Japan's Attempt To Copy A Legendary Fighter: Nakajima Kikka

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 15 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 481

  • @Falkenlp3
    @Falkenlp3 Місяць тому +122

    • The Heinkel He 178 was the first jet-powered aircraft to fly, with its maiden flight on August 27, 1939. However, it never went beyond the prototype stage.
    • The Messerschmitt Me 262 was the first jet fighter to be used in combat. Its first combat mission occurred on July 25, 1944, when it intercepted an Allied reconnaissance aircraft.
    • The Gloster E.28/39 (also known as the Gloster Whittle) was the first British jet-powered aircraft, making its first flight on May 15, 1941. It served as a prototype for future developments.
    • The Gloster Meteor was the first Allied jet fighter to see combat, with its first operational mission on July 27, 1944. It was initially deployed to intercept German V1 flying bombs.
    For all the bri‘ish geezers out there

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +6

      The first actual successful kill on the Me262 didn’t occur until August 8.
      The Mosquito attacked on July 25th successfully returned to base…

    • @antony3678
      @antony3678 Місяць тому +5

      It wasn't operational! The first operational jet fighter was actually the British Meteor NOT the ME262!

    • @wawa8408
      @wawa8408 Місяць тому +9

      ​@@antony3678Kurwa, Meteor was .45, the 262 was 44

    • @biernut8723
      @biernut8723 Місяць тому +2

      @@antony3678 It doesn't matter because the Me 262 was better.

    • @timonsolus
      @timonsolus Місяць тому +3

      @@biernut8723 : The Me 262 was tremendously better than the earliest Meteor F.1 - which had underpowered Welland engines and could only do 417 mph - slower than a Spitfire Mk.XIV.
      However, the 1945 Meteor F.3 was equal to the Me 262 - and the postwar Meteor F.8 was tremendously better than the Me 262.

  • @codymoon7552
    @codymoon7552 Місяць тому +334

    The Kika is cool and all, but it has nothing on that paper airplane I made in 8th grade. This is because the paper airplane actually flew

    • @onenote6619
      @onenote6619 Місяць тому +47

      The first prototype flew. And crashed on the second flight.

    • @yenchey3270
      @yenchey3270 Місяць тому +37

      And Cody's 8th grade paper airplane flew, crashed, and flew again probably a dozen times over. Kikka's got nothing on it

    • @brealistic3542
      @brealistic3542 Місяць тому +8

      My dad won the world paper airplane competition so there you go, amateur paper aircraft builder.😛

    • @floycewhite6991
      @floycewhite6991 Місяць тому

      ​@@brealistic3542Is he the guy on the 60 Minutes story?

    • @tomellis4750
      @tomellis4750 Місяць тому

      But did it carry 50 cals?

  • @gort8203
    @gort8203 Місяць тому +71

    Slow acceleration of the engine itself does not require a longer runway. The engine is run up to full RPM prior to brake release. The longer runway is required because early jets had lower thrust compared to the trust provided by propellers at low speed.

    • @daszieher
      @daszieher Місяць тому +2

      Especially the ratio between static and at speed. A propeller, especially a constant speed or variable pitch provides much more thrust at takeoff than a jet of comparable thrust at design speed.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      Slow acceleration is a major problem on landing however - it means you HAVE to make a slow approach and only get a single shot at landing.

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 Місяць тому

      It does if you don’t want it to FOD out on an unprepared surface.

    • @gort8203
      @gort8203 Місяць тому

      @@allangibson8494 I don’t know what you meant to say in that first sentence, but you don’t have to use a slower approach speed because your engine spools slowly. Approach speed is determined by the wing and is nominally in the area of 1.3 Vstall.
      Slow engine spool up is not a major problem, it is a feature of early engines that had to be compensated for. Different airplanes used different means to increase drag or attenuate trust during approach so that the engine rpm remined far enough above idle to allow a reasonable spool time. Pilots have to anticipate the need to increase or reduce power more than they do in a prop plane, but they soon get used to it.

    • @gort8203
      @gort8203 Місяць тому

      @@calvinnickel9995 "It does if you don’t want it to FOD out on an unprepared surface."
      What the heck does runway length have to do with whether the surface is prepared or unprepared, which is a completely separate subject?

  • @gort8203
    @gort8203 Місяць тому +128

    The reason to power a Kamikaze with jet engines is because it would make it less likely to be intercepted by enemy fighter cover and more likely to strike its target. Resources expended on weapons that can complete the mission are often more productive than resources expended on weapons that are unlikely to complete the mission. It was not stupid. (Especially when the engine didn't last more than one flight between overhauls anyway.)

    • @daszieher
      @daszieher Місяць тому +8

      Rockets were simpler. The Baka (Okha) was a better choice for the Kamikaze role.

    • @eriks.9730
      @eriks.9730 Місяць тому +13

      @@daszieherIf it could have been delivered to a target. They had to be carried by a lumbering bomber which was vulnerable to radar, picket ships, and air cover. Sometimes the bomber crew would say f! it and jettison the Ohka before getting in range of a target.

    • @lllordllloyd
      @lllordllloyd Місяць тому +6

      Glad you said this: and a jet fighter is still much cheaper than even a small warship.
      I am a little wary of the constant claims of Axis "waste of resources". Going to war was the moment of stupidity: to win a war as a small, high(er) tech nation, better weapons is the only option.
      And the nature of developing better weapons means many will fail and the tech will be pushed to the limit.
      To this end, the German weapons of 44/45 all make sense given the situation. The Japanese had to try something.
      Meanwhile, in Britain for example, there were at least half a dozen aircraft in mass production that were a complete- and obvious- waste of resources, and a similar number undergoing development. This is little discussed but could be a good episode in itself!

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +4

      @@daszieherRockets are very short ranged. That was the vulnerability of the Ohka - the Betty bombers carrying them were sitting ducks if intercepted by American fighters.
      The turbojet Ohka 43 was developed to overcome this problem.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +5

      Jet engines take less resources than a piston engine of the same power (about a quarter the labor based on German data).

  • @allangibson8494
    @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +75

    The Kikka wasn’t a ‘clone’ so much as ‘inspired by’.
    They started the design based on magazine photos long before they actually got drawings.

    • @rob6052
      @rob6052 Місяць тому +9

      It would have been a copy, had the sub made it. Later developments would have been inspired by. Still miraculous that with a few drawings and the knowledge in one guy's head, that they got as far as they did. And they might have pulled it off if not for those meddling kids in Gato and Salmon class subs, F4's, Catalina's, etc..., denying Japan's access to strategic materials.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +2

      @@rob6052 And the fact the Japanese I-29 was actually sunk by Japanese forces in an “own goal” attack…

    • @DIREWOLFx75
      @DIREWOLFx75 Місяць тому +5

      "The Kikka wasn’t a ‘clone’ so much as ‘inspired by’."
      Yeah. Also, it wasn't a fighter... It was going to get a fighter sub-variant with stronger engines, but the primary variant was a light bomber with no guns.

