Messerschmitt Me 163 Pt.2 Plus Me 263 and More!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- Me 163, 263, and the B2 Bomber's dirty secret
I hope you folks like this video. There just isn't a lot of really solid information on the 163, which means this video is a bit different from others on this channel. I have to interject my own opinions to fill in blanks a bit more than I would like.
Please consider supporting this channel on Patreon: / gregsairplanesandautom...
On the subject of Rocket engines, I didn't say they are not effected by altitude, I said power doesn't decrease with altitude. I'm basing that on the following statement on the Wikipedia Rocket page: "At full throttle, the net thrust of a rocket motor improves slightly with increasing altitude, because as atmospheric pressure decreases with altitude, the pressure thrust term increases."
Regarding the B2, those comments seem to have hurt some people's feelings. First, I said the the B2 does NOT have a Lavatory. That IS correct. If anyone disagrees, I invite you to post a link showing that it does have Lavatory. I did not say there is no toilet. There is a non flushing type IN the cockpit behind the pilot's seat.
So, if they have a toilet, why use an adult diaper? It's because the "toilet" is really a small stainless steel bowl, like a tiny camping toilet and does not have the capacity for long trips. To make up for that pilots take "piddle packs" or alternatively use adult diapers. Source: www.airspacema...
The same pilot told me about the medication. that's supported here by a quote from Doctor Capt. Caleb JamesHere is the quote: "For especially long missions, James said doctors will prescribe medication “in the event that those members need that little bit of extra push to help them stay focused on the mission.”
Source for that quote: www.defensenew...
So, I have a source for everything I said about the B2, in addition to the B2 pilot I talked to.
Hanna Reitsch. Since this isn't a political channel, I am not all that interested in using up video time discussing her political beliefs. I am focused on her aviation exploits. There is conflicting information about her crash. Some say it was a 163A, some a B. In either case, she never flew a B in powered flight.
The Official auto and Air Fan Store is Here!
gregs-airplane...
Hanna Reitsch had her accident in an Me 163b, not in an "a". She had used her political power to try and finagle her way into the flight test program of the Me 163, and had been allowed to fly the Me 163b as a glider IIRC 4 times. She continued to try to assert her will to get into the real experimental flight test issues of the aircraft, so Späte came up with the idea to let her be a production type test pilot for new production run aircraft to confirm they handled like they were supposed to. This would get her out of the experimental test pilot's hair because they viewed her as being non-current (spending too much time away doing other things) and meddling in their jobs. The Kroneis factory had a contract for the first 70 production run Me 163b's, and Kroneis arranged for her to be his factory pilot. The accident happened on her very first factory acceptance flight. Trust me, I know the story better than most anyone out there. My father was was her tow pilot that day, and also the only Me 163 test pilot present, and also the only other Me 163 pilot to have landed an Me 163 with the take-off dolly still attached (so he knew what her problems were). I don't want to "hunt & peck" a book at this point, but suffice it to say that she just royally botched up the approach to the airport. The accident was her fault because the aircraft could have been landed safely with the dolly still attached. After she recovered from her injuries, she then took the regular 5 flight transition course for new Me 163 pilots coming from other aircraft. Those 5 flights were in the Me 163a model with the last one IIRC being under power. It was then that she went back to Späte demanding to be allowed to fly the Me 163b under power. Späte refused on the grounds that he now had a lot of combat pilots to train and could not afford her a "joyride". It was at that point that she got mad and never came back. My father also pointed out that shortly after that episode, Späte was transferred back to the Eastern front. My father felt that it just made no sense to transfer the commander away just as everything he had worked for was starting to come together. My father's gut feeling was that Hanna had exercised her power and vindictiveness. On another note, you rely entirely too much on Mano Ziegler's book. He sensationalized a lot in order to sell books, and didn't really have the intimate involvement to tell the whole story. He was sort of a peripheral player. There are a number of other books out there which are better from a historical perspective.
MROD2b whatsapp an amazon story! Have you or your father written his story? I'd buy it.
Quite an interesting point of view, to be certain. There's so much "History" out there, in all aspects, that either over-glorify or under-glorify historical figures, and it's often difficult to determine what is factually accurate and what isn't (for instance, Paul Revere's _Midnight Ride,_ and so forth). I tend to find your perspective believable.
I can believe this from what I've read of her personality. Pretty sure she had pull with Hitler being buddy buddy. It's amazing what first hand information straight from the source that pops up in UA-cam comments on history videos, even more fun when it's you yourself doing it... it's like Bill Gates said... business at the speed of thought. Well, almost, delayed only by the few hours, days, or years until the right person stumbles across the video or the comment in a search or skim... birds of a feather, flock together.
