The Bomber That Made The B-17 Look Small | Douglas XB-19

[@RexsHangar]

Go to ground.news/rex to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Sign up for free or subscribe for unlimited access if you support the mission. 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.

[@John.0z]

Thank you for the plans to the same scale - I have never appreciated the size of the XB-19 from the photos I have seen.

[@ground_news]

Thank you for sharing! For anyone interested in seeing both sides of the story to stay fully informed, check out the link above and let us know if you have any questions.

[@Sturminfantrist]

Thank you for covering the XB-19 Do-19 (or Do-11 , heard or read that the Do-11 flew also with Reichsbahn/Railroad Comp. markings. ) or the Ju-98 , Ju-290/390 , He-277 / He 274 the latter completed by the French after the war and used for tests Or the other Nations 4 engined Pe-8 or the Piaggio 108

[@lawrenceallen8096]

Had England capitulated this intercontinental bomber would have been needed.

[@WarblesOnALot]

@@lawrenceallen8096 G'day, IF Your Grandmother had Have had Caterpillar Tracks...; THEN She would have Been a Sherman Tank...! The same Circular Pseudo-"Logic" Applies to your Statement. The Great Brutisch Empire was NEVER ever "Going to capitulate" To Germany and it's Army of HORSE-DRAWN Logistics, but NO Amphibious Landing-Craft with which to ferry their Horses & Wagons Over the Kanal to be Sunk while trying to Capture a Harbour in which to Disembark. Britain was Never Considering Quitting... EXCEPT Inside the Wishfool Thunkin's of Adolf and the Hitlerites, And the Halfwits who Swallowed German Propaganda. Besides. IF Britain had Followed the French And Surrendered...; The ONLY way for US Investors to retain their EuroPeon Assets Would have been to Pivot... Swinging around to supply War Materiel to the Wehrmacht... When it went to Attack the USSR. In 1942 J.Edgar Hoover was STILL Arresting Communists, for "Premature Anti-Fascism". It took TIME To Recalibrate AmeriKa to Accept the concept that White EuroPeon Racist Christian Fascists were the Designated Enemy...; Whereas the Dreaded Russian Communists Were SUDDENLY NOW Comrades in Arms. The likes of Lindbergh & Henry Ford & J. Edgar Hoover WOULD HAVE Ensured that If the British Empire had Folded up like the French & Dutch Empires both did, Then Unkle Spam would have Bin-Fightin' COMMUNISTS, while helping their Aryan Eugenic Kith & Kindred, to "Defend and Rescue EuroPeon Kultur, from the Communist hordes of Slavic Untermenschen...!" Or, Words to that effect. Read some HISTORY Books. Just(ifiably ?) sayin', Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@AZBroncomaniac]

My dad worked on the XB-19 at Douglas in Santa Monica. I have letters postmarked with the maiden flight and an award he received for inventing a tool to make adjusting the ball turrets a simple task.

[@blatherskite9601]

How cool is that? Good on your Dad!

[@chantelwalton6152]

@@blatherskite9601 c zźż

[@jonnymoka]

Thank you for your family’s support to the war:)

[@benhudman7911]

That’s a great memory that you shared. We have lost all of the people like your dad that took initiative for the good of the mission.

[@anotherrandomguy6012]

That's awesome man! Wish we could have seen Intercontinental bombers in some form during WW2!

[@DavidSiebert]

I love the breaking the runway story because the B-36 did the exact same thing. They even tried to put tracks on it. I will add that about 23 years ago I went to an airshow in Daytona Florida. They had an F-14 at the show and it broke through the runway, they tried to tow it out with a tug but that failed and they ended up using the engines to power it out of the hole. Sounds just like the B-19 :).

[@anzaca1]

How? The F-14 isn't that heavy.

[@applicationuser9764]

I never heard that about the tracks on the 36. Odd concept.

[@AtheistOrphan]

F-14? But it’s only a 2-seat fighter.

[@fguocokgyloeu4817]

F-14 is heavier than a B-17, obviously motjing compared to a B-36 but if the runway wasn't built to spec for WW2 heavy bombers combined with poor maintenance I believe it.

[@dzhang4459]

@@fguocokgyloeu4817 It was probably a sinkhole or a pothole rather than a weight issue.

[@L.Pondera]

I wish stuff like this would be added to War Thunder, not because it's good for anything. Just because it's a great place to fly a behemoth and watch it explode. Such an important piece of history deserves to be kept alive in more than flight simulators.

