I guess that this aircraft 'looks right' as it so closely resembles a prototype of the Me 262, a rather amazing design which many would agree was a classic design ...
And the Blohm Voss BV 238 is a great example. If you search almost anywhere else Google and others will otherwise erroneously tell you that the Me 323 Gigant was the largest WW2 plane built. The BV 238 much larger in almost all measurements.
The trick to the Bf-109 staying viable throughout the war was that the Bf 109 ABCD versions are nothing at all like the BF-109 FG and K versions. They are virtually completely different aircraft with just a general shape staying the same. But literally everything else is different I think you could say the same for the Spitfire to a similar extent
One of aviation history's greatest losses due to Allied bombing has to be the Dornier Do X flying boat that was destroyed in a museum in Berlin. A video on the Do X would be cool for your channel. Keep up the great work.
@@cosmoray9750 Too late. Smedley Butler already warned about the use of the military to further private enterprise goals. The book, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" covers the corporate use of our govt. and military through the 70s and partial 80s. US foreign policy has been used from the beginning to further the business interests of the powerful; going all the way back to Commodore Perry attacking the peaceful sovereign nation of Japan in the 1850s. Now it's globalust corporatism . Stateless actors using multiple governments to force their agenda.
@@cosmoray9750 That is ironic seeing he did a lot to strengthen said military industrial complex. Anyway, the fact that pentagon is allowed to keep its 900 billion spending after Afghan and Iraq war were "finished" and no one is protesting the spending should go back to 2000 levels is proof how brainwashed and/or bought US public is. The money should go to some worthwhile cause, not to feed useless leeches like Boeing and other death peddlers.
Eisenhower’s German POW concentration camps in which historians now say over one million died on the low end, makes him unqualified to comment on anything, in a moral sense.
Edgar Schmued, chief aerodynamicist on the Mustang, had worked with Messerschmitt early in his career. Fortunately for the Allies, he emigrated to the USA...
I don't know how you do it but I am SO EFFING GLAD that you do, Mr. Nash. For 45 years I have read references to the 309. You casually throw facts that make the history geek in me squee. Thank you so much for your channel, I look forward to your vids.
I believe the first 262`s were tail draggers , which seems odd to me, as this aicraft was a trike straight from the drawing board ,and they were being developed at the same time . Thank you for the superb video , at 82 i thought i had seen everything . Just shows you can learn something new every day .
@2:30 that nose wheel setup worries My center of Gravity! IN my humble opinion, Ed's content is quite possibly the most interesting aircraft content on UA-cam right now. Certainly Out of World War II aircraft content. Where else am I going to hear about all these beautiful (in this case)...and sometimes not so beautiful monsters.
It would appear the tail is the same form factor as the ME-262. Also the round nose and landing gear setup did give Willie some valuable inspiration and experience.
Wow, that is a cool airplane. The tail of a 262, the fuselage shape of a P-39, with the engine of a 109 at the front sitting just over top of the retractable nose wheel which pulls the whole look together.
You should have mentioned that it was fitted with a reverse pitch propeller and the incident that occurred when this feature was demonstrated in front of high ranking officials by the test pilot.
Another excellent story, with great detail. You are right - it looks graceful and deadly at the same time: hints of Airacobra, P-51D and Me262. Did any survive?
The Focke-Wulf 190 was the Raise-the-Stakes Plane for the Luftwaffe . Set everyone else on their Heels for a while . Very Small and Tough . Very Agile and Well Armed . And Very Very Fast . At ALL altitudes .
Except the BMW801 powered ones(atleast until the A9s..as long as those got the engines they were supposed to have), resembled an asthmatic jogger the higher it got^^
@@NashmanNashthat's just radial engine though, Corsair, bearcat, La-5, La-7, La-9, Yak-3U and Tempest all suffer from this problem, where the engine suffer after reaching 3.500m altitude.
I appreciate the way you linger on the rare images. It was neat to hear about trials in development. It was a pretty bird with its graceful long wings, but I see no real place for armaments in that grace especially with the heavy engines. A pretty bird.
It looks a bit under ruddered having a short rear fuselage and limited tail area, probably helps keep drag down, but an issue with handling torque reaction of pwerful engine. You can see how the Spitfire had its tail both lengthened and ruder area increased as its power was upgraded.
