Why Did Britain Sell Jet Engines to the Soviet Union?

That is the question...
Please Like/Share/Subscribe and
Buy my book: amzn.to/3preYyO
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatter...
If you like this content please consider buying me a coffee or else supporting me at Patreon:
ko-fi.com/edna...
/ ednash
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.

[@stephengloor8451]

I think Stanley Hooker, one of the designers of the Nene, had the best comeback. In much later years when touring a Chinese plant, that also copied the Nene, he remarked when looking at a cutaway “oh yes - you copied all the mistakes as well”

[@davidrussell8689]

Glad to see someone else posted this remark 👍

[@AryanKumar-fz2dm]

Indeed. From this I recall an incident when reverse engineering the B29. One of the aircarfts had a small hole on its wing, the purpose of which could not be deciphered. The soviets hence drilled holes at the same position. Much later it was learnt by the Tupolev Company that it was most probabaly an production flaw.

[@parrotraiser6541]

@@stephengloor8451 In the same way the Russians copied a B-29 that force-landed in Siberia, including a patch repairing combat damage.

[@johndell3642]

Great Video Ed! - Amazingly, the French were able to put on a full Paris Air Show in 1946, the year after the war ended. - It featured a stand with Rolls Royce jet engines, all neatly cut away so you could see the internal workings. The Soviet delegation paid very close attention! - But, as you say, it was the alloys used to make the turbines and other components that were the real "secret" of the British jet engines. In December of 1946, a delegation of Soviet engineers was given an extended tour of British airframe and engine factories, including Rolls Royce. One of those in the delegation was Vladimir Klimov, the soviet engine designer himself. He wore special shoes to trap the metal swarf from the lathes at the Rolls Royce factory, and reportedly even stole a turbine blade from a workbench and stuffed it up the sleeve of his heavy overcoat. - These were then sent back to the USSR in a diplomatic pouch for analysis. Another issue was that the British were upset that the USA sought to block all European nations from selling military and civil aircraft to South American countries. The sale of Vampires and Lincolns to Argentina had particularly annoyed the USA. The sale of engines to the USSR could be seen as a riposte to that.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Sergey Timofeyevich Kishkin was the one who pocketed the turbine blade

[@richardvernon317]

The Lincolns, Lancaster's and Meteors were exchanged with the Argies for Corned beef!!!

[@HootOwl513]

@@richardvernon317 STENDEC

[@Barabel22]

I believe that Britain was also peeved about being cut off from information sharing on nuclear weapons and energy with the U.S. after the war and that was another one of the reasons for selling the engines.

[@howardchambers9679]

America is not our friend.

[@Ulfcytel]

The issue with the MiG15 was as much the brilliance of its design - aerodynamically and lightness of weight - as being "gifted" a mechanically reliable engine (as opposed to copies of German wartime axial-flow designs they'd been working with before). Things like swept wings with boundary layer fences were always going to give better performance than the earliest, relatively "safe" designs with thick, straight wings like the Meteor and Vampire. The Sabre only matched it because they were following the same design route. Great video, as ever.

[@rob5944]

Complete with knockov engines lol.

[@GG-ir1hw]

I think a lot of the MIG-15s aerodynamics and layout concepts were derived from the Ta-183. Basically Russians copied, altered and merged the ideas behind the Ta-183 and the Rolls-Royce Nene, the air frame being the MiG 15 and the engine the KV-1. This was most of the USSRs weapons and advancements at the time with the exception being rocket science. But by any other standard they were years behind until they got into allied and axis secrets.

[@floycewhite6991]

@@GG-ir1hw Yes that's right. I'll add that the use of fences denotes an airflow problem the designers couldn't solve before the wing had to go into production. Problems of the transonic regime plagued development of the most-powerful engines and fastest airframes.

[@Ulfcytel]

@@GG-ir1hw Indeed. But it was that putting together of the technologies (better German aerodynamics, more reliable British engines) which produced a brilliant fighter. The Meteor and Vampire were too early to benefit from that first element (which hads not been captured at that point). The MiG-15 and Sabre had both. Britain soon took a big step forward themselves with the Hunter, Javelin and Lightning.

[@Ulfcytel]

@@floycewhite6991 Yes, but it's a reasonably neat temporary solution to a problem designers didn't have the answer for at that time. A bit of drag in exchange for better lift in the transonic environment.

[@9Apilot]

There was that story about the Soviet official getting a tour of the Rolls Royce Nene manufacturing facility. He wore shoes with cork like soles that allowed metallic shavings to be penetrate the soles and recovered later for deep analysis and process replication. After what the Soviets achieved with TU-4 it was arrogant of the west to assume the Soviets wouldn’t be able to figure something out.

[@johndell3642]

It was Vladimir Klimov, the Soviet engine designer himself, who was part of a delegation given a tour of UK airframe and engine factories at the end of 1946. He wore special shoes to pick up the metal shavings near lathes for analysis. Perhaps more shockingly, he simply stole a whole turbine blade off a bench, stuffing it up his sleeve!

[@moss8448]

read that myself somewhere sneaky rascals

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Yep. Vladimir Klimov did that, and Sergey Timofeyevich Kishkin just palmed and pocketed a turbine blade

[@user-jz1vh7zj7p]

​@@johndell3642 I am now in my 70's and I have heard this story all my life. It's a good yarn but it's rubbish. If the Soviets had already received Nene jets in 1946 complete with all their turbine blades, why would Kishin need to steal one? Additionally, any reasonably competent Soviet metallurgist would have easily established the metallic composition of the blades. This story was told in line with the anti-Soviet talk of the day to try and make out that Soviet engineers were less competent than those in the West.

[@johndell3642]

@@user-jz1vh7zj7p But the Soviets hadn't received any Nenes in 1946. The well-documented tour of British Aircraft and engine factories by Artem Mikoyan, Vladimir Klimov and metallurgist ST Kishkin took place in December of 1946. The first Nenes and Derwents were not put on a ship to Russia until the end of January 1947 and right up until that point, there were still uncertainties about whether the UK government would allow the sale to go ahead. It would have been stupid for the Soviets not to pass up any chance of getting whatever information they could on their visit, not only about the Nene, but the other British jets in development and still on the "secret list" (like the Rolls Royce AJ45, later to be renamed the "Avon"). Interestingly, it was the airshow the Soviets put on at Tushino, near Moscow, on the 3rd of August 1947, that alerted both the British and US governments about how advanced the Russians were. Then the British insisted on a policy of "reciprocity", demanding tours of Soviet airframe and engine factories and the ability to buy any aircraft and engines the Soviets had in production. This, of course, the Soviets denied. After that, there were no more sales of jet engines to Russia (although the Soviets were trying to order more). There's a good article about all this on the Key Aero website, and a great one quoting official government records and dates, in the July 2001 edition of the old "Air Enthusiast" magazine.

[@Zorglub1966]

1:44 "A bunch of damned pinkoes" learning slang while educating ourselves.😆

[@s.marcus3669]

"pinkos", meaning Communist sympathizer; i.e. light red in color.

