Russia's Forgotten WW2 Heavy Bomber, and Why It Failed | Petlyakov Pe-8

[@RexsHangar]

Play War Thunder for FREE on PC, PS®5 and Xbox Series X|S: playwt.link/rexhangar_ Follow the link to download the game to get a premium tank, aircraft AND ship, along with a seven day account boost just for downloading. F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.

[@superjuca55]

I suggest the Polikarpov I-180. It's history is even 'richer' than that of the PE-8. The evolution of the I-16 that could have been the best fighter the soviets would have had at the start of the war, the tragedies, the political sabotage... Maybe the greatest 'what if' fighter of WW2 together with the Heinkel HE-100 and Arsenal VG-33.

[@alan-sk7ky]

Rex, Douglas DC5/R4D ;-)

[@tonyisepik1203]

Such a perfect sponsor, love it

[@john502]

Can you do a video about the me-264

[@CitizenSmith50]

It's sad that the deaths of millions of men and women; many of those innocent bystanders; should be turned into a "Game" !!!

[@zdor95]

Not forgotten but despised in a certain military online combat game.

[@MediumRareOpinions]

The name appearing on screen prompts the immediate response to remove it with extreme prejudice

[@nickthompson9697]

5 tons of CAS coming your way, baby!

[@Damian-03x3]

I've never played it but from what I've seen it's one of the most effective team killers in the game.

[@iffracem]

Yeah, because it was intended as a long range strategic bomber, but WT has it as a precision close air support plane, something it would be impossible to do in reality. It's use in WT is ridiculous, but much of WT is unrealistic, and ridiculous

[@RyllenKriel]

Yeah, War Thunder is fun but it is a very unbalanced and janky game. Some historically well performing vehicles are junk while other experimental or flawed designs have epic levels of performance. It's not too surprising the Russian made game takes craft like the Pe-8 and makes them far better than they really are.

[@MenwithHill]

Actually, its most effective role was arguably revenge CAS

[@ofcefcipu]

or bt5-cap-rush-kill-teammates-after CAS

[@tacticalginger9623]

Ah, I see a man of culture

[@fastestfail2645]

Literally just raged off the game because of a pe 8 revenge bombing loser 😂

[@superworm1233]

Or team killing

[@manofcultura]

@@superworm1233 you gotta break a few eggs to make a multi-kill omelette.

[@coisinho47]

One of my favorite activities in il2 was shooting these down when they were carrying the 5000 bomb, the explosion effect when they went down looked like a nuke

[@stoneman8387]

The Pe-8 can take a lot of punishment, but the 5 tons of fireworks is very impressive.

[@loveofmangos001]

Do people still play il-2? Lol Last time I played was in 2004/2005 back in middle school

[@MegaPunisher777]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@BlackMasterRoshi]

@@loveofmangos001 there have been updates released and it looks pretty good now. the channel growling sidewinder alternates between that and DCS.

[@stephenmeier4658]

Wheeeeee killin' is fun

[@CWHistory]

The PE-8 isnt forgotten, it still terrorizes War Thunder players to this day

[@joseSanchez-ej2oh]

I have it aced 😏

[@andipus]

The pe 8 bomb jumpscare is the worst nightmare to many tank players, especially when they play ground realistic battles.

[@Shyntetica]

oh look a bomb dropped and it didnt explo-

[@YataTheFifteenth]

terrorise? That's a free air victory for my Spitfire right there

[@SirenHead00]

and the lancaster

[@jameslawrie3807]

It's commonly assumed that the B-24 factory was left running and no one managed to get it turned off before there was 18,000 airframes piled up outside.

[@simoncullum5019]

At the end of the war they were flown straight from the production line to a site to be scrapped

[@jollyjohnthepirate3168]

Consoladated was busy building the B 32 Dominator. They could never get the pressurization system to work but still managed to get them into action flying bombing missions just as the war ended.

[@curtiswebb8135]

You rule.

[@RANDALLBRIGGS]

@@simoncullum5019 Do you have a source for that?

[@TheSlamburger]

I like to imagine everyone went to lunch and went “Wait, SHIT!”

[@meitynajoan5553]

T'was said that for every single enemy vehicle taken out by it's bomb, 3 allied vehicles taken out by the same bomb of this aircraft

[@harrisonrawlinson5650]

Just tag me next time

[@AnakinSkyobiliviator]

>PE-8 >Forgotten >Shudders in War Thunder ground battles

[@vantuz8264]

One major reason why Pe-8 couldn't be built in numbers was... *TORPEDO BOATS* . And i'm not even joking. Marshall Tukhachevsky (later "unfairly" executed during the purge) was so impressed by the UK raid on Krondshtadt harbour 18 aug 1919 that he assigned a lot of funds to development and major production of Sh-4 and G-5 classes of hydroplaning torpedo boats to... ambush enemy fleet when it comes very close to soviet ports. Sounds dumb already? *Tupolev* was the head designer of these boats. Not the best use of his time if you ask me. UK torpedo boats were made out of durable red wood, which wasn't available in USSR. Instead *duraluminium* was used to make them. UK torpedo boats had displacement of 4 tons. G-5 had 15 tons, which required significantly more powerful engines. Each G-5 torpedo boats was powered by *2 GAM-34 engines* (a version of the engine used in Pe-8) The boats were total garbage. They required a completely calm water to operate because any waves badly affected movement and torpedo use. In addition salt water is corrosive for duraluminium so the boats had to be stored ashore preferably in heated and well-vented hangars. And now, drumrolls... Despite all that 84 of Sh-4 and 333 of G-5 boats were built. That's 166 sets of engines for Pe-8 and hundreds of tons of precious duraluminium. These boats without a doubt torpedoed the whole soviet aviation both bombers and fighters for a decade.

