womble321]

Might have said this before machine guns were actually fired in single shot mode. A single round was released when the prop was in front of the barrel. It took time so it missed the prop and then had the maximum time to depart the aircraft before the next blade passed. Ammunition was unreliable so slight hang fires had to be allowed for. Due to this timing some later aircraft could not fire at high engine RPM as the gap between the blades was not enough. Also at too slow an engine speed the prop would not clear the barrel.

[@tgwazu]

Rex (and all); I remember reading about how, along with pistols and rifles, pilots and observers would break bricks in half and carry them in their pockets to throw at enemy planes.

[@mato5758]

Observing from a kite?? Wind drops, and so does the observer.... Splat!!

[@RexsHangar]

Not a job you'd want lol

[@roblamb8327]

Not too bad a job as long as you don't mind hanging about! Also watch out if Biggles Flies Undone!

[@RTD1947]

Any information on the propeller size and type of the Nieuport 24bis?

[@ryankane7177]

Just coming here to say that the Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.2 (and subsequent developments thereof), with its headers sticking all the way up over the top wing, is the coolest looking biplane.

[@sidneycashion7817]

No bodies done a video on the improvement of the fuel and lubricants adding to horsepower especially between the wars the avgas got much better. And also the cameras and films were improved greatly by the end of WW1 . Love your vids.

[@Mishn0]

Look at the KZbin channel "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles". He's got a number of videos on that topic.

[@shanebailey9128]

WTF???

[@davidrivero7943]

Amazing to still see the faces of the Men that Flew & worked on these contraptions. If theid only seen the advancement in War Birds firepower 30 - 40 yrs later.

[@aabumble9954]

Could you make a video about all of most World War 1 monoplanes?

[@benjaminrush4443]

Thanks.

[@somerandomguy___]

Cant wait for the part where you get to talk about everyone's favouraite ww1 ace, Manfred Von Richtoffen aka the Red Barron

[@Mishn0]

Huh, not mine. My favorite WWI ace is Frank Luke. That dude was a true bad ass. He shot down 18 German aircraft, mostly the heavily defended observation balloons, in 8 days of combat and was killed when after being shot down, he drew his revolver and tried to fight it out with the German infantry who were trying to capture him.

[@yfelwulf]

Aerial Torpedo was the name given to early air dropped bombs. Aircraft were still refered to as KITES the word Aeroplane appeared later.

[@Rincypoopoo]

My Grandpa was in the RNAS on blimps. Still got his snaps, including a HP 0/100 ? Twin heavy bomber somewhere in Greece.

[@comikdebris]

Synchronization and Interceptor gear are two completely different systems. Two different methods to achieve the same goal. The first synch/time the gun to fire between the blades. The second uses a gear to interrupt/stop the gun from firing when the blade would be in the way.

[@Cemi_Mhikku]

If they do essentially the same thing but in different ways, then they are not completely different. However by your own description, they are essentially the same, if mechanically different. They both mechanically prevent the gun from firing when the blades are in the way. Any more detail than that is largely academic and well out of the scope of a short video like this.

[@Mishn0]

@@Cemi_Mhikku They are completely different in operation, but you're right, they're very similar in the end function. And you are wrong about one thing, the synchronizer doesn't prevent the gun from firing when the blade is in the way, in that system, not firing is the default state. It fires the gun when the propeller blade is NOT in the way. The interrupter does the opposite in that it inhibits the gun from firing when the blade IS in the way.

[@Cemi_Mhikku]

​@@Mishn0 So they literally both prevent the gun from firing when the blades are in the way. One only fires when the barrels are clear, and the other... gee whizz, also only fires then! My point was that I understand the difference, but that it is literally unimportant to the point of the video, and generally just unimportant beyond the ken of engineering history nerds like ourselves. Your average layperson is just going to look at it in the way I described, and the rest will be utterly unintelligible to them. Feel free to ignore my explanation again, though.

