The Fieseler Fi 167; Germany’s STOVL (kind of) Torpedo Bomber

[@lancesteele9719]

I always enjoy videos like this one that feature largely unknown WWII aircraft. Thanks, Ed.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

You're more than welcome 😁

[@athelwulfgalland]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters As a modeler I REALLY liked the additional information on the type. I thought it seemed weird that every source seems to conflict; It turned out it wasn't just modeler references. I also liked seeing the Fi 167 in Croatian markings as where I hadn't ever before! I'll need to look more closely at that as I'd like to build one in their colors. Thanks Mr. Nash!

[@kkang2828]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters Do you have plans to cover some helicopters?

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

@@kkang2828 I have done a couple already, will no doubt do some more in the future :D

[@d.cypher2920]

@@athelwulfgalland I'm no expert, nor a historian... yet I believe the colors of the Croatians, is the red and white "checker" pattern... which is a part of the 'Ustashá" flag. It's synonymous with the swastika for many people in the former Jugoslavija. Most especially the Serbs. [During WW2 the Ustashá, under Ante Pavelic, who headed the German appointed government... the Ustashá rounded up and killed millions of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and anyone else that they thought was undesirable.] Just pointing that out. 😎🇺🇸

[@bryanalldredge3394]

Looks like the love child of a Stuka and a Storch. As usual, a great video of a little known aircraft.

[@kittyhawk9707]

more of a result of a Swordfish having a drunken one night stand with a Storch

[@Deviation4360]

Stuka: I couldn't help it, she was just so graceful...Oh and those long legs 😇😍 Storch: Hey big boot legged boy...Can I be your siren tonight😘🙃

[@AndrewC6]

Perfect !

[@oofi1]

​@@Deviation4360 bloody hell

[@d.cypher2920]

Even today the feisler is a formidable low stall speed aircraft. I heard that after the war it was used as a Bush plane in Africa, and other very remote areas. The Beaver is probably one of my favorite aircraft, yet unless you're Mike Patey or his twin brother, you're going to need a really well designed aircraft to pull off the kind of STOL maneuvers that very few aircraft can achieve. 😎🇺🇸 great channel, great videos! 🙏

[@Sturminfantrist]

France used Fieseler Storch`s during the indochina war, some were later handed over to south vietnamese air force, iam not 100% sure but i think the French produced the Storch even after WW2. Post war built Dornier Do-27 were used often as a bushplane in africa, saw them flying in 60s, 70s mostly german Army/HEER Dorniers , a belgium Army Do-27 landed during a big manouvre on a field near my Village a army officier climbed in the plane and it started . The Beaver is legend saw them flying during manouvres, i think they were british army Beavers

[@d.cypher2920]

@@Sturminfantrist thanks for the comment. That's awesome. 😎🇺🇸

[@kevkfz5226]

One of a few channels I press like before it even starts.

[@onehopeofthedoomed]

I met Fieseler's grandson when were were both at basic. Funnily enough he was air force and was bound for pilot's training after basic.

[@foreverpinkf.7603]

You did it again. As a long time aviation fan from Germany you presented a plane I´ve never heard of. Great work, please carry on.

[@mikepette4422]

was just reading up on this plane this morning.

[@Philistine47]

I wouldn't call the TBD Devastator "thoroughly modern" by mid-1942; while it was certainly cutting edge when it entered service, by the time the Pacific War began the type was clearly obsolescent, and the USN was rushing the TBF Avenger toward squadron service as quickly as possible. But I do agree that there's no reason to expect Swordfish, Albacores, or Fi 167s - which were if anything _even more_ obsolescent than the Devastator - to have done any better under the circumstances of Midway.

[@petesheppard1709]

Lack of fighter escort was the killer. TBFs flying off Midway (a VT-8 detachment) were similarly abused by the Japanese; Avengers in lieu of Devastators would have likely suffered a similar fate as the TBDs.

[@blackenedmagic888]

@@petesheppard1709 And, to make matters even worse, the Mark XIII torpedoes the USN used at the time were notoriously unreliable so any of the Devastators that actualyl got to drop their torpedoes never hit anything.

[@ROBERTN-ut2il]

@@petesheppard1709 Five of six were shot down. The sole survivor limped back to Midway with a hole in its engine, its interior painted red from blood, one crewman dead and the other two seriously wounded. After making a wheels up crash landing and having its crew rushed to the hospital or morgue, they started counting the number of holes, gashes and tears in the large target (The TBF was known to the USN as the Turkey because of its size and comparative lack of agility). After getting to 200 and still with over half the aircraft left to examine, it was decided to junk it and a truck pushed it off the runway and to the graveyard.

[@petesheppard1709]

@@ROBERTN-ut2il Interesting! Another quality product of the 'Grumman Iron Works'! I have seen a photo that purported to be the surviving TBF at Midway sitting on its landing gear. It's easy to get old photos mixed up.