choppergirl.air-war.org
@@moriahmolotovschroeder-hug5632 My father was never a publicity hound or a glory seeker. He was a professional test pilot who would never lay claim to anything unless he had ironclad proof, and above all just wanted history to be recorded exactly as it happened without any spin attached. He never had the desire to write a book, and in the end he said that a lot of his story had already been written down in various forms, just not all collated in one place. He is in all the Me 163 books as he and Dittmar were the two primary experimental test pilots on the aircraft. Perhaps the most accurate involving him is Jeff Ethell's book Komet The Messerschmitt 163. His involvement in the 10 May 1940 glider assault on the Maginot Line and his in involvement with the Horten flying wings (mostly post war) is found in other places. Regarding the Hanna Reitsch story, he was always afraid of her political pull
even long after the war. She had her legion of supporters, so he never publicly came out with the story I shared here in fear of retribution. He was the only qualified observer there. He
saw everything, and accompanied her in the car to the clinic
and hospital afterwards. Everyone just took her word for what happened, and no one asked my father what he saw or thought. Every other published account was second hand
heresay. Towards the end, I was his firewall in helping him filter out who among all the folks clamoring for contact with him, that he would actually respond to. I finally convinced him to tell me the whole Hanna Reitsch accident story because I knew that people would be asking me about it long after he
was gone. So, he did in excruciating detail, but it is way too long to type here. His end vindication was that she and her accident set the program back by 6 months during which time he had to redo all the flight tests that could have had
something to do with her accident. In the end, there were
absolutely NO changes made to the aircraft or it's handling.
Most everyone who flew it (including Hanna) raved about the
great handling qualities, so that confirmed to him that she was just making excuses to try and cover up her own errors. To
him as a professional test pilot, if you screwed up, you had to
admit it, so to him, she had committed a cardinal sin....and it almost got the whole program canceled.
@@robertgantry2118 Thank you. It is the truth, which is sometimes hard to come by. Please my other answer in this thread.
I believe the coal in the coal fired turbines was processed coal in the form of precision briquettes. They were contained in a matrix, heated to red heat and spun at high speed in a compressed airflow. It appears feasible, although I'm not sure if the turbine was ever manufactured. Coal has a lot of potential in various forms and should not be lightly dismissed. It's still a valuable resource, loathed of course by the carbon zero narrative.
your right about the F-106, it was an aerodynamic masterpiece, it was the second fastest single engine interceptor made just a tad slower than the Mig-23 which had about 4,000 lbs more thrust.
I just got around to watching this ( May 2024 ). One correction: The
B-2 Spirit in fact has an onboard chemical toilet, ( vented ) a small cot
to allow one crewman to lay down and rest, and an onboard ..... wait
for it..... MICROWAVE OVEN ! Crew comforts are not totally ignored.
It must be noted: These were ' aftermarket ' add-ons, implemented
after the aircraft came into service.
Lot's of airplanes have add-ons. That doesn't excuse the omission in the first place. Furthermore it still doesn't have a lav.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles The B-2 Spirit is a
two seat bomber. Like the DeHavilland DH-4 Liberty
Bomber, The Douglas SBD Dauntless, The Grumman
A-6 Intruder, or the McDonnel Douglas F-15 E Strike
Eagle. Did ANY of these other aircraft have an onboard
toilet, a bunk bed, a microwave, or a ' lav ' ?
The B-70 and the F-111 both had Ejection Compartments-
which were a failure. The B-1A had the same design, but
was replaced in the B-1B with four Ejection Seats.
Look, if you want to fly in an aircraft with an onboard
bathroom, take an Airbus. If you want to penetrate
hundreds of miles into enemy territory and deliver a
nuclear strike package, and get out alive, you will have
to make a few sacrifices in terms of comfort to gain
some performance and survivability.
If I'm flying for 20 hours, I want a lav.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles If you are trying to evade
three SAMs at once, all you need is a Diaper !
Greg, I haven’t been able to find your 737 MAX and Boeing Automated Flight System video. Did you try to reupload it? Did you put it on another available site?
Thanks for your great videos. I love this content. I loved reading about these advanced German aircraft when I was in Jr High and High School, a looong time ago.
I unlisted it because youtube demonetized it.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles That seems a bit disturbing... wonder if there was an explanation and/or if you understand the reasoning... I'm not familiar with YT rationales. Hmm... maybe my naivete and the subject is not discussable.
Another Great Video. At 19:48 the data : Sinking speed-(landing)....115 ft/sec, does that mean on short final a gliding rate of descent of 6900 feet/minute? How fast would we be going at this sink rate? Thank you, Jon
I'm not sure what that means, but it can't be the sink rate at touch down. That would be a full on crash which would obliterate the airplane. It's probably the decent rate on the way back to base, but I'm not really sure.
I also want to say, good observation. You clearly really watched the video. It makes me happy that people have such interest in this stuff.
Love it - thx
It’s really great to see your in depth reviews with so much technical background rather than all the - could have should have click bait speculations by some UA-camrs !!
I hope you get to make one about the HO 229 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229 as well, seems to have been a promising design....
B-2 High Spirit, the Meth Bomber.
Just wanted to add that the MK in MK 108 isn't Mk (or mark). It is M.K. as in Maschinenkanone. Really awesome videos. I really enjoy the channel.
Yeah was about to say...
Max, you are correct sir. Great point!
And that weapon-system was called Jagdfaust SC500. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdfaust Unfinished parts(frames) found and identified after war in Central Bohemia(Czechoslovakia). On your picture was FW190 probably with SG116 ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/sonder-geraet-116.44901/ Both were 5cm/2inch
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles I'm a flight simmer and I used to refer to them as Mk. 108s as well. You definitely can't deny that Mark One Oh Eight rolls off the tongue really nicely. :)
@@M4xPower Yeah, but it's German, so it must be complicated. :-D
Interesting, I heard a lot about the 163 from my older brother who a tail gunner in a B17. He saw both the 163 and the 262, not mention the Messerschmidt and the Focke Wolf. He died about 15 years ago and I wish he was still so he could comment on the bombers point of view.