[@CaptainLumpyDog]

Why do you think Tukhachevsky wasn't unfairly purged? (Great comment otherwise, but one other thing: A. Tupolev was a well-known hydroplane designer. I think some of his boats may still be in service.)

[@avotsm]

@@CaptainLumpyDog Probably thinks that modernizing the army is a bad thing because competent people might start a coup.

[@samuelphanoto4565]

​@@CaptainLumpyDogwhile tukachevsky is modernizing the army, the same cannot be said to the air force. He's too proccupied with planes with big guns aka recoiless rifle attached on a plane wich is as you can guess hardly beneficial.

[@CaptainLumpyDog]

@@avotsm Say what?

[@lebien4554]

Speaking of bombers. Would love to see some Soviet workhorses of the war: the Tupolev Tu-2 and Petlyakov Pe-2

[@whiskeysk]

Exactly my thoughts after watching this!

[@John.McMillan]

I certainly cannot say it is forgotton on ANY forum, but by all means it's role and use greatly over looked. Games like War Thunder may have popularised it's existance but the actual use and role are generally forgotton as there were bombers the Soviet Union had along side this that performed what most people would think roles the PE-8 filled. In reality the PE-8 for a short while was actually a quite impressive heavy long range bomber. Granted, the Soviets could be described by "Advanced for their time, outdated for their war." Fun fact: Much like the TB-3, for a short time the PE-8 also had a consideration of carrying I-16's under it's wings. Though I cannot find if this was actually ever done.

[@WayneMoyer]

Okay now I have to go see if I can find anything on that. I didn't think the PE-8 was large enough for that but the Soviets would have done "Modifications" to make it work.

[@John.McMillan]

@@WayneMoyer Exactly. I know that there was consideration for trying to make it capable of carrying one or two I-16's but I cant find anything thay says it was ever actually done or tested on the PE-8. I think it was just an experimental doctrine that fell through and was only used on the TB-3. Though the idea of using long range heavy bombers as motherships is certainly fascinating I think it was entirely scrapped woth the advent of escort aircraft like the PE-2 or simply giving bombers better guns.

[@pancharder1592]

Youre a real one for covering soviet aircraft that almost no other channels talk about

[@jakekaywell5972]

@Rache Johnson Nah, they absolutely are.

[@Dr_Jebus]

Absolutely love the new 3D animations. Pity about not being able to include more in this one, but look forward to more in future videos.

[@mirthenary]

Rex- "The entire bomber program encountered a problem... Me- "Stalin" Rex- ..."The great purge" Me "yep"

[@harbl99]

Stalin: "Why is new plane delay? ... Oh yes, the purges. ... Makes no difference. Work faster."

[@scottsuttan2123]

there really never was a heavy bomber arm with USSR and Germany for that matter the doctrine was the Airforce was to supplement the army

[@thethirdman225]

@@scottsuttan2123 Exactly. The Red Air Force, despite its size, was a _tactical_ air force, as was the Luftwaffe. Few people realise this and it’s why the Soviet Union was not interested in developing high altitude fighters or long range strategic bombers. Their attitude was ‘if we can destroy them on the ground then we don’t need to destroy them in the air.

[@markolysynchuk5264]

​@@thethirdman225 Big mistake.

[@thethirdman225]

@@markolysynchuk5264 What was?

[@jiroproduction8831]

TB-3: WW1 version of the Pe-8 Pe-8: WW2 version of the TB-3 _Now there's two of them_

[@soapycactuses9281]

TB-7 was the future Pe-8. Before the War they were preparing a ginormous factory in Kazan but when germany invaded they switeched production mostly to the Pe/Il2/Yak/Lagg/La/Mig. They produced a very limited amount of the TB7/Pe8 and was mostly used by the ADD(Long Range Aviation) but mostly the ADD used american aircraft and some modenised DB-3(f) and later in the war a limited amount of the TU-2

[@Blackburn6969]

No single aircraft could match the might of the TB series. Its effortless takeoff capacity, the ability to carry 2x light fighters under its wings! As well as a bomb payload! At the time also, machine guns weren't capable of any major damage to it, it was a literal flying tank

[@ravenouself4181]

The TB-3 is an inter-war design, not a WW1 design

[@jimgordon1563]

Hi from Dundee, Scotland. The photo of the PE8 in Scotland, was taken about 5 miles from here at Tealing aerodrome. Some people still remember its visit! The aerodrome later became a farm. There are still remains of it.

[@guaporeturns9472]

That’s cool

[@Vinemaple]

Seems to me that Soviet WW2 aircraft all have fascinating, "Development Hell" origin stories... thanks for this, I had a great half hour!

[@zoompt-lm5xw]

The price for faillure was not the same in the west...

[@vlexonkol8466]

Yeah, human safety was not one of those priority in soviet union

[@markalex5136]

Weren't there any purges in the USA? In some strange way, 7 million Americans disappeared from statistics from 1933 to 1941, do you know for what reason? But Americans know everything about the Gulag and the purges in the USSR. Take an interest in your history with the mass murders of its citizens by the authorities, you will be surprised that the USSR was more democratic than the West. By the way, take an interest in how the “Hunger March” of unemployed and unarmed veterans of the First World War with their families to Washington was organized in 1932. Regular troops and tanks were thrown against them. The dispersal of veterans was led by General D. MacArthur, Colonel D. Eisenhower and Major D. Patton. All three are the most famous personalities in history.

[@stevetournay6103]

Had no idea there'd been a radial Pe8. That could have been an excellent patrol bomber in the manner of the Liberator...and those late war and postwar test models are wild!

[@CakePrincessCelestia]

I've been dropping 5 ton bombs from a horribly managed Soviet heavyweight way before War Thunder and even KZbin existed - in the original Il-2 series. The thing was only flyable through external cam though but I did some nice drops that other people didn't expect, was a great time :) - WT has taken over a lot of assets from that original Il-2 BTW which is why they have so many WW2 aircraft - especially the not so well known - in common.