    • @jimmymcgoochie5363
      @jimmymcgoochie5363 Місяць тому

      “We have Me262 at home”
      Me262 at home:

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +1

      @@jimmymcgoochie5363 The Japanese also started building an exact 262 clone but it didn’t fly.
      They also bought a Tiger 1 Tank but it got lost in Cherbourg in July 1944 before it could be shipped.

  • @andrewbrennan2891
    @andrewbrennan2891 Місяць тому +21

    I really enjoy your presentations. A great mix of info and just the right amount of humour.

  • @Nafeels
    @Nafeels Місяць тому +109

    OH MAN this one’s long due and I’m surprised very few warplane UA-camrs talked about the Kikka. This, among other things, was further proof that Japanese aviation knowledge was on par with Western ones. Considering their status in 1943-44, knowing how to replicate the complex turbine internals and their metallurgy properties WITH ONLY USING PICTURES OF THE BMW 003 they did a FANTASTIC job.
    While the very short lifespan of the first jet engines would be a pain and losing the most important day for them, I would imagine this would be a Tuesday morning to the Japanese scientists instead with how they utilized it. A disposable light interceptor packing some heat with it and taking out bombers in a last ditch attempt is very on-brand for late war Japan.

    • @onenote6619
      @onenote6619 Місяць тому

      An interceptor with no guns. Try again.

    • @aleksaradojicic8114
      @aleksaradojicic8114 Місяць тому +20

      @@onenote6619 Prototype not having guns is perfectly normal thing to see. On top of that, Kikka was not intendent from start to be interceptor (literarly in video).

    • @The_Conspiracy_Analyst
      @The_Conspiracy_Analyst Місяць тому +1

      Imagine calling blueprints/technical drawings and detailed engineering data "jUsT piKsHurz". LOL this is the weebiest comment I've seen on yoo toob to date

    • @The_Conspiracy_Analyst
      @The_Conspiracy_Analyst Місяць тому

      Imagine calling blueprints/technical drawings and detailed engineering data "jUsT piKsHurz". LOL this is the weebiest comment I've seen on yoo toob to date

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +1

      @@onenote6619Ohka 43… Single use interceptor (although some cannon armed examples of the Ohka were used in combat over Japan (they had trouble reaching the B-29’s at altitude)).

  • @jimh4375
    @jimh4375 Місяць тому +52

    The Jumo 004 engine had total life of 25 hrs, which means they went to scrap not rebuild after 25 hrs. So Japan wasn't that far off. This is why the allies (Most notably Frank Whittle) did't try to build axial flow engines.

    • @ivanconnolly7332
      @ivanconnolly7332 Місяць тому +14

      Was a scarcity of chromium not a major cause of accelerated wear on on the Jumo 004.

    • @gort8203
      @gort8203 Місяць тому +3

      Not a serious limitation when fighters defending German airspace had a combat lifespan of about 25 hours.

    • @gort8203
      @gort8203 Місяць тому +15

      @@ivanconnolly7332 Lack of high temperature alloys would limit the lifespan of a centrifugal flow engine in much the same way as an axial flow engine. That is because the term centrifugal or axial describes the compressor section of the engine. Both types of engine use an axial flow turbine to extract power to drive the compressor section. The turbine is the section subjected to the very high temperature exhaust gases.

    • @Schlipperschlopper
      @Schlipperschlopper Місяць тому +3

      All worn out Jumos were rebuilt not scrapped during war. The factory for Jumo 004 rebuils was located in Zittau at ZIT works.

    • @wwanimator
      @wwanimator Місяць тому +4

      The 25hr of engine life wasn’t a design flaw per se, all jet engines require heat resistant materials that Germany couldn’t produce in large quantities due to resource shortages. The prototype Jumo 004s actually had much longer engine lives because they were built with the right materials. The allies didn’t have these problems because they had much more resources and didn’t really mass produce jets yet anyway

  • @arisspilios7091
    @arisspilios7091 Місяць тому +9

    Make a video about J7w1 Shinden please!!! I became addicted to this channel, keep up with the great work!

  • @alienbeef0421
    @alienbeef0421 Місяць тому +49

    Holy shit that 262 with a Jumo 210 looks cursed as hell

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +4

      A pair of failed engines made it very useful (a common occurrence until they fixed the engine design problems).

    • @petrucercel9855
      @petrucercel9855 Місяць тому +3

      and it's also a tail dragger

    • @Lurch-Bot
      @Lurch-Bot Місяць тому

      I guess you've never seen a He 162 with a Jumo engine, lol.

    • @alienbeef0421
      @alienbeef0421 Місяць тому

      @@Lurch-Bot i was not ready for that lmao

  • @jhoncho4x4
    @jhoncho4x4 Місяць тому +3

    Spent many hours studying the 262 and cutaway engine at Wright-Patt National Airforce Museum since childhood.
    I touch the under wing of Boxscar now; sat at the controls as a kid and pretended to fly with school mates running other controls; was a different time.

  • @mredsterish
    @mredsterish Місяць тому +7

    "...that work began in honest". (6:10) ? I earnestly do not comprehend that statement.

    • @GuyAnderson-b8i
      @GuyAnderson-b8i Місяць тому

      Perhaps he meant to say ‘in earnest’ but that doesn’t really work either.

  • @zanenobbs352
    @zanenobbs352 Місяць тому +29

    Very nice! The Kikka test pilot, IJN Lieutenant Susumu Takaoka, would also pilot Japan's first post-war jet, the Fuji T-1 Hatsutaka 初鷹 (Young Falcon) a decade later.

  • @Nedski42YT
    @Nedski42YT Місяць тому +8

    Is that Jay Leno photobombing Goering @2:20? He must be a time traveler! /S

  • @mathewkelly9968
    @mathewkelly9968 Місяць тому +17

    3:35 note the straight wing , the Germans got to the swept wing by accident not design . They had to sweep the wings for centre of gravity units , because the engines where over design weight and underpowered

    • @vornamenachname989
      @vornamenachname989 Місяць тому +2

      I don't think that's entirely true, since a German scientist named Busemann already found out in 1935 that a swept wing design was more aerodynamic at higher speeds. Also, the swept wings on the Messerschmitt Me163 was definitely not due to center of gravity, since it didn't have jet engines on its wing.

    • @stephenmeier4658
      @stephenmeier4658 Місяць тому +1

      ​@@vornamenachname989It is entirely true. The wings were swept to fix the center of gravity. Willy couldn't design a properly balanced aircraft

    • @vornamenachname989
      @vornamenachname989 Місяць тому

      ​@@stephenmeier4658That Willy wasn't the best at his job I definitely believe, especially considering that he wasn't a pilot like Kurt Tank for example. However, I think it's more likely that they killed two birds with one stone, they noticed that the weight wasn't distributed evenly, and then decided to go with swept wings because they also carry the advantage of better aerodynamics. Because if what you said is true, then Willy Messerschmitt must have been completely unaware of Busemann's findings, and that seems highly unlikely to me.