[@kfeltenberger]

This would make one hell of a “barn find”…

[@jansirkia3809]

Wow! Never heard about that one before. Thanks!

[@sealove79able]

A great very interesting video about this airplane I knew nothing about.It looks like a stuka ju87 a bit.Have a good one Mr.Nash.

[@kkang2828]

One of my favorite aircraft! Thanks again for covering such relatively unknown yet fascinating aircraft.

[@karlp8484]

I think its a very attrative looking aircraft. And very efficient.

[@johndavey72]

Another what if aeroplane Ed. The war certainly dictated many what ifs ! Thanks Ed. Yet another one l'd never heard of !

[@pigpenz2]

Very interesting thanks. The photo at 8.06, is that insignia on the tail fin Yugoslavian I wonder????

[@luddite6239]

It's actually the flag of the People's Republic of Croatia, which existed for a couple of years from May 1945.

[@JGCR59]

I have the Book "Germany's only aircraft carrier" by KzS Ulrich Israel. While it was written before GZs ultimate fate as a target ship for the soviets was know, it contains a lot of information about the doctrine that was intended for a german carrier. Similar to the British and Japanese at the time, the Fi 167 called "multi-purpose airplane" was supposed to be the mainstay of the carrier, taking off conventionally. It had the same role as the TSR (Torpedo/Spotter/Reconaissance) with the Royal Navy with Swordfish/Albacore etc. The 109s and Ju 87s on the other hand were supposed to take off catapult assisted on trolleys developed from the german flying boat catapult system, with 109s even taking of with landing gear retracted. There was a very elaborate system to be installed catching the trolleys and returning them after launch which sounded like a good idea but probably wasn't. But the Fieseler itself was no part of this but would have taken off and recovered like a converntional aircraft

[@williamzk9083]

The trolley system was able to launch 42,000lb Blohm & Voss Ha 139 4 engine aircraft. It could also launch aircraft without turning into the wind thus allowing the Graf Zeppelin to launch in the confined waters of the Baltic, Denmark Straights without wasting time and in scenarios impossible for conventional catapults.

[@mp-modelplastic]

Excelent video, very good dcumentary with History. Great work. 😉👍Greetings from Portugal.

[@johnforsyth7987]

Thank you for another very informative video. I have really enjoyed your recent videos on biplanes in the early years of WWII. Keep up the good work.

[@gregcampwriter]

The German efforts at building an aircraft carrier is a case of being busy with no clear idea of what one ought to be doing.

[@sim.frischh9781]

Pretty much, yes. They did it because everyone else did it.

[@BHuang92]

Pretty much shows how dysfunctional the rivalry was between the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine.

[@rolf-joachimschroder917]

The Kriegsmarine was not yet in a position to put together a formation that could have protected the poor aircraft carrier

[@AnonNomad]

Germany had studied Japanese carrier doctrine and design philosophy in 1935 but realised on the way home that the Pacific ocean was not the North Atlantic, and most of the lessons could not be applied in the context of the theatre the Graf would be operating in. Throw in that there was no German carrier doctrine and a rivalry between the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe for resources, and you can see why the project was so start-stop.

[@grizwoldphantasia5005]

Germany was a territorial nation, not a maritime nation. When push came to shove, the army always has priority. U-Boats were fine; a fleet was useless. And as useless as battleships were, aircraft carriers were downright idiotic.

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

One of the reasons for the Swordfish's success was it's canvas covered design. Most bullet hits only cause rather small holes while most of the structure of the aircraft stays intact. And that kind of damage is very easy to repair. It's far from certain if the metal covered Fi 167 could have had the same success in the same environment. Gerhard Fieseler's decent from 3000 to 30 meters without moving forward probably really happened. He was one of the best and most experienced pilots of his time. He was WW1 fighter pilot and interwar world aerobatic champion and he knew all the physics involved. He knew how important a good show can be to get a contract and he certainly chose the perfect day for that demonstration. Late in the war, Fieseler "won" a simulated dogfight against a Bf109, flying one of the Fi 256 prototypes. I don't remember the name of the Bf109 pilot, but he was a regular Luftwaffe fighter pilot. The Bf109 didn't get a single picture of Fieseler on its gun camera. He did that to prove that it was still safe to fly between his production facilities. To be fair, he knew every detail about each type's performance and therefore knew all the tricks needed to outmanouver the Bf109. The outcome against an aircraft that's performance he didn't know in detail could have been different. And of course, that demonstration certainly would have had another outcome if he had tried his luck against a pair of opponents.

[@johnshepherd9676]

The Swordfish's legendary durability is just that, a legend. The Swordfish was successful because it was never used in contested airspace except during the Channel Dash where they were shot down by German fighters before they could get a torpedo in the water. The Fiesler would not have been maneuverable with 2000lb torpedo or bomb slung underneath and that is when maneuverability counts most.