[@Zawmbbeh]

free kills? :0

[@Aahmpower]

Bet it'll be 2.3

[@Kaltrademarked]

That shit would fly worse than the Catalina 💀

[@joshleming902]

Bruh war thunder is literally a flight sim

[@L.Pondera]

@@joshleming902 it's also flight arcade, and an in-between mode. It's also got tanks and ships. It's not specifically a flight sim not exclusive to flying. It has a broader appeal than a solely flight sim game.

[@drstevenrey]

Did you know that this behemoth even made it into the story of a Bugs Bunny cartoon in 1948. It rotates around 'Gremlins' and begins with the B-19 parking with its massive wheel in top of Bug's hole. I know, it is not really relevant, but only really really popular objects ever made it into such cartoons. Hence, everybody knew about the B-19. Just fascinating.

[@jpgabobo]

The "Drachinifel" of aviation channels. I learn something I never knew in each of your videos, and appreciate all the hard work you put into every one. Keep up the great work.

[@SephirothRyu]

A collab must be done. If rex is air and drach is ship, then maybe covering some lesser known specific airships?

[@A_barrel]

I would rather bestow that title to "Greg's airplanes and automobiles" nobody is more detailed than him

[@dallesamllhals9161]

BIG words - are you flying HIGH?

[@mudcrab3420]

Drachinifel is a very well meaning hack. Rex actually does a shit load of research and cross checking before he opens his mouth.

[@kilianortmann9979]

@@A_barrel I'd say Greg is in a separate bracket, Drach can be very detailed, but usually not quite as excessive as Greg. I think Rex and Drach compare quite well, we just need a Greg for ships.

[@mpersad]

Yes please, Rex. A comparison of the construction history of the XB19, B29 and B36 would be very welcome. Really enjoyed this very thorough summary of such an interesting aircraft. Top work!

[@GalbornNargalad]

I was hoping to find a comment like this. I very much hope he does a comparison.

[@georgec8859]

XB-15 too...

[@SueDoeNimh]

You have to have the B-50 in there. Government shenanigans at their finest.

[@josephlannert969]

Yes I concur with everything previously said

[@NtFlashy]

Doo it doo it doo it 👍

[@lucaswallace7476]

The aircraft that drove Douglas batshit insane.

[@george2113]

A reference to bugout Doug?

[@BiscuitDelivery]

If I was forced to spend a fortune developing a test bed at a loss just so the government could then force me to hand those plans over to my greatest rival for free I'd go insane too.

[@applicationuser9764]

And through the whole thing, nobody ever had the thought of using two tires per side instead of one huge one. Same with the prototype B-36. At least they figured it out.

[@testy462]

Who wants to go with two boring regular tires when you have government funds to make super cool big ones lol.

[@ronjon7942]

@@testy462 laf. Plus it has that ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit’ look.

[@Colt45hatchback]

I was thinking the same thing, spread the load out

[@flouisbailey]

@@Colt45hatchback At least they didn’t go with bicycle tires to save some weight. Put those extra tanks in the bomb bay who needs bombs on a bomber.

[@marckyle5895]

Just like in Amazing Stories 'The Mission'!

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

You get a like just for that NCIS Gibbs reference.

[@philvanderlaan5942]

Rex : That was a joke. Gibbs : You think ?

[@chheinrich8486]

😅😅😂😂🤣🤣

[@timbirch4999]

*- headsmack -*

[@paulds65]

I visited the Museum of the Air Force a couple of months ago and did take a good look at this wheel. A real pity that the aircraft was not preserved. Fantastic video.

[@rogersmith7396]

Sac Omaha has an original B 36 wheel. Huge.

[@kilotango6726]

Same it's ridiculous

[@mpetersen6]

Last time I went to the museum at Wright Patterson (2005) you could wander around underneath a lot of the larger aircraft. The main gear wheels on the XB-36 are huge.

[@timbirch4999]

Where would you keep it?!! That thing was larger than Rhode Island!!!

[@michaelfrench3396]

You know every time I watch one of your videos, and as a subscriber it is a pretty freak when occasion, I can't help but think how much better you are than a lot of the more well-known military equipment channels. Especially pertaining to aircraft. I tell everybody that I know who's interested in this type of thing about your channel because you put out a lot of great information. and as someone who's been filling his brain with information on aircraft since I used to have to go to the public library and dig through books and books and books to find the cool interesting experimental ones It's so cool to me that you still find things that I've never seen and you present them in such an interesting and understandable way. I think you are one of the top two aviation channels on KZbin. The other one being the crazy Australian squarespace advertiser

[@stacksmalacks8826]

You should try paper skies. One of the best aviation youtube channels

[@magisterrleth3129]

Rex's Hangar is the Drachinifel of aviation. Thorough information, good editing, and I'm American, so his accent is like smooth butter in my ear holes. 10/10 channel.