    • @st.dennie1149
      @st.dennie1149 Місяць тому

      This is simply untrue, the Horten brothers were working on the flying wing design in the 30's. The Ho 229 is truly a beautiful thing.

    • @CrusaderSports250
      @CrusaderSports250 Місяць тому

      ​@@stephenmeier4658they also did that on the Sunderland flying boat to fix CofG issues, the engines were about 4 degrees off centre but as it didn't seem an issue they were left like it, slightly different performance envelope but the same fix.

  • @brendonbewersdorf986
    @brendonbewersdorf986 Місяць тому +23

    The Japanese me 163 rocket fighter copys are also interesting i hope you can cover those as well sometime theh even made some improvements from what ive seen with several models

    • @goaway7346
      @goaway7346 Місяць тому +1

      If they were launched from a "mother ship" they could have been very effective Kamikaze craft.

    • @guaposneeze
      @guaposneeze Місяць тому

      In a grim fictional alternate history, yeah a rocket powered kamikaze would make much more sense than a jet engine. Rockets are hard to make re-useable, but something like a solid rocket motor is relatively easy to manufacture if you have the inputs and a large industrial base. With a jet engine, you need very high quality materials so the compressor blades don't burn up inside the engine. With a rocket... no, burning up is fine. Limited range, but it would defend the coast from anything that got in range.

    • @Lurch-Bot
      @Lurch-Bot Місяць тому +1

      Not a copy. The Japanese rocket fighter was substantially larger and was only loosely based on the Me 163. The engine was about the only thing they had in common, other than general layout. The Japanese rocket plane was designed to engage the B-29, which flew roughly 10,000 ft higher than the allied bombers operating in the ETO. So it had to have longer endurance and enough fuel to get to the higher altitude. Also, the Me 163 was way too fast and making something larger kept the speeds down while still having nearly the same climb performance, which is the most important characteristic of a point defense fighter.

    • @brendonbewersdorf986
      @brendonbewersdorf986 Місяць тому

      @Lurch-Bot the later ki-202 model was definitely a lot larger and much different but the first model the J8M was nearly identical in shape and size to the me 163 they definitely weren't straight copys but were rather like the kikka a reimagining if you will

  • @TomBall-r4d
    @TomBall-r4d Місяць тому +111

    You get the impression that a lot of aircraft designers in Germany and Japan were making jobs for themselves in order to avoid being given a rifle and getting sent to the front

    • @luisnunes3863
      @luisnunes3863 Місяць тому +3

      🎯🎯🎯

    • @mpetersen6
      @mpetersen6 Місяць тому +5

      In that case these designs were very successful.

    • @emmano6340
      @emmano6340 Місяць тому +11

      ​@@mpetersen6 And a lot of German Designs were later used by the US and USSR in the culmination of what would become the Mig-15 and F-86 Sabre

    • @CFG-eb3my
      @CFG-eb3my Місяць тому +1

      ya' think?

    • @dvogonen
      @dvogonen Місяць тому +10

      Sweden also got hold of the German swept wing research that later was used for the Sabre and the MiG-15. Back in the 40ies all Swedish engineers knew German, so they picked up on the importance somewhat quicker than their counterparts in the superpowers. For a brief moment in time the resulting aircraft Saab J29 was the fastest airplane in the world.
      Luckily we never needed to use it in a conflict, but it provided the backbone in our air deterrent against a Russian invasion throughout the 50ies.
      So, "thank you Luftwaffe", I guess.

  • @Jerre27
    @Jerre27 Місяць тому +6

    In the proces of finishing finemolds' 1/48 scale Kikka. Good lookin' aircraft.

  • @souous7700
    @souous7700 Місяць тому +5

    It is widely misunderstood, but the Kikka is not a copy of the Me262. Research into jet engines had been ongoing for some time, and the Japanese had already made four different types of engines before the materials arrived from Germany. Moreover, all that was sent from Germany were a few photographs of the jet engine's exterior and simple conceptual drawings, with no detailed blueprints or blueprints for the aircraft.
    When the Japanese designers took one look at the conceptual drawings of the jet engine, they were confident that "we were not wrong," and went on to complete their own original engine and aircraft.

  • @radish6691
    @radish6691 Місяць тому +6

    Dang why is the first picture so dark? I was tapping my screen thinking it auto-dimmed super fast! 😂

  • @odonovan
    @odonovan Місяць тому +14

    6:15 - "...in honest." WTF??? The phrase is "in earnest," meaning seriously and with determination.

    • @jonHErickson
      @jonHErickson Місяць тому +1

      Everything is going to be okay.

  • @ravenclaw8975
    @ravenclaw8975 Місяць тому +2

    If you haven't already done so, I would like to see a video on the HE 280. Thank you for the informative video.

  • @Idahoguy10157
    @Idahoguy10157 Місяць тому +30

    IIRC the Gloster Meteor was both in squadron service and combat before the Me 262. The combat being against V1 flying bombs

    • @MsZsc
      @MsZsc Місяць тому +4

      yeah idk why he said that

    • @madmullets
      @madmullets Місяць тому +5

      Thank you. People get all ooohhh ME 262 first fighter jet and have no or little knowledge oh the Gloster Meteor.

    • @starlight2098
      @starlight2098 Місяць тому +5

      Indeed, this video started and I was already rolling my eyes going, "Another American pretending like the Gloster Meteor doesn't exist," and frankly, I nearly stopped the video. I wonder sometimes if they're embarrassed that they were behind on jets or if its just the fetishisation of German Wunderwaffe. The latter notion actually being sadder.

    • @Idahoguy10157
      @Idahoguy10157 Місяць тому

      @@madmullets … the 262 was a lot sexier. Menacing looking. Fought allied manned aircraft. Whereas the Meteor was chasing down the unmanned V2 flying bomb. Over England. The Meteor stayed in service for over a decade. In different air forces. The 262 was a one and done fighter

    • @Katy_Jones
      @Katy_Jones Місяць тому +6

      @@starlight2098 Apparently being sent to a test unit and spending most of the time on the ground is "operational"...

  • @daszieher
    @daszieher Місяць тому +3

    Nice job! I like the presentation style ❤

  • @bullettube9863
    @bullettube9863 Місяць тому +2

    The Germans were aided by the fact that Frank Whittlle's work had been published where as the Germans kept their work secret. Frank Whittle's designs showed the Germans how to make effective compressor vanes. In the same way the German rocket scientists took advantage of the publish work of Robert Goddard. It was noted by people familiar with Goddard's work, that they recognized his influence in the V-2 rockets as being upscaled versions. Goddard had developed the idea of high speed pumps and a separate tank of oxygen for his system, something early rocketeers hadn't thought of.

  • @richardeikenburg7347
    @richardeikenburg7347 Місяць тому +2

    Hurry up and do the dedicated video on the ME-262! Make it long and detailed!

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 Місяць тому +6

    Whittle developed the 1st jet engine that operated.

  • @kurtwillig4230
    @kurtwillig4230 Місяць тому +5

    The Kikka would have had the same problem as the Hein "Tony". So much down time for maintenance that few squadrons would ever be fully operational. Even the German jet units had that problem.