[@legoeasycompany]

When I first played WT right as it came out in 2013 it really surprised me to hear even the radio calls were the same from IL-2 Birds of Prey and the models too.

[@dse763]

@@legoeasycompany Well, Il2 Birds of Pray is from Gaijin Entertainment, none less. However, don't know if Maddox Games gave the code of IL2 to Gaijin.

[@reggiekoestoer1511]

I also initially thought WT was from the makers of IL-2

[@legoeasycompany]

@@dse763 I mean the BT hangars and such seemed to be riped straight from Birds of Prey. I'm sure they did since they did a bunch of console stuff but then they got that bright idea

[@linkfreeman1998]

Well have u tried the updated IL-2 1946? I think now it has cockpit for the Pe-8.

[@kevinmello9149]

This is why I thoroughly enjoy your channel. Until today I didn't realize the soviets had any strategic bombers beyond the TB-3.

[@jeebusk]

A potentially strategic bomber, actually used for tactical purposes.

[@stevetournay6103]

I have a 1:72 recognition model of this big beast with the V12s. Curiously, it dates not from World War II but from the 1950s, so during the Cold War...by which time few if any Pe8s would have been operating as bombers.(Indeed, by then the Soviet heavy bomber, instead of being somewhat reminiscent of a contemporary Boeing design, was an outright facsimile of one: Tupolev's epic reverse engineering exercise, the Tu4 "Bull" clone of the B-29, which, Rex, would be another great subject.)

[@justforever96]

I thought the internal engine was to drive the cabin pressurization as well. And they used the Klimov because they didn't need a full sized engine just to compress air. The Klimov was significantly smaller and lighter, you don't want to use more engine than you need.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

Always excited to see you've uploaded something Rex. Your work is appreciated and you are one of my favorites in our little corner of the internet.

[@Jdhog152]

Now, we need a video for Russia’s even more forgotten heavy bomber, the YER-2.

[@martijn9568]

Not a heavy bomber but a long-range bomber to replace the TB-3/Il-4 if memory serves me right.

[@АнтонГ-ж1ъ]

@@martijn9568 Not TB-3, but DB-3 (Dalniy Bombardirovshchik), the first designation of Yer-2 was DB-240.

[@martijn9568]

@Антон Г Shit, meant DB-3 indeed. Not sure how I managed to write TB-3 instead, as I'm familiar with both aircraft.😅

[@soapycactuses9281]

Essentially that thing was very unreliable and they kept on putting it into production and then cancelling it because engines powerful enough for it were never fully "worked out" to be put into mass production. This is a fairly common theme with soviet plane engines through ww2.

[@JGCR59]

Interestingly the second prototype called the "Doubleur" was used operationally until the end of the war and was generally regarded as the most reliable of the bunch. Also the leading Pe-8 pilot was Estonian: Endel Puusepp who was awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union after flying Molotov to the US but continued flying operationally afterwards. I have an interesting book on the Pe-8 by an east german author. Apparently the USSR had recovered the wreckage of a Pe-8 that crashed on arctic service in the late 80s and planned to rebuilt the aircraft for museum display in Monino but that never happened.

[@stuff___idontknow2610]

Finally, a video about the war thunder vehicle of all time

[@datathunderstorm]

Great video, Rex! Your research into Soviet era aircraft is truly impressive. Still waiting for a video on the Short Stirling - my favourite WW2 Bomber 😊

[@justforever96]

Yes, I love the underappreciated planes, and the Stirling just has great character. And I think a far worse reputation than it really deserves.

[@frank_style2946]

I am from Argentina and I am a lover of aviation and tanks but especially of the engineering they have behind, your videos help me to understand and learn many things about them and make me interested more and more in the engineering of these beasts, In short I love your videos please never stop making them, greetings from argentina ❤

[@cedricliggins7528]

What happened to Argentina's air force? After the Falklands War (Malvinas) it hasn't been the same.

[@Tallorian]

Great video and a fair assessment. People in the West often either don't know about Pe-8 or throw mud at it. Meanwhile, it was a great design with a strong potential, but the main reason for its small numbers and other difficulties with components lies exactly in the character of the anticipated (and then the actual) war - when the resources are limited, the emphasis has to be made on producing the most crucial things, which at the time was the "front aviation", i.e. fighters, dive bombers and ground attack planes.

[@tomt373]

It appears both Stalin and Hitler had a similar, if not the same mindset for their aviation industry. Competing nose-to-nose instead of getting into the broader picture of long-range strategic bombing. An example is Hitler's interference with the He-177 to force Heinkel into using two propellers only for four engines, hampering their development and making them problematic for reliability and maintenance, and hampering production.

[@Tallorian]

@@tomt373 First, there was no such thing as "nose-to-nose" mindset of Stalin in terms of aviation. Russia pioneered large and/or long range planes (bombers) since WWI "Ilya Muromets" by Sikorsky, and this didn't change much with communists. Rex's channel already told the stories of the largest Soviet planes of 1920-30s. Furthermore, in 1937 an ANT-25 conducted a direct (i.e. without any intermediary landings) flight from Moscow to the mainland United States. So Stalin was never intentionally harming or forbidding works on large aviation and/or bombers; a lot of non-technical issues came not only from "paranoid machinations" (which is a wrong way to describe internal struggle within the communist party), but from the severe competition in the field too - for example Tupolev was not once accused of "sabotaging" by his peers and pilots for various bold (and sometimes dubious) decisions. And when the war started, in the situation when the enemy was moving with a fast pace, and the country was literally fighting for its survival, spending too much resources on those non-critical projects would be an impossible luxury. Besides, "strategic bombing" in WWII was not as efficient as some might think after listening to all the praises. It's known that Western bomber crews were often dropping bombs "somewhere in the vicinity" while not being able to identify their target. And when they were hitting the mark, more often than not the damage was not severe or crippling- usually Germans were resuming production/repairing the damage within a couple of days, if not hours. This is true until at least 1943 - when the fate of the war was already decided in the East. In fact, the most well-known "achievements" of Anglo-American strategic bombing aviation are the terror acts against civilians (napalm bombing of Dresden, Konigsberg, Tokyo etc., atomic bombing of Japan), that did not require precision.