That's true. I'm thinking, of the Me109 and a P51 had a baby. What would she look like? Wow. This is her. the lines, the cuts of all trims cry, " Move" Like, "Move the Fuck out of my way. Dick..." That's my girl...
Aerodynamically speaking, I've always thought the tail wheel was the best way to go. The wings are already angled up to grab the air sooner doing take off. Understandably, the pilots view during take off is restricted. But as most airfields, during that time were fields, having a nose gear would more than likely cause the nose gear to collapse when hitting a rut in the ground.
On the other hand, if you look for the soviet comments on the P-39, you'll always find nose gear under the "pros". The reason is in case of a tail dragger if any wing gear hit a rut the plane could easily turn over its nose, possibly killing the pilot. (Look up Alexander Klubov, killed in such accident in La-7) In case of nose gear it was safer to taxi, land and take off from all kinds of airfields and the visibility was far better. Well, that's what is mentioned when the pilots compared P-39 to LaGG-3, Yak-1 or MiG-3.
During WW2 was the accident rate at ground caused from taildragger landing gear (no visibility forward and loss of controll) was EXTREMLY hight, this explain why some aircrafts was if possible made with tricycle landing gears, in addition first me 262 was taildraggers, but this aircraft did need a very long roll distance to take off, who was significant reduced with the tricycle landing gear
The "looks right" adage holds true - it looks like it had woeful total wing area, surely causing the terrible handling. The radiators could easily have been incorporated into larger wings which would have cured the overheating issues too. What I see is too much hesitancy in changing the basic 109 layout.
That nose wheel collapse also happened in the Me-262 program in testing, but Tricycle gear was Needed to keep Jet Exhaust from igniting Grass strip runways.
Also in the case of the 262, the initial V1 prototype was a taildragger and the test pilot had to step on the brakes so the tail could lift during rotation. It’s hard to imagine today, but back then the 262 was an incredibly tricky plane to fly. Green pilots would probably screw up the takeoff process, more so while being under attack by allied fighters which were frequent.
The BF 109 in most of its variants were successful...but from what if read its narrow track undercarriage was always a problem, especially for novice pilots..once in the air, flown by a competent pilot it was a force to be reckoned with
Thanks Ed for yet another great video..I truly like the way you make these video and even though I am a bit of a plane nerd...you still manage to teach me something new:)
I always like stories like this, the ones that showcase the story arc of the war for Germany. 1941: We're unstoppable, research upgrades! 1942: Okay this is harder than we thought, maybe we should spend the resources on proven tech. 1943: Uh-oh, better completely abandon that upgrade, we don't have enough weapons for the front line. 1944: With this wunderwaffen we will win the war! 1945: Please let me surrender to you, the Russians are mean.
I often wonder what would have been if Kurt Tank had worked for Messerschmitt. Messerschmitt had the backing of Goering and more resources, plus the leadership in the field of jet power. Tank was head and shoulders above any other aircraft designer at the time. Putting the two together would no doubt have produced some phenomenal aircraft.
@Prime Artemis no, actually that's why the first 190s had the radial engines. Messerschmitt had a lock on the Daimler engines. The later C versions did have the DB 603 before switching to the Junkers Jumo 213 for the D version. Of course the Ta-152 was Tank's masterpiece.
Excellent video 📹 109 is the most produced fighter? Knowledge. The problem is that the radial engined fw190 answer answered every other question and was so versatile. They complemented each other.
Im unsure if it ever got any further than paper, but i saw a line drawing of an me-109 fuselage with a me-262 nose, wing, engines, and tail empennage...supposedly it was rejected out of hand as the fuselage could never have withstood the forces a jets performance entails.
Head of the Luftwaffe fighter command, Adolf Galland said the Me 209/309 was a "Lame Duck". That probably killed it. But some design features crept into the Me 262, so not all the work was wasted.
What now. If the greatest war birds of the air, the Me109 and P51, had a baby? What would she look like? Wow. This is her... The kooler underside inlets, The lines, cuts the air. Saying, "Move." "Move out of my way." At 495mph, I'ld move too... Just look at her. A work of art. Oberst Robert Schwatisch...