[@aidanacebo9529]

"The goal of Socialism, is Communism." -Vladimir Lenin. they were all commie pinko traitors, no matter the geo-economic situation in Britain at the time.

[@brettbuck7362]

Absolutely true, they also systematically mismanaged every British industry. They tried the same thing in the USA, fortunately that was stamped out - until about 2008...

[@bfc3057]

​@@brettbuck7362that's right, it was Labour that closed down the coal mines and steel works. Thatcher would have turned in her grave if she was dead - which she wasn't, because she was Prime Minister.

[@bacarnal]

Opening scene, the cafeteria fight in Blazing Saddles....PERFECT!!!!!!😂

[@jon9021]

That’s what I thought!

[@alanbrown9178]

My understanding is that the UK decided not to use axial-flow compressors intially because the materials were not sufficiently advanced and so used centrifugal compressors meantime. I note Capt Eric Brown RN, a guy who knew a thing or two about numerous aeroplanes, said in one of his chat videos, that the German axial flow compressors had a life of only 10-12 hours, after which they were fit for scrap....

[@ibex485]

Quite right. The Germans took risks and rushed aircraft into service out of desperation, despite serious unresolved issues. The allies already had a comfortable advantage in the air, so did not need to take such risks. The Gloster Meteor was arguably an intentionally conservative design, likewise it used a conservative more reliable engine design. Which is the sensible way to do development of a radical new technology - you can't learn as much from engines which have suffered catastrophic failue, planes which have crashed and dead test pilots. Even though the Meteor entered service before the end of the war it was kept back in Britain, as the allies simply didn't need to risk using it on the front line. The existing piston-engined aircraft had the ME262 threat contained, they were able to destroy most on the ground before they could take off or when they returned to land.

[@Margarinetaylorgrease]

I speculate if the super chargers being developed at the time had an influence. That’s a lot of maths and R&D half done for you.

[@johnnunn8688]

That would be turbines, NOT compressors.

[@ibex485]

@@johnnunn8688 "A turbine is a rotary mechanical device that extracts energy from a fluid flow and converts it into useful work." - Wikipedia. Thus the rear stage of a turbojet engine (axial or centrifugal), after the combustion stage is the turbine. The front stage, before the combustion chamber, is the compressor.

[@jontemple1038]

Don't forget that 10-12 hours might equate to around 15-20 air defence sorties against Allied aircraft in the latter stages of the war, which was probably in excess of the anticipated combat life of the plane at that time..

[@Sonofdonald2024]

Great video as always Ed. Be good to see you topping 100k subs soon

[@docnele]

The "problem" was that centrifugal engines probably were a dead end in the terms of development, but their performance, size and materials used were not necessarily obsolete (compared to contemporary axial engines). It worked well enough to be a main powerplant of the frontal aviation until early-mid 50's when local axial types were introduced for first supersonic aircraft.

[@gingernutpreacher]

Agread it's not as if we said the Avon is in development want in?

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Yep but they were still ahead of any axial-flow turbojet up through the Korean War. Edit: Actually the Avon was on the Canberra in mid-1951

[@chrissmith2114]

Helicopters still use centrifugal engines due to their shorter length and much better resistance to FOD, and the frontal area of helicopter not so important as a supersonic aircraft - a centrifugal compressor can produce a much greater pressure rise in a small length. They both have their places, so centrifugal in no way obsolete.

[@gingernutpreacher]

@@chrissmith2114 the Americans still brought Rolls Royce CF engines because they like the shorter stance and FOD as you say they made a big engine only they brought no UK demand

[@robertbalazslorincz8218]

picturing in my head the following scene: Klimov is working at his desk, looking at a magazine/technical paper and figuring out how to copy the Nene, when someone knocks on the door. He lets the person in who turns out to be Stalin. They have a little chit-chat and Stalin explains he bought a gift to Klimov and his team. Rolled in on a small trolley is a suspiciously jet-engine shaped object object covered in wrapping paper. By now, all the designers have also gathered round. Klimov opens the gift and finds an original, fully working Rolls-Royce Nene inside. Stalin says "have fun" and leaves as the designers begin to assess the sight before them with literally every tool they have at their disposal.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

No Klimov was in Britain as part of the Soviet delegation being shown around the production facilities

[@z_actual]

The British, unlike almost everyone else, had to pay for their Lend Lease requirement throughout WW2. The debt was so huge it took until 2006 to pay for it, and meanwhile in merry England they were still on rations and ration cards until 1954. Even while all this happened, the US went about white anting UK aircraft industry which eventually was to bring most of it down. Starved of sales and financial support, Britain housed some of the greatest talent in aircraft design that its own government left to rot. They had ended with some fascinating designs like TSR2, Harrier, 1/2 the Concorde, Lightning, Vulcan, Fairey Rotodyne and many more that were never to realise success. Engineering genius dominated by political fools.

[@robmclaughjr]

Finland paid and no lend-lease

[@ibex485]

At the end of the war Truman ended Lend Lease abruptly, rather than reducing it gradually as had always been expected. Which had a catastrophic effect on the British economy. Large quantities of factory machinery provided under Lend Lease which should have been used post-war to rebuild the economy & pay off the debts as planned now had to be either immediately paid for or destroyed - vast quantities was simply taken out to sea and dumped. But what isn't so well known is that Lend Lease worked both ways, and Truman shot the Americans in the foot too. What the new US government didn't appear to realise was that Britain had supplied a significant quantity of military equipment to the US under Lend Lease, in particular cutting edge electronic systems. When Lend Lease ended the US Navy suddenly found it had to remove some important systems from major warships and had no replacements available.

[@gort8203]

Don't confuse Lend-Lease with the postwar loan the U.S. made to help Britain recover. That was the 2% interest loan mentioned in the video. That loan was eventually repaid, but Lend-Lease was never intended to be repaid -- it was a cost the U.S. was able and willing to bear in support of the allied war effort.

[@Desertduleler_88]

Britain shouldn’t had declared war on Germany for political reasons it couldn’t buy itself out of. At the end it bankrupted it’s Empire and assisted Communism. FDR was quite happy for Britain to sell up its reserves for American assistance, only to become a vassal nation of the American Empire.

[@ibex485]

Lend Lease was supplying equipment & consumable supplies to allies for the duration of the war, without monetary payment. Equipment would only have to be paid for at the end of the scheme if the recipient wanted to keep it. If they returned or destroyed it, there was no payment owing. And it worked both ways - the US received almost $8 Billion of materials & equipment from its allies, ~90% of which came from Britain. (About 1/4 of the ~$31Bn, Britain received from the US, a significant contribution to America's own war effort.)

[@s.marcus3669]

I certainly learned a lot today; almost everything I've ever read over the decades used the word: "gifted" instead of "sold". Even still, I learned about the REASONS for the sale and for that, I thank you!

[@McRocket]

Thank you for (apparently) correcting historical errors on this subject, Ed. It's nice to see history told properly. ☮

[@Mishn0]

You mean, "it's nice to see history told so it conforms with my biases".