  • @mastathrash5609
    @mastathrash5609 Місяць тому +5

    That pic of Herman, Bugger was meme then and he still is. 😄

  • @carlthecoworker5596
    @carlthecoworker5596 Місяць тому +3

    One of my favorite aircraft of the war, such a unique R&D and fate fitting for its environment in the late Pacific war

  • @DIREWOLFx75
    @DIREWOLFx75 Місяць тому +10

    Just one HUGE problem... The Kikka wasn't a fighter...
    The primary variant developed was a light bomber with no guns.
    Also, there was no actual copying, simply because Japan didn't have anything to actually copy from.
    They had some pictures of the plane and a cut-away drawing of a BMW-003.
    Even just looking up the very basics of the engine says everything you need to know, as the Ne-20 only weighs 3/4 of the -003 while having 60% of its thrust.
    The engine's doesn't even have the same number of compression stages... So definitely no copy.
    And the Kikka itself is also much smaller than the -262. Over 1.5 TON lighter!
    "engine costs"
    The total cost of a jet engine was distinctly LOWER than that of regular engine however, thanks to the much smaller amount of precision machining and seals etc required.
    "add a great deal of weight"
    The fighter version REMOVED the 500kg bombload and replaced it with two 30mm cannons that was actually a bit lighter than said bombload and bombrack.
    So no, it would have removed weight, if just slightly.

    • @alexsv1938
      @alexsv1938 Місяць тому +4

      In addition to what you said, the interceptor variant would have been powered by the still in design stage Ne-20 Kai engines. (20% increase in thrust, higher fuel consumption but lower weight as it reduced the number of compressor stages from 8 to 6)
      If there was a copy of the Me 262 that would be the Ki-201 and not the Kikka.

    • @DIREWOLFx75
      @DIREWOLFx75 Місяць тому

      @@alexsv1938 Exactly.

  • @johnjackson3800
    @johnjackson3800 Місяць тому +5

    Thank you for doing this video, the history of German jet history is well-known, but very little is known of what the Japanese were doing with the jet engine.

  • @willemran
    @willemran Місяць тому +10

    😂 who's the cross eyed officer? I hoped you noticed him to and boy, you did not dissapoint!

  • @RemusKingOfRome
    @RemusKingOfRome Місяць тому +8

    The plane was NOT pointless, Japanese engineers gained great knowledge about jet engines - cutting edge tech !!! How can you say it was pointless ? f

    • @nektulosnewbie
      @nektulosnewbie Місяць тому +1

      Yes, such important things when your nation is losing a war with your country is burning down around you.

    • @CrusaderSports250
      @CrusaderSports250 Місяць тому

      ​@@nektulosnewbiebut something that may be of great benifit after, at that stage the writing was on the wall and forward looking people may well have been planning for the opportunities peace may provide.

    • @nektulosnewbie
      @nektulosnewbie Місяць тому +1

      @@CrusaderSports250 that's getting into pedantic territory that's rather extreme, especially given that the Kikka led nowhere developmentally wise.

    • @hektor6766
      @hektor6766 Місяць тому +1

      @@nektulosnewbie What did Japan produce post-war? North American F-86 Sabres for the USAF.

    • @nektulosnewbie
      @nektulosnewbie Місяць тому

      @@hektor6766 Powered by indigenous designed and built Japanese engines? Were the F-86s modifed to accomodate certain design features that could trace their evolutionary history back to the Kikka?
      No, the Kikka was a dead end, and what jet industry Japan later built had little to nothing connected to what was done in WWII. It was useless, and trying to say it had some benefit post-war when it was just a drain on resources without benefit during WWII is trying to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.

  • @Idahoguy10157
    @Idahoguy10157 Місяць тому +4

    Allied navies never did stop Japanese and German submarines making it to France or Singapore. Before the war ended there was a squadron of U-Boats stationed in Indonesia. As unbelievable as that seems. German scientists and engineers were happy to work for America.

  • @sidefx996
    @sidefx996 Місяць тому +9

    Came looking for comments and there were none yet lol

  • @jimdavis5849
    @jimdavis5849 Місяць тому +5

    The Japanese are very spiritual and poetic and have a great love of nature, so it's not surprising their military aircraft had poetic names.

    • @hektor6766
      @hektor6766 Місяць тому

      Unfortunately, they couldn't launch it from "Auspicious Crane" (Zuikaku) or "Soaring Crane" (Shoukaku), since they'd been sunk by this time.

  • @mpetersen6
    @mpetersen6 Місяць тому +1

    The wing sweep angle was the same as the DC-3/C-47. Not to emply that the Gooney Bird was a high performance airframe.

  • @richardsweeney197
    @richardsweeney197 Місяць тому +2

    There is a Kikka in the collection of the National Air and Space Museum, part of the Smithsonian.

  • @M4xPower
    @M4xPower Місяць тому +4

    If both engines put out 1000lbf and its take off speed was 150 mph (just a guess), both engines would be putting out around 800 horsepower combined at that speed (400 horsepower per engine). At its top speed, both engines would be putting out a combined 2300 horsepower, or 1150 per engine. So it's a little unsurprising that its take off run was very long. Also, that's not a lot of power for that high speed. While it was fast I'm guessing it would have had problems in other areas, like climbing, turning, or accelerating.

  • @ruihund
    @ruihund Місяць тому +8

    While the allies shipped countless men, equipment and supplies across the globe, the axis struggled to exchange anything materially. It really goes to show the superiority the allies had😂

    • @luisnunes3863
      @luisnunes3863 Місяць тому +3

      And the utter stupidity of attacking that giant country between them, aka Russia.

    • @hunormagyar1843
      @hunormagyar1843 Місяць тому

      ​​@@luisnunes3863For real. Germans were pacted with Soviets at some point, if they coulda gotten the Japs to focus solely on America...
      Or if they somehow all allied the US against the Soviets. But to fight both, and at the same time... That was just retarded.

    • @CrusaderSports250
      @CrusaderSports250 Місяць тому +1

      ​@@luisnunes3863it would be interesting to speculate on a German/Japanese attack solely on Russia, leaving the rest of the world out, would the western allies actually have helped? or just stood and watched, and without western support could the Russians have held out long enough to have blunted the axis attacks, I don't know enough of the detail myself to make a realistic stab at it but would like to see if it could have been viable, any takers?😊.