[@stacksmalacks8826]

@@magisterrleth3129 I wouldnt go that far. Drach is quite well regarded within the naval enthusiast community. Rex is more like a hobby guy

[@michaelfrench3396]

@@stacksmalacks8826 I'm a subscriber. They're good as well.

[@The_Modeling_Underdog]

@@stacksmalacks8826 Agreed. Paper Skies is the Montemayor of Aviation. Doesn't post too often but when he does his content es excellent.

[@Caktusdud.]

Omg, I saw the thumbnail and I was like WHAT THE HELL IS THAT!!!! I gotta watch this.

[@ivancho5854]

Wow, the normal crew only had one engineer! That's unbelievable considering his duties must have included balancing the aircraft's fuel tanks to maintain the correct centre of gravity while not stressing the airframe. This would be without computers to assist him. In addition the hydraulic system which powered absolutely everything sounds like a nightmare waiting to happen, to say nothing of four (at least it wasn't six!) brand new engines. I also wonder what the Aircraft Commander's role encompassed? Great video. Thank you.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

Ahh, back when ADHD was used usefully!

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day, It's probably bullshit, but the son of an old Aircraft Maintenance Engineer claimed that the Oscilloscope was invented for the purpose of Testing & visualising what was Actually occurring within the Ignition Harnesses Of those old Multi-Row Radial Aero-Engines. 18 Cylinders, 36 Plugs, 28 Cylinders, 56 Plugs...; So the Flight Engineers were Furnished with Oscilloscopes in order to be able to switch into the Left or Right Magneto's Harness on any of the Engines, to better attempt to diagnose Perceived Rough running in flight.. I have the impression that it was the Lockheed Constellation, which old mate's father worked on ; but sometime during WW-2 the Yanks started fitting Oscilloscopes into the Flight Engineers' Stations, The better to monitor All that Sparkliness...(!). But the Thymes They be A' Changeling... These dayze, of course, As you alluded to, They'd have a Microchip Trained up to do All that...(!). And then when the Microchip dies, During a Voltage-Spike, The "Cure" would be to Swap out the entire Engine, and return it to the Manufacturer... Who holds the only remaining supply of That particular Flight-Certified Microchip, And the Powerplant Manufacturer's Type Certificate required, in order to sign-off on any Engine as being Fit to Fly, After Replacing any Component therewithin, At all Whatsoever... Because unless the weight Of the covering Paperwork and Permits Exceeds the total Takeoff-Weight of the Aeroplane concerned ; then it is generally not lawful to sit Inside such a machine and Attempt to Levitate With insufficient Paperwork. As a generalisation, Kinda Thing (!). Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@michaelglinski3809]

I seem to remember it was similar to a pilot. Instead of pilot/copilot, it was Aircraft Commander/pilot. It made more sense on the older big planes that needed a whole crew to simply fly the thing. Take the B-29, for example. The main throttles are controlled by the flight engineer, not the pilot. There literally needed to be constant communication between the pilot and engineer just to keep the bird in the air.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

@@WarblesOnALot STOP! Boring me ;-)

[@crazypetec-130fe7]

I'm a retired C-130 flight engineer, most of my time on E models with no computer assistance. I think those duties sound reasonable for one well-trained aviator. Probably just enough going on to keep you awake through the flight. It might get hairy when things go wrong, though.

[@RapideWombaticus]

As an avid Aviation adorer, always anticipate amazing archival analysis about Airframes - from you lol Great Channel indeed!

[@flickingbollocks5542]

Aye aye.

[@alexandermonro6768]

Alliteration is actually awesome!

[@F0urSidedHexag0n]

I feel like an air museum could have been built around this massive aircraft, like how the Cosmosphere in Kansas built their main lobby around an SR-71!

[@JTA1961]

Could have...

[@johnforsyth7987]

When you enter the Kanas Cosmosphere. The SR-71 is the first thing you see. But the space museum in the basement is even better.

[@MediumRareOpinions]

Theres a hangar in Duxford which is entirely filled with a B52, you walk in and people ask "where's the big plane" and then you tell them to look up.