[@MB5rider81]

Those Fokkers stole the idea !

[@MrSimonw58]

Fokker six o'clock high

[@COPPERSTATETREASURES]

This is amazing!!! Great commentary.. 👍

[@maximillian7001]

Huh, the pic of a pilot holding a hotchkiss feed strip.. that had to be fun to try to wrangle in midflight, as they are not always easy to get seated on the ground, and had to be dubious to get done while in a dogfight.

[@jamesberwick2210]

The real problem started when someone took their service revolver and started shooting at the other guy. From there, multi barrel cannons and air to air missiles with hundred mile ranges.

[@ScooterFXRS]

It was bound to happen sooner or later.

[@jamesberwick2210]

@@ScooterFXRS The funniest one was the Germans figured out the Interrupter gear that allowed the gun to fire through the propellor. French aviators found this was far better than shooting over the propellor, so they put the gun, minus the interrupter gear and shot their propellors off. Then someone fixed steal plates to the propellor and the ones that hit the plates shot themselves down. It wasn't until they got to a crashed German plane to find the secret, once they had the gear, it was full on.

[@jeffkeith637]

@@jamesberwick2210 did you not watch the video?

[@jamesberwick2210]

@@jeffkeith637 Yes, I also studied early air warfare. The military leaders at the time WW1 broke out, only saw military aircraft as spotters, for the ground forces. Then each side sent their own across and soon the pistols broke out, that didn't work, so they started arming them, it escalated into aircraft being an integral part of warfare to this day.

[@johnwilson1094]

@@jeffkeith637 and ​ @James Berwick, and one of those weapons carried up into the air for offense and defense was the first semi-auto rifle, invented by a man in the Mexican Army, manufactured by SIG (If memory serves), and when the Mexican army didn't pay, SIG sold them to the Germans who used them in the airplanes. The Mondragon.

[@user-ec9fq4ld1g]

I love the D12 Fokker.

[@generalg.b.mcclellan3079]

@10:52 Major 'Mick' E. Mannock 85 Squadron Commander changing a drum magazine.

[@gregorydahl]

At 9:12 it sounds like you said farmer experimental . I thought it was Farnam.

[@fenderfetish]

12:13 I’m enjoying this video…but you’d better check your pronunciation of ‘Morane-Saulnier’

[@maurovinciotti1180]

Grazie.

[@porusmehta2807]

Hi @Rex'sHangar did you mean Bristol Boxkite instead of British Boxkite?

[@RexsHangar]

Yes that lol. Im still getting used to reading from a script 😅

[@Mishn0]

Well, Bristol is a British company so he's not exactly wrong...

[@StevenVanLoven]

Interesting documentary , I always thought the mechanical system to shoot through a prop was a Fokker invention. I only like to point forward you didn't say anything about the Caproni CA 20 design. The Ca.20 is recognised as the world's first fighter and it is on display at the Boeing museum in Seattle. Never taken a active role in the WW1 and only one ever build. Thanks for this documentary.

[@BatMan-oe2gh]

He did not mention the Caproni CA 20 as it was never in service and only one built. Not relevant to this Video he has put out.

[@DCresident123]

Its amazing that the wright brothers are still officially the inventors of the plane

[@deltavee2]

2:48 to 3:06 is the cut Rex uses for his outro from "Heaven and Hell" by Jeremy Blake. See drop-down under the video for the link to the song from the KZbin Audio Library. Nice choice, Rex!

[@jacobjonm0511]

12:50 that plane looks ahead of its time airodynamically.

[@USAACbrat]

my grand father taught me to build a War Kite, but much smaller, great in high winds. the control tower called my mother and asked if we would lower our kites. she did not ask.