    • @IRNHYD
      @IRNHYD Місяць тому +2

      That was the original goal of Germany and Japan and the two nations agreed upon a preliminary plan to do just that. They figured their respective armies would push steadily inward actoss Russia/Asia and link up somewhere in India or the Middle East.
      It was a good plan which, if carried out would have defeated the Soviet Union in relatively short order. It also made sense, since Japan’s Kwantung Army had been tied up fighting the Soviets in Manchuria for years at that point.
      The fly in the ointment… and the cause of the Axis ultimate defeat… was Hitler’s surprise announcement of the Tripartite Pact between Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler. Designed purely as a ruse to set Stalin at ease before Operation Barbarossa could commence, Japan was never made privy to the knowledge that such a pact was in the works, nor did Germany bother to clue their Japanese allies in to the fact that the whole pact was merely a ruse to keep Stalin oblivious to the upcoming Teutonic invasion.
      When Japan learned of the announcement of the pact, they were stunned… and justifiably took the knowledge as a slap in the face. So they quietly sued for peace with Stalin, pulled their army from Manchuria and turned their attention to the US.
      The only reason that Stalin was able to finally stem the initial German invasion was because the Soviet forces that were held down in Manchuria (including Zhukov) were no longer required there and were hastily moved west to face the Germans.
      I believe that ultimately the Axis forces would have been defeated by the atomic bomb. But the few years leading to the gadgets testing would have been FAR more costly for the US, without Russia swallowing up 3/4 of German men, materials and resources.

    • @luisnunes3863
      @luisnunes3863 Місяць тому

      @@CrusaderSports250 Well, Germany would have to go through Poland to realistically get to Russia, so that means war with the Western Powers is automatic. And the financial connections are such that includes the USA unless UK and France win alone.
      Japan. Is bogged down in a never ending war in China before it enters a World War. You can't make this s💩💩t. It's quite possible the Japanese could have turned their army around and beaten the forces defending the Soviet Far East, though not very likely. Then they are stuck occupying it, saying goodbye to Northern China, which is the reason why the Kuantung Army pressed for war in the first place... Also, they're at one end of the Trans-Siberian Railway, which the Russians can't really make work reliably all year at this point. All other important parts of the Soviet Union other than Vladivostock are several time zones away. Impasse.
      Did I mention that the Germans never had the logistics to get to Moscow anyway? In fact, they culminated about 100 km away from where their logistics chief predicted.
      So, the Soviet union always survives WWII, plus or minus a few bits.
      So, the only realistic plan for the Axis to win the Great Oil War [aka WWII] is to make peace with the other pariah state, do everything they need to do to keep the Russian oil flowing so they can have a vaguely winnable fight against the powers that control the rest of the world's oil. For example, Germany can mechanize more divisions, Italy can fight her fine ships and Japan can run the industry, get iron that the US and UK can't block.
      War is logistics, logistics, logistics.

  • @herschelmayo2727
    @herschelmayo2727 Місяць тому +14

    Allied evaluation of captured aircraft detetmined that the fit and finish of Japanese planes was far better than German.

    • @codymoon7552
      @codymoon7552 Місяць тому

      This is because the Germans cannot build a good vehicle

    • @onenote6619
      @onenote6619 Місяць тому +3

      This aircraft? Or in general? Because it flew twice and crashed on the second flight.

    • @Schlipperschlopper
      @Schlipperschlopper Місяць тому

      because the german ones were slave labour products

    • @23GreyFox
      @23GreyFox Місяць тому

      Allied evaluations had many flaws and where often downright wrong.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      @@onenote6619 Compared to the Me262 (which had hundreds of crashes due to engine failures…)…

  • @sinisterisrandom8537
    @sinisterisrandom8537 Місяць тому +1

    Crazy to think that the Nakajima Kikka was built from Blueprints of German engines, pictures, and primarily eyewitness reports. From the submarine that did survive as the other one sank. After being destroyed by Catalina's.
    Besides that, because they did not have a physical version of the Me-262, this was also considered smaller than the original would have served in a Jet Bomber role, irl, unlike war Thunder which was never armed nor intended to be.
    That would have gone to the Ki-200. While in appearance are very similar to the Me-163, they were very different rocket crafts.

  • @neves5083
    @neves5083 Місяць тому +5

    recently ive seeing people saying that the 262 is not actually the first operational jet, could ya make an video explaining this?

    • @WALTERBROADDUS
      @WALTERBROADDUS Місяць тому +3

      They would be wrong.

    • @mathieudelmar6112
      @mathieudelmar6112 Місяць тому +9

      Technically the Gloster Meteor was the first to be put into operational service. But they only ever intercepted V-1 flying bombs over England, and did some light ground attack at the very end of the war. They never engaged german aircraft in the air, and were actually prohibited from flying over German territory for most of the war due to fears of the plane falling into enemy hands.
      The 262 was the first jet to fight other aircraft in the air so it often gets the title for being the first jet fighter.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      @@mathieudelmar6112The V-1 is a jet aircraft…

    • @mathieudelmar6112
      @mathieudelmar6112 Місяць тому +2

      @allangibson8494 The V1 isn't a fighter aircraft though, which is the whole point of the discussion. There's a big difference between shooting down a manned fighter aircraft, and a flying bomb.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      @@mathieudelmar6112 Shooting down a flying bomb is actually harder and more dangerous.
      Fighters are four times the size, slower and don’t contain a ton of explosives.
      Me262’s were largely ineffective against piston engined fighters too and like the Meteor, stayed on their side of the front line.

  • @LugborG
    @LugborG Місяць тому +1

    It's a shame the Kikka didn't get farther in its development. If it had been more well known, there's a very real possibility that we'd have a Kikkachu flying around at air shows today.

  • @donaldrobertson8463
    @donaldrobertson8463 Місяць тому

    The closing commentary is the highlight of the show

  • @Geoff31818
    @Geoff31818 Місяць тому +20

    Just to clarify its almost certain the gloster meteor was first into operational service and it almost certainly achieved the first kills (the ME262 first kill couldn’t have happened as no mosquitos were lost that day or any aircraft in that area)
    Also the ME262 was great in a straight line but crap are turning, landing, taking off and pretty much anything rlse

    • @sergeychmelev5270
      @sergeychmelev5270 Місяць тому +5

      “Almost certain” has nothing to do with the history. The fact is - Me-262 officially went into service on April 17th while Meteor did so on July 17th. What’s more important is that the Meteor’s war “service” was a joke - merely practicing on essentially training targets called V1 in friendly skies while Me-262s were fighting the real battles. I can see why Meteor F.1 was kept away from the real service - the poor thing was slower than most of the contemporary piston fighters. But there’s no good excuse for F.3 when it finally went into service in 1945. The “it might fall into the German hands” is just lame since by then almost lost ability to produce what they’ve had, let alone copy some latest tech. The more real explanation is that F.3 still sucked in the first months of its service, and then the war ended.

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 Місяць тому +1

      @sergeychmelev5270
      The 262 was mostly getting shot down by slower P-51s, P-47s, and Tempests. And having its engines changed every 50 hours and sitting on the ground for lack of fuel, parts, and pilots.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +2

      @@sergeychmelev5270The first confirmed Me262 kill occurred on August 8,1944.
      The first flew with Testing Command (Erprobungskommando) 262 on 19 April, 1944. (Not an actual operational squadron).
      The Me262 didn’t actually enter squadron service (as opposed to test flights) until November 1944 with KG51.
      The Meteor on the other hand entered squadron service with 616 Squadron on 12 July 1944 with its first operational sortie on 27 July 1944.