[@F0urSidedHexag0n]

@John Forsyth Omg, I know I've been there, and all of it is awesome. Want to go there again.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

the airforce museum has a b-31 and a few b52's and yet it was the xb-70 that they had to build a hanger around

[@rockharvey5787]

It’s a shame the xb-19 didn’t make it to the USAF museum in Ohio. I have seen that wheel and it is truly massive.

[@warriorgaming1604]

If someone would make a replica even a wooden one it would be on display

[@Phenixtri]

@@warriorgaming1604 agreed it doesn't have to be a flying replica just a full scale mock up that people could go inside just to appreciate the sheer scope and size of it. Hell id pay to see that beast of a bomber in person.

[@AtholAnderson]

If there's information available, I'm sure all of us would love to see a video on the XBLR-3. I'm sure many (like myself) have never really thought about Sikorsky making fixed wing aircraft.

[@musewolfman]

The New England Air museum has one of Sikorsky's huge flying boats. It's properly impressive.

[@tkiehn13]

I believe Igor built the first 4 engine bomber during WWI when he was still in Russia. The Ilya Muromets.

[@musewolfman]

@@tkiehn13 that's a very good point. I think you're right.

[@datathunderstorm]

This was absolutely lovely to watch! Never heard of this aircraft - but this has been very educational and entertaining indeed. Thank you Rex 😊👍🏾

[@fonesrphunny7242]

12:52 ... both engines share a common crankcase but the crankshafts are separate, running into a common gearbox at the front.

[@mpetersen6]

Or in the version for the P-75 each crankshaft coupled to an extension shaft. Another version would have had gearboxes that turned the output 90° with another 90° gearbox in each wing. Proposed for aircraft with the engine buried in the fuselage and the props on the wings. The original McDonnell proposal that morphed into the XP-67 and the proposed North American Super Strafer

[@Sssaaatttuuurrrnnn]

Yessss. Since the first few videos of yours I watched, I've waiting for you to make one about this plane. I love all the record-breaking, large, bumbling aircraft videos, especially of the inter-war designs when things were getting larger than they probably should have been.

[@deaks25]

A genuinely fascinating video on an aircraft that definitely deserves more recognition, even if it is just being the sleekest concrete breaker in history.

[@petro3366]

Always a happy day when Rex posts a video.

[@Shady97342]

Thanks for the videos! I especially love the longer format ones. Formally suggesting the P-61 Black Widow!

[@radiosnail]

A very interesting video. THE Convair b36 cracked concrete when it was first built. They replaced the big single main wheels with two wheels instead.

[@robertheinkel6225]

Actually it was replaced with two of the modern four tire landing gear trucks.

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated excellent insights as usual from you.

[@Dr_Jebus]

Brilliant video. Didn't really know how much I loved crazily oversized planes until you started your channel, but I can't get enough now. I love the photo at 13:50 it just does a great job at showing the scale of the damn thing.

[@ronjon7942]

Oh snap, yeah! I love WWII production photos.

[@maxshep2829]

Haha, i loved the NCIS Gibbs reference! ❤ Dang, now i want one of these in 1/144

[@alexandermonro6768]

Yes please Rex, I would be very interested in another video going into more detail about the construction of the XB19. Also, comparison with the B29 and B36 would be interesting too. I realise that this will be another epic length video, and it will take you some time to produce, but I'm happy to wait. Many thanks for all you do on this channel.

[@NostalgiaRant]

these videos are well made its a shame that most of his videos dont have very much views, very well made, good quality 10/10

[@RamSkirata]

That was an INCREDIBLY GOOD piece of flying on that landing. Wow. He controlled the bounce so extremely well - in a completely untested aircraft nobody had ever landed befor. wow.

[@duneydan7993]

A salvage company director, who was paid to scrap it and would gain money by selling the scraps, was more willing to preserve her than the the base commander who was just annoyed by her presence... I don't who that commander was but I hope he stubbed his pinky toe on his bed post every morning after that!

[@JTA1961]

Athefumen

[@Driver-ur9mf]

Good call, unpleasant experience to be sure.

[@duneydan7993]

@@Driver-ur9mf i usually wish for people that their phone would only charge with the cable angled but this one was a bit too ancient.

[@anlydaly5726]

Forget flying fortress, this behemoth was a flying hotel (with guns ... and bombs).