[@AKUJIVALDO]

@@tomt373 why bomb targets(factories, cities) behind enemy lines if you can capture them? And knowing that Soviets had over 20,000 tanks and over 21,000 warplanes and 5,000,000 soldiers when Germany preemptively attacked...

[@klobiforpresident2254]

@@Tallorian I'll add that curious readers might wish to look at "Kelly's History"'s documentation of British strategic bombing in Germany.

[@Tallorian]

@@klobiforpresident2254 Thank you for recommending that channel! I've never heard of it before, but after looking through a couple of videos I've found not only things I'd previously known from other sources, but a lot of deep research in archive documents. A truly tremendous work done by that guy! Such a shame his channel is so small and unknown to the public. And he did videos not only about the British bombing, but also an analysis of the facts behind the narrative story about the American precision bombing. In the context of this video about Pe-8, I doubt that after watching Kelly's research anyone would still be able in good faith suggest that the Soviet focus on attack planes and dive bombers for ground support instead of large high-altitude and long range bombers was a mistake move forced by a silly, shortsighted and incompetent dictator.

[@therealspeedwagon1451]

They didn’t make enough of this bomber because they ran out of Stalinium to make it.

[@dannya1854]

Hearing these stories about the Great Purge always make me sad. People don't often comprehend how the Great Purge stifled development in pretty much every single facet of Soviet life. Science, historical research, engineering, leadership, morale, basic functions of industrial life, safety regulations, quality control, quantity of goods, education, and of course the party itself was crippled. The entire union was flipped over and told to try again. It's either miraculous that the military apparatus managed to even function in enough time or it goes to show how little of a chance the Germans had at taking over that even with the stars aligned in their favor they lost.

[@merafirewing6591]

It also killed any chances of the Soviets of having a proper blue water Navy.

[@jlvfr]

Afak the FAB-5000 was the 3rd largest non- nuclear bomb of WWII, after the british Tallboy and Grand Slam.

[@high-velocitymammal5030]

3rd would be the 12,000 lbs "super-cookie" surely? Or 3x 4,000 lbs "cookies" stuck together.

[@jlvfr]

@@high-velocitymammal5030 I didn't mentioned them precisely because the supers were "frankenbomb", 2-3 strapped together.

[@bmw_fantopdrives5501]

What about the Fritz Bombs?

[@jlvfr]

@@bmw_fantopdrives5501 the V1 had a 850kg warhead, the V2 1000kg. The Tallboy's was 2400kg, the Grand Slam 4300kg... so they win by far, in terms of sheer explosive power.

[@bmw_fantopdrives5501]

@@jlvfr did some Research, the biggest German bomb was 2500kg

[@nashaigra8973]

The thing didnt fail. The problem was that there were things MORE IMPORTANT than heavy bombers.

[@petergray7576]

It failed. They never developed a reliable engine for this aircraft, which explains the low production numbers. Unlike the Germans, the USSR was interested in long range strategic bombing, and a four engined bomber would have allowed them to bomb German railheads and supply depots in Poland and Western USSR. But the Soviet aviation industry was still underdeveloped in comparison to western countries, and this was especially evident in engine development and design.

[@nashaigra8973]

@@petergray7576 The thing wasnt the best but still worked i dont think anything would make the production rates bigger since most of the resources were sent to strike and fighter aircraft. Allies could let themselves to produce a lot of bombers since they didnt rlly have ground battles. Soviets couldnt. especcially in the early years.

[@jakekaywell5972]

@@petergray7576 Soviet military doctrine simply didn't need the Pe-8 in the numbers of its Western counterparts, as explained in the video. Thus, I wouldn't call it a failure. It just didn't fit the type of conflict that was the Great Patriotic War. Soviet industry had to focus primarily on fighters and tactical bombers. So not really a failure, just not produced in numbers enough to make a difference.

[@soapycactuses9281]

@@petergray7576 Not the aviation industry when it comes to amount of planes produced but when it comes to engines the soviet industry was mostly relying on improved engines "Borrowed"(semi-stolen) American and French desighns which were acquire for pennies during the height of the depression.

[@Klovaneer]

@@petergray7576 AM-35 used in Pe-8 was developed into AM-38 of which there would be FORTY THOUSAND built. *F* *O* *R* *T* *Y* *T* *H* *O* *U* *S* *A* *N* *D* Germans were very interested in long range bombers, to bomb the ural industry and even united states while soviets pumped out thousands of tactical bombers and ground attack planes (powered by these "unreliable" engines) instead.

[@nickthompson9697]

No way, the first historical use of the Boost Caboose, some 80 years before Roadkill tried it.

[@justforever96]

It want even the first time they tried what , and no, it is not an original idea. Shit, the first jet engines were motorjets with the compressor driven by a V12 aero engine instead of a turbine, it is definitely not a new idea.

[@metivs]

It was Stalin personally who ordered to perfom attack on Berlin by diesel engine PE-8. They wanted to attack in any way possible despite knowing those engines will be troublesome.

[@Simon_Nonymous]

Can I say that your graphics and production seem to have reached an amazing level of professionalism. Well done on that alone, never mind your well researched and interesting content too!

[@benniotto]

“And then the great purge happened…” is a great description of Soviet military development during the 1930s in general.