[@McRocket]

@Mishn0 I know what I meant. And I meant that I like seeing history told accurately. Bye, troll. ✌️

[@gromit8023]

Britain was financially buggered

[@edwardscott3262]

So was the US. The interest rate we offered didn't even cover the monthly inflation in the coming months. Let alone years. I believe it was December of 1946 when our monthly inflation rate hit over 18%.

[@ibex485]

It didn't have to be that way. The expectation was that Lend Lease would be wound down gradually, giving the British economy time time to recover. Large quantities of factory machinery was provided under Lend Lease, which after the war could have been used to grow the economy and repay the debts. But instead Truman ended Lend Lease suddenly, which meant all equipment provided had to be either paid for immediately or destroyed. So vast quantities of factory machinery was just taken out to sea and dumped. But what Truman didn't seem to realise was Lend Lease worked both ways and Britain had supplied the US with a significant quantity of military equipment also - in particular cutting edge electronics. So his actions shot the US in the foot too - without warning the US Navy suddenly had to remove some important electronic systems from its warships and had nothing to replace them.

[@DaveSCameron]

And buggered repeatedly by our former #WW2 Allies. Meanwhile Labour has already given up millions in aid to African countries…. I could go on but instead I’m going to protest tomorrow, 27th Saturday July in London. Enough is enough!

[@stevenfarrall3942]

Times don't change much do they...?

[@None-zc5vg]

...deliberately so, by the American so-called 'allies'.

[@TheAnxiousAardvark]

Thanks, very interesting video helping to correct the "as everybody knows" view of the deal.

[@johnthresher259]

Nice one Ed. Your content improves with every video. I'm a bit of a WW2 and aircraft nerd and I 've learnt a lot viewing this! Keep 'em coming!

[@ColdWarAviator]

In the U.S. we have a term "Monday morning quarterback"... Referring to sports fans who like to opine about what the (American style) football quarterback SHOULD have done to better win the game the night before. History and politics are FULL of "Monday morning quarterbacks" and probably always will be. Even today I hear young history students and even politicians (mostly Democrats for some reason 🤔) talk about how Reagan and Thatcher SHOULD have dealt with the Cold War. As a Soldier who lived it, I can say that they did an OUTSTANDING job given what they were dealing with, just as i expect post War Britain did at that time. Outstanding video as usual. 👍

[@braidybecket8946]

Cold war was fine. The USSR was inherently inefficient and attempting to keep up with the West was economic suicide. The errors occurred afterwards when there was no systematic guidance. Further aided by the KGB, which, in trying to shut out Gorbachev, saddled Russia with a corrupt piss-artist who was then manoevered out of power by the same KGB under a different name.

[@nobilismaximus]

Coz we were fucked poor by the war and needed money

[@lionel66cajppppp0]

Basically correct

[@christhirion9474]

And to piss of the Yanks for not sharing the atom bomb

[@RetroGamesCollector]

Not by the war, by our 'closest ally'.

[@lionel66cajppppp0]

​@christhirion9474 We shared that with them Where do you think they got the technology and the blueprints for the bomb? It was supplied to them by Churchill along with all our other secret projects be ause he was worried we were going to be over run It's lies oppenhimer film

[@jabezhane]

I think the UK was the only nation that got absolutely nothing out of winning WW2. Even Germany and Japan did better for losing. And we paid it all back!

[@johndavey72]

Thankyou Ed. Well presented. We can always rely on your thoroughness and honest approach .

[@billwhite1603]

It wasn't British pilots dying to the Mig 15, it was almost all American, so the British didn't pay a high price for decision. The 2% loan rate was very low and cost the lenders money because the rate of return they could have gotten, or opportunity cost, was higher. Somewhere between the prime rate, and average NADAQ for the duration. Yes the yanks were bad with nuclear technology but then there was the Cambridge 5 (or 3) and were the ones that fed all the nuclear technology to Stalin. Britain before, during, and after the war was infested with communist especially in sciences and academia.

[@gort8203]

Good points.

[@Desertduleler_88]

@@billwhite1603 So were the Americans…. Especially those in the inner circle close to FDR who was sympathetic to Communism. There were a lot of traitors in the Manhattan project post war that gave secrets to the USSR.

[@skylongskylong1982]

British pilots were not dying, but Australian pilots were. The RAF pulled their meteors aircraft out , but the brave RAAF stayed and fought bravely with their out date Meteors, and even shot down several Mig 15s. Forgotten Heroes.

[@richardvernon317]

@@skylongskylong1982 RAF didn't have any Meteors in theatre, but at least 25% of the pilots flying RAAF Meteors were RAF!!!

[@michaelperry4308]

There was an agreement between the Allies to exchange technological developments, and the British were the only ones to abide by this agreement, giving Radar, jet engines and computer technology to the Americans and Russians. It was Churchill who agreed at one of the 3 way meetings, not the Labour government. The engines were build under license, the same as Yugoslavia and the PRC, who bought engine licenses from RR. The Americans did not want to give nuclear tech to Britain, but as so many of our people were in the Manhatten project it proved difficult. Reading the agreements will prove there was no underhand dealingsa, it was just about keeping your word, abstract concepts to both Russians and Americans.

[@nickdanger3802]

The Tizard Mission: 75 years on by Deborah Evanson 02 December 2015 "Carrying a cargo of blueprints, prototypes and new technologies, the group travelled to the United States via Canada with the hope of sharing these innovations in exchange for assistance with the war effort." "Winston Churchill commissioned a task force to share some of Britain’s technological secrets with the US- particularly its advances in radar - in return for industrial resources to help develop these technologies at the mass scale needed for war." "Among the secrets taken across the Atlantic was a piece of hardware called a cavity magnetron - the core technology for microwave radar. Invented just a few months earlier by scientists John Randall and Harry Boot, the cavity magnetron would greatly reduce the size of radar sensors such that they could be incorporated into aircraft." "By early 1941, portable airborne radar had been developed and fitted to both American and British planes. The collaboration led to the development of other technologies which would be instrumental in the war effort." Vernon Gibson, chief scientific advisor for the Ministry of Defence, said: "The Tizard Mission, and the partnership resulting from it, showed that the way we develop technology is just as important as how we use technology,"

[@lelandcarlson1668]

Great video! Thank you for the background information surrounding the sale of these jet engines to the Soviets. It's always important to understand the context of any given situation before passing judgement on someone's actions.

[@jamesdalton2014]

The Soviets had plenty of resources, German scientists and a truly Machiavellian political master capable of focusing an entire nation on any problem. It's no wonder they were able to produce the best fighter at that time. British politicians simply couldn't conceive of the Communists being able to do anything better than they could and were clearly surprised when they did. They should have heeded Oswald Boelcke's words: "Never underestimate your opponent; always assume he is dangerous."

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Best interceptor, absolutely. Fighter, debatable. Unless you're talking about the MiG-17, which would be a more firm argument

[@mpetersen6]

​@@TyrannoJoris_Rex The Russians (1) had one major advantage over the West when it came to aircraft development. At least at that time. If Joe said l want this. Multiple design agencies got busy. Britain and France were broke. Even the US could not spend endless money. And then there is Congress. 450+ egotistical fools who all believe they are the smartest person in the room. On any subject.