The "problem" was that the BF 109 managed - with some ups and downs - to stay competive with the latest allied fighters till the end, so there was really no urgent need to replace it. Of course that is easy to say with the benefit of hindsight etc....
It's interesting how the 109 design and FW-190 design switched back and forth as the premier German piston fighter, with the TA-152 being ultimate of the 190 type.
It wasn't really that heavy, but with all the guns and small wing area had an extremely high wingloading at 52 lb / sq ft. It needed new wings with better airfoil. You'd think that with all of Prandtl's proteges that they'd have produced better airfoils wrt boundary layer and lift.
Sieht aus, wie eine Mischung zwischen ME 262 und P-51 Mustang, durch die Hutze unter dem Motor,aber warum nur eine 3 Blatt Luftschraube, und kein 4 Blatt Propeller?
That ignores the high takeoff and landing accident rate with the narrow landing gear with the tail dragger 109. By the way, the Me 262 was known for having nose gear failures.
actually radial engines are not bad. on higher altitude radial dont produce so much more than drag than v engines anyway. also fw190 had some really clever solutions for lower drag. apparently fw190 had less drag than spitfire. air cooling also help for radials to sustain more damage. many non build american super props were to use radial engines. when you look at that its lucky that germany didnt have some really powerful radial engines that they could fit on fw190
@@jebise1126 indeed the chunky p-47 with turbo supercharger was almost unbeatable once they put a paddle prop on it …. The Fw190 was better of a war horse than the 109 and the Dora version was the one of the best at high altitude … part of their success was the variable speed supercharger …. And of course the Genius of Kurt Tank and that Diemler Engine…
@@luisgimenez8660 Now I gotta rewatch the episode about the 190 D-9 version on Greg’sAircraft & Automobiles …I’m surprised our government didn’t grab Kurt Tank and give him a job After the war
This very first 109 being a little goofy in appearence and not as aggressive as the later model have some friendly charm to it. The 309 in silhouette look like it have some similiarity to the later 262.
The 309 here looks a lot a German version of the p-51. Neither of which would be my favorite one from either side. But it did what was needed to test other technology coming up the line.
The saying "the exception that proves the rule" doesn't mean what most people think it means. In this saying the word proves means to test (as the Proof House were guns were put under test).
Even with this design idea in 1941 they were looking the "bubble" canopy and fuselage silhouette that became the "standard" for most fighters and taken up by others later in the conflict. Looking at the "philosophies" of Britain and Germany regarding early Spitfire's and 109's, they ended up with very similar performance from two very different approaches. The 109 was basically "put the biggest possible engine in the smallest airframe, downside being cramped cockpit and very high wing loading (limited space for weapons internal to the wing, meaning external "pods" being used, effecting performance a great deal). The Spit went for a bigger airfame, with it's semi elliptical wing having a much lower loading, and able to house heavier weapons internally. However the more complicated construction made the Spitfire wing more expensive and longer to build. The inverted engine in the 109 lent to better streamlining, and easier cowl mounted weapons, balancing things again. Despite a smaller capacity (27 litres to the DB601's 33.9 and 603's 44.5) and carburetor fuel system (not really a power output problem, but a more to do with gravity effecting fuel delivery) compared to the Daimler's injection, the Rolls Royce engines I believe were for the most part more powerful, and were able to be "up-rated" to match any improvements that Daimler made. I think that the Rolls Royce engine was a better bet for continued development and improvement. The jet age arriving meant we'll never really know, would love to have seen how a fuel injected turbo-supercharged Marlin or Griffon would have performed.