[@markalex5136]

Weren't there any purges in the USA? In some strange way, 7 million Americans disappeared from statistics from 1933 to 1941, do you know for what reason? But Americans know everything about the Gulag and the purges in the USSR. Take an interest in your history with the mass murders of its citizens by the authorities, you will be surprised that the USSR was more democratic than the West. By the way, take an interest in how the “Hunger March” of unemployed and unarmed veterans of the First World War with their families to Washington was organized in 1932. Regular troops and tanks were thrown against them. The dispersal of veterans was led by General D. MacArthur, Colonel D. Eisenhower and Major D. Patton. All three are the most famous personalities in history.

[@merafirewing6591]

The one thing that War Thunder players all feared, the Pe-8 and it's 5,000 bomb.

[@suthiraksb]

Players hate it because it's Soviet and Gaijin rarely nerf Soviet. High attitude + early spawn + big bomb. Too hard to counter. Players always leave the match after 1 bomb because it's useless to play against unfair match.

[@loyalpiper]

@@suthiraksb just intercept the bomb.

[@robynmorin1230]

Not forgotten, Warthunder players around the world remembers this aircraft most dearly.

[@johnforsyth7987]

Thank you for another very informative video regarding the PE-8. I would be very interested in seeing a future video about the Petlyakov PE-2. I understand it was a high performance aircraft in it's day. (WWII) But it was also somewhat difficult to fly.

[@steel8231]

Russian reporting on their plane's success tends to he a "bit" skewed... like that time the IL2 was reported as destroying more German tanks in a single battle than were ever actually deployed on the Eastern Front throughout the entire war.

[@The_Modeling_Underdog]

I've been missing the Zvezda Pe-8 ever since I sold it. Thanks for reopening that wound, mate. Nah, just kidding. Great video. The Pe-8 deserves far more respect it's garnered through time. Cheers.

[@bob_computer8279]

if you play warthunder, this plane is most certainly not forgotten. the scourge of all ground vehicles and the scorn of open tops

[@peterasp1968]

Thanks for highlighting a relatively less known aircraft. You could do a series on such heavy bombers. A particular candidate would be the Nakajima G8N

[@reikawahara770]

Love the super SECRET photo at 10:28. 😆 Great video... informative, humorous, and well researched.

[@Taketimeout3]

1936? That's pretty early for such an advanced design. And the cruise speed of 255 mph of later versions is faster than any allied bomber, if true. This is an impressive aircraft.

[@allangibson8494]

The slightly later B-29 was significantly faster at 357 mph (but cruised at 220mph).

[@grahambuckerfield4640]

Fascinating, thanks. Growing up in 1970’s UK we had a volume of books, roughly one for each year of WW2, published just after the end of the conflict, they were photo and war artist based with descriptions to move the narrative along. On one page, the visit of Molotov to the UK was shown, with the diplomat/servant to Stalin’s whims, with the aircraft described as ‘the giant Soviet bomber which brought him here’, the Pe-8, not that this designation was used. Like many in the 1946 publication, the picture was poor quality/heavily retouched. The wonderful dark satirical comedy film, Death of Stalin, featured Commissar Kaganovich, played by Dermot Crowley and of course Molotov by the legendary Micheal Palin.

[@alistairdiren5790]

Ah yes the bringer of death if your a Warthunder player against the Soviets or with the Soviets the 5000kg bomb doesn't matter and doesn't care if friend or foe is in it's blast radius, once the bomb is drop your fate is sealed.

[@RedXlV]

For some reason, other nations don't get their own giant bombs yet in War Thunder. Where's Britain's 4,000, 8,000, and 12,000 lb Blockbusters, along with 12,000 lb Tallboy and 22,000 lb Grand Slam? Where's America's 4,000 lb AN-M56, 10,000 lb pumpkin bomb (a conventional version of Fat Man), and 12,000 lb Tarzon (radio-guided Tallboy)?

[@merafirewing6591]

@@RedXlV oh, if those enter into War Thunder. Oh it's going to be a bloodbath.

[@zacharyprovance3128]

"Once Mr. FAB-5000 is dropped, it is no one's friend."

[@merafirewing6591]

@@RedXlV yeah, and see how many vehicles die to the megabombs wrath.

[@jonathanallen3688]

@@RedXlV while I'm all for parity please no. It's already a pain to deal with longe range bomber that can comfortably sit outside of SPAA range and don't have to even aim. If they added actual bomb movement ie anything not delivered via dive bomb be accurate then sure.

[@harrisonrawlinson5650]

Remember guys, CAS doesn’t count if it’s dropped from 6000ft. Therefore, I do not partake in revenge CAS

[@ModelMinutes]

Another fascinating breakdown! Love putting your videos on whilst i'm doing some modelling

Very interesting. Thx for the Video

[@davidjones332]

Anybody else noticed how hard it is to make sensible decisions when your boss is a paranoid psychopathic mass-murderer?

[@jakekaywell5972]

Stalin was many things, but "psycopathic mass-murderer" wasn't one of them. Its also not paranoia if the danger was real, as evidenced by the Nazi plan to plant pro-Nazi paraphernalia in design bureau offices, with the expectation that those bureau chiefs would be reprised.

[@Zond3r]

Chill, Dave, Stalin was an above-average decision maker

[@generalhorse493]

@@Zond3r In solidifying power in Russia for himself yes, in war and research no. In fact when he realized he should let the generals general and believe the intelligence reports sent to him, things got a lot better for the Soviet military. (Hitler went the exact opposite direction)

[@SovietBear91]

@@generalhorse493 chill The shietviet Union was beaten by Pepsi and McDonalds

[@skeletonjanitor]

Chill, he’s literally a minor and neurodivergent

[@BrockvsTV]

As much as war thunder has hurt my soul over the last 9 years it has considerably expanded my military vehicle history knowledge so I am thankful for that

[@iiKiboshii-c3z]

Funny thing is the Pe-8 in warthunder is wrong. Its labeled as an 85 engine, with specs slightly above that. With the 85 engine, it shouldn't have rear gunners. It also shouldn't be able to pull an immelman at 120mph without stalling, nor should it be able to pull 12g to do a reverse, or turn. Should be much more sluggish, and even more so with the rear gunners.