[@jamesdalton2014]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex Yes, it was built to be an interceptor. But, when I said "at that time", I meant when it first went into service, not over the course of its service life. If you compare it to other jets in service in 1949, it was a game-changer, capable of beating any of them in a dogfight. Western nations had to scramble to catch up. Fortunately for the Americans, they were already developing the F-86 and were immediately able to counter the MiG-15. The British and the French weren't able to field comparable aircraft for 5 years. Even among the first generation swept wing jets, it probably wasn't the best dogfighter but, it was the first successful design and it gave some rough handling to jets of the previous generation at the start of the Korean War.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

@@jamesdalton2014 Sabre was also in service in 1949

[@jamesdalton2014]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex I couldn't find any information online about which months the 2 aircraft went into service, at least not quickly. I was going on what I can remember reading long ago, which is that the MiG-15 went into service before the F-86, albeit not by very much. I'll have to dig out my books on the subject to check the actual dates.

[@goddepersonno3782]

This kind of postwar optimism has to be one of my greatest frustrations reading 20th century history. We didn't learn after the great war, we didn't learn after ww2, and we didn't learn after the cold war. Humanity will always stay as they are - profoundly selfish and willing to seek any end to satisfy their desires. No amount of human suffering and trauma can change that. Perhaps less blood would have been spilt, less lives lost, and less precious time and material wasted if we were a more realistic people.

[@Desertduleler_88]

@@goddepersonno3782 Need to read up on the way International finance and diplomacy works, the people behind that are the ones who shed blood.

[@braidybecket8946]

The way Russia was encouraged into a wild west economy taking the criminal attitudes of the Soviet Era and repurposing them into Ultra de-regulated capitalism was the reason why another jumped up Bureaucrat ended up taking Russia down the path of imperialism and war again

[@bendafyddgillard]

humanity as a whole, and most humans individually, are not inherently and perpetually selfish. Some humans are, such as Stalin and a certain present day character, and when they get power we all suffer. If the USSR had had a Khrushchev or a Gorbachev or an Atlee instead of Stalin, things could have turned out very differently, I believe.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

So ... The moral of this story is that while the issue is more complicated than usually portrayed - the British still should not have sold the engines to the Soviets. .

[@MrOlgrumpy]

Hindsight is 20/20, but Churchill had Stalin's character pegged early on. That trend still perpetuates east of the caucus

[@braidybecket8946]

Any port in a storm, when faced with a duplicitous "ally" trying to block your trade and cut you off from technology you had contributed to particularly in terms of scientific developent, it is hardly surprising that the UK looked for other markets. Karma in a way.

[@bendafyddgillard]

Maybe. it's impossible to know, because we don't know how history would have played out if they didn't sell the engines. Maybe starvation in Britain would have destabilised the government preventing the beneficial socialist projects named in this video, leading to a very different UK. Maybe the Soviets would have persisted with the MiG-15 with a local engine until the VK-1 came along, so not selling would have made no difference, or maybe they'd have cancelled the MiG-15 and the MiG-15, -17, -19, -21 line wouldn't exist.

[@ianseddon9347]

@@MrOlgrumpyand Roosevelt naively trusted Stalin and the Americans allowed industrial quantities of spying ( of course the idiot upper class English communists didn’t help!)

[@Claymore5]

Excellent work Ed as usual. I always wondered about the motivation behind this - I'd kind of assumed it was sort of a tit for tat after the Americans reneged on the Atomic Weapons deal that meant we sold the engines to Russia. There was so much more to it than that. Mind you at the same time the Yanks were given all the info on the new 'all flying tailplane' that the Miles company were developing and suddenly the Bell X1 appeared - as if by magic...

[@everypitchcounts4875]

Because it wasn't a Brit who stole the atomic weapon blueprints for the Soviets

[@princesofthepower3690]

@@everypitchcounts4875there were multiple people that did and some of them include Americans, i.e the Rosenbergs

[@CaptainLumpyDog]

@@princesofthepower3690Klaus Fuchs was a spymaster par excellence.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

@@everypitchcounts4875 You say that like none of the scientists in the Manhattan Project who were critical in sustaining a nuclear reaction were Communists who'd fled from the Fascist takeover in Europe

[@jon9021]

@@princesofthepower3690exactly..

[@joaoonda]

For years, I read this story on the history books and I always knew it couldnt be that "simple"

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

What did the history books say? That they just sold the turbojets and the Soviets copied them?

[@joaoonda]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex yap, because the labor party were a group of communist sympathizers

[@williamkennedy5492]

The old saying rings true, "Play ball with the yanks and we all now where the bat ends up!" Just because they speak english ( at the moment) people think they are like us, they are not !!! The Nene was basically a gift to Russians engineers something to measure their own efforts by. As explained it would appear there was vast quantities of information already available on the engine and an aggressive sales pitch, perhaps i have been mistaken in thinking Stafford Cripps worked for the commies ! as he certainly didn't work for the Brits .

[@nickdanger3802]

In 1945 the US wrote off over 20 billion USD of Britain's Lend Lease debt and loaned 3.75 billion at 2% for 50 years with first payment deferred to 1950 and option to skip 5 years. 1948-52 Britain received 2,7 billion in Marshall Plan (ERP) aid.

[@keiranallcott1515]

Good video Ed , one thing I also have heard in docos was that Britain also considered selling the de haviland comet to the Soviet Union , the US advised against it. the series of accidents with the design flaw of the pressurised fuselage sank that idea

[@wbertie2604]

That seems unlikely. The Cold War was on before the Comet flew and it entered service during the Korean War.

[@wbertie2604]

At the time of the initial sale, the Cold War hadn't started. Shortly after the sale of the Nene, the situation changed and sales of further materials were blocked. However, no one expected a Nene derivative to be used for military purposes as centrifugal flow was a passe technology. There was no suggestion of selling the latest axial flow engines.

[@pigdroppings]

Those engines were obsolete...they were Centrifugal compression engines The future was Axial compression engines....all the propulsion engines today are Axial compression engines. Only very small engines have Centrifugal compressors today.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Still had more power and a better output:weight ratio than any other turbojet in the world at the time

[@wbertie2604]

Obsolescent rather than obsolete, but definitely on the way out.

[@pigdroppings]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex But, for a very short time.

[@davidrussell8689]

Stop gaps in technical development should never be dismissed . They provide a temporary solution to a temporary situation.

[@robbabcock_]

Terrific analysis!

[@ibex485]

Re. Loans: The US could take a similarly commercial attitude to loans after WW1. After the war America provided food aid to Europe to avert famine. Austria-Hungary was in a dire situation and the US wanted to provide food, but domestic law prevented sending money to former enemies. So the US concocted a mechanism where the US lent the money ($15 million?? iirc) to its European allies who acted as middlemen to loan the money on to Austria-Hungary, all on the condition that it was used to buy US grain. Then in the 1920s Austria/Hungary defaulted on the debts, and the US demanded its European allies repay the US anyway. Britain & France pointed out that the entire loan had gone to benefit US farmers and they had only become involved at the request of the US, to help them avoid a legal obstacle so morally the risk belonged to the US. But America insisted on payment in full, with interest (something France could barely afford). So in 1927 when Lindberg landed in Paris, he could not be sure what kind of reception he would receive. Americans were so unpopular that tourists in Paris were often denied service, or even attacked in the streets (according to Bill Bryson's book One Summer).