So interesting. The stories he could tell....
R.I.P.
My late uncle, a B-17 copilot with 27 missions over Europe, told me that one of his gunners shot down a 163 making a vertical pass by aiming his fifty caliber machine gun far ahead of the 163's flight path and simply holding down the trigger until the 163 flew through his barrage fire.
Rockwell International used two F-106 Delta Darts as chase aircraft during the B-1b flight test program. I worked there, and watched them fly on numerous occasions at Sierra Highway and Avenue N in Palmdale CA. It was certainly cool to see those old F-106's flying out of US Air Force Plant 42 during the early days of the B-1b program.
The B-2, the entire outer wing, was twisted something like 7 degrees leading edge down. And during the modification program for the B-2, new inboard elevons were fitted that had the trailing edge twisted upwards, i.e. reflex airfoils. Reflex airfoils are another means of stabilizing a tailless aircraft, mainly for aircraft with minimum sweepback.
I used to fly a lot of radio control aircraft in my younger days. And have built many tailless aircraft, either with washout or reflex airfoils. The reflex airfoil changes the way the center of pressure and the center of gravity interact. Radio control aircraft I built with reflex airfoils would have this crazy tendency to bob the nose up-and-down when speed over a certain range was there. It was like the cp was arguing with the cg over who was right.
No wonder this thing was so slow, with that tiny propeller they put on it!!!
but its soooo aerodymanic....
LMAO!
Hahaha...
They first used rubber-band power, but a critical shortage in the strategic Latex stockpile left Goering no choice but to have a seven-squirrel* treadmill spin the prop. *With amphetamines.
This channel is a hidden gem.
I've been learning more about aviation aerodynamics with this channel than with a large number of other channels combined.
Thank you ever so much.
This channels comment section is a hidden gem, minus my comments :D
I'm surprised that Greg's videos don't get more views, although, knowing how people are, I shouldn't be surprised at all. Learning is just too much work for most people, I think, and they'd rather be entertained at all times rather than learn anything of value in their spare time.
Indeed...
If they only knew how entertaining learning things of value can be :)
@@robertgantry2118 Sad isnt it, short attention span of most on youtube means videos longer than 15min rarely do well, youtube also are not fond of videos with certain symbols and subject matter, even if they are just reporting on history which absolutly should never be censored. Without a doubt the best millitary aircraft related content on yt and its criminal he doesnt have the 1m+ subs he deserves, hopefully one day he explodes. Thanks Greg if you happen to read this.
Guess I won't be sleeping for a while.
Just hit that prop pitch air brake 👌
Adam, your youtube channel is great!
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Likewise, thanks for the praise!
38:34 *quietly draws a line on the "Become a B2 pilot" entry on the to-do list
Back in the eighties I worked at an aerospace company. Once I attended a professional dinner where I sat next to an engineer from Naval Air Station Oceana. He commented that although they tested Sidewinder air to air missiles without warheads, they still had a tendency to hit and destroy the target drones. As drones were expensive, they would routinely crank in an offset to the Sidewinder guidance system to ensure it would not hit the drone. He went on to say that this was not necessary with the Falcon missile, as it never hit the drone. The Falcon was refereed to as "the friendly missile".
Yet the Swiss spent a fortune when buying the french Mirage III in the sixties as they wanted the best of the best and so they wanted the U.S. Falcon missile system fitted to their Mirage III. The radar and electronics (from Hughes I think) was called "Taran" presumably to guide the Falcon. In almost 35 years of service you can find actually only few early pictures of Swiss Mirage III mounted with Falcon on the center point of the fuselage. The whole acquisition program went to so much overcost it became a political scandal and the Swiss Parliement ordered a reduction in half of the initial order to recoup the budget over-inflation.
The late, Captain Eric "Winkle" Brown, RN, had flown this plane after capture. He holds two records that will never be beaten: he flew the most types of aircraft, and he has the most carrier landings and takeoffs. He also holds many firsts: first to land twin engine plane on carrier - the Mosquito, and first to land jet on carrier.
Yes, 'Winkle' Brown was absolutely hopping-mad that he was prevented from flying a 163.
Officially, for safety reasons...
@@VincentComet-l8e The actual powered flight happened later at Humul airfield with a selected German ground crew assisting. (Eric Brown speaks fluent German) During this flight he climbed at a 45degree angle at a speed of 450mph, reaching 32,000feet in 2.75 minutes. ua-cam.com/video/8PN9AP710e0/v-deo.html
Eric Brown's book " Wing's on my sleeve " is an excellent read.
Brown also flew the de Havilland DH-108 which was a Vampire with the tail removed and the wings replaced with ones based on the Me-163. Built at a time when the Brits thought tailless aircraft might be the key to supersonic flight, it had all the trans-sonic issues of the Me-163 together with a greater propensity to spin and a nasty divergent longitudinal oscillation if one pulled g's at a high mach. They built 3 and all 3 crashed, killing 3 experienced test pilots. It's still considered the first British aircraft to go supersonic, although today most consider that it was not the first British aircraft to go supersonic in controlled flight.
Gort interceptor: F-102 and F-106, bomber B-58,
all influenced by Lippisch.