The better performance from allies engines came from a more leaded fuel rising the octans to 150 allowing boosts pressures to be much higher than the 120 from germans
1) I agree Ed (for what it is worth). A pretty plane. 2) To me? It makes little sense that they even designed the 309 as they did. This thing weighed - empty - (according to wikipedia) over 50% more than a Bf 109G-6 empty. With only about 20% more power. How on Earth was this thing supposed to fly MUCH faster than the 109? 3) this is a minor example of German overengineering during WW2. The nosewheel was basically a luxury. It just added weight and complexity for almost nothing but better pilot visibility on the ground. So what? 4) all they needed to do was take the basic idea of the 109 (stuff big engine into tiny airframe)? Give it a bubble canopy and (ESPECIALLY) inward-folding landing gear and perhaps make it a bit larger. Thus allowing for a larger cockpit plus the ability to use engines other than the DB...which was running out of development reserves. Thank you for this Ed. ☮
I totally subscribe to the theory that if it looks right it flies right but there will always be exceptions to the rule. As an avid WW2 aircraft model plane enthusiast and building an Me 309 model kit, it looked really nice in my collection too. I didn't test fly it though haha
I guess that this aircraft 'looks right' as it so closely resembles a prototype of the Me 262, a rather amazing design which many would agree was a classic design ...
The tricycle landing gear adds a lot to the affect.
The tail structure looks almost the same. At any rate, it's pure Messerschmitt.
The the tail looks very 262.
As welll as the canopy...but then the nose cone and blades looks similar to a kitty hawk to me too.
@@kyle857 true, but there is a resemblance in the tail, canopy and contours of the upper fuselage.
Once again you have come up with a plane I have never heard of. You sir are a information bloodhound of the highest degree. I salute you.
What a great channel …!
corny hahaha 😅
And the Blohm Voss BV 238 is a great example. If you search almost anywhere else Google and others will otherwise erroneously tell you that the Me 323 Gigant was the largest WW2 plane built. The BV 238 much larger in almost all measurements.
Look up Jumo 223 engine.....
The trick to the Bf-109 staying viable throughout the war was that the Bf 109 ABCD versions are nothing at all like the BF-109 FG and K versions. They are virtually completely different aircraft with just a general shape staying the same. But literally everything else is different
I think you could say the same for the Spitfire to a similar extent
If I recall correctly the only major airframe component of the spitfire to remain unchanged were the flaps...
Spitfire fans insist it was the same aircraft throughout. Yet almost nothing of the original remained in the later marks
Theseus's air superiority fighter
The 109 got less maneuverable as the war progressed. Because they kept giving it heavier engines without changing the wing area to compensate.
@@riazhassan6570 The fuselage didn't change much. The major change was in the wing.
Ed, as a Historian, I am full of awe over your knowledge and research. It is really impressive!
Remind me again what makes someone allowed to call themselves a historian
Another great piece of research, Mr. Nash! It looks like a Me 109 and a P51D Mustang had a baby.
One of aviation history's greatest losses due to Allied bombing has to be the Dornier Do X flying boat that was destroyed in a museum in Berlin. A video on the Do X would be cool for your channel. Keep up the great work.
@@cosmoray9750
Too late. Smedley Butler already warned about the use of the military to further private enterprise goals. The book, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" covers the corporate use of our govt. and military through the 70s and partial 80s. US foreign policy has been used from the beginning to further the business interests of the powerful; going all the way back to Commodore Perry attacking the peaceful sovereign nation of Japan in the 1850s. Now it's globalust corporatism . Stateless actors using multiple governments to force their agenda.
@@cosmoray9750 That is ironic seeing he did a lot to strengthen said military industrial complex. Anyway, the fact that pentagon is allowed to keep its 900 billion spending after Afghan and Iraq war were "finished" and no one is protesting the spending should go back to 2000 levels is proof how brainwashed and/or bought US public is. The money should go to some worthwhile cause, not to feed useless leeches like Boeing and other death peddlers.
@@KuK137 The corporate owned "media" never met a war it didn't like.
Eisenhower’s German POW concentration camps in which historians now say over one million died on the low end, makes him unqualified to comment on anything, in a moral sense.
Another one is being built!
Looks like a mix of the P51 and BF109 I can actually see a bit of me 262 in it, beautiful design
Take a closer look at the fuselage and tail.
@@bigguns917 I had a mistake in the comment, I meant to say that I see the 262 in it
I thought P39
Edgar Schmued, chief aerodynamicist on the Mustang, had worked with Messerschmitt early in his career. Fortunately for the Allies, he emigrated to the USA...
Interesting that you mention the Me.262 as the tail fin in remarkably similar.
I believe the nose gear is shared between the two aircraft.
I don't know how you do it but I am SO EFFING GLAD that you do, Mr. Nash.