[@nickdanger3802]

WW I "European belligerents had financed the conflict through loans, mainly from the United States, and as a result France owed the United States 4,137,224,354 dollars, about 80% of it directly to the U.S. Treasury and the rest to American banks." The Quasi-War Between France and the United States

[@mpersad]

Another terrifically researched and, most importantly, balanced review of an historically significant event in post WW2 military aviation. Thank you!

[@lundsweden]

The Soviets tried again to buy British tech in the late 70s, this time they approached Lucas, who had made the fuel management system for Concorde. But they were rejected this time, as the tech could (and would've) been used in military aircraft had they bought some "samples".

[@davidrussell8689]

Excellent video . I suggest you read “ Not much of an engineer “; autobiography of Sir Stanley Hooker . I’ve never heard the story of angry Rolls Royce executives in China . What is remarked in the aforementioned book is Sir Hooker’s invitation and visit to Pekín in the seventies . Presented with a copy of copy of the engine he designed he remarked it was “ an excellent job ; you’ve even copied the mistakes ! “ 😂 . True that centrifugal compressors were a dead end , even Sir Whittle recognized that , but in terms of reliability and service hours at that moment it was the way to go . Axial flow was obviously the future and the rest is history.

[@wahiba]

Saw a Nene and a Klimov side by side in of all places a French aero museum. Very very similar. Glad to learn the full story.

[@tegli4]

This feels like someone opened reddit and saw a specific question today in a specific subreddit and decided to make a video about it. Great video as awlays :D

[@JGCR59]

I always found it weird that the ostensible winner of WW2 had to keep food rationing going for about 5 years longer than Germany

[@richardvernon317]

The UK imported most of its food and to buy it required other currencies or gold, neither of which the UK had.

[@johnnunn8688]

@@richardvernon317the USA pumped zillions of dollars into Germany and Japan, I still don’t understand why.

[@MinhThu-xn2bt]

Mr. Ed Nash, seeing the rigorous seriousness of your research, we would like to see you broaden the subject of your videos to cover the historical impact of the planes you describe. Thank you.

[@yoochoob1858]

Pretty much covered everything there, what about the story of Russian visitors wearing sticky-soled shoes to pick up filings from the factory floor for metalurgical analysis? Another myth?

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Story goes that Vladimir Klimov himself did that, and metallurgist Sergey Timofeyevich Kishkin pocketed a turbine blade

[@mikemilk2653]

Still many west country sell components and other material to russia, china and iran.

[@snapdragon6601]

Yeah, it's shameful.

[@huskyflylangley6053]

Soviets were said to have solved the metallurgy problem by visiting the RR factory and picking up shavings with gum soled shoes from the floor by the machines which made the blades . Shavings alloy was then reverse engineered back in the USSR. Don't know if this was a wife's tale or not.

[@robertcardon5402]

I wondered why this story got so much hype. The Russians already had captured BMW axial flow engine's with ring type combustion chambers. Which all future jet engines would become.

[@joshuaharlow4241]

The context matters. What a weight.

[@jessicaluchesi]

Thank you so much for the video, it is a really good topic I had serious interest to know how it went down.

[@joshkamp7499]

Easily the most thorough and impassive treatment of this topic I've seen on the internet, excellent job Ed. One small further point, if I may. At the time, I'm not sure anyone in the west knew how badly the purges and the German advanced had hurt Soviet development. Very tough to conduct effective research programs when faced with an existential threat. As such it was assumed the Nene, which as you point out was an excellent but in the West very much current and not cutting edge design, was not a sale of technology at all but merely a product, which gives the story VERY different implications. As it turned out, despite Klimov's excellent but at the time incomplete work, the Nene almost certainly advanced Soviet capability by a year or 2 in a time where aircraft were developing as fast as designers could draw up the next. While it's easy to draw up the Mig 15 in Korea narrative based on this looking back, in reality it's very difficult to tell whether it would've made any real difference by then if the Soviet development would've continued unaided.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

So what was the cutting edge design in early-1947?

[@joshkamp7499]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex the Avon, certainly. First run in March '57, introduced in '50 which is exactly the same timeline as the Klimov VK-1 which was the definitive Soviet design either derived from, or significantly aided by the imported Nenes, the brute force copy RD-500 being incredibly expensive to produce and hideously unreliable due to the inability to match the metallurgy and manufacturing processes, as the video alludes to but never fully covers. Metrovick was also well into development of various model that would become the Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire, first run in 48, although introduction wouldn't be til after Korea. I'm in no way arguing that the sale of Nenes was a good idea, just trying to illustrate how at the time, incorrect assumptions about the state of the Soviet jet development program led the British government to believe it was merely a sale of an established product with dead-end centrifugal compressor design and not (what hindsight shows it actually was) a sale of important technology.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

@@joshkamp7499 Avon was introduced in mid-1951 on the Canberra B.2 and the Soviet delegation was in Britain in December 1946. By March 1947, the Derwents and Nenes had already been delivered to Moscow, and the MiG-15 in service in 1949

[@joshkamp7499]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex correct. Once again, the point I'm making is that the Nene was considered established, not important future technology. I'm not arguing its usefulness or the results of the sale in the slightest, just trying to illustrate a misguided but historically explainable reason they had at the time for the sale.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

@@joshkamp7499 I see

[@singlechannelstuff8666]

The war busted England financially. Churchill had borrowed enormous amounts of money off the Yanks to pay for the war. Plus he let them have naval bases all around the world. Churchill seemed to have a soft spot for the Americans perhaps because his Mother was American. But the Americans have allways had a profound fear and distrust of Empires plus their highly competitive. In 1945 the Yanks had a strangle hold on Britain so they just kept squeezing.

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

Despite being an empire themselves, which is why they were so close with Britain prior to WW1

[@Bailbondello]

And who owns the banks? The American federal reserve is not part of our government, but it is part of the international financial clique Hitler fought....

[@gort8203]

And yours is the thanks they get for a 2% interest long-term loan to keep the country afloat. And let's just forget lend-lease, which was not a loan but a gift. The naval bases were traded for destroyers. Where do you think Britain would be without all this assistance.

[@ivancho5854]

​@@gort8203Honestly, against the Nazis the UK would probably have been fine. Without US assistance the UK probably would have made peace with the Third Reich. They couldn't invade the UK and would have concentrated on Russia as planned. Who knows what direction it would have gone after that though. Having a unified Europe and Russia, at least to the Urals, sure would have given the USA a headache though. Which is of course why America assisted the UK and Europe - because it was in the interest of the USA and nothing else. America sure didn't "Free the World" and sacrifice American lives out of the goodness of their hearts, I'm sure you'd agree. All the best. ♥️🇺🇲 🇺🇦🇬🇧

[@NathanDudani]

​@@ivancho5854 revisionist slander

[@6thmichcav262]

+1 for the cafeteria scene from Blazing Saddles. I never saw the movie in theater, but our band director made us play it a thousand times; as a result the tune stuck in my head and I watched it later on cable. You can’t movies like that any more, and I admit without shame that I laughed my head off.