Interesting info about the changing CG in a Mustang. That explains a LOT about it's reputation during takeoffs. I'm not a full-scale pilot, I've flown a lot of R/C aircraft...many of which have been homebrew 'TLAR' (That Looks About Right) designs. Yeah, a CG that's too far aft can rapidly become a nightmare. Sure, a CG that's too far forward can get bad, but too far aft gets catastrophic a lot faster.
C-Stoff fill point: About a foot from the T-Stoff fill point if the ground crew is attentive, about a mile if they’re not. Great video, very informative in particular about the challenges of operating this thing and turning it around. Which seems rather a common theme for rocket planes that use hypergolic fuels. Thanks again.
The design criterion for the B-21 bomber (replacement for the B-2): Gentlemen, we need you to design a stealthy airframe around............ this toilet...........
The "Cornfield Bomber" is the nickname given to a Convair F-106 Delta Dart, operated by the 71st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron of the United States Air Force. In 1970, during a training exercise, it made an unpiloted landing in a farmer's field in Montana, suffering only minor damage, after the pilot had ejected from the aircraft. The aircraft, recovered and repaired, was returned to service, and is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force.
I forgot all about that Coal Powered Interceptor until you reminded me. Man the solutions to the desperate fuel shortage.
Another informative video as always Greg, all that explanation about Aircraft CG and Lift and was very nicely explained as well. I would wager you would do well as a teacher on topics like these, since videos are testament to that since they are so well explained. Demanding watcher attention but not wallowing in its own terminology and jargon.
I've heard North Korea has coal powered submarines. lol
Yeah the idea of a coal powered fighter is a new one on me !!
what else did they consider ? ... wood burners ? .. bottled farts ? ...
The Germans certainly cornered the market of crazy ideas !! :D
Coal powered?!
It would've made sense on logistics trucks... maybe even on tanks. But on fighters/interceptors? No.
Haha, ah but did they fly ? :D :D :D
even so, how cool/crazy is that !! how many miles to a log I wonder ? :)
If I remember rightly the Russians had some vehicles that would run on anything that could be burnt .. still though a coal powered fighter is going to take some beating !! ... it's how the Victorians would have done it, eat your heart out Jules Verne !! :D :D :D
@Gort Yes but then the allies bombed the synthetic oil refineries. At that point it was only coal.
35:43 "Mach 2.3....Which was very fast for 1959." It's very fast for 2020 too, just sayin'. Sure, it didn't have supercruise, so range. But a measurement that turns up is "zero lift to drag" ratio, and the same design school B-58 and F-106 are the lowest I've seen. Although the B-2 is probably right there too. And I'm betting the B-58 was in it's clean config. Man, how much ice cream could they make in that fuel pod?!? #wwiistory
If you look at the plan view of the 263, you'll notice it has a "waistline" in the centre fuselage which indicates knowledge and application of the Area rule needed for supersonic flight.
You can see this applied on most supersonic fighters. Mirages, F106, F104, F4, F16 which only emerged in the late 50's, 60's and 70's
This is quite an important topic... PERHAPS Greg could review the drawings he has access to, and help us clarify if the 263 truly had any "Area-Rule" design considerations, or not.
I was building a model of the Douglas F4D (later designated the F-6) Skyray, when I thought that it reminded me of another aircraft. I started looking around and there was the Me163. I checked and sure enough Alexander Lippisch’s name popped up. Short service career, but Mach 1 and first carrier-launched aircraft to hold the world’s absolute speed record (Wikipedia). It was a nice build.
Back in the day we referred to the F4D as the "Ford".
I remember when you could buy WW II surplus flight suits from ads in surplus equipment catalogs and the backs of magazines. They were described as having waist pockets and also waste pockets.
i love the "heavily medicated" euphemism.
on mildly unrelated note if you'd find time to comment on P-39 balance and spin characteristic it would be great.
It may just be one pilot taking zolpidem to sleep while the other is flying, and later they change around.
@@MultiZirkon No, they take stimulants. Specifically dextroamphetamine. B2s are probably one of the only aircraft they use dextroamphetamine on. Caffeine pills are used on all sorts of USAF flights though.
Thank you for the explanation of tailless aerodynamics. I have always wondered how they work.
I remember playing a game called Wing of the Luftwaffe in the early 90's and the ME163 had the vertical rocket weapon.
Or Aces Over Europe. One of my first PC games (besides Castle Wolfenstein/Doom).
LucasArts Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe was a favorite!
Alexander Lippisch is one of the great aircraft designers in history, what a legacy he left behind.
It sounds like the B-52 is much better to crew than the B-2. That last bit on the B-2 was disturbing to hear.
The B52 is the most useful military aircraft ever, considering its length of service and ongoing importance in the USA's Nuclear Triad.
The post war influence of german designs (and designers) is just unbelievably fascinating.
Would love to hear more about it (maybe on both sides of the iron curtain)!
Once again a fantastic video Greg!
I absolutely love this channel. I'm so captured by it that I find myself wearing adult diapers for a binge watch.
iPads make Adult Diapers obsolete in this instance... Trips to the Head are easy...
😁
30:45 "there's a lot of good comments in the comment section of this channel" wait till you reach 100k subs Greg, then it gets "interesting." lol
True, but right now the comment section is a treasure trove of info, there are some very smart people in here. I'm not sure this type of content can reach 100k subscribers, but maybe.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles just don't venture into the political side of things and you'll be fine. I've seen many a good channel lose its way and the comment go sideways once that happens.