[@merafirewing6591]

It might as well be called "The Sky Fortress" because of it's size.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

The Allison V-3420 wasn't a V-24 format engine but a W-24 format engine.

[@John.0z]

It's even different to the "usual" W format (such as the Napier Lion). Being a twin design, like the similar but inverted DB605 used in the Heinkel He 177 Greif, there is no letter of the alphabet to adequately describe it. I suppose the DB605 would be called an "M" layout? The present day Audi/Bugatti "W" is different in other ways, and yet again, "W" is about the best that can be used to describe it.

[@paulflocken2730]

It is interesting that she "pulled a Warspite" in refusing to go into eternity without a fight. It is also brought into sharp relief just how criminally incompetent the Air Force was about letting the B-29 go into service with overheating problems despite having had the forewarning of not just the B-29's development but also the testing of the B-19.

[@merafirewing6591]

The XB-19 would've been a better option.

[@paulflocken2730]

@@merafirewing6591 Since the B-29 ended up finding its fulfilling role operating at night, at lower speed, and dramatically lower altitude, that is almost worth thinking about. But the B-19 was impractical for enough good reasons and the B-29 was superior in plenty of other ways.

[@SephirothRyu]

the Airspite.

[@rogersmith7396]

Most WWII planes were defective in some way. Neither they nor their pilots were expected to last long and they needed to design and build them fast. The Russian T 34 tank was not built to last for more than 100 hours in use.

[@bittyjupiter3607]

I've been waiting for this video for a long time. I love the XB-19 and I hope that this video makes it a little less forgotten.

[@marcelogeka]

Belleza de avión!! Me encantó. Poderoso, grande, súper práctico y moderno para su época

[@baystgrp]

Absolutely first rate channel on every aspect of aircraft from various eras. I have seen planes discussed here I never knew existed. Truly an impressive. The B-19 was a behemoth, love the shot of the pilot on the maiden flight chewing on his cigar. He must have been fully aware of the amount of funding, effort, and hopes that were riding on the results of that first test flight.

[@Zeppflyer]

Do a comparison of an interwar behemoth with the last two classic bombers? YES PLEASE! Please do a video about the 19, 29, and 36.

[@elliotdryden7560]

What an astoundingly well done production! I echo the other commenters when I say your channel is top-shelf in every way. I never knew about the V-1710x2 configuration engines being flown on this aircraft, either and have been into this subject matter my whole life. (57 years old and a Commercial Pilot since 1991)

[@flemmingaaberg4457]

Best presentation of a sponsor's product I have seen in a long while - nicely done.

[@1blujj]

would a video on the xb 39 or b50? be possible?

[@BrucifyMe]

Haven't checked in on this channel in a while. So glad to see you still going, and now I have lots of videos to catch up on.

[@AkX1353]

Rex, I haven't even finished this. Once again, you have surprised me. I didn't think this episode would interests me. But knowing you have surprised me in the past, I tried it. I think your channel just moved into my mental list of watch every episode and like immediately. My reasoning on liking immediately is that I can always go back and unlike. What I've found is once I place a channel in that particular category, I'm hooked . So, for what it's worked. Congratulations REX. JK

[@maryclarafjare]

An excellent video, this was fascinating. How sad that it was scrapped. I had no idea that we'd ever had a massive plane like this, so early on. Amazing.

[@drnono8605]

A video on the construction would be a dream come true

[@TS-bj8my]

I love history and especially military history. How this is the FIRST that I've heard of the XB-19 is really quite stunning! Thanks for info. I really appreciate the effort. I'm subscribed now:o)

[@gregbolitho9775]

Yeh, sorry, the Leroy Jethro Gibbs joke, was a bad one m8 Geez it better have been good with all those names Sheesh! 30:06 in. Ah yes the obligatory cigar, an we eat alot of ice cream speech. "I've actually heard that at an 'Airshow! ". what gets me, is why didn't the bother chuckin another 3 or more wheels on the XB19A and make it sit lighter on the tarmac and hardstands? Glad something was saved from old 19, She did good. Thanks m8, done well!

[@markhailes6851]

I "liked" this at the NICS joke. Nice one Rex.

[@jimsvideos7201]

The Douglas tail is eternally gorgeous.

[@timbirch4999]

It does have sexy lines. Like the wings on the Vulcan bomber.

[@gingerlacey738]

Thanks for a really interesting film,you have done a great thing for aviation history,sad it was scrapped but that’s the fate of most things when time and memory move on.This is that rarest of things on KZbin ie the content is infinitely more substantial than the thumbnail,very well done.