[@Sacto1654]

What's interesting was that the Soviets never really took advantage of getting the Nene engine beyond the MiG-19. The newer Soviet fighters such as the MiG-21 and Su-7 used Russian-designed axial flow engines, and those were vastly inferior to their Western counterparts. It wasn't until the late 1970's when the Soviets finally figured out how to develop FADEC (full authority digial engine control) that they started to produce engines like those used on the MiG-29 and Su-27 fighters and the An-124 transport.

[@DaveSCameron]

March tomorrow in London for Great Britain.📚🇬🇧🙏

[@ceciljohnrhodes4987]

No.

[@ceciljohnrhodes4987]

Major Attlee, the best of us.

[@mowogfpv7582]

Pushed for Churchill to succeed Chamberlain (alongside Arthur Greenwood and against the wishes of the appeasers in the Tory party who wanted Halifax). Conceived and lobied for the creation of nato (with Ernie Bevin). Took Britain into Korea against the opposition from the chiefs of staff. Secretly launched the British atomic weapons effort and made us a nuclear power. But some nerds on the Internet think he was a commie because they watched a tik video once.

[@chriskortan1530]

The engine design was two years old. As fast as aircraft technology was progressing, that's already obsolete. It was an easy moneymaker when they surely felt they had superior designs ready to go.

[@Saxtoo]

The Nene engine was also tested on our British railway tracks to blow away snow. 2 of them were fixed onto an open wagon and was found to be too powerful, blowing the ballust as well as the snow! There are photos showing this test.

[@ConversionCenters]

There were three Joint US Air Force/RAF bases in the UK at the end of the war that were built up as time passed for eventually SAC/NATO B52's. Thank you for the balanced, well researched video!

[@jontemple1038]

Excellent video... Great to see this episode properly analysed. The British have almost entirely forgotten quite how bankrupt their economy was in the years following the end of the war. Harold Wilson (one of the Board of Trade team that went to Moscow on the 'sales trip) was forever pilloried for the rest of his career, but the UK faced rationing (lacking currency to pay for wheat and grain) and severe shortages of coal and steel for domestic use. The irony is that the real threat was from the right wing of the 'Establishment' who were betraying the country to the Soviets (Burgess, Philby, McLean, Liddell, Blunt etc).

[@terrynewsome6698]

Could you cover the Fiat g.91 and its service in the Portuguese colonial wars?

[@philliprobinson7724]

Hi. Excellent video, especially the attention to context. Another possible factor. The British were on the cusp of breaking Mach1 with the Miles M52, an aircraft Britain axed for cost reasons, but only after the U.S. Army Airforce were allowed into the factory to suck the technical juice from it. Britain sold the "glory" of being the first to break the sound barrier in 1947, and this could have been the price they paid for that huge low interest loan. Chuck Yeager's Bell X1 was rocket powered, unlike the Miles M51 which had a RR. Welland with an afterburner. This shows just how far behind Britain the US research was. A quarter sized R/C model of the M52 later broke the sound barrier, so Britain should have that particular feather in her cap too. Britain was desperately selling everything. (Dad got a nice set of spoons.😄) Cheers, P.R.

[@bearray57]

How could they under estimate the country that could build a funtioning copy of a B-29 bomber!

[@Simon_Nonymous]

Very interesting! A good response to internet instamemes that get repeated without question or scrutiny!

[@iatsechannel5255]

Great Job Ed! Keep it up!

[@GaryArmstrongmacgh]

I had recently asked this question of a British ePal. He was very polite to me. Chances are he probably knew the answer.

[@RobSchofield]

What an excellent essay - really enjoyable and an eye-opener. A piece like this would make a chapter in an illustrated book - have you considered turning your scripts into a book of collected pieces?

[@stephenconnolly3018]

It was mostly the Australian Meteor pilots that had trouble combating the MIG15's they were very new to the type and had only recently converted from P51. Had the Australian's had more experience and training on the type before going in to combat the results may not been so bad.

[@roderickhamilton9891]

Quite the refreshing change after watching a Tik video to have someone take a balanced stance towards Labour 🙂

[@ricardokowalski1579]

6:10 "took a couple of years to occur" respectfully disagree. Patton wanted to take Moscow, and Churchill wanted it nuked. Some people were squaring off for the cold war even before Vday Europe. I do grant that this would be a millitarily impossibility. You do NOT want to pick a fight against the red army in May 1945. What took two years to occur (on both sides of the iron curtain) was changing public's hate from one enemy to another. "eurasia has always been at war with Oceania" kind of thing. regards

[@HootOwl513]

Truth is Lies, Comrade.

[@terrynewsome6698]

What is your thoughts on the rebels finally capturing a major military district command center in Myanmar?

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

Huge! I am tracking it hoping to do a video.

[@MrRobster1234]

A wonderful, old Canadian I used to know who made his millions ($) the hard way told me about the strings the Americans attached to Lend Lease. The Americans got 99 year leases on British bases all over the world including Labrador where over the years they spilled so much jet fuel that it was pumped out of the ground and sold for heating oil.

[@nickdanger3802]