Love your channel Greg, ever thought of doing a round up on Aussie muscle cars? Not a lot of content on it and definitely nothing good and in depth.
From the home grown small block Aussie 253 and 308 to the the US small block chevs, windsors and clevos and then the 245/265 hemis.
If you ever get run out of ideas ;)
See Greg, you're almost at the 100k mark! :)
This is such a useful site although Greg always seems so well informed that if he said a plane was made of cheese I’d only want to know which one. Another great episode.
B2 bomber crew with a nuclear payload high on Mil Spec Meth wearing Depends........Really? Thanks Greg sleep well TC
They must be really Pooped after a long flight...
@@MemorialRifleRange
Not to mention they could drop a big load at any moment and without warning.
Also in the news; Trapeze performer with diarrhea shits on 23 people. (That's a true story that happened recently, June somewhere in Spain)
@@dukecraig2402 I checked Snopes. This was a satirical story.
@@kyle857
I am so disappointed, that was the only bright spot I found in all of 2020, damn.
My passion for aviation gave me more understanding of physics than the years of school. One of my new teachers was Mr. Greg. I listen with pleasure, thank you my friend!
Coal powered ramjet.....
I know, it sounds crazy. I wish we could see that flying.
Its actually a really good idéa. The volymetric energy of coal is 20% higher than Jet-A/diesel... While it need to be powdered, that will lose a bite of space.
A RAM jet engine can have pretty much a unlimited size burning chambour. This is one problem with coal. Because the powder can´t be made unlimited small like fuel dropplets, the burning chambour need to be a lot larger.
For example compare a wood burning stove with a pellet burning stove. The pellets one is about 10 times smaller even if it uses the same raw ingredient, just due to pelet size.
While you theoreticaly could make a burning chambour in a turbine-jet very lager to, in a aircraft that is really not practical. A ram jet can have almost the full length of the engine as a burning chambour.
Now all true jet engines theoretically increase there power to the speed. In practical terms the turbine is is limiting this effect making them taper of at high speeds.
For a ram-jet, this issue don´t exist, and the power increase pretty much regardless of speed.
Now the power needed is increased with the square of the speed (well roughly) . Now to increase the power of the burning chambour it scales cubicly, and the thrust scales to the square. So if you want twice as much power, you just needs make it 25% longer, wider and higher. Also increasing altitude is very beneficial for ram jet engines.
Now compare the V1 to the Lippisch P.13a. Se the Ram-jet of the V1 is really not that big. And the one of the P.13a is ... well pretty much longer than the plane.
Now for supersonic flight with RAM jets.. The air that actually burn the coal is slowed down quite significantly. So the burn is not supersonic. The air is also compressed, so warmer and volumetric more oxygen rich. This turns out to be much more effective than rocket engines, and much cheaper and lighter than a jet engine. While breaking the sound barrier might be a problem in some case.
this is not just theory. RAM jet was actually used for supersonic missiles quite a lot in the 50-tys proving that both Mach 3 and 4 was possible...
The issue with RAM jet is that there fuel efficiency is terribly, specially at low speeds... and well there thrust is 0 at a stand still. But proving of the blodhound and kingfisher.. it would probobly work
@@matsv201 v1 uses a pulse jet , not technically a ramjet
@@adamrudling1339 true true... but the burningchambour would be about the same... od cause s ram jet is simpler..... in theory....
A great video. The 163 pilots went way beyond brave into crazy. The airframe basically great for an interceptor, the rocket motor is just not ready for prime time
Great video!
I especially liked your explanation of CG. Flying an RC model of the me163, including the Mirage, I can say that flying wings are really quite tricky when it comes to their CG, with no such problem with pitch authority/stability, and can be very much more sensitive when trying to maintain a neutral CG than compared to a more traditional design like a bf 109. Though despite only being a model it's a real joy to fly. Mine also takes off with a detachable dolly and being electrically powered it's a real demon in the sky with about the same flight time as the real one haha. It's most tricky during take offs and landing, as the latter you really got to try and bleed it's speed. Most probably my fastest plane in the hanger than compared to my other warbirds. Some people with a GPS tracker on their models have clocked it at around 300km/h as claimed on forums.
HR was remembered in the film Operation Crossbow when she flew the manned V-1.
I haven't seen it, but every time I have seen her depicted in a movie, I feel it's been poorly done.
OK, I just watched a clip, not bad.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles It's a very good movie. Lots of inaccuracies but definitely worth watching. The depiction of the test flight is more-or-less authentic.
@ She didn't get launched from a catapult though, but got dropped from a bomber like they did with the X-15.
She was also seen in Untergang.
And one of the main characters in Yann&Henriet comic book "Bear's Tooth"
lol, that ending made me laugh a bit. Nice video with lots of information!
I can see why the cannon isn't that effective, probably due to the very short barrel. It only has a velocity of 1770 fps. (the A10's 30mm is close to 3300 fps) There are 12ga shotgun slug as fast as the MK 108's rounds. But that is slow for a bullet, and being a big 30 mm one with a lot of drag--- and it's going to bleed off speed fast and would be subsonic in less than couple hundred yards.
How about a used vegetable oil ram jet? A French Fry Fighter?