For 45 years I have read references to the 309. You casually throw facts that make the history geek in me squee.
Thank you so much for your channel, I look forward to your vids.
Absolutely my pleasure :)
You can definitely see the influence to the ME 262. I think given resources and time it would have made a good fighter.
I believe the first 262`s were tail draggers , which seems odd to me, as this aicraft was a trike straight from the drawing board ,and they were being developed at the same time .
Thank you for the superb video , at 82 i thought i had seen everything . Just shows you can learn something new every day .
I was thinking the landing gear looks like it came off the same drawing pad as the 262. In the 262 had notoriously weak landing gear
Except - they were all out of resources. And time.
@2:30 that nose wheel setup worries My center of Gravity! IN my humble opinion, Ed's content is quite possibly the most interesting aircraft content on UA-cam right now. Certainly Out of World War II aircraft content. Where else am I going to hear about all these beautiful (in this case)...and sometimes not so beautiful monsters.
It would appear the tail is the same form factor as the ME-262. Also the round nose and landing gear setup did give Willie some valuable inspiration and experience.
The first 262s were tail sitters
Again I learned something. Thanks, Ed Nash.
Wow, that is a cool airplane. The tail of a 262, the fuselage shape of a P-39, with the engine of a 109 at the front sitting just over top of the retractable nose wheel which pulls the whole look together.
,not mentioned is the Me 609,a jnteresting design.
They may be get it from Japanese Army capture goody and get the copy of the landing gears
As soon as I saw the tail on that thing, I thought, “well that looks familiar.”
Saw one at Smithsonian. Cabin was very small
+@marktweet7379 No Me-309 survives, so you saw something else. Only partial remains of the Me-209 variant survive in Poland.
You should have mentioned that it was fitted with a reverse pitch propeller and the incident that occurred when this feature was demonstrated in front of high ranking officials by the test pilot.
Another excellent story, with great detail. You are right - it looks graceful and deadly at the same time: hints of Airacobra, P-51D and Me262. Did any survive?
The Focke-Wulf 190 was the Raise-the-Stakes Plane for the Luftwaffe . Set everyone else on their Heels for a while .
Very Small and Tough . Very Agile and Well Armed . And Very Very Fast . At ALL altitudes .
Except the BMW801 powered ones(atleast until the A9s..as long as those got the engines they were supposed to have), resembled an asthmatic jogger the higher it got^^
@@NashmanNashthat's just radial engine though, Corsair, bearcat, La-5, La-7, La-9, Yak-3U and Tempest all suffer from this problem, where the engine suffer after reaching 3.500m altitude.
Hey Ed, You're The Aviation History Man & Obviously A Research Master!! Thanks For Sharing.
I knew of the ME 309. But not much about it's details. You have provided excellent material about this aircraft that I did not know. Thank You.
... its* details (it's = it is)
A great very interesting video about an airframe I knew nothing about.Have a good one Mr.Ed.
@ 3:55 a picture taken at the Aircraft Recovery Group 40-45 museum in Heemskerk, the Netherlands.
Such a pretty looking plane that I've always thought it was a shame that she never worked out.
Oh well.
Looks similar to a ME 262 from the cockpit back
I appreciate the way you linger on the rare images.
It was neat to hear about trials in development. It was a pretty bird with its graceful long wings, but I see no real place for armaments in that grace especially with the heavy engines. A pretty bird.
It looks a bit under ruddered having a short rear fuselage and limited tail area, probably helps keep drag down, but an issue with handling torque reaction of pwerful engine. You can see how the Spitfire had its tail both lengthened and ruder area increased as its power was upgraded.
thanks for the miles/kilometers conversions mate !
Thanx for this video. I once drove a 309.... Peugeot 309 😊
Looked like a 109 and 262 had a kid...
Great info and effort. Many thanks
Looks like the offspring of an Me-262 and a P39 Airacobra.
Hey-Hey!!
A new video from Mr Nash.
Saturday is turning into a better day.
Looks like a stepping stone towards the ME 262
That's true. I'm thinking, of the Me109 and a P51 had a baby.
What would she look like?
Wow. This is her. the lines, the cuts of all trims cry, " Move"
Like, "Move the Fuck out of my way. Dick..."