[@Bird_Dog00]

Ok, now I realy want to see that promissed video on the PE-2. An interesting aircraft, the PE-8. I think I have come accross it once or twice before but never payed much attention to (my interst has so far been focussed more on land and naval warfare and less to aerial warfare, though the content of your channel clearly has the potential of broadening my horizon in this regard).

[@ImWallace799]

It is Fact that the more rare it is irl, the more people use it in WT

[@joewalker2152]

Regarding British heavey bombers, everybody quotes Lancaster's but forget that over 6100 Halifax and 2300 Stirling's were also produced.

[@owenshebbeare2999]

I suppose it is because the Lancaster carried the largest loads.

[@ilpoomatili9549]

Honestly I like the Halifax and Stirling more that the Lancaster ._.

[@joewalker2152]

@@ilpoomatili9549 I agree. I like the fact they are both underdogs. After the Halibags initial teething troubles (it was designed with a vertical tail which caused stability issues and was resolved with the twin tail design), it proved a capable bomber, even if it couldn't fly as high as the Lanc and suffered for it. It's the same for the Stirling, but it was the Air Ministries insistence it must fit in the standard RAF type C hanger, so the wing span had to be less than100ft, again restricting its service ceiling.

[@mikearmstrong8483]

​@joewalker2152 A common misconception. Actually, the standard RAF hangar door width at the start of the war was 120', and Lancasters could fit in the hangars.

[@athiftsabit1208]

Without War Thunder this bird will easily forgotten

[@jakekaywell5972]

Not by me, who knows of its vital importance in establishing Soviet artic research bases.

[@calvingreene90]

Whenever I think of what Congress did to the USofA's military readiness I will remember that they were only denying funding not imprisoning and executing the best and brightest design and production engineers.

[@FirstDagger]

Superb episode, can't wait for videos on the SB, Pe-2 and potentially Tu-2.

[@danieleyre8913]

So really this thing didn’t really “fail”, it just didn’t really fit into the Soviet situation and responded war plans. Let’s be honest; this thing was flying and in service long before the Lancaster or the B-24 or the actually usable later versions of the B-17…

[@stevew6138]

I find it striking how such a bureaucratically bloated machine as the Soviet Government, at the time, went on to build tanks and planes by the thousands in short order during WWII. The power of necessity, I guess.

[@chessell256]

Thank you Rex, as WW2 nerd of all things, I had no idea about this Soviet Aircraft, Please keep it coming!

[@NormanSilver]

40 were built. 29 crashed.

[@SirenHead00]

skill issue

[@billwebb5256]

Like the use of the models! I really appreciate the research and presentation of the videos! Keep up the excellent work and this channel will grow even more!

[@Zorglub1966]

Zeppelin Staaken also had an additional engine in the fuselage....😁

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated excellent insights as always. Thanks

[@wktodd]

Excellent production Rex 8⁠-⁠)

[@valdorhightower]

It appears that the first really successful Soviet heavy bomber was the Tu-4, an unlicensed, reverse-engineered copy of a B-29 Superfortress that had landed in Siberia after being damaged in a bombong raid on Japan.

[@jameshall1300]

Supposedly it was such an exact copy of that frame that they even copied an unneeded hole that an assembler mistakenly drilled in a piece of the framing. I can't remember where I heard this, but it stuck with me.

[@rizalardiansyah4486]

@@jameshall1300 It was said in a forum I forgot that even the rudder pedals of the Tu-4 has the Boeing logo...

[@eyo8766]

"No no no Mr. John, this definitely isn't an exact copy of your bomber. This one clearly has cannons instead of your 50 cals"

[@tobiasfreitag2182]

@@rizalardiansyah4486 as far as I read that was kind of tupolev giving Stalin the finger. Tupolev had some ideas how to improve the b-29 when copying here. So he went to Stalin for approval of these changes but Stalin insisted on a exact copy. So tupulev went and made a exact copy.... including all boeing logos

[@merafirewing6591]

​@@tobiasfreitag2182 lel.

[@mpersad]

Another terrifically well researched and illustrated video. Thank you Rex, top video again!

[@XSpamDragonX]

War Thunder music legit gives me anxiety. There's an incredible simulator that can be fun in there, but the level of MT pushing and gameplay/balance breaking is just disturbing. I totally understand that you need to take the sponsors you can get, but I would really appreciate if you would be willing to look at some evidence of their borderline criminal behaviour, starting with GE bundles being a worse value the larger they get when purchased in certain currencies, which happens to include Canadian Loonies.

[@Lobonova]

The music relaxes me. I love Classical music.

[@uingaeoc3905]

Less than 100 built with no particular 'battle honours'. To put this in perspective it was outclassed in all parameters by the Short Stirling, regarded as the least advanced of the RAF Heavies, with 2,371 manufactured . The HP Halifax, not mentioned as a comparator with the others by rex had 6,170 manufactured. Both served in all Europan and North African theatres.

[@kaletovhangar]

Considering all the circumstances of USSR and artificially boosted difficulties Soviet leadership inflicted upon their own engineers and scientists,it's actually quite impressive design in it's own right.In some weird way,it reminds me of Tu-95 (which looks like somebody merged Pe-8 with Tu-4).

[@kittyhawk9707]

Yes but this was planned and designed well before the Stirling etc .. Hell .. these were flying while we still relied on Wellingtons and Whitleys .. It is like saying the B29 outclassed the Lancaster .. look at the timeframe between the two planes ..