A couple of years ago Hanna Reitsch was honored in an international celebration of women in aviation here in Quebec, and it was quite the controversy. It also turns out that she saw eye to eye with Heinrich Himmler, and all of this "master race" stuff. Too bad, because she was quite a flight pioneer.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/aviation-event-girls-nazi-1.4013827
She actually recanted the master race stuff, and even started a flight school in Ghana. She did however remain true to the other concepts of the National Socialist Worker's Party.
In 1972-73 I was a student at a University in Taipei studying Chinese. I lived just off 中山北路, not far from the "combat zone" near the JUSMAG compound. Your video shows a very different ambiance to the area than it had in 1972.😎
Damn that that 263 is a sexy beast
It sure is.
If you are interested in the F-102 and F-106 you should check out Bruce Gordon´s YT Channel. He wrote a book about his experiences in these aircraft and more, and on his YT channel he talks about some of the episodes/anecdotes in short videos.
His 'MACE kill', 'BOMARC kill' and especially 'Pilotless F-102 over Kansas City' are particularly interesting.
Could you do a video on the Japanese copy of this plane please?
Great video as always. Felt like there needed to have been an, "And on that bombshell, good night," at the end.
A coal powered rocket interceptor - the ultimate steam punk meme ...
It would be something to see that fly.
Convair also made the (basically unknown) F2Y Sea Dart (a "seaplane"/"floatplane" fighter) and the much better known B-58 Hustler!
You can actually see a short clip of the F2Y in the premier of Sea Hunt (s1, e1): Sixty Feet Below....
Thanks Greg Another Excellent Production “Pitch Stability” Is an Interesting Topic 😀😊😎
Your comment about the P-51s with the fuselage fuel tank having CG issues.... I'm a tad bit surprised that you didn't mention the P-82/F-82 Twin Mustang issues since it had TWO fuselage fuel tanks!
Excellent video! Thanks for posting!
What an incredible plane and such an interesting story. Many thanks for the addendum on Lippisch Coal Interceptor!
Have a great day!
Greetings from Guatemala!
12:28 this may be a little off in the weeds but rocket thrust is affected by altitude. The nozzle geometry is optimized for a specific altitude. Without knowing for which altitude the nozzle was optimized it's difficult to quantify the effect in real life performance.
Love these videos!
Can you expand on that ? Interesting.
From Wikipedia: "At full throttle, the net thrust of a rocket motor improves slightly with increasing altitude, because as atmospheric pressure decreases with altitude, the pressure thrust term increases." While I don't doubt there is some scenario where power will decrease, I think its going to be insignificant relative to a jet.
Indeed this is the reason for staging in rockets such as the Saturn V. Ideally, the gases should be expanded to reach the ambient pressure. I don't really understand the problem of attempting to do too much expansion though.
If you don't expand enough, after the gases leave the nozzle, they then expand outwards which wastes some of the energy.
Scott Manley has a great video that covers how atmospheric pressure interacts with rocket exhaust and nozzle design. In short, as atmospheric pressure decreases the exhaust needs more room for expansion to get maximum efficiency. A nozzle optimized for low altitude work is too narrow for maximum efficiency in a vacuum.
30:43 Funny thing about that, Messerschmitt was actually working on an early SAM called Enzian that was based off of the Me 163 airframe.
Have you considered doing a video or a series over the P-39? It gets a terrible reputation in the US service as a bad fighter but I've heard the Soviets used it very effectively. I always thought it was a cool design and the P-63 seemed to fix many of the issues.
It was poorly suited for high altitude because it lacked a supercharger, and it was less maneuverable than its foes in the pacific theater. However it was excellent at low altitude and the Soviets used it to great effect.
Video technical comment: Reading Text by pausing?
Whenever I press pause, my TV, the bottom third has a pop up that obscures the bottom 1/3+ of the screen. (A video progress time-lapse bar, and other video thumbnails). So, reading text, now obscured, isn't possible, by using that.
Possible solution?
Maybe text that you post could slow scroll or something? (If it's worth dealing with).
.
Cheers.
Great video. If NAZI Germany had a post mortem Truman commission, it would be very damning of these Wunderwaffe projects. Germany never accepted its lack of resources and lack of time. Most similar proposals on the allied side were rejected out of hand.
Meth and adult diapers. Sounds like a rockin' Saturday night at the trailer park.
Totally destroyed my perception of the b2; pilots high on some drug cocktail sitting in their own fecies... Damn!
So the next time you meet a B2 pilot at a cocktail party and he's boasting loudly about his awesome plane, some people may wonder why _you_ have that grin on your face. 👍😜
I’m not sure why they can’t take a payload penalty of a thousand pounds, increase costs by $2,000,000 per unit and add a lavatory and a rest area/bunk small galley to make coffee and heat a precooked meal or can of soup, and observer station for a relief pilot, or no relief pilot and train them single pilot when the machine is during cruise. It’s just not a lot to ask for in engineering terms to extend the fuselage by 1.5m and fill that empty space with accommodations I feel. It’s a B2 for crying out loud 😂 it doesn’t need to be the Taj Mahal, but for 30hrs missions you could at least make it as accommodating and spacious as an 8ft camper trailer. They wouldn’t need to medicate a pilot or issue a diaper. They probably spend more per year in ongoing costs running the medicate/diaper program than building that space to begin with on the airplane. They need to take a page out of the AN124, and PBY playbook and start just designing accommodations on the airplane. It probably takes the flight crew nearly a week to recover after one of those 30hrs missions, they might be ready the following day with proper facilities on board.
i'm pretty sure there was a picture of the Sondergerät SG 500 Jagdfaust in the Rocket Fighter book.. at least in the one i have..