[@hlynnkeith9334]

1. Mechanical synchronization gear v Constantino-Colley synchronization gear Fokker produced a mechanical synchronization gear system. The Germans used mechanical systems for the duration. So did Austria. . The French produced innovative mechanical synchronization gear systems until they adopted the Constantino-Colley (CC) hydraulic synchronization gear system late in the war. . The Brits used mechanical synchronization gear systems on rotary-engined airplanes -- Sopwith Strutter, Sopwith Pup, Sopwith Camel -- while they developed the CC hydraulic synchronization gear system. At first, the CC gear worked for only one gun. That is why the SE5a had a single synchronized Vickers on the deck and a wing-mounted Lewis gun. This combination gave the SE5a a two-gun punch when the CC gear synchronized only one gun. The Brits worked out the problems with two-gun synchronization by November 1917, in time to arm the Sopwith Dolphin and persuade the French to mount CC gear on the SPAD XIII. The Brits worked up a field modification for the Camel and by spring 1918, all Camels mounted CC gear. . 2. Open bolt v closed bolt You cannot synchronize open bolt guns because you cannot accurately predict the time it takes for the bolt to close before firing. . The Austrians mounted the Scharzlose machine gun -- an open bolt gun -- on their airplanes anyway. The Luftfahrtruppen -- Austrian air force -- painted an arc on each plane's tachometer (rev-counter) to indicate the range of engine speeds at which it was safe to fire the gun. The Austrians also mounted Schwarzlose guns in a housing above the wing. . 3. Disintegrating links When the war began, the Brits and the Germans used cloth belt-fed machine guns. The French used strip-fed machine guns and that choice SEVERELY limited the rate of fire of their guns. . Cloth belts were not a great impediment to use of the machine guns by a crew of four: gunner, one to feed the belt in, one to pull the belt out, and one to get more ammo. But cloth belts were a pain to deal with in airplanes. . This pain did not prevent the German Luftstreitkräfte from using cloth belts as their standard for the duration. There is hard evidence that Manfred von Richthofen ordered all pilots in JG1 to load their own ammo belts. They were specifically prohibited from delegating this duty to fitters and mechanics. There is some evidence that a few pilots used disintegrating links. German industry produced disintegrating links during the war, but there were problems with them and the Germans reverted to cloth belts. So where did the Germans pilots get disintegrating links? Dunno. Probably the same place Josef Jacobs got castor oil for his beloved Triplane. . The Brits developed the Prideaux disintegrating link in 1916, and the RFC first used it in early 1917. By October, it was standard. However, the empty cloth belts provided pilots some excitement. Not a good thing. Raymond Collishaw wrote of his experience with the tail of an empty belt blowing back into his cockpit and fouling the stick. . Once the kinks were worked out of the Prideaux disintegrating link, it became standard for all allied air forces.

[@Dynioglowy1986]

4:15 thats scary !!!

[@Flight72]

Very good! Rex or anybody knows why early models have half cowling like what we can see for instance at 13''14 of this video! I mean doesn't make too much sense! I think would be better not have cowling all?! And by the why what is the roll of the cowling in the rotary engines, like this one. And radial engines?

[@jamesbugbee6812]

Trying 2 keep the castor oil off the pilot, lest he XSively defecate.

[@marcsmith7037]

Early engine cowling was about protecting the pilot from oil & grease (and exhaust) flying from the engines. A Rotary engine slings oil out at an alarming rate. The half-cowl contained the oil mist and let the remainder drip out of the bottom of the cowl (and stream along the bottom of the fuselage). Even full cowls had slots in the bottom to let the oil out. This is far less important in Radials. The role of cowlings, later on, was for streamlining. In this period, aerodynamics were poorly understood and tactics were about maneuverability, not speed. Tactics would evolve, eventually, as did engine technologies.

[@pycckkuu]

Russian airforce was the largest at the beginning of WWI (263 planet and 14 airships), followed by France (148 planes and 15 airships). And most of the air fleets at the time were outdated, but for some reason it's mentioned only towards Russian air fleet.