[@The_Modeling_Underdog]

@@kittyhawk9707 Most people lack context. Agreed. On the other hand, they are contemporary designs. First fllight in 1936 for the 8 and 1939 for the Stirling. Which may come as a shock to most. God only knows what the Soviets could have achieved had it not been for the Great Purge throwing back the development of the 8 for two years. And even though the Stirling could fly circuits around the Pe-8 at low altitude, it lacked the ability to reach high altitudes and a decent cruise speed. Both were delightful flyers, the Stirling being a bit tricky during take off and landing. That being said, you make do with what you have. And neither the RAF nor the VVS had much for some veritable long range bombing during 1941-42. They were hitting fields and the wrong cities in almost every single sortie during that period. Cheers.

[@uingaeoc3905]

@@kittyhawk9707 The point is the PE8 may have had an initial flight earlier than the Stirling but nothing came of it and it was the ONLY 4 engine heavy the VVS had and it was kept in service and underpowered for the entire war. The Stirling was a success and replaced by Halifaxs and Lancasters, the PE8 was not. You are aware that the Wellington was the most produced UK bomber and that it was used in all theatres and gave excellent service throughout the war. The Wellington outclassed the PE8 in all practical metrics, not the. fantasy tats of the PE bureaux.

[@uingaeoc3905]

@@The_Modeling_Underdog There was no accrate bombers in WW2, the Nordern Sight was useless.

[@jds6206]

Russia in the 1930s was, more or less, cut off from the West's technology. Unless Russia could steal the necessary technology it was incapable of developing anything comparable to what the UK and USA were designing, manufacturing, fielding and using operationally. Russia was strictly a second class military power then.j It still is today.

[@warlordshaxx856]

at 29:05 is that a Focke Wulf Fw 200 Condor in the background

[@casualmannoobq]

No, I believe it’s a American DC-3 in the background

[@warlordshaxx856]

@@casualmannoobq might need to re-watch the video before i agree with you cuz i have forgotten about this video

[@RTD1947]

Excellent presentation!....Outstanding Graphics!!!

[@sergeipohkerova7211]

I feel like the Luftwaffe of 1943-44 would have shredded fleets of these if the Russians attacked in the same manner as the Americans and British.

[@petergray7576]

Maybe. But then you realize that these raids were taking up a majority of the Luftwaffe's resources. To have another air force start launching air raids against German military and industrial targets would have probably pushed the Luftwaffe to the breaking point much sooner.

[@sergeipohkerova7211]

@@petergray7576 True, I just mean the Russian bombers wouldn't be high altitude and their defense would probably be less formidable than the Americans and less sneaky/stealthy than the British, so they would get a good running through by the Luftwaffe just like the Luftwaffe in general got very favorable kill loss ratios versus Soviets. The Luftwaffe would still lose, though, 100%.

[@McLarenMercedes]

@@sergeipohkerova7211 The Soviets believed that long-range strategic bombing wouldn't cause the enemy sufficient damage and that too many cities would need to be targeted for it to have any effect. Given the distance (and yes, quite a few times longer than German submarine pens in France or Germany itself from Britain) and all focus going to land forces and what could be allocated to the airforce was for fighters and attack aircraft/light bombers it was an obvious choice. Here's what: *After* the war it turned out the Soviets were correct. The allies were overly optimistic that Nazi Germany could just be bombed to surrender. If anything it strengthened their resolve to fight the total war (Goebbel's words in a speech to the German people). In early 1943 the allies discovered that their strategic bombing didn't cause enough sustained damage to German industry. One of the main reasons for this is that *most bombs dropped missed their target* and those that did hit their target usually meant the production was halted for a few days or weeks. Nazi Germany had seized a lot of workers from occupied countries all over Europe and they were really good at "motivating" them to work hard and repair damaged equipment and buildings. In order to limit the effect of allied bombing raids Nazi Germany moved their production of shells and ammo to buildings which the allies obviously wouldn't target. Some production of wheel bearings and certain parts were done in neutral countries such as Sweden and Switzerland - which obviously wouldn't be bombed. In fact production of parts were out-resourced to smaller facilities and then just the *assembly* was done in factories. German production broke all records in 1944 - *when the allied bombings were the worst and most intense* . Some aircraft were assembled in factories lacking roofs from previous bombings. In other words strategic bombing certainly didn't end neither German production nor will to fight. And as for "precision bombing", during WWII this was highly theoretical and we didn't see that until the Gulf War of the 1990's. The British were aware that allied bombings did little to stop German production so they had an idea... if German factories and machines could be repaired and rebuilt, German *workers* couldn't. Hence the firebombing of cities like Dresden. With dead workers who is going to work in the factories? And they decided on this strategy precisely because they knew just bombing factories and military targets did little lasting damage. After the war it was calculated that the allied bombing raids limited German production by roughly 20%. Most of that from the last three years of the war. How much allied bombing raids limited German production in 1939-1942 I don't know but not significantly would be my modest guess. So (ironically) the Soviets were right largely ignoring long-range strategic bombing. Besides, given the fact they faced the lion's share of the Wehrmacht on a vast front ( *and* most of the axis allies and client-states as well as foreign volunteers and SS divisions) it's easy too see, like I mentioned, how long-range strategic bombing wasn't considered. Lack of oil and strategic raw materials was what doomed Nazi Germany the longer the war went on. Certainly not bombing raids. German logistics suffered throughout the war and when the fuel reserves were getting critical they couldn't conduct any large-scale offensives anymore from early 1943 onward. Vietnam was bombed to cinder during the Vietnam War by a huge number of B-52's. That bombing made the bombing of Nazi Germany look like a picnic. Yet, the Vietnamese didn't surrender. Or lose the war... So the PE-8 being used in strategic bombing is an academic question. Had the Soviets somehow decided to start it themselves they'd probably use fast two-engined bombers or develop a whole new heavy bomber design in the final years of the war.