Lend Lease approved for Britain March 1941. In 1945 the US wrote off over 20 billion USD of debt. The Secretary of State (Hull) to the British Ambassador (Lothian) Department of State Washington September 2, 1940. Excellency: I have received your note of September 2, 1940, of which the text is as follows: I have the honour under instructions from His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to inform you that in view of the friendly and sympathetic interest of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom in the national security of the United States and their desire to strengthen the ability of the United States to cooperate effectively with the other nations of the Americas in the defence of the Western Hemisphere, His Majesty's Government will secure the grant to the Government of the United States, freely and without consideration, of the lease for immediate Establishment and use of naval and air bases and facilities for entrance thereto and the operation and protection thereof, on the Avalon Peninsula and on the southern coast of Newfoundland, and on the east coast and on the Great Bay of Bermuda. Furthermore, in view of the above and in view of the desire of the United States to acquire additional air and naval bases in the Caribbean and in British Guiana, and without endeavouring to place a monetary or commercial value upon the many tangible and intangible rights and properties involved, His Majesty's Government will make available to the United States for immediate establishment and use naval and air bases and facilities for entrance thereto and the operation and protection thereof, on the eastern side of the Bahamas, the southern coast of Jamaica, the western coast of St. Lucia, the west coast of Trinidad in the Gulf of Paria, in the island of Antigua and in British Guiana within fifty miles of Georgetown, in exchange for naval and military equipment and material which the United States Government will transfer to His Majesty's Government. All the bases and facilities referred to in the preceding paragraphs will be leased to the United States for a period of ninety- nine years, free from all rent and charges other than such compensation to be mutually agreed on to be paid by the United States in order to compensate the owners of private property for loss by expropriation or damage arising out of the establishment of the bases and facilities in question. His Majesty's Government, in the leases to be agreed upon, will grant to the United States for the period of the leases all the rights, power, and authority within the bases leased, and within the limits of the territorial waters and air spaces adjacent to or in the vicinity of such bases, necessary to provide access to and defence of such bases, and appropriate provisions for their control. Without prejudice to the above-mentioned rights of the United States authorities and their jurisdiction within the leased areas, the adjustment and reconciliation between the jurisdiction of the authorities of the United States within these areas and the jurisdiction of the authorities of the territories in which these areas are situated, shall be determined by common agreement. The exact location and bounds of the aforesaid bases, the necessary seaward, coast and anti-aircraft defences, the location of sufficient military garrisons, stores and other necessary auxiliary facilities shall be determined by common agreement. His Majesty's Government are prepared to designate immediately experts to meet with experts of the United States for these purposes. Should these experts be unable to agree in any particular situation, except in the case of Newfoundland and Bermuda, the matter shall be settled by the Secretary of State of the United States and His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. I am directed by the President to reply to your note as follows: The Government of the United States appreciates the declarations and the generous action of His Majesty's Government as contained in your communication which are destined to enhance the national security of the United States and greatly to strengthen its ability to cooperate effectively with the other nations of the Americas in the defense of the Western Hemisphere. It therefore gladly accepts the proposals. The Government of the United States will immediately designate experts to meet with experts designated by His Majesty's Government to determine upon the exact location of the naval and air bases mentioned in your communication under acknowledgment. In consideration of the declarations above quoted, the Government of the United States will immediately transfer to His Majesty's Government fifty United States Navy' destroyers generally referred to as the twelve hundred-ton type. Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. Cordell Hull His Excellency The Right Honorable The Marquess of Lothian, C. H., British Ambassador. [END]

[@alanthehat595]

Excellent video Ed. One thing in this story undiscussed that may or may not be mythical is the story of the RR executive and the billiards game bet with the Soviet delegation, was there any truth to it? Can't remember what book it comes from, but I've encountered it a few times. Obviously it sounds a bit mad, but then again, high-level politics and business is just as full of bonkers events as anywhere else.

[@FinsburyPhil]

Excellent video Ed. Thank you.

[@nickdanger3802]

If the Americans stopped Lend-Lease, Britain would face a 'financial Dunkirk' - his words - unless Washington could be touched for a loan of $5 billion. Keynes wrote that such a 'Dunkirk' would have to be met by: '... a sudden and humiliating withdrawal from our onerous responsibilities with great loss of prestige and the acceptance for the time being of the position of second-class Power, rather like the present position of France.' BBC The Wasting of Britain's Marshall Aid

[@user-tu7yi5yw9x]

Longer than usual but great.

[@craiglarge5925]

The Bear was very smart at the end of

[@ChrisBrown-iu8ii]

Thanks Ed this was a very informative video.

[@user-nn3jk5ms2m]

FDR looked askance at the British Empire - perhaps esp at India. Perhaps that got passed down to Truman. I also heard that one of the big Soviet designers got a tour of the RR factory. He stuck gum on the sole of his shoe and nonchalantly stepped in a pile of millings under the lathe that formed the turbine blades. So they got enough of a sample to analyze and copy.

[@NakulDalakoti]

10:29 Hawker Seahawk has an excellent combat record with Indian Naval Air Arm, you would be eager to know more about it.

[@Steve-GM0HUU]

👍Thanks for video. I think I read somewhere that a condition of Nene being sold to the USSR was that it would be used only for civilian purposes.

[@nektulosnewbie]

Ideological rivals are often hated more than ideological opponents; "Better Turk that Papist". During the Cold War the Socialist and other Left elements hated the Communists more than the Conservatives and Right did - they were competitors, and in places like Germany, were fighting for the hearts and minds of the people that they could sway to their side or be swayed by the Communists. Everyone in the Left knew there was no chance of swaying much, if any, on the Right, so they were fighting with the Communists over a shared pool of people. Had the Soviets taken over Western Europe, the Right would have been largely untouched, but the Left would have been eviscerated for this very reason.

[@mowogfpv7582]

Indeed, mainstream socialists and social democrats were intimately familiar with the far left's entryist tactics moral relativism and general duplicity. This was what made them amongst the strongest anti-communists. And you see the echoes of that in internal Labour party politics to this day.

[@breth8159]

Without the advanced Nazi swept wing airframe that engine wouldn't have met much ... When you watch The vampire footage of them disintegrating due to airspeed you realize just how important what you were talking about with the understanding of advanced aerodynamics... I grew up hearing about this engine as a kid in the 60s and part of a family who help start the JPL in Pasadena excellent report

[@tomlobos2871]

if i can recall correctly, one spy documentary stated that soviets were visiting the engine manufacturing, being prepared with soft rubber shoe soles to snatch metal chips from the machining. then being able to investigate before recieving the engine itself. idk how true that is, but that spirit fits the time.

[@daverooneyca]

This is a great episode! Thank you so much for putting some "meat on the bone" of what actually led to the Nenes being sold the Soviets!

[@KABModels]

Sell would imply Russia paid for them, which, as of yet, they haven't...

[@TyrannoJoris_Rex]

They paid for the 50 engines over 3 orders, they didn't pay for any patents to copy them

[@richardvernon317]

@@TyrannoJoris_Rex They paid for the engines with Grain!! Just like the Argentinians paid for their aircraft with Corned beef!!

[@vault1310]

As an American, I think we treated Britain really poorly after the war by not including them in the Marshall Plan rebuilding effort, or even forgiving any of the debt. I’m guessing many American military and political leaders born in the late 1800s still thought of Britain in terms of its empire and resented it.

[@nickdanger3802]

Marshall Plan aid 1948-52 Britain 2.7 billion USD, West Germany 1.7 billion "Over the whole period from March 1941 to September 1945, the balance in favour of the United States in the mutual aid books24 was in round terms about $21,000 millions. But by the settlement of 1945 Britain was required to pay no more than $650 millions, or £162 millions sterling." page 547 British War Economy

[@proteusnz99]

Another interesting suggestion is that the Nene centrifugal engine design was seen as dated technology, while axial designs such as the Sapphire/Avon were the coming thing. Possibly, part of the motivation was socialist comradeship, but the need for foreign exchange was desperate. The other thing is that the senior people in the civil service had a better understanding of Classical Greece and Rome than modern engineering, such people were simply ill-equipped to understand the consequences of their decision.

[@ChrisHodgsonCorben-Dallas]

Re : Anglo American relations post war you could add the story of the race to break the sound barrier?As I heard it British and US teams were competing, and had agreed mutual friendly visits to gauge each others progress. US team got their visit in England but when the return visit was planned the Americans just laughed and said no. In response Brits ramped up their program to beat Yeager and the X-1 but were then told from on high that the entire UK sound barrier effort was not to be shut down to preserve relations with our new financial paymasters.

[@Mishn0]

Yeah, right.