[@jeebusk]

Yes only a few channels seem to meet this condition, off the top of my head Drachinifel and KingsAndGenerals come to mind.

[@merafirewing6591]

Yes! I've been waiting for this video for a long while. Thank you Rex. I look forward to seeing the XB-15 and other never were USAAC bombers that never left the drawing board or model stage get their own videos. And now you got me curious about the DC-4?

[@Flies2FLL]

What's funny is that they designed an airplane with the wingspan of a 747-400 and the fuselage length of a 727-100 with the empty weight of a 727-200~ Airplanes are generally designed around available engines, which is how this airplane took place.

[@UD503J]

I love that there was a time during the war and in the immediate post-war era where aircraft engineers, dealing with the weight of their aircraft, just said "make the wheels bigger!" and had single huge tires for the main gear. AFAIK the B-36 was the first one to get multiple wheel bogeys after a similar problem, itself having the largest landing gear tire ever, up to that point.

[@Peter_Morris]

Excellent video again, Rex. I’m surprised this aircraft was never included in some compilation of useful prototypes. Or maybe it was and I’ve just never seen it. But it’s contributions to large bombers is indeed impressive.

[@Nedski42YT]

It's good to have the complex history of this aircraft in a relatively brief video. Even though I was aware of this airplane I never gave too much thought to it because most videos about it were way too short! I'd like to see more about the Boeing XB-15 and the Sikorsky LRB even though it didn't have a prototype built, or did it? 😉

[@drewywgx924]

I'm waiting on a Westland wyvern or Garrett stamp video

[@mckinleyseaver5061]

Can you please go deeper into the production of the XB-19?!

[@swagnut9864]

I'm brand new to this channel and I already know I'm going to love this content. You have yourself another subscriber my friend!

[@Dr.K.Wette_BE]

0:57 If you think your job is not very useful, remember this guy guarding a single wheel (obscuring 75% of his view), paying so much attention to the square he is making around it in a stiff walk, that he wouldn't notice an elephant coming ! 😅

[@wildancrazy159]

I just read over a few other comments, and I MUST agree, you and your channel is and has been one of the best I've seen, your complete and interesting way of presenting the information, and the very obvious way you present the subject as a ( I do hate using this word)' Expert' is a profound and refreshing thing. I hope you are happy doing this work, and your life is enhance by doing so, because it certainly does so for me. To think, if not for the internet, we would not have any clue as to your existence, or the fascinating output you present to us, and for us. I mean this next statement from the bottom of my heart, thank you. I so wish I could do more to help in this fantastic work, but to give what I feel is empty words. But, again, Thank you young man, you are a gift and greatly valued ..

[@wilsonrawlin8547]

No matter what happened with it. This was an incredible plane for its time. The Engineers did an outstanding job no matter the problems getting it into the air. It was a masterpiece of aviation engineering.

[@eivindlunde7772]

I really enjoy these longer videos that go into more detail, so please keep them coming!

[@tedmustard2798]

Thank you for a fascinating video. I think what looks like a PIO (pilot induced oscillation) in pitch on take-off and approach and landing (at 30:00) was more likely caused by excessive elevator control gearing or lags in the pitch control circuit (i.e.a time-lag between moving the control column in pitch and the elevator trim tab or elevator hydraulic circuit responding). Alternatively, if the ballast was forward of the C of G and its removal for the first take-off put the C of G too far aft, this too could have caused excessive pitch control sensitivity. Most of my flying (as a service pilot and qualified experimental test pilot) was on helicopters, so hopefully there may be some fixed wing viewers who can add their ideas. Thanks again Rex.

[@samspeed6271]

A very interesting video, I had not heard of the XB-19 before, even though it was such an important aircraft for research and development of technology. I was having trouble trying to picture how big this thing is. The biggest aircraft at the air museums I've been to is the Avro Vulcan, and the XB-19 makes the Vulcan look tiny. By weight, it's about the same weight as the Vulcan at MTOW. The wingspan is more than double that of the Vulcan and it is also about 35 feet longer. The scale of this plane is amazing, and the fact it was designed in the late 30s and flying by 1941 is even more amazing. It is such a shame she was scrapped. It's such a shame so many historic aircraft have been scrapped.

[@stevenschiff808]

Excellent, a fun and interesting watch. Thank you.