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

Very cool presentation. Thanks.

[@migueldelacruz4799]

That thing looks beautiful

[@rogeremmerson]

Such an elegant aircraft. Thanks for this.

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

Thank you. I requested this a short while ago because I think it's a very interesting aircraft.

[@steveshoemaker6347]

Thanks Ed 👍 🇺🇸

[@geoffspitfire5160]

So interesting - that would be an great aircraft to own and fun to fly. I read somewhere that a test pilot heading into wind pretty much hovered over the same spot and landed from 1000ft. Great low speed handling.

[@davidb6576]

I'll guess you wrote this comment before watching the video?

[@caldrail]

@@davidb6576 On one occaision I flew a Cessna 150 with less low speed capability than the Fi167. The wind at ground level forty knots but I was allowed to fly because it matched the runway heading. That meant I left the ground at about ten miles an hour ground speed. It was fairly dramatic and my landing run was of the order of less than fifty feet.

[@oneshotme]

Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up

[@SoloRenegade]

the story of the Storch descending while remaining over one spot is entirely possible in the right winds. I've done similar in Cessna aircraft. Flew a C182RG backwards over the ground at 50kts once. We had high winds in the mountain valley, and winds on the ground regularly reached 40kts. So at altitude we slowed up and put teh flaps out while facing south and the GPS showed us flying north at 50kts ground speed, and we visually confirmed we were flying backwards in relation to the ground. And in weather like that an airplane with a stall speed below 40kts could easily land with zero ground speed. There used to be two videos online that I unfortunately can't find anymore. One was of a guy in Alaska landing his bush plane with zero ground speed, descending the last ~20ft vertically. The second was of an early Carbon Cub model taking off backwards into a strong wind. It's simple aerodynamics.

[@yes_head]

This one definitely wins some sort of "Rare WWII Warplanes" award. Thanks, Ed.

[@bradleyjanes2949]

Great content ed👍thank you

[@mongolike513]

Outstanding! I have been wanting to see more impressions of this unit since seeing it in Macdonalds books of Second World War aircraft. There was one photo there that showed the ground crew dwarfed by the immensity of this aircraft, only one photo in this presentation gave any hint of human scale and that was the shot from the back where it was surrounded by soldiers in Yugoslavia. This was a big unit which made the Swordfish and its cousins look like WW1 biplanes, this was no stringbag.

[@trance_trousers]

They gave out WWII aircraft books with Happy Meals?! 😁

[@Roqedda]

I always wondered about the choosing of die Fi 167, because of the outdated looks. But in comparison and with the specs it made sense. At least more the the Bf 109 as fighter -> early Seafires

[@trauko1388]

Messerchmitt and the KM spent two years navalizing the 109, the brits welded on a hook and got a shitty carrier aircraft as a consequence, two VERY different attitudes.

[@drewschumann1]

​​@@trauko1388Navalizing the 109 is still retarded, esp since the FW 190 was always a better candidate. Or even Navalizing the Heinkel 112

[@mbr5742]

​@@trauko1388 The Brits HAD both a functional carrier aircraft AND functional aircraft carriers. The brown pigs had neither. As a result they got a nice metal sculpture on the bottom of the Atlantic

[@AAO342]

Would like to see a video about the Me 109 T... .

[@luddite6239]

Very interesting as usual. The aircraft in the photo at 8:05 sports the flag of the People's Republic of Croatia on the tail, which existed for a couple of years from May 1945.

[@JosipRadnik1]

Looks like a Yugoslav flag to me - where is the difference?

[@luddite6239]

@@JosipRadnik1 The Yugoslav flag had blue on top and red at the bottom while the Croatian flag colours were reversed. In black and white photos, the red shows up lighter than the blue suggesting that the top band is red and bottom blue (Croatian).

[@Justin-rv7oy]

I would argue the Nakajima B5N Kate was pretty comparable with it, and actually served in wide-scale service. Cool aircraft though.

[@cvr527]

The B5N was in a class by itself for the first half of the war. I doubt the Fieseler would have compared.

[@tomlobos2871]

a biplane wasnt the worst idea. flying slower means the target approach is longer. more time to aim before getting to a critical distance for AA. looking at its basic design i suspect that its a quite stable platform. aerodynamic gear covers might even help on that.

[@philiphumphrey1548]

Being too slow doesn't help, Fairy Swordfish had a real problem catching up a 30 knot ship (Bismarck) steaming into a strong headwind when their best speed fully loaded at sea level was about 100 knots.

[@tomlobos2871]

@@philiphumphrey1548 yeah, but this isnt the underpowered swordfish kite. its not about the possible top speed, rather about being able to reduce the speed to a needed level when attacking or landing.

[@trauko1388]

@@philiphumphrey1548 The Fieseler was a good 100Km/h faster than the Swordfish.