[@Ospray3151]

@@Mishn0 there is video somewhere, the British launched a test flight model with working jet engine a few weeks before the American rocket engined flight, it was about 1/3 to 1/2 scale using some form of early remote control, Im not sure exactly but there is chase plane camera footage of it It broke the sound barrier a few weeks before the Americans, but they had been told to not proceed with building the full scale aircraft over a year earlier. Some of the engineers said even claimed that test wasn't supposed to go ahead, but it was all ready ready for over a year at that point, so rather than scrap it they went ahead before the project was shut down completely This was a jet powered test aircraft capable of going supersonic in level flight, the American design had to use rocket motors as they couldn't build a sufficiently powerful jet engine, yet A memoire from a Lockheed engineer on the visit apparently said the British design was ahead of theirs, featuring things they had only just worked out from wind tunnel testing and had recently been classified highly such as a all moving tail plane as tests showed the older ailerons failed to control an aircraft through the trans-sonic boundary. Apparently there was an fear/assumption that the British has spies in Lockheed until they later on saw from earlier designs the British had figured this out years earlier Not just the British have a tendency to underestimate the level of advancement of other countries....

[@richardvernon317]

@@Ospray3151 Load of crap!!! the British Rocket powered M.52 model first flew in 1948 and the only successful drop of it was on 9 October 1948, a year after Yeager took the Bell X-1 supersonic. The rocket motors in the models were British copies of German rocket motors (The telemetry system failed, so the British never got any useable data form the test either). The Yanks were flying rocket boosted radio controlled models of the X-1 at supersonic speeds in 1946. What has Lockheed got to do with it??? The X-1 was designed and built by Bell, the wing profile and thickness on both of the original X-1's were nowhere near as thin as those intended for the M.52 and the aircraft was designed to be controlled with Elevators. What it did have was a variable incidence tail plane that was built into the design as it was known that there would be massive trim changes as the aircraft went through the transonic region. These were not new as the Me-262 was fitted with such a device, as were a number of other aircraft like the early F-86 Sabres. The US model work had suggest that blanking of the elevators by shockwaves was a possibility, but various test had shown sometime it did and some times it didn't. The first confirmation that the effect was real was when Yeager took the X-1 to Mach 0.94 and found that the elevators didn't work. There were various reasons why the Miles M'52 were cancelled. The Engine didn't work, it didn't produce the thrust required and every time Frank Whittle ran it , it melted!!!! The People would were paying for the project, The Royal Aircraft Establishment decided that with the war over, the requirement for a crash program was not needed. This, plus the fact that the Germans had managed to work out who to build a large supersonic wind tunnel allowed the research to be done with models, along with radio controlled rocket models as the telemetry and radar tracking equipment existed to allow the majority of the testing to be done, before a full size aircraft was built. The Miles M.52 was found to have major yaw stability issues in high speed wind tunnel testing in 1944/45, which would have most likely required larger tail surfaces which meant drag and I doubt they would have got an air intake design to work that didn't suffer from Boundary Layer issues which would have resulted in unstable airflow into the engine and compressor surges. Fitting the X-1 with a rocket motor meant that the X-1 didn't need to deal with that issue. Why the the British Model M.52 fly OK? It was fitted with an stabilised autopilot!! Most likely a single channel device which with 1940's electronics was fine for a Model, but nowhere near safe enough of a manned aircraft at the time.

[@ChrisHodgsonCorben-Dallas]

It was just the story I’d heard… like the Nene/MIG story it needs clarification

[@Ospray3151]

@@richardvernon317 Load of crap? So polite! You must be really pleasant to be around :( As I said I remember the story from a book/memoire in the early 90's from a aircraft engineer who would work the majority of his career at the so called Lockheed skunkworks from around the 1950's until the late 70's, I not good with remember exact dates sorry, also cannot remember the books name as it got cleared out probably 20 years ago now They starting as a junior on what would become the U2 then becoming a specialist on jet engine air intakes on what would become the SR71 and some preliminary work as a team lead on early stealth that would become the F111 eventually including radar cross section testing The book included a large number of stories from engineers he worked and talked with around the 'skunkworks', not all seen by the author himself but considered common knowledge by the engineers working there at the time, the kind they would use when saying 'well this is possible, this failed, this work for X' And the sort of common knowledge of who could do what and how estimates of how advanced each country and company was at the time i.e. 1950/70's etc

[@paulwoodman5131]

The Small Fighter Mafia was born. 🎉

[@lonestarreview]

Pretty scathing outlook on the U.S. position in the immediate aftermath of the war. There would be an awful lot to unpack in retort, but suffice to say that there are two main points: if the European powers had listened to U.S. envoys at the end of WW1, then WW2 is not likely to have happened in the first place; not just at Paris, but much more importantly in Sevres (which the U.S. is still paying Europe's bill for to this day). And, the Lend Lease agreement would only see Britain repay the U.S. 10% of the value of all material given, at that 2% interest rate mentioned in the video. And received exactly 0% back from the Soviet Union in like fashion. When Britain promised to protect the sovereignty of Poland, and then only focused on Germany when the USSR took the other HALF, and then allowed them a seat at the table, it's safe to say the Roosevelt and Churchill made a deal with the devil, and the devil's name was Stalin.

[@L5GUK]

In these comments: Those who haven't watched the video. And those that have and are simply repeating what the video said, except without any nuance.

[@MM22966]

1:40 PINKO COMMIES!!! I KNEW IT!!!! I mean, it was always suspicious, with how much the Brits liked to dress up in red so often....

[@Hiznogood]

Oh … so how about those MAGA people they sure like their red hats and t-shirts! Pinkos?😂

[@thegreyhound1073]

The British have always acted like the US owes them something. From the time we were colonies till today. Same with the commonwealth.

[@white-dragon4424]

The government also gave the Soviets Whittle's second prototype jet engine.

[@stretch3281]

2:20 but looking back, it's still a bit fuzzy.

[@Del_S]

"Now you have to promise to only use it for civilian aircraft." "Ah relax, guy, I'm Stalin, I don't lie!" "Are you lying right now?" "No." "Well, that all seems to be in order and goddamn it he lied to us didn't he."

[@KaiWipfler]

Very interesting, thanks.

[@MattVF]

Great video. The U.K. was bankrupt,infrastructure wrecked,industry worn out. Cripps’s mantra was “export or die”. We had a product ,we sold it. Were we niave ? Probably. But we probably weren’t alone as you point out . The thing about the loans was that whilst the rate was only 2% it came with conditions . Main one being the abolishment of the “Sterling belt”. And those loans only came about because the U.K. was threatening to pull out its forces from the Greek civil war as it simply couldn’t afford the cost.

[@MinhThu-xn2bt]

9:20 -> Pr. Alan John Percival (AJP) Taylor proposed that the 🇬🇧 ditched the Atlantic Alliance, & enter into one with the soviets.

[@ferdyahern4355]

This was amazing, never knew that :)

[@hmshood9212]

Thanks Labour

[@saparotrob7888]

I haven't heard "pinkos" in decades!

[@georges.7683]

5:27 The USA and Canada couldn't supply the wheat?