    • @Geoff31818
      @Geoff31818 Місяць тому +1

      @@sergeychmelev5270 no the Me262 was delivered to 2 Luftwaffe squadrons In April 44 the first claimed kills where in august (but no allied aircraft recorded as lost to corroborate those kills. It was only in October 1944 that ME262 claims start matching the allied losses.
      Also the meteor was pushed into service a bit quicker than was liked to as it was one of the few allied aircraft with guns that could catch a V1 in level flight and that’s what it was used against. Once that threat receded the RAF slowed its introduction as yes some issues were found with it. Also they didn’t want the Germans to capture one or a wreck and either takes its technical details and copy or give them away to Japan.
      These are provable facts that are on record.

    • @Geoff31818
      @Geoff31818 Місяць тому

      @@calvinnickel9995engines on the 262 were changed every 10 hours in service shockingly

  • @androidemulator6952
    @androidemulator6952 Місяць тому +2

    I have one of Nakajima Aircraft Company products in my garage - great to fly, or in this case , drive... a Subaru Forester by Fuji Heavy Industries (what Nakajima eventually became today) .. :) LOL

    • @hektor6766
      @hektor6766 Місяць тому +1

      My Subaru Outback is nice, but I really liked my mitsubishi-too bad someone came left of center and totalled it.

  • @builder396
    @builder396 Місяць тому +1

    11:10 "Japanese aircraft were pretty small..."
    Im not saying youre wrong as a broad-strokes-comparison, but the Bf 109 is just tiny compared to ANYTHING on ANY side.

  • @mountainghost5044
    @mountainghost5044 Місяць тому

    Awesome research, thank you.

  • @AsbestosMuffins
    @AsbestosMuffins Місяць тому +3

    really weird how the germans saw the HE 178 and yawned when basically all jet fighters would independently return to its form

  • @SoloRenegade
    @SoloRenegade Місяць тому +8

    0:56 wrong, US was producing engines for the P-80 in WW2. Modified specifically for mass production and massively improved over the British version.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +2

      The British engines were on par with the best of the American ones.
      The P-59A beat the P-80 into production but its American engines let it down…

    • @stringpicker5468
      @stringpicker5468 Місяць тому +1

      Wrong the US were using Halford engines until they worked out how to make them themselves.

    • @wawa8408
      @wawa8408 Місяць тому

      Mig-15. My dad's plane. British engine. Rolls-Royce Nene.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +2

      @@stringpicker5468 And by “working out how to make them themselves”, the British sent an engineer over who pointed out they had left out an oil passage in the castings…

    • @Katy_Jones
      @Katy_Jones Місяць тому +1

      @@allangibson8494 Ssssh, don't use reality...

  • @lqr824
    @lqr824 Місяць тому +1

    15:00 as to the Kamikaze aspect: 1) what real record do we have that it was actually designed or intended for such use? Strange that practically all documentation would disappear EXCEPT for that. Point me to even Japanese documents if anyone has such sources. 2) What design features does it actually have that a Kamikaze would need? 3) You mention it was stupid to use jet engines for such a purpose but my understanding is that the jets were actually like 1/10 the man-hours and cost of the piston engines, but they might only operate 10 hours or something given poor materials and machining in wartime DE/JP. If those facts are correct, then arguably it'd be a GREAT engine for use-once missions, whether Kamikaze or one-way Amerikabomber.

  • @comchia4306
    @comchia4306 Місяць тому

    The 1992 MS-DOS game Aces of The Pacific had an expansion pack titled 1946 that let you fly the Kikka, or fight against it. It also has the F-80 Shooting Star in combat much earlier than real life. Super cool game, and how I found out about the Kikka.

  • @charlesmoss8119
    @charlesmoss8119 Місяць тому +3

    So where does the Meteor fit in the jet timeline?

    • @WALTERBROADDUS
      @WALTERBROADDUS Місяць тому +1

      Being developed simultaneously.

    • @99somerville
      @99somerville Місяць тому +1

      The Gloster Meteor had Almost exactly the same timeline as the ME262.

  • @Mr.McWatson
    @Mr.McWatson Місяць тому

    In terms of looks, the Kikka is actually pretty cool looking imo. I really like the tail section and vertical stabilizers the Japanese went with at the time. Kind of square looking but still "sporty".

  • @stejer211
    @stejer211 Місяць тому +1

    7:50 What plane is that?

  • @mikesweet2554
    @mikesweet2554 Місяць тому

    Any chance on doing a video about the Yokosuka R2Y2 or Mitsubishi C8M Shusui ?Hope so !

  • @Bob-b7x6v
    @Bob-b7x6v Місяць тому +1

    I've got the 1/48 Fine Molds kit! Great box art.

  • @NothMeeh
    @NothMeeh Місяць тому

    Honestly, I’m impressed that they even tried this

  • @joeyjoejoejrshabadu
    @joeyjoejoejrshabadu Місяць тому

    This man will make a video about every paper plane related to the 262 except for the 262 itself

  • @Lurch-Bot
    @Lurch-Bot Місяць тому

    The Ki-61 was loosely inspired by the BF-109 and used the same engine.
    Another reason to make the Kikka smaller was the fact it had to engage bombers flying a couple of miles higher than the ones the Germans were engaging in the ETO.

  • @Idahoguy10157
    @Idahoguy10157 Місяць тому +5

    Herman Goering wasn’t know for good decisions in WW2

    • @hektor6766
      @hektor6766 Місяць тому +1

      He rode on his WWI rep.

  • @mysss29
    @mysss29 Місяць тому

    At least one person has mentioned this in passing, but a single jet fighter operated by a single pilot is much less resource-intensive than anything it might be used to target in a kamikaze attack. In addition, the methods kamikaze attacks seem to have used to reach their targets, namely avoiding and/or spoofing Allied IFF signals, would not allow them to return home anyway. Late-war Allied anti-aircraft fire and combat air patrols were simply too effective. That is why kamikaze raids developed into a full-fledged tactic the way they did. Nothing about the greater resource-intensivity of a Kikka detracts from the goal of a kamikaze mission, because even a smaller ship like an Allied destroyer (often the target of a kamikaze pilot) would have taken far greater resources to build and crew than the jet and its pilot. Much like later missiles, the effectiveness of a kamikaze attack was great enough that it was worth the vast amount of resources it took to enact, especially with such a small chance a conventional delivery system, including its pilot(s) and crew, would survive to fight again.

  • @michaelhorning6014
    @michaelhorning6014 9 днів тому

    I loved Oscar Wilde's "The Importance of Being Honest".

  • @rastarn
    @rastarn Місяць тому

    Cool as always! Love your work!
    Btw, the term is, "began in earnest", not, "began in honest".

  • @patrickrameau
    @patrickrameau Місяць тому

    11:55 - The Tsu-11 can't really be called a jet engine except in the most generic sense. Today, we would call that a Ducted Fan... a propeller inside a tube, powered by a small piston engine rather than a turbine. The Tsu-11 was installed on the MXY7 Ohka-22 "Cherry Blossom" kamikaze plane, intended to replace its original solid rocket motors with something an engine offering greater range.