[@jlvfr]

A fun fact: the germans did indeed inspect a japanese carrier, the _Akagi_ . The japanese let them see it from top to bottom, in 1935... rigth before they sent the ship to be rebuilt, negating many of the "lessons" the germans took away!

[@chpet1655]

Crafty those Japanese but even your allies shouldn’t know ALL you can field the Germans did much the same to the Russians when they invited a bunch to inspect all the brand new Panzers being built of course not showing them the Panzer IV and only early models of the Panzer III. The Russians laughed at the feeble German designs because they of course had begun building the T-70 and soneth8bg called the T-34.

[@jlvfr]

@@chpet1655 it's like you can't trust people...

[@fliegeroh]

Great video

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

It looks a bit like a biplane version of the Ju-87.

[@cvr527]

I thought the same thing when I first saw it.

[@Panzerless_SG]

I would love to see a video on the Do 24/Do 24K (Dutch Export variant). Your videos are great as always and when I visited the military aviation museum in the Netherlands I saw this beast of a Floatplane and thought it was a very awesome looking plane and I'd love to get some more information about them! Either way great vid! Cheers from the Netherlands

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

Thinking about the Swordfish one day it occurred to me why these biplanes were so succesful: they function exactly like attack helicopters.

[@aaronfrizzel3821]

Outstanding

[@TallDude73]

It had good speed for a biplane, and able to haul significant loads. Interesting "what if?".

[@jamesmcdonnal6371]

Wonderful video about an interesting, if niche, aircraft. Question: would the Fi 167 had conducted rolling take offs or been catapulted from the Graf Zeppelin?

[@MrPHAELAN]

primarily roll-offs! the catapults were mainly reserved for the me-109s.

[@trauko1388]

Rolling take offs, the catapults were for the 109s and Stukas only, as a matter of fact, the compressed air vessels had enough air to launch all 109s and 87s before having to recharge... and you will see a bunch of morons laughing at the silly Germans for not installing large enough air vessels for all the aircraft. Like a biplane would need a catapult....

[@jamesmcdonnal6371]

Thanks! I've read accounts of British swordfish catapult launched and catapults seems to have been Graf Zeppelin's primary launch system.

[@MrPHAELAN]

@@trauko1388 Like a biplane, that was renowned for its' fabulous stol-characteristics to be precise! morons is not enough to describe their stupidity! how about inbreds instead?

[@williamzk9083]

-The trolley compressed air catapults allowed the Me 109T (and planed Me 155) to be launched wheels up. The primary advantage was that the Me 109 and Ju 87 could be launched without turning the aircraft carrier into the wind at speed as conventional catapults or rolling takeoff required. This was critical for operations in the confined waters Baltic and the Denmark straights where the German carriers might face on rushing destroyers and fast boats and not have time to turn to the wind. They could also be launched in heavy seas. -The Blohm & Voss Ha 139 4 engine float plane with weight of 42000lb was being launched by this method so the Germans had a lot of experience. -The usual narrative is that the Germans were impractical and stupid but the reality was that they had unique requirements. The Heavy armour and guns was to help the Carriers fight their way out and take a little damage without having to cancel their mission.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

​@EdNashsMilitaryMatters >>> 👍👍

[@jwrappuhn71]

Excellent.

[@ironwolfF1]

One of those great 'what if' aircraft...with the right deployment, the Fi 167 could have made a run through the English Channel a lively affair. (With the proper fighter escort of course...)

[@monkeyboy2076]

Managed to find a nice 1:72 version of both this aircraft & the I-185.

[@BrianTheGreenMan]

The Fleet Canuck, as it was called in Canada could with a decent headwind fly 'backwards' in slow flight. Not a myth or hearsay I've done it! No reason the 167 couldn't do the same.

[@johnladuke6475]

I can't quite pin down why flying backwards on purpose feels like an extremely Canadian activity. I can definitely pin down why I feel like Newfies must have races backwards.

[@Kathikas1]

Descending vertically is not always about headwind/stall speed. Another Canadian aircraft, the D.H Chipmunk could do so by entering a stall and maintaining a certain attitude/power setting and then motoring out of the stall as and when required. I did this twice, more by accident than design, but our CFI could do it at will …

[@markfryer9880]