[@zrbbg9639]

Thanks for making this video, you did an awesome job and this comes from someone who also got very interested and researched quite a lot about the TB-7/Pe-8 with its numerous variations. I feel like some information about this aircraft is still too difficult to find... There were variants apparently with 7 mounted guns or some of the ones that mounted a fifth engine at the front don't really get any more context than the obvious testbed thingy... By the way you sort of missed on the Pe-8 "T" variant, which was drafted up as a response to the B-29. This was also pretty interesting, when looking at the (theoretical) specs. But I suppose it isn't that much a major topic when it comes to the Pe-8.

[@anharsreejon9371]

at last someone makes a video about the PE 8

[@marckyle5895]

14:22 It's over 9000! (crushes scouter)

[@Electric_Bagpipes]

Just accept it, WT players have *entered chat.*

[@RemusKingOfRome]

Very detailed video on the PE8, excellent.

[@SolverAfiq]

In war thunder almost everyone know about pe8 because of the 5000kg bomb it carry

[@eyo8766]

The self proclaimed nuke before actual nukes were introduced

[@abandonedaccount123]

@@eyo8766 still called a nuke lol

[@stalkedbycats7366]

Regarding the proposed gunship escort variant: was this concept actually ever tried in a serious way with any plane?

[@nickthompson9697]

My favorite CAS machine in war thunder.

[@jacobbeckley5292]

It's not forgotten in War Thunder, I can tell you that.

[@thedayofthetanks]

I used the PE 8 with the FAB 5000 today. I got 5 kills! 👍 Good vid!

[@TheNewOrder-DaysOfConflict]

It can be forgotten by history,but war thunder players will never forget it

[@mek1429]

Ah Yes *THE WAR THUNDER TACTICAL NUKE*

[@brucebaxter6923]

I wonder if they kept the cabin pressurised at a few psi above outside to keep strength for hard landings?

[@brucebaxter6923]

Oops. Commented on wrong video. It was meant to be on an airliner that buckled the fuselage on hard landings.

[@Phoenix44th]

I remember this plane and will never forget it for all the times i died to it while capping the D point

[@AceofAllAcesJames5558]

**See's 5,000KG bombload in **1:57**** Literally me: **PTSD INTENSIFIES**

[@WelcomeToDERPLAND]

Forgotten? This is literally one of if not the most well known heavy bombers thanks to WarThunder.

[@moery2435]

Yeah i dont know what he means by forgotten

[@rapter229]

Most people don't play War Thunder

[@WelcomeToDERPLAND]

@@rapter229 Most people know nothing about bombers in general, however in an enthusiast space for planes- the Pe-8 is probably one of the most well known bombers there is.

[@j_taylor]

I've read a lot of books and web sites about 20th century aviation, and especially WWII aircraft, and I never heard of this aircraft before. Clearly I never read "War Thunder." (Also been to many airshows by the likes of the CAF and saw plenty of bombers, but never this. Maybe it's not the most famous bomber?)

[@alexwinfield9540]

​@@WelcomeToDERPLAND most "enthuisasts" don't play some crap arcade game, p.s if you are getting your info from a game then you I am sorry to inform you but warthunder is very often just flatout wrong

[@maryclarafjare]

This was fascinating! We alwsys look forward to seeing your videos, and are never disappointed.😊

[@papalegba6796]

It had 4 engines. Therefore it was a deathtrap when faced with the slightest opposition, as well as being far more malfunction-prone & harder to fly than 2 engine types, like all 4 engine bombers were. Amazed no historians point these facts out, I knew them from talking to my uncle who was a wing commander in the pathfinders with a DFC. He hated all 4 engine types with a passion, yes including the Lancaster, tho he flew them when ordered to.

[@Jaystarzgaming]

And then you have the lancaster bombers with 12,000lb cookie.

[@Schlipperschlopper]

Soviet planes are the best!!!

[@gorgehilly7308]

What do you mean "forgotten"? Every person who played 3rd rank of ground RB know this horrible vehicle

[@jasonhansen782]

Ads will not watch anymore..No ads...

[@sadwingsraging3044]

Do _YOU_ work for free? I'm glad my boy Rex and his colleagues are making a bit of cash for their work.🤷‍♂️

[@jasonhansen782]

@@sadwingsraging3044 Do YOU EVEN Work boy?? calling people you boy, you must from prison culture... Take Care Boy rage 🖕

[@sadwingsraging3044]

@@jasonhansen782 toss a rock in a pig pen and the one you hit will let you know. 🤣

[@sparkling925]

be happy they are getting sponsorships

[@DIREWOLFx75]

Get Adblocker ultimate then.

[@蔡林翰-v2m]

蘇聯的武器裝備都是相同的問題，紙本上、設計上都是堪稱完美，而且有著許多"先進的"的設計 但是實際上場作戰，就發現這些都有多落漆 然後為了讓它實際能用，必須拆掉一堆東西、重新設計、然後打掉重來，升級再升級，終於才有足夠的能力去作戰

[@蔡林翰-v2m]

想像一下，一對轟炸機邊隊 有 16架重型飛機，一年後有17架，其中損失了16架 代表所有飛機都毀了，而且一半以上是因為自己的引擎問題自毀的

[@prycenewberg3976]

Anyone that studies aviation history will quickly learn that the 1930s were a terrible time for new aircraft. Not because technology was slow, but because it was too fast. Every time a new plane was designed, a new technology finished development to obsolete the new plane. The P-39, P-38, and P-40 are all examples of this.

[@dancahill8555]

Thanks so much! A big want would be the Levanevsky story and the prewar giant Soviet designs.