  • @gort8203
    @gort8203 Місяць тому +3

    There is no meaningful difference in "leaping" to a jet engine from an inline piston engine or a radial piston engine. A turbojet engine had more in common with a turbosupercharger than a piston engine.

  • @zJoriz
    @zJoriz 11 днів тому

    OK, this is very petty but I can't unsee it. In the painting @13:27, the landing rear is reflected in the right engine pod, but inside out.
    Ai art?

  • @MilitarySummaryChannel2024
    @MilitarySummaryChannel2024 Місяць тому +4

    *Do not let this history be forgotten or rewritten. Thank you.*

  • @jeffwarshaw6838
    @jeffwarshaw6838 Місяць тому

    The Kikka was a last ditch measure, and it wasn’t really possible for Japan to produce large numbers of them. But it was still a good effort. The Japanese Army Air Force was also working on a smaller, fully swept wing version to be called the Karyu (Fire Dragon), but it never got past the drawing board.

  • @MisterOcclusion
    @MisterOcclusion Місяць тому +4

    5:01. His friends called him Cocaine Klaus 😂

    • @Siddich
      @Siddich Місяць тому

      Kokain Klaus, ja

  • @Zbigniew_Nowak
    @Zbigniew_Nowak Місяць тому

    It appears that this first German jet from 1939 had a rather complex and interesting retractable landing gear. A bit strange for a prototype that is essentially designed to "just fly".

  • @jameswebb4593
    @jameswebb4593 Місяць тому +2

    In the cold light of day , what did the Me 262 accomplish ? NOTHING . If it had been introduced by the spring of 1943 , then it may have been a game changer. This is pure supposition , but with an air superiority fighter against you , the Americans may well of abandoned their daylight bombing offensive. If that had happened Germany could have won the war . My reasoning , the Luftwaffe fighter arm was destroyed in 1944 by USAAF fighter numbers . Allied bombing was devastating but not war winning , control of the air was vital.
    Air power proved itself on DDay and afterwards . The Germans could do nothing to stop it , even with their Jets.
    Even taking into account the limited number of 262's available , and also the huge number of allied aircraft to shoot down . The first combats were against RAF unarmed PR Mosquito's . The first evaded the attacks but the second on 8/8/44 killed the crew of 540 sq over Munich. 262 pilots claimed 582 allied aircraft , losing 180 of their number in combat. Probably justified in adding another 50 in losses through accidents.
    A lot of hype , which go's with most German fighters . Always perceived to be better then they actually were.

  • @robertbowers9856
    @robertbowers9856 Місяць тому

    I say again, I love your sarcastic narration!

  • @77gravity
    @77gravity Місяць тому

    Ministry: We need a jet-fighter.
    Designer: Yes, we can build a jet-fighter
    Ministry: We also want it multi-role. Fighter-bomber.
    Designer: Tricky, but maybe . . .
    Ministry: and also scout-transport-amphibious, carrier operations, do 700mph at sea level and 40,000 feet, 3000 mile range, carry 3 tons of bombs, with multiple turrets with combined 12.7mm machine guns, 30mm cannon, and maybe some rocket-tubes. Oh, and torpedoes.
    Designer: ummm....

    • @CrusaderSports250
      @CrusaderSports250 Місяць тому

      Sounds like the French ministry specification, Rexs Hanger has done two great French interwar design posts, well worth watching.

  • @LarsAgerbk
    @LarsAgerbk Місяць тому

    13:42 does anybody know what those two tubes under the fuselage are?

  • @BernardSchaefer
    @BernardSchaefer Місяць тому

    For prestege purposes! It did put Japan on the map as a WWII Jet country.

  • @AniMageNeBy
    @AniMageNeBy Місяць тому

    Interesting. Didn't know about this.

  • @donviglone7707
    @donviglone7707 Місяць тому +6

    Everybody gangsta until they realise that their jet plane is slower than the Ki 87 (which I do wish to see in a video of yours).

  • @billballbuster7186
    @billballbuster7186 Місяць тому +10

    You forget that the Germans used published jet engine data from the British engineer AA Griffiths who built the first axial flow turbojet engine in 1923. The difference was the Germans got the funding in 1937 the British not until 1940. But the British ended up going with the centrifugal-flow turbojet which was safer and offered much more power. These engines were used in British Meteor, Vampire and Venon, US P-80, Grumman Panther and Cougar, Soviet MiG-15 and 17 etc.

    • @WALTERBROADDUS
      @WALTERBROADDUS Місяць тому +1

      Griffith is given no such credit.

    • @alfonsfalkhayn8950
      @alfonsfalkhayn8950 Місяць тому +1

      Bullshit, I say....!!

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Місяць тому +2

      @@WALTERBROADDUS Actually Hans Von Ohaine who designed the Jumo 004, thanked Griffith for his papers on axial-flow engines.

    • @WALTERBROADDUS
      @WALTERBROADDUS Місяць тому

      @@billballbuster7186 Very different than your original claim.

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Місяць тому +1

      @@WALTERBROADDUS No, Griffiths was building experimental axial flow jet engines from 1923, he wrote his papers in 1928. Which von Ohaine used.
      Griffith sold his final jjet engine to Vickers, who built is as the Metrovick F2 in 1940

  • @Rom3_29
    @Rom3_29 Місяць тому +2

    2:26 - Behind Herman that smugly smiling fellow might be Doug Demuro’s distant relative.

  • @animalian01
    @animalian01 Місяць тому

    If they had managed to get it into production,it would have been developed, and it would have got a more powerful engine that would have increased its top speed.

  • @Pootycat8359
    @Pootycat8359 Місяць тому +1

    6:16 Work began ".....In HONEST"? Hee, hee, hee! 😝

  • @lqr824
    @lqr824 Місяць тому +1

    21:50 Jets have a huge, huge, HUGE advantage in speed while climbing, and can totally out-run (or, catch up to) any prop plane. The UA-cam channel Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles spends like two hours beating that horse to death, chopping into hamburger and burning it to ashes. They may not have the fastest climb RATE in terms of feet per second (the piston Bearcat's climb rate was unbeaten by jets for 10-20 years) but it's extreme. You continue to talk about armament: these would have been used against B-29s so wouldn't have had machine guns, I'm pretty sure, only 20mm. Also, that 20mm would have been central so they'd have been easy to aim.