I remember reading a book about the Battle of The Atlantic and just cruising past the mention of the Graf Zeppelin! Insert record scratch noises here! Wait a minute, Nazi Germany had an Aircraft Carrier? Then I learnt that it had never been completed. Can you imagine just how different the whole Bismarck Sortie could have been if it had been in company with the Graf Zeppelin? It would have changed the whole dynamics of the various stages of the Battle. The Hood was destined to be sunk, but what of the then brand new Prince of Wales? Damaged from the big gun battle, would it have survived a concerted air attack by the G.Z. Air Gruppe? Later on the first and second attacks by Swordfish may not have had the outcome that History has recorded if the Swordfish had been intercepted by Bf-109Ts from the G.Z. What effect on the Battle of The Atlantic would the Bismarck and G. Zeppelin have had if they had been able to reach Brest safely and then been repaired. A fast and heavy Pocket Battleship and Aircraft Carrier positioned to raid out into the Atlantic from Brest or one of the other Bay of Biscay ports to keep them clear of British air attacks. Running Convoys to Gibraltar, North Africa or the Far East would have been like passing outside a Lion's Den and would have required British Heavy Units to provide Close Support at least as far as Gibraltar. Imagine just how many sleepless nights Churchill would have had with the Bismarck waiting to pounce from a French Atlantic port? The Graf Zeppelin and possibly a sister ship could have very easily altered the Balance of Sea Power in The North Atlantic away from the Royal Navy and closer to parity or beyond depending upon how various battles played out?

[@trauko1388]

The GZ airgroup would have sunk the trailing cruisers, so no Ark Royal strike even... and this is what the RN thought about GZ: "[ADM 1/10617] 29 January 1940 Threat posed by Bismarck and Graf Zeppelin Our forces available in June to match the Bismarck will be:- (a) Modern and reconstructed capital ships. Nelson Rodney Warspite Valiant Hood Renown (b) Aircraft Carriers Ark Royal Glorious Furious Illustrious 2. Either Nelson or Rodney or any pair of (a), with one of (b), should have a marked superiority. The decisive element of any such combination would be the aircraft carrier because she would be the means of locating the enemy and of reducing his speed below that of our forces. 3. During the summer months, it will be more difficult for the enemy to break out of the North Sea. Our capital ship forces will be disposed to prevent a break out. Precise dispositions must depend upon the situation on the trade routes, but we should never fall below four capital ships and two aircraft carriers with the Home Fleet unless we hear that the Bismarck is actually in the Atlantic. 4. It is considered unlikely that this valuable ship would be sent to areas beyond her endurance. Dependence upon meeting oilers would be too great a risk. The North Atlantic, where trade is of the greatest importance, is her probable limit. 5. If she broke out, we should have to redispose our forces according to the general situation. We should be faced with a difficult problem, but not one which should cause undue alarm. Our hunting groups would be fewer than at present, because they would have to be stronger, but, with French assistance, we should be able to constitute three capital ships and aircraft carrier hunting groups in the North Atlantic, and at the same time retain one group in our northern approaches to deal with the break back. 6. In D. of P's opinion, it is the aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin which is likely to provide our most disagreeable problem. If this ship, accompanied by Bismarck or one of the Scharnhorsts, were to break out we should have to be prepared for very serious depredations on our trade. In good weather the aircraft carrier could reconnoitre some 20,000 square miles in one day and could hardly fail to locate some of our large convoys. Her reconaissance would serve equally to defend the attackers from our hunting groups. This power of evasion might enable raids to be pressed into the Western Approaches, our most vulnerable area. 7. The conclusion is that the Bismarck herself is not likely to prove the menace that would at first seem likely. It is the aircraft carrier which is going to turn the scales in favour of any raider. The enemy's best course of action would probably be to retain the Bismarck at home to contain the maximum of our forces and to send a Scharnhorst with a carrier to the North Atlantic. To meet such a combination, and possibly a Deutschland in the South Atlantic, we ourselves should need every aircraft carrier we could make available..."

[@markfryer9880]

@@trauko1388 Thanks for such a great response. It must have taken a while for you to type that all in? By the looks of things while the British would seem to have the edge, one cannot forget to allow for the vagaries of war to throw up unexpected results. You need only look at the sinking of The Hood for evidence of such results. Either way with the Bismarck and the Graf Zeppelin at large in the North Atlantic, Winston Churchill would not be able to get much quality sleep. Mark from Melbourne Australia

[@trauko1388]

@@markfryer9880 No problem, I finally found that quote years ago and have it on file. This is a very ineteresting subject and a pet of mine since, a decade or so ago, I had that same WTF moment: "The Germans had a carrier???" GZ was designed to operate 43 aircraft... but had around the same hangar area as Ark Royal so, POTENTIALLY, could have carried more at some point. I-400's cold launch system was very likely based on the one intended for GZ, since the German solution to fighter defense was to quicly catapult them off at the first sight of trouble. That meant, engine, oil and fuel heaters, catapult trolleys, rails, etc... In the end, a carrier on the loose is a nightmare, it would have been the worst possible kind of raider for the RN to deal with, but luckily dumb Raeder wanted BBs and carriers were literally last on his list of priorities, so he gave up naval aviation in exchange for Goerings support for... plan Z.

[@johnshepherd9676]

The TBD is was a better aircraft and was effective through the Battle of the Coral Sea. The TBD entered service in 1937 and made biplane torpedo bombers obsolete. The TBD's reputation suffers because of what happened at the Battle of Midway but its replacement, the Grumman TBF, performed no better during the battle without fighter cover. Later in the war the US Navy found you could drop torpedoes for higher altitudes and greater speeds reducing loss rates.