[@williamlloyd3769]

Had no idea Douglas XB-19 had been built at Santa Monica, Clover Air Field aka Santa Monica airport. PS - Too bad bomber no longer exists. Aircraft would have been great to see it at Museum of Flying at Santa Monica Airport. Museum is well worth a visit!

[@MarshallLoveday]

Santa Monica Airport still exists, although it is supposed to be closed permanently around 2027, to be replaced by a huge park. The 'Clover Field' name isn't really used any more, but it was, through the 60's or so...... I grew up in the 50's and 60's living in a house only a couple blocks south of the airport property.

[@williamlloyd3769]

@@MarshallLoveday - Thanks. Corrected

[@emjackson2289]

Amazing to think the XB35 and XB36 were given prototype contracts in 1941 *before* Pearl Harbour.

[@enolopanr9820]

Well we knew a war was gonna come our way eventually.

[@wraithwyvern528]

War was fashionable in the 40s

[@JohnDoe-cf8ho]

​@@enolopanr9820especially since FDR was doing everything in his power to get us involved in it

[@enolopanr9820]

@@JohnDoe-cf8ho think what you want but I don't think so. There was lots of money to be made giving guns to UK and USSR and any country wouldn't miss a chance like that. As for the story that America was antagonizing Japan, that was warranted because of imperial expansion into China with mass atrocities. War was unavoidable and it was good for the world, at least most of it, that US was involved.

[@JohnDoe-cf8ho]

@@enolopanr9820 first of all it wasn't a story, FDR did everything he could possibly do to get Japan to attack the US. As for the atrocities committed by Japan, they were child's play compared to what the CCP would commit. Every where I look, I do not see a single situation where the US involvement has played out to be a long term positive.

[@peterszar]

Excellent video. You keep saying your sorry for the length of some videos, but for me they can never be to long, ha ha. I loved the full schematics of the systems, and the photo's, sharp and clear. The entire video was really interesting, adio-ski's.

[@b.griffin317]

Yes to the video comparing construction of various super-heavy bombers.

[@fiftycal1]

My father was born in 1927. He enlisted in The USAAF in 1944 (as he was a minor - his mother signed his papers). He went through training as an aerial gunner/radio operator. He completed training in March of 45. (Some B-17s had a single 50 caliber for The Radio Operator.) Since he finished training so late - his orders to Europe were cancelled. Instead - he was ordered to Everett Field in Washington State to cross train in B-29s. He was there until the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima & Nagasaki. Dad was demobilized. They didn’t need him for Korea - SAC needed him however. He wound up being assigned to The Magnesium Overcast aka The B-36. Dad said the plane was so large - if Zip Codes had existed when the plane was around - the nose and tail would have had separate ones. One thing absolutely phenomenal about The B-36 was its endurance. Even without aerial refueling - the plane could stay airborne over a day.

[@JustanOlGuy]

Props to Jethro, Semper Fi,.

[@shannonkohl68]

So why did early designers of huge aircraft not understand the advantages of using multiple wheels in a carriage arrangement? It's something that was already done on trains, bulldozers, and tanks at a minimum.

[@RapideWombaticus]

Good point! I was thinking this myself after seeing these massive tyres. They cottoned on eventually...

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

They may not have been able to fit powerful enough gear hydraulics. You have to remember that wheels that size weigh as much as a motorcycle or small car.

[@petesheppard1709]

I suppose it was one of those lessons that had to be learned the hard way. The original B-36 had single-tire mains as well.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

There were technical difficulties that needed to be overcome in regards to landing, taxi-ing, braking and stowage. With a single wheel on each leg these issues are easier to comprehend but with a four wheel bogie do yo want it to have all 4 wheels touching down together, rear pair first or front pair first? Does the bogie have to pivot on the leg and if so, how do you control the pivoting over the bogie? There are a lot of questions like this that the engineers and designers were looking into in the post-war years.

[@victorboucher675]

Like they were so stupid with the Ford Model T cause no turbos?

[@charlesodonnell2993]

This is an amazing presentation! Thank you for enlightening me!

[@guiltyofbias8818]

The XB-19 is one of my favorite planes, it just looks awesome

[@JTA1961]

Being in Tucson Arizona & hearing aircraft ALL day & night (one now)... sound is important. Be nice to { hear } the sound of the various being described if possible.

[@gmanbo]

The base data for big planes and other bits here is amazing. Shame it got destroyed. But it seems that setting this thing up gave excellent data that allowed for better understanding of large aircraft. Including large cargo and passenger aircraft of today

[@bobfry5267]

This one aircraft alone could have closed the mid Atlantic U boat gap and saved many losses. A two day flight duration? Amazing. Should have had a cinema!