[@noahressler7114]

Really interesting how in 1914 planes were used for the military without machine guns. I think really old planes just shooting each other with rifles and pistols is crazy. Air war in 1914 amazes me the most, definitely.

[@johnwilson1094]

Roland Garros, brave French pilot, and 100 years later, inexplicably a big name in French tennis circles.

[@mbryson2899]

He was a tennis star before the war.

[@lambastepirate]

Sorry but the Germans developed the first synchronization gears and put them on planes Fokker and a design team developed it first. Garros used deflector plates to shoot through the propeller he might have even shot the prop off of his plane when he went down!

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

August Euier (also the holder of the 1st pilot's licence in Germany) came up with the idea of synchronisstion in 1910, and was awarded a patent for it. Around 1913/1914 Franz Scheider (Swizz working for LVG) came up with a working interupter system, there is some question as to whether or not his design which was also patented, was every built. Meanwhile in France Raymond Saulnier built an interrupter system. However it never went into production. Fokker looked st the wedgd deflectors used by Garros but dismissed it as suitable as he didn't think it would stand up to the steel jacketted bullets used by the Germans. However, Garros' aircraft had traces of the interupter gear that had been tested on it, and it is from this that it is now believed that Fokker reverse engineered his interrupter gear.

[@goojedooje660]

When Garros tested the deflecters on the propeller blades the bullets killed some officers

[@gabrielbennett5162]

I'm surprised he wasn't brought up on some kind of charges over that.

[@muddrudder2656]

those darn Fokkers

[@sirengriffon5734]

You missed the US's first sortie: against striking civilian miners at the Battle of Blair Mountain, in West Virginia.

[@ShadeGaming4444]

of course it was. America never fails to end up morally below everyone else. ffs i hate it here

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

What type is that timeless beauty in 1:41 ?

[@spudgunn8695]

Surprised there was no mention of some pilots throwing half a brick at other planes in the early days of the war... although thinking about it, that may have been an apocryphal story from my childhood!

[@patrickwentz8413]

First rule of aerial combat is to not shoot yourself down.

[@mandoprince1]

My understanding is that, due to the failure of the synchronisation gear developed by Raymond Saulnier, the aircraft flown by Roland Garros had the gear either removed or disabled and relied solely on deflector plates to protect the propeller🤔 I have always found it curious that the venue for the French Open Tennis tournament is named after Roland Garros, though he had no real connection to the game😁

[@samsignorelli]

8:00....that is possibly the most Russian air combat technique I've ever heard of.

[@johnwilson1094]

In WW2 one Soviet airplane was reinforced to be able to ram and still make it back home.

[@smooth_sundaes5172]

Reinforcing sticky tape? Please tell me it was a Royal Marine who came up with that idea

[@simonredding6582]

Surely it’s a Bristol Boxkite

[@deltagamma-en1zh]

Very good overall, but, sorry to say, a little inaccurate in some(MANY!) ways. First and foremost, COMPLETELY dismissed the VERY early combats and victories, made solely by rifles and carbines, by both French and Austro-Hungarian-German twin-seaters (late '14- early '15). Then COMPLETELY messed up the Morane-Saulnier flown by Roland Garros, fitted by DEFLECTOR CONES on the propeller blades, and, after its capture, the adoption by the Austro-Hungarian-German operated, Dutch-designed, Fokker Eindecker E.I, of the modified Constantinescu, HUNGARIAN-designed, and NOT Fokker-designed, interrupter gear. Please read(if you can find it!) "Aux temps de carabines", by Renè Chambe, who fought the very early aerial combats of WWI ( and lived to write about it....), and you will get to the point. In the process, you will know about Pelletier-Doisy, Rober Navarre, Commandant De Rose, and many other early names in combat flying over the Western front 1914-15.

[@roblamb8327]

He'll learn, meanwhile he makes up for it with observations like "you need a whole prop to keep flying" and "I wish I was making this up" or words to that effect.