[@randlerobbertson8792]

Still looking for a kit of this wonderful angular looking aeroplane.

[@dennismason3740]

There's a pilot in YT named Kermit and he took us on a walk-around followed by flight of his Storch and by the end of the video I had a new Greatest Airplane Ever. The airplane literally flies itself if there is a strong wind.

[@christopherwebber3804]

Interesting video. In fact, the aircraft's greatest enemy was "I own everything that flies" Goering, who had a really bad relationship with the navy, and did everything he could to stop the navy having any aircraft. he even wanted to control the spotter planes on battleships.

[@rob5944]

Having said that, some successful attacks were made using torpedo Bombers, Toronto, Pearl harbour and of course the Bismark come to mind.

[@jenniferstewarts4851]

This is aircraft is a perfect example of germany's lack of... focus. Without a carrier, they still had a 250-300 mile combat range, their rugged undercarriage allowed them to operate off of rough or unprepared runways, combined with their bomb load... they would have been of great use hidden along coastal area's, taking off from camouflaged farms to strike at convoys bound for Russia, attacks in the Med from Africa and from Italy.

[@eze8970]

TY 🙏🙏

[@tedstrikertwa800]

Very very good Ed! I wondered what happened to the Nazi aircraft carrier program. Thanks for his insight.

[@philiphumphrey1548]

Looks to me like it could have given the Royal Navy a serious problem in the early years of the war. Especially as the Fleet Air arm didn't really have a decent fighter until they got some Grumman Wildcats (Martlets).

[@MrAstrojensen]

Wasn't there a torpedo carrying version of the FW-190?

[@mbr5742]

FW 190 A8/U11

[@loddude5706]

1000hp? - Needs a skilled stilt-walker to hand-swing one of these babies on a moving carrier deck.

[@pcka12]

A top speed just sufficient to get it into the 'easily shoot down able' range for then modern interceptors!

[@alexandremarcelino7360]

Eu acho esse biplano muito bonito.🌟

[@akacerbera1598]

I've seen the Storch pretty much hover on the spot at a couple of air shows (Little Gransden '14 & Shuttleworth military Pageant '15) so I can believe the story. I mean it wasn't what I would call windy on both those days. Plus if the winds strong enough, can't the Storch go backwards?

[@WildBillCox13]

Nice. Thanks for posting. Anyone else see a resemblance to modern era short field bush planes?

[@danpatterson8009]

Have to imagine that a carrier-spec Bf-109 would be as successful as the Sea Spitfire, what with their narrow undercarriages. Looking for videos of RC models or kits for the Fi 167, not finding any...

[@trauko1388]

Messerchmitt and the KM spent two years navalizing the 109, the brits welded on a hook and got a shitty carrier aircraft as a consequence, two VERY different attitudes.

[@danpatterson8009]

@@trauko1388 Far as I can tell, the 109T never performed a deck landing- not that the plane was at fault. At least the Brits managed to wreck few Spitfires doing so.

[@trauko1388]

@@danpatterson8009 No, but the Germans did bother to perform 1.800 arrested landings in trials in order to DEVELOP a carrier fighter, the brits didnt and paid the price. The Germans on the other hand were able to operate those aircraft safely from a sandbar in the North Sea and from north Norway were, funnily enough, ended up massacring FAA aircraft... They also put a bomb on Warspite, well, at least a pilot from the former carrier wing did.

[@williamzk9083]

@@trauko1388 The Me 109T received a broader wing span and spoilers to make it safer to land (an area the Seafire was notorious for) The trolley/catapult system was well proven and allowed the Graf Zeppelin to launch without turning into the wind and extremely heavy seas. This was critical for operations in the Baltic and the Denmark straights where the Germans would need to break out and would have time or space to turn into the wind. Once working the system would have been superior allowing the Germans to opperate in heavier seas and get aircraft airborne where RN and USN carriers would have struggled.

[@trauko1388]

@@williamzk9083 That is correct, because if you are being chased by surface units you do not have the luxury to turn into the wind, you launch NOW, which is why the KM developed a launch system that could do so regardless of wing speed and direction.

[@juliane__]

The "Storch" is known to take off and land on the same spot, if headwinds are perfect. It regularly took off in a couple of 10 meters. Would really love to fly it. If you are interested in spelling Stroch. It was ok-goodish. One could say you are from the coastal regions to excuse the St-part. But it would take three steps to the correct "Hochdeutsch" one. The beginning S sounds like a short ch in choose, then smile a lot while the CH part and clip the s-sound at the end.

[@kiereluurs1243]

Stroch?

[@kiereluurs1243]

The standard advise is: Forvo.