Woohoo great video again. Also as for that miracle plane landing, i remember the story of the Japanese pilot surviving a headshot and flying home. It possible the pilot landed the plane but died of his. Also can you elaborate any wood wings are bad for high speed scientifically of course.
The pilot you may be talking about is Saburu Sakai. His A6m2 was shot up by the tail gunners of a few Avenger torpedo bombers in 1942.
masbeetleboy I knew it was Sakai! I just didn’t know the spelling and left it to the smart people in the comments!
ZeroTheHero A6M I know that’s insane, I was referencing that if it’s possible he lived with that, a pilot could land then die as well
A bit OT but there is also the incident in the PTO whence an american pilot in 'parachute mode' made a head-shot kill on a Zero pilot with his Govt Model 1911 pistol.
Did Dittmar exceed Mach 1 in 1944? The plane certainly seemed to have the capability to go transonic.
I believe the F-106 still maintains the absolute speed record for a single engine fighter - 1526 mph.
Flying (well gliding) ME163 Check this out: ua-cam.com/video/BNIpJcOZPlA/v-deo.html
Your point about not judging past decisions with what we know now is well taken. Looking back at US weapons development 1945-60, we tried a lot of weird stuff that ended up going nowhere, and it reads like a lot of money was just wasted. But the rapid postwar development of technology (nukes, electronics, jets, missiles) made it difficult to be sure what was going to be needed in the future- so try everything!
Another fun fact of the F-106 the nuclear air-to-air missile was developed in part by James Irwin the Apollo 15 LM pilot"
even if this thing worked, how could it possibly make any difference for thousands and thousands of allied planes? would’ve been better off just spray those t-stof over the allied planes
Thanks for the great video! As a side note: Famous British Navy Pilot Eric Brown flew the Me 163 without the rocket motor and fuel on board. He was full of praise for the handling. He would have loved try out the plane with the rocket motor, but that was not to be.
As I recall the low muzzle velocity on the MK108 was an intentional design concession to increase the rate of fire. Since MG151s weren't cutting it, they needed a good bomber killer weapon, and 30mm did the job very well, but most cannons that large fired rather slow, making it difficult to get enough hits in during a high speed pass.
So in order to increase the number of hits in a pass, they accordingly wanted a higher rate of fire. To achieve this the 108 used a very unique chambering system that gave it a much higher rate of fire than similarly sized cannons, but that system required a very specific muzzle velocity to get the timing just right, one that happened to be fairly slow. For shooting at a giant bomber in a high speed pass though, where aim is less important than burst mass, low muzzle velocity and accuracy were considered acceptable concessions.
B-2 pilots doing +30 hours missions in diapers ? No thanks. At least the ruskies build crew rest area and toilets in their Su-34 which is a far less long range and long time in the air kind of bomber.
Someone tell the devs of War Thunder that it takes more than 2 cannon hits to bring down a heavy bomber please... they're like flying paper right now.
If I was told I had to fly 30 hour missions in a stealth bomber then was handed a pack of adult diapers, I'd need to be heavily medicated too.
Fascinating stuff as always. I'm pretty sure negative wing twist is called wash _out_.
I'm a tad disappointed Greg jumped from the XF-88 straight to the F-106, ignoring the F-102 Delta Dagger. The F-102/F-106 story would be a good video as it illustrates the fast-changing pace of thinking and technology of the time. Otherwise, bully!
I seriously though about going through the F102, but the video was starting to run on forever, so I had to wrap it up.
Talking about the 102 would take hours as it was such a problem child, not just in aerodynamics but in the avionics. Of the two the 106 is a much better example.
Interesting that you mention the book "The women who flew for Hitler". I just finished it, and really enjoyed it. Not really any flying stuff that would appeal to pilots, but interesting to read their experiences of living through the war. I knew who Hana Reitch was previously, but learned a lot more ( negative ) about her from this book. I'm going to read Éric Brown's book next...
Would it be possible to launch the Me163 from a ramp, like the Bachem Natter?
I can't see why not, assuming the slide is long enough.
Thanks. I love the detail you put out.
I was expecting the B2s secret to be a bit less....... shitty.
well done!!
Hey Greg !
Congratulations on the channel. Real good, detailed and proper technical explanations. Fantastic "stoff", really XD
I'd like to make a comment, and I'm not sure if someone pointed this out already. If so, I apologise in advance...anyway, here it goes:
You are absolutely right when pointing out that the Me-163 have a noticeable wing twist, but I suspect the reason behind that aerodynamic feature does not have to do with aileron isues or wing tip stall...but rather with pitch stability.
Wing twist is a common feature to all early tail-less aircraft designs, and its purpose is to create an opposing force-and therefore a momentum- to produce some leverage to counteract the momentum generated by the lift and the distance betweet the center of pressure (CP) and CG. Kind of a built-in trimming feature, if you like.
By the way: that´s also the reason pretty much all flying wings have swept wings. This goes all the way back to the very early designs, like the D-8 for instance, since it constitute a kind of intuite way of dealing with pitch stability without elevators.