  • @taiyoarata6763
    @taiyoarata6763 Місяць тому +1

    Nakajima had become " SUBARU " after WAR Ⅱ YOU KNOW

  • @melburns4378
    @melburns4378 Місяць тому +1

    You scared me at 5:00 👀

  • @jimdavison4077
    @jimdavison4077 Місяць тому

    Why is it people make claims without even understanding what they mean? The definition of an operational aircraft means a type delivered to an operational squadron in full numbers with spare parts for regular operation and servicing plus fully trained technicians. The Me 262 which flew in combat in July fit none of those definitions. First of all they were delivered to Erprobungskommando 262 in April 44 which was a test unit. Aircraft arrived in small numbers given the fact the Jumo 004B would never enter series production until August 44. When the commander of Erprobungskommando 262 was killed in action Walter Nowotny was assigned to replace him changing the unit name to Kommando Nowotny which remained a test and trials unit. It would be until December 1944 before the 262 reached an operational unit fitting the definition of operational. That said RAF 616 squadron was equipped with Meteor F1 in July 44 tasked with shooting down V1 rockets. This being a operational unit with a full compliment of aircraft and training along with tools and spares makes the Meteor the first operational jet aircraft in the world and not the 262. Now the 262 can claim to be the first jet fighter to engage in combat but it was not the first operational jet aircraft. Since Jg 07 only became operational in December as I stated earlier. Also the delay wasn't Messerschmitt's fault as they had the airframe ready but it was the waiting for BMW to produce a reliable jet engine which they failed to deliver then the job was given to Jumo. Jumo produced the 004A engine which was suitable but it used to much restricted material so they had to go back to the drawing board and make a turbojet engine with very little of the common known metals that could handle high temperatures used in the 004B engine. The fat that it worked at all is a great credit to the Jumo team, though it would not run long at full throttle it ironically mirrored the high performance piston aircraft of the day which could only run emergency boost for a short time before they could cause serious damage to their engines. So combat with either engine type was waged with strategic use of full power deciding who went home not just by the use of the gun sights. Given the lack of restricted metals and that Jumo 004 engines were often built with slave labour they were known for being seriously unreliable. Post war one series of test flights by the USAF used no less than eight jumo engines to reach six hours of test flight. This unreliability made the Me 262 and Jumo 004B in no interest post war after testing determined how fragile they were. The only notable post war activity was in Czechoslovakia where they inherited a complete German factory with drawings, jigs and so on. They would produce somewhere shy of 15 aircraft in the hopes of producing them for export yet no sales would come. By 1950 half the fleet we destroyed in accidents or unserviceable. The type was quickly retired and sent for scrap with the other 262's junked post war. of the over 500 claimed kills by Luftwaffe pilots more than half were shown to be false when checked against Allied loss records. In the end it had a 1.5 to 1 kill ratio which was pretty poor compared to the BF 109 or FW 190. The large problem Germany had in the last six month to year of the war was a lack of aviation fuel for their piston fighters which were more capable than the 262. The Jumo 004b engine ran of any kind of fuel Germany had. The largest source of fuel was a synthetic coal derived fuel somewhat like Kerosene called J2. It was available in some amount as Germany still had access to coal reserves while all other types of fuel were drying up. That's why Germany turned to an unreliable engine in a aircraft plagued with problems.

  • @JoeOvercoat
    @JoeOvercoat Місяць тому

    8:22 That’s a boat to boat transfer. One does not see that often… 🤔

  • @larrybremer4930
    @larrybremer4930 Місяць тому

    In the early 1940s the German engines were far more advanced axial flow type vs the allies centrifugal compressors. The Jumo and BMW get engines only suffered from the lack of correct materials to make them last longer than a few sorties, or only one sortie if the thrust lever was not handled carefully. All of the engines of the period were using flame can combustion chambers for simplicity as well but the German research on annular combustion chambers truly gave GE, PW and RR a great start on much better engines in the postwar era.
    It is also incorrect to say it's stupid to put a jet engine on a kamikaze (except to say the entire program was stupid) but according to postwar records the Jumo-004 was significantly faster and cheaper to make, and required less skilled labor than their high performance piston engine counterparts so a Kika was possibly more cost effective than building kates, zeros, or the like for the same purpose.

  • @SkyWriter25
    @SkyWriter25 Місяць тому

    If you factor in the point that the engines would probably be worn out by the time the Kikka arrived at it's intended target then maybe using it as a kamikaze isn't as crazy as it first sounds as it would not be able to make it home anyway. 🤔

  • @mattosullivan9687
    @mattosullivan9687 Місяць тому +1

    The 262 looks like a shark, way cool

  • @maxpayne2574
    @maxpayne2574 Місяць тому

    The U.K. and U.S. also had jets. They weren't desperate enough to put the unperfected jets in combat.

    • @YellowEvoV110
      @YellowEvoV110 Місяць тому

      Uk actually did few months afterwards but those early meteors were worse than the spitfire.

  • @vcv6560
    @vcv6560 Місяць тому +1

    Kikka, a ship too late to save a drowning witch. Ironic that while it was waiting to get off the ground Richard Bong is killed in an early jet Lockheed P-80 in the United States

  • @thurin84
    @thurin84 Місяць тому

    "mamasan, i want an me 262!"
    mamasan; "we have me 262 at home."
    me 262 at home; kikka.....

  • @hoodoo2001
    @hoodoo2001 Місяць тому

    "When you are desperate you do stupid things." Germany and Japan's WWII epitaph.

  • @HunterZ32
    @HunterZ32 Місяць тому

    Why is bro looking at me like that 👀😂

  • @300guy
    @300guy Місяць тому +25

    It is pretty amazing the Japanese were able to build a version of the BMW 003 Just from images and basic measurements from a manual. Especially with the pressure they were under the last 2 years of the war.
    The 003 also ended up being the basis for the French SNECMA Atar and some Soviet post war axial flow engines after the RD10 and 20.

    • @michaljanecek82
      @michaljanecek82 Місяць тому +7

      absolute bullshit.. the AM-5/RD-09 (Mig-19) weren't based on any german engine... as so as R11 engine of early Mig-21... better to study more and write shit less...

    • @objectriddimy61
      @objectriddimy61 Місяць тому

      please share whatever crack you are smoking, neither rd-9 or r11 were developed from 003 lmao

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Місяць тому +5

      The axial-flow turbojets were very poor until the designs matured in the mid-1950s. Around 70% of the post-WW2 jet fighters were powered by British centrifugal-flow designs which were safer, more reliable and offered greater power.

    • @jimroberts3009
      @jimroberts3009 Місяць тому +2

      @300guy. No the AM5 was not based on any pre-existing German or British designs. It was an early Soviet turbojet engine.

    • @jimroberts3009
      @jimroberts3009 Місяць тому +1

      @300guy The SNECMA Atar was actually based on the BMW 018 not the 003. Similar but different. Your comment is factually very incorrect, try using Google more.

  • @shaunclemtiger
    @shaunclemtiger Місяць тому

    The only reason the Germans had the 1st jet engine because the engines they were building were not really ready for actually use. The British were far ahead in jet development since they created it. The US and the British combine came up with an actually reliable jet engine

  • @stephenoliver1379
    @stephenoliver1379 Місяць тому

    Until the Soviet Union entered the war in the Far East, Japanese high commend intended to continue the war to negotiate a conditional surrender allowing Japan to keep the Emperor. The Soviet Union entering the war disrupted the IJA's defense plans and persuaded the United States to offer a conditional surrender - Japan got to keep the Emperor.