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

Constantinescu was Rumanian, not Hungarian and his hydraulic interruptor gear appeared on British aircraft, and later in the war than Fokker's interruptor gear, which was, I believe, purely mechanical. So, you're a little inaccurate yourself :-).

[@ProjectFlashlight612]

Should have used He 219A-7s with 30mm cannons and _Jazz Musik_ guns firing upwards.

[@jamesbugbee6812]

Think a P-47 w/ her 8 50s would have blown their minds enuff. & w/ higher rate of fire would have dissolved those poor WWI kites. Always loved the DH-2, tho'. 💜💜💜

[@LBG-cf8gu]

Why sound effects?

[@dallesamllhals9161]

1:16 ..and Denmark (Hrmph!)

[@michaeloboyle8798]

@0:20, it looks like Batman is riding a horse watching the Wrighy flyer.

[@hikotai1925]

Another crazy thing is they used calvarymen as pilots, many of which expected it to be a safe or safer part of the war... boy were they wrong, but still better than a trench. I also heavily recommend Gregs Automobiles and Aeroplanes for inspiration if you have not already... Similar cadence to the videos.

[@kyle857]

Pretty much all of the cavalry that didn't end up in the sky ended up in the trenches anyway. At least on the Western front.

[@RexsHangar]

Thanks! I'll check out that channel :)

[@kyle857]

@@RexsHangar Greg is very very technical but he has excellent information.

[@elennapointer701]

In the case of the British it was decided pretty much from the get-go that all pilots would be public-school educated (in the UK a public school is actually a private, fee-paying establishment frequented by the offspring of the elite - very confusing if you're American!) on the grounds that flying was for gentlemen. As a direct result, once the Fokker Scourge - and, later, Bloody April - got going, these chinless wonders were slaughtered to the point where the bewhiskered gentlemen of the realm decided that maybe having a few more commoners up there to soak up the bullets would be better. Thus was born the phenomenon of the Sergeant Pilot - an ordinary working-class bloke granted the privilege of flying - although sergeants and officers were strictly sequestered by class. Ironically, one of the greatest British pilots, Edward Corringham 'Mick' Mannock came from such humble beginnings, as an Anglo-Irish ordinary working-class bloke who, by the time he was killed in action, had amassed 61 kills.

[@Andy-ub3ub]

​@@elennapointer701chinless wonders? You know what they were doing? Are you soft in the head?

[@pittuk6500]

Just imagine that the first flight ever happened just 11 years before?!

[@johnwilson1094]

Sixty-six years from Kitty Hawk to Tranquility Base. No, sixty-six years to Apollo 12.

[@QPRTokyo]

How many mistakes did you spot?

[@peanutgallery4159]

Had to have huge balls to go into battle in those airplane, I wouldn't do it?

[@mrrolandlawrence]

9:42 is he having a smoke while flying?

[@erwin6395]

I would like to state that I am very happy to have stumbled across your channel. Your speaking voice is very pleasant and the quality of your videos comes close to Discovery series (pre "SHARKS KILL EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE"). Reminds me very much of the Peter Ustinov series of the Soviet airforce. Please keep it up!!!

[@marscaleb]

This is really fascinating. Honestly though, what I'm curious about is what life is like for the pilots. WW1 was horrible for the troops, living in trenches with all the rats and lice. What conditions did the pilots and their support crew live in? How far out from the frontline did they have the airfields? They couldn't put an airfield just anywhere, but they had to be close enough that they could deploy the planes out to where they needed to be and get back home again. What were those airfields like? Were they just taking off and landing in grass fields where they could? Were they paving runways?

[@guillensuarezmartinez713]

= The concept airships. And inn for the echo lake city village base with. 🛩️🛩️🛩️🛩️🛩️

[@sabrekai8706]

Poor guy on the kite string... Probably thinking, "next time I won't honk off the Sargeant".

[@russetwolf13]

Dude figured out how to do a goddamn command grab on an air plane.