That's my girl...
Great video. To me it resembles a cross between the 262 and a Macchi (which is no bad thing). However the nose wheel does look out of place.
That nose gear is the shit!
@@greggstrasser5791 yes, I'd say an incumberane.
Peculiar avion aleman!! No sabia de su existencia hasta hoy 2022?!! Increible!!👏👏👏👏
4:11....almost looks like a captured P-39 in Luftwaffe livery.
1:35 This aircraft looks like it was parked over night in East L.A.
I just discovered this channel….and I love it!
Welcome aboard ;)
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters I was literally thinking 'Welcome aboard' before I saw your comment
Aerodynamically speaking, I've always thought the tail wheel was the best way to go.
The wings are already angled up to grab the air sooner doing take off.
Understandably, the pilots view during take off is restricted.
But as most airfields, during that time were fields, having a nose gear would more than likely cause the nose gear to collapse when hitting a rut in the ground.
On the other hand, if you look for the soviet comments on the P-39, you'll always find nose gear under the "pros". The reason is in case of a tail dragger if any wing gear hit a rut the plane could easily turn over its nose, possibly killing the pilot. (Look up Alexander Klubov, killed in such accident in La-7)
In case of nose gear it was safer to taxi, land and take off from all kinds of airfields and the visibility was far better.
Well, that's what is mentioned when the pilots compared P-39 to LaGG-3, Yak-1 or MiG-3.
Yet a taildragger will normally lift the tail to level the fuselage to attain takeoff speed and sufficient lift.
During WW2 was the accident rate at ground caused from taildragger landing gear (no visibility forward and loss of controll) was EXTREMLY hight, this explain why some aircrafts was if possible made with tricycle landing gears, in addition first me 262 was taildraggers, but this aircraft did need a very long roll distance to take off, who was significant reduced with the tricycle landing gear
Outstanding video and presentation.
The "looks right" adage holds true - it looks like it had woeful total wing area, surely causing the terrible handling. The radiators could easily have been incorporated into larger wings which would have cured the overheating issues too. What I see is too much hesitancy in changing the basic 109 layout.
That nose wheel collapse also happened in the Me-262 program in testing, but Tricycle gear was Needed to keep Jet Exhaust from igniting Grass strip runways.
Also in the case of the 262, the initial V1 prototype was a taildragger and the test pilot had to step on the brakes so the tail could lift during rotation.
It’s hard to imagine today, but back then the 262 was an incredibly tricky plane to fly. Green pilots would probably screw up the takeoff process, more so while being under attack by allied fighters which were frequent.
Looks a bit P-63ish. It also has some features that turned up in the later Ar-335.
I thought it looked like a P-63 too.
P39 too!
The BF 109 in most of its variants were successful...but from what if read its narrow track undercarriage was always a problem, especially for novice pilots..once in the air, flown by a competent pilot it was a force to be reckoned with
That can be said with basically every front-line fighter used during WWII, minus the awful landing gear.
Thanks Ed for yet another great video..I truly like the way you make these video and even though I am a bit of a plane nerd...you still manage to teach me something new:)
I like it. I wish model companies would make kits for these lesser known planes.
Very interesting as always, Thanks.
I always like stories like this, the ones that showcase the story arc of the war for Germany.
1941: We're unstoppable, research upgrades!
1942: Okay this is harder than we thought, maybe we should spend the resources on proven tech.
1943: Uh-oh, better completely abandon that upgrade, we don't have enough weapons for the front line.
1944: With this wunderwaffen we will win the war!
1945: Please let me surrender to you, the Russians are mean.
shame they lost
@typo pit : Yes, they were modest in their desires; they wanted only northern Europe, much of Asia, and the Middle East -- for the time being.
A comment from the war vacationers or one of those already defeated at Dunkirk
I often wonder what would have been if Kurt Tank had worked for Messerschmitt. Messerschmitt had the backing of Goering and more resources, plus the leadership in the field of jet power. Tank was head and shoulders above any other aircraft designer at the time. Putting the two together would no doubt have produced some phenomenal aircraft.