[@thethirdman225]

4:30 That incident was reported in William Green's _'Warplanes of the Third Reich',_ pp.168-169.

[@JS-fe8sx]

Yup, I’ve had that hefty book for many years. Great book.

[@dave.of.the.forrest]

Maybe someday there will be a barn-find in Romania.

[@hrky7595]

Croatian and later YU partisan Fi 167 was involved in a friendly fire incident in Nov 1944 when 5 RAF Spits shot down one that was transporting partisan 8th Corps commander - right in the middle of a joint Allied - partisan offensive to liberate Dalmatia. One could hardly blame the RAF pilots - I mean the design of the Fi167 screams German! from miles away...

[@MM22966]

Fieseler: "Stupidly slow, micro takeoff distances and long landing legs?! That's my wheelhouse!"

[@JS-fe8sx]

It was designed and built to meet required specifications which it significantly exceeded in every respect. Its competitors by the other manufacturers struggled to meet the specs.

[@gerardhogan3]

Very very interesting. I wish there was an example still surviving

[@CarstenOepping]

the Fieseler Storch was so slow, that the Wehrmacht used it to lay Telephone cables between HQs. it could fly stable at 30 km/h ! imagine. needed start and landing was 50 m with two persons and 200 kg.

[@Axgoodofdunemaul]

With a cargo pod underneath it looks like it could have done the job of delivering cargos and evacuating wounded from tiny dirt strips in the mountains of Yugoslavia.

[@thecyberdork776]

Interesting aircraft, i wonder if you could present us some Baltic aircraft.

[@docnele]

Well, there are sources (books) in Croatian that list at least ten in service of AF ISH , and two survivors in YuAF service after the war dubbed "Big Storks", a photo of one at time 8:05 .

[@acebubbles5023]

i couldn’t imagine landing a 109 on a carrier

[@trauko1388]

The 109 had a wider landing gear than the Wildcat...

[@williamzk9083]

The Me 109T was given an increase wing span and spoilers to aid landing. The Me 109 in general had no worse an accidental rate in landing than any other Luftwaffe fighter though its pilots were given additional training to avoid the ground looping problem. The key parameters is a good difference between approach speed and stalling speed. -The Me 109K-4, Me 109G-10, most Me 109G-14 and some Me 108-G6 were fitted with an extended tail yoke. This raised the sitting angle from about 13.5 degrees to 12 degrees. What had been happening was that propeller circulation had been causing one wing to stall ahead of the other leading to the problem. The corsair had the same problem and also received an extended tail yoke for the same reason. Corsair also received stall strips to make both wings stall equally.

[@trauko1388]

@@williamzk9083 No, the new slats available since the 109F in 1940 fixed the problem, no uneven opening unless damaged.

[@williamzk9083]

@@trauko1388 The ground looking problem wasn’t caused by uneven slat deployment. It was caused by propeller circulation. The extended tail yoke solved this.

[@trauko1388]

@@williamzk9083 I referred to the uneven slat opening, cease to be an issue from 1941.

[@FRIEND_711]

I find it funny that this torpedo bomber never carried a torpedo into combat.

[@huwzebediahthomas9193]

Interesting aircraft. Narrow wings.

[@stinkymccheese8010]

Sounds like something that could be modernized and used as a bush plane.

[@Saukko31]

Flag on the tail (at 8:15) is Yugoslav Partisans' flag?

[@luddite6239]

It's actually the flag of the People's Republic of Croatia, which existed for a couple of years from May 1945.

[@nrudnjanin]

Right. In video there are 2 photos of this plane in Yugoslav markings and one with Croatian markings.

[@OvertravelX]

Looks like something Pilatus would have designed before WWII.

[@chriscarbaugh3936]

Hard to believe that the Carrier project was restarted in 1943!

[@mbr5742]

Why? The average brown pig had an IQ in the low double digit numbers so doing stupid stuff comes natural of the Idiot Race

[@brucebaxter6923]

Please please please Do a dorneir do-29 Twin engine pusher vectored thrust

[@jameshaury2716]

American torpedoes were a big problem for torpedo bombers when they were fixed the bombers were able to be much more aggressive.

[@FlyingCircusPeanut]

IDK man, landing a Bf-109 on an aircraft carrier seems like an even worse idea than trying to land a Spitfire on an aircraft carrier...

[@trauko1388]

Messerchmitt and the KM spent two years navalizing the 109, the brits welded on a hook and got a shitty carrier aircraft as a consequence, two VERY different attitudes.

[@FlyingCircusPeanut]

@@trauko1388 You know what I wanna see if a Bf-109 biplane convertion. Or a triplane! @_@ Don't care if it's inefficient slap some red paint on her

[@williamzk9083]

The Me 109T had a longer wing span, spoilers to give improved landing characteristics. @ trauko 1388. The Seafire had notorious landing accidents and no wing fold. It was not really navalised.