[@Seasonstobecheerful]

Fascinating and thoroughly entertaining stuff 👏 👍

[@superbob1001]

Coming in to this late, amazing video as always. A B-19 vs 29 vs 36 construction video would be amazing

[@keithstudly6071]

Thank You Rex, I was unaware of the XB-19A with it's Alison v-3420 engines. Those were really 2 V-1710 engines built in a common crankcase and Allison had high hopes for the engine but it was never put into normal production. Maybe you might tell us more about the Douglas DC-4E as it was much more advanced then the DC-4 and was, surprisingly sold to the Japanese just before the war. One wonders what the Japanese learned from it.

[@mpetersen6]

There was also the XB-39 powered by 4 V-3420s as a back-up to the R-3350 powered B-29.

[@alcoholfree6381]

My father was a WW2 Army trainer bombardier in a B-17 over Europe. His first mission was on D-Day and he was shot down on 12/24/1944 over Belgium on his 24th mission. They were bombing the Germans at The Battle of the Bulge! The B-17 sounds like a more practical plane; there were 12,731 built from 1936-45. Dad said that the plane was durable and could take a lot of punishment and still fly and fight. He said that the Luftwaffe was very depleted by the time he started flying. They were shot down by German 88 AA guns. Great documentary!

[@colbullsigh6823]

I love your reference to Jethro Gibbs's mystery of getting his boats out of the basement!

[@boris8787]

I love the mighty SPITFIRE as seen in the 1944 World War Two movie set in the town of Chillingbourne.

[@thomas15082]

Without XB-19 no C-124 Globemaster ii. I remember, as an adolescent, watching the tunnel for the flight engineer to the inboard engines of the C-124.

[@MBSLC]

Excellent work on this! A thousand thanks for this entertaining and informative video!

[@gerardlabelle9626]

Most enjoyable! Watching the huge plane crush the tarmac really illuminates the consequences of under strength runways. Now I understand why US engineers in the Pacific could construct fighter airstrips in a matter of days, while the bomber airstrips took weeks. It’s not so much the extra length as it is the substantially stouter foundations.

[@robertheinkel6225]

When we repaired the runway at Grissom AFB, IN, the runway was four feet thick at the ends where the aircraft landed. Four feet of reinforced concrete. It took weeks to break it up, to replace it.

[@AluVixapede]

I've never even heard of this before ... somehow, nice~

[@williamscoggin1509]

One hell of a story about one hell of an aircraft!!! 😉 🇺🇲

[@loddude5706]

28:40 - "Hey, it's even more fun if you hold your arms in the air like this . . ." : )

[@cdfe3388]

Please do that XB-19 deep dive!

[@rchassereau2]

Would love to see that construction analysis video

[@williamsmith7340]

Excellent video. You just got yourself another sub.

[@interestingvideosofinteres5136]

Yes! Construction analysis video please❤️

[@jimpollard9392]

Years ago, there were a couple of niche aircraft enthusiast magazines by the name of "Wings" and "Airpower". I still have a large collection of these (need to figure out what to do with them in my will.) There were several articles on this airplane, and a couple that were side-by-side comparisons with the Boeing XB-15. None of these, though, captured the dark comedy of the actual development history. Thanks to this video, I'm now aware of how actually hilarious some aspects of this process were.

[@cxcgamer1603]

Yes I would love for you to a do a 2hr version where basically cover anything and everything including theories so we just can't ask questions caus they were answered

[@garyhooper1820]

Absolutely stunning work on this video.

[@sabrekai8706]

You do great videos, I've enjoyed all of them. Any chance of taking a look at the YB-35? Always admired that aircraft ever since I saw it as a kid in "War of the Worlds".

[@AncientCreature-i2o]

Inspiration for the infamous 'arsenal bird' in AC7!

[@aceofhearts573]

Wish the Boeig XB-15 had been a tricycle landing gear designs because then the B-17 would have also had a tricycle landing gear and this was a superior designs to having the little wheel in the back which was standard design.

[@oldschool8798]

I have to question the reasoning of the base commander who decided this plane should be broken up. Not historic enough??? It was the largest airplane in the world!

[@rogersmith7396]

The B 36 was going into production and the Flying wing.

[@RegtheDroid]

It’s still a piece of American aviation history