@Prime Artemis no, actually that's why the first 190s had the radial engines. Messerschmitt had a lock on the Daimler engines. The later C versions did have the DB 603 before switching to the Junkers Jumo 213 for the D version. Of course the Ta-152 was Tank's masterpiece.
Excellent video 📹
109 is the most produced fighter? Knowledge.
The problem is that the radial engined fw190 answer answered every other question and was so versatile. They complemented each other.
Thanx! There was a many creative people at work on these time…
Yaaassss!!!! ive read everything ive been able to get my hands on in regard to this aircraft. thankyou for the videos :)
Great work Ed.
Good job Ed, another new plane for me.
Excellently concise and informative presentation. Thank you 🙏
Im unsure if it ever got any further than paper, but i saw a line drawing of an me-109 fuselage with a me-262 nose, wing, engines, and tail empennage...supposedly it was rejected out of hand as the fuselage could never have withstood the forces a jets performance entails.
Head of the Luftwaffe fighter command, Adolf Galland said the Me 209/309 was a "Lame Duck". That probably killed it. But some design features crept into the Me 262, so not all the work was wasted.
What now. If the greatest war birds of the air, the Me109 and P51, had a baby?
What would she look like?
Wow.
This is her...
The kooler underside inlets, The lines, cuts the air. Saying,
"Move." "Move out of my way." At 495mph, I'ld move too...
Just look at her. A work of art.
Oberst Robert Schwatisch...
Looks like a back-engineered Airacomet.
Great stuff Ed - thanks.
The landing gear looks dainty.
The "problem" was that the BF 109 managed - with some ups and downs - to stay competive with the latest allied fighters till the end, so there was really no urgent need to replace it. Of course that is easy to say with the benefit of hindsight etc....
It's interesting how the 109 design and FW-190 design switched back and forth as the premier German piston fighter, with the TA-152 being ultimate of the 190 type.
The Me 109 Gustav was nicknamed "the killer" for some reason...!"
The 309 looks like the 262, so you can see how the 262 got its shape
The change to the tricycle landing gear would have made it all worthwhile.
Thanks Ed...From🇺🇸
Like the landing gear,wonder what a radial engine would do for it.
Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
Very impressive, informative video.
Can you do the ta-152?
It wasn't really that heavy, but with all the guns and small wing area had an extremely high wingloading at 52 lb / sq ft. It needed new wings with better airfoil.
You'd think that with all of Prandtl's proteges that they'd have produced better airfoils wrt boundary layer and lift.
Great stuff , i subscribed.
Did i see two photos of Foche Wulf 190's in the end there ? ?
Thanks for sharing ...
Sieht aus, wie eine Mischung zwischen ME 262 und P-51 Mustang, durch die Hutze unter dem Motor,aber warum nur eine 3 Blatt Luftschraube, und kein 4 Blatt Propeller?
I wonder if they ever considered reverting to a traditional tail wheel? A lot of the problems seem to have stemmed from the undercart...
That ignores the high takeoff and landing accident rate with the narrow landing gear with the tail dragger 109. By the way, the Me 262 was known for having nose gear failures.
Well done 👍….thanks Ed Nash … but still no sliding canopy… it’s a good thing they didn’t put those engines into full scale production on the FW 190 …
actually radial engines are not bad. on higher altitude radial dont produce so much more than drag than v engines anyway. also fw190 had some really clever solutions for lower drag. apparently fw190 had less drag than spitfire.
air cooling also help for radials to sustain more damage.
many non build american super props were to use radial engines. when you look at that its lucky that germany didnt have some really powerful radial engines that they could fit on fw190
The FW 190D series used a Junkers Jumo 213 V12 liquid cooled engine with an anular radiator in front.
@@jebise1126 indeed the chunky p-47 with turbo supercharger was almost unbeatable once they put a paddle prop on it …. The Fw190 was better of a war horse than the 109 and the Dora version was the one of the best at high altitude … part of their success was the variable speed supercharger …. And of course the Genius of Kurt Tank and that Diemler Engine…
@@luisgimenez8660 Now I gotta rewatch the episode about the 190 D-9 version on Greg’sAircraft & Automobiles …I’m surprised our government didn’t grab Kurt Tank and give him a job After the war
I think it is a test for the Me-262 air frame using a piston engine.