[@Chilly_Billy]

Considering the fact that the Fw-190 was proven capable of carrying a torpedo as well as sizeable bomb load, in addition to its obvious fighter pedigree, I could never understand why the Germans didn't use the Focke-Wulf for its entire Graf Zeppelin air wing. It would've simplified training for pilots and maintenance crews, parts availability, and survivability compared to the Ju-87 or Fi-167. The design was already a rugged design, with a landing sink rate comparable to dedicated carrier fighters.* *Reported on Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles channel.

[@williamzk9083]

The Fw 190 had a fast landing and a high wing loading no suitable for carrier op operations. The Ta 152 with its longer wing might have done the job. As it was the decision was to replace the Me 109T with the Me 155 which had a similar long span wing.

[@babboon5764]

LOOK CLOSELY at the photo at 3.57 Anyone else seeing *slots* in the leading edges of the wings? They would be totally in accord with the slow-speed handling reports.

[@babboon5764]

Maybe clearer still at 8.50

[@kennenandersen]

I fully believe this aircraft could perform a vertical landing in proper conditions. I have personally witnessed a pilot, at some altitude, hover a Columbia 400.

[@SynapseDriven]

The thought of taking off or landing on a carrier in a 109 is terryfing.

[@chpet1655]

So would the Fi 167s have really suffered heavy losses in combat ? Got to remember in the early war the RAF might have been very formidable however they wouldn’t reach Norway easily. And of course the first time the Graf Zeppelin would have seen combat would have been against Royal Navy in the Norway Campaign. Some of the RN carriers in that battle just carried strike aircraft aboard. Those carriers with fighters would show that the Fleet Air Arm wasn’t so hot. Their best plane was the questionable Fairy Fulmar which equipped a few squadrons and would have been a threat to the German planes, but they were more likely to meet Gloster Sea Gladiators and Blackburn Skua dive bombers turned to the fighter role. So maybe early war Fi 167s would have been very successful and not suffered too many losses.

[@napalmholocaust9093]

Do you think Franklin's triangle machine could fly with a Hayabusa power plant grafted in?

[@johnjephcote7636]

Capt. Brown would have admired this but I can find no reference to it in his book.

[@turtlewolfpack6061]

Makes one wonder what may have been if Germany had been slightly less aggressive initially and played the long game?

[@binaway]

Both the Soviets, British and French would also have expanding their military forces. The Kriegsmarine Z plan was to reach parity with the RN by 1944. This depended on the RN not expanding as well. Given both the RN an French Navies were expanding Germany could never have reached Parity.

[@dalejmobiledalej6361]

Every time you make a video, kind sir, I have to make sure April's Fool's has passed. :)

[@Sturminfantrist]

germanys Aircraft Carrier "Graf Zeppelin" , the (Tradition) Name lived on until today, after rearmament the Name was given to the Bundesmarine (federal Navy) MFG3 "Graf Zeppelin" (Naval air wing 3) in Nordholz, served in the Graf Zeppelin wing in a base security/base defense unit. MFG3 was first equipett with Fairey Gannet ASW planes , then with Breguet Atlantic 1 and today with P-3 Orion.

[@clydebalcom3679]

A little airplane that was kinda cute.

[@AndrewC6]

Looks like an over-engineered Stuka.

[@ConradAinger]

If the Graf Zeppelin, equipped with the Fieseler 167, had been available in the early months of 1941, it might well have been disastrous for the Royal Navy. After all, out on the high seas, it would have faced, at best, the Fulmar.

[@ROBERTN-ut2il]

ONE carrier versus the RN? WRONG !

[@ConradAinger]

@ROBERTN-ut2il In the early months of 1941 the RN was rather on the back foot. Pressure eased after the Bismarck was sunk. But suppose the Bismarck had come out with the Graf Zeppelin?

[@ROBERTN-ut2il]

@@ConradAinger The Germans would have lost a battleship AND a carrier. What you don't seem to realize is that from early Jan 1942 US TF99, based in Iceland, was under the operational control of the Home Fleet. It consisted of two battleships (North Carolina and Washington), two carriers (Ranger and Wasp, each with 40 F4F's and 40 SBD's), three heavy cruisers (Astoria, Tuscaloosa and Wichita), three light cruisers (Brooklyn, Savannah and Philadelphia) and several squadrons of destroyers (most probably Benson class ships)

[@ConradAinger]

@ROBERTN-ut2il If you suppose that TF99 would have attacked the Bismarck and the Graf Zeppelin (which is to say, the USA would have gone to war with Germany), then why didn't it engage the Bismarck anyway? Your thinking is fanciful. It was only when Germany declared war on the US on Dec 11th 41, after Pearl Harbour, that US ships would openly engage German heavy units. Or would have, for in fact they were never to encounter them.

[@raypurchase801]

A biplane torpedo bomber. The Swordfish beat 'em to it.