I notice some similarities with the 262, did the 309 influence the design?
The Me309 and the Me262 are similar in fuselage profile. Maybe that is not a coincidence?
funny the krauts never got into 4 bladed props...airframe looks good though, mustangish front on.
I note that the tailplane shape is similar to the later me 262
This very first 109 being a little goofy in appearence and not as aggressive as the later model have some friendly charm to it. The 309 in silhouette look like it have some similiarity to the later 262.
Absolutely beautiful and purposeful looking but it just made sense that the Reich focused on the Me262.
The 309 here looks a lot a German version of the p-51. Neither of which would be my favorite one from either side. But it did what was needed to test other technology coming up the line.
Caught your mistake it was the FW 190 not FW109 as you stated at 7.32 into the video lol. I am an ass mate great video love your stuff.
Again, I find myself totally interested and not fast forwarding or skipping sections. Another fine video sir!
were the wings laminar flow? the crappy handing might suggest it and they have a look in some pictures
The rear section of the fuesalage looks a lot like the Me262.
I couldn’t agree more…the Me309 is a pretty plane!
I believe they even proposed a Me-609 consisting of two joined Me-309's much akin to the P-82 Twin-Mustang
Never heard of this.....great vid
The saying "the exception that proves the rule" doesn't mean what most people think it means. In this saying the word proves means to test (as the Proof House were guns were put under test).
Even with this design idea in 1941 they were looking the "bubble" canopy and fuselage silhouette that became the "standard" for most fighters and taken up by others later in the conflict.
Looking at the "philosophies" of Britain and Germany regarding early Spitfire's and 109's, they ended up with very similar performance from two very different approaches.
The 109 was basically "put the biggest possible engine in the smallest airframe, downside being cramped cockpit and very high wing loading (limited space for weapons internal to the wing, meaning external "pods" being used, effecting performance a great deal).
The Spit went for a bigger airfame, with it's semi elliptical wing having a much lower loading, and able to house heavier weapons internally. However the more complicated construction made the Spitfire wing more expensive and longer to build.
The inverted engine in the 109 lent to better streamlining, and easier cowl mounted weapons, balancing things again.
Despite a smaller capacity (27 litres to the DB601's 33.9 and 603's 44.5) and carburetor fuel system (not really a power output problem, but a more to do with gravity effecting fuel delivery) compared to the Daimler's injection, the Rolls Royce engines I believe were for the most part more powerful, and were able to be "up-rated" to match any improvements that Daimler made. I think that the Rolls Royce engine was a better bet for continued development and improvement. The jet age arriving meant we'll never really know, would love to have seen how a fuel injected turbo-supercharged Marlin or Griffon would have performed.
The better performance from allies engines came from a more leaded fuel rising the octans to 150 allowing boosts pressures to be much higher than the 120 from germans
It’s such a tribute to the 109 that it was upgradeable enough to keep the 309 a low priority
1) I agree Ed (for what it is worth). A pretty plane.
2) To me? It makes little sense that they even designed the 309 as they did.
This thing weighed - empty - (according to wikipedia) over 50% more than a Bf 109G-6 empty. With only about 20% more power.
How on Earth was this thing supposed to fly MUCH faster than the 109?
3) this is a minor example of German overengineering during WW2. The nosewheel was basically a luxury. It just added weight and complexity for almost nothing but better pilot visibility on the ground. So what?
4) all they needed to do was take the basic idea of the 109 (stuff big engine into tiny airframe)? Give it a bubble canopy and (ESPECIALLY) inward-folding landing gear and perhaps make it a bit larger. Thus allowing for a larger cockpit plus the ability to use engines other than the DB...which was running out of development reserves.
Thank you for this Ed.
☮
I was just thinking the 309 looked wrong right as you said it looked right. That tiny tail and overly long nose was the issue for me.
Lol evidently your eye is better than mine :)
I totally subscribe to the theory that if it looks right it flies right but there will always be exceptions to the rule. As an avid WW2 aircraft model plane enthusiast and building an Me 309 model kit, it looked really nice in my collection too. I didn't test fly it though haha
Hopefully you will have a look at the Me509 which lead from the 309
Very interesting, thank you