Yes, it provides yaw stability and have a lot advantages at high speed...but the combination of wing twist + swept wing planform was the only way of dealing with flying wing's fundamental problem, at least in the minds of early 20th century aircraft designers...waaay before pressure distribution and aileron reversal became an issue (or even dreamt of, I'd say). In their defense, I'd only say it is kind of a natural way of thinking...
-Need pitch stability w/o elevators => make a built-in counteracting force in the only aerodinamic surface available-the wing itself-and move it as back as possible !
All the best, man !
Carlos
Ohh...
:|
"Heavily medicated and wearing adult diapers". Yep, sign me up to be a B-2 pilot.
Hi Greg. Really love your videos. I'd like to offer comments regarding the relevance of Alexander Lippisch's delta wing research and the notion of its commonly accepted influence on American post war delta wing design. I am just finishing an excellent book titled "Captured Eagles" written by Frederick Johnsen who was a U.S. Air Force Historian and also the former Director of the Air Force Flight Test Center Museum at Edwards AFB, and Public Affairs Director for the NASA Dryden Research Center. In his book Johnsen relates that in 1946 American researchers investigating Lippisch's DM-1 (the glider predecessor to the P13a) found that its thick delta wing could not produce, and in fact inhibited, the desired leading edge vortex useful in a thin delta for stabilizing airflow and thereby allowing maximum lift coefficients at much higher angles of attack than are possible with a conventional wing. The same researchers subsequently modified the DM-1's leading edge, making it thinner. According to Johnsen, the result was an increase in the useable AOA from the original 18 degrees with the thick profile, to 31 degrees with the thinner leading edges generating their signature vortex, along with an associated increase in maximum lift coefficient. Johnsen states that American aeronautical engineer Michael Gluhareff at Vought-Sikorsky conceptualized a delta wing as early as 1939 and that NACA reviewed some of his work in 1944, and that Lippisch's work was not so influential as the driver of American delta wing implementation, but rather a somewhat flawed application of the delta wing's potential which served more as a humble catalyst toward legitimate independent design breakthroughs in America. I think Johnsen's book would be right up your alley as he talks about the process of capturing and evaluating German WWII aircraft. Thanks!
It's very clear that significant changes were made going from Lippish's designs to the Convair designs. In pictures you can easily see how much thinner the wing became. I can't quantify how big Lippish's post war contributions were, only that he did in fact pioneer tailless aircraft, built one that saw combat, and had at least some influence. How much I just don't know.
Great to see your Me-163B videos, I just independently read Jet Fighter by Mano Ziegler - one of the most awesome Luftwaffe books I've read (20 so far). The way to pronounce Wolfgang Späte is... (phonetically)... "Voolf Gang Shpett"
Thanks Alan, I admit to be weak on pronunciation of these German names. I am trying to get better, thanks for the help :)
Some layman’s terms on why decreasing thrust didn’t extend the 163’s flight time: a rocket engine works by using the nozzle to turn high pressure low velocity gas into low pressure high velocity gas. If you lower the pressure in the chamber by throttling the fuel, this results in lower exhaust velocity.
Boy, thank you Greg, for that disturbing visual about the 30-hour plane rides! hahaha I kid, I kid. This really was a fascinating two-part series, and I hope to see more of its kind in the future. Thank you for all the research you are doing and the information you're putting out here. We love it!
The MK 108 were exceeding low velocity.
The first of the trio of Luftwaffe 3cm MK, the 3cm/30mm MK 101, was heavy and had a slow rate of fire, but hit like the wrath of Iron Man at 900mps/2970fps, making it most accurate of the three types of 3cm cannon.
In an effort to improve ROF and reduce weight, the MK 101 was developed into the MK 103. Its AP projectiles left the barrel at 860mps/2800fps. It seems to be roughly the same weight as the earlier cannon, however.
These guns had performance figures equal to equivalent ground bound antitank weapons in terms of MV and penetration. They hit hard and were quite accurate. It seems possible that someone in the design bureau was doing a bit too much meth, for these guns, proving just too heavy and bulky to install as motor connon, were further devolved into the MK 108, one of the five worst accuracy aircraft cannon ever flown , having a muzzle velocity of just 540mps/1770fps. It was only half as heavy as its predecessors, but only half as accurate, too*.
To give you an anecdotal description, Chuck Yeager reported using the T9 Cannon was like "lobbing grapefruit".
*(the other ones being the T9 "Oldsmobile" cannon of the P39 at 610mps, the Japanese Ho-301 40mm caseless ammo cannon of 265mps, and the British Vickers 40mm S gun used in the 'urricane at 570mps)
The low muzzle velocity on the 108 was an intentional design concession to increase the rate of fire. They needed a good bomber killer weapon, and 30mm did the job very well, but most cannons that large fired rather slow, making it difficult to get enough hits in during a high speed pass.
So in order to increase the number of hits in a pass, they accordingly wanted a higher rate of fire. To achieve this it used a very unique chambering system that gave it a much higher rate of fire than similarly sized cannons, but that system required a very specific muzzle velocity to get the timing just right, one that happened to be fairly slow. For shooting at a giant bomber in a high speed pass though, where aim is less important than burst mass, low muzzle velocity and accuracy were considered acceptable concessions.
If there is one museum that pisses me moff then it is the Smithsonian. They let the only surviving Horton jet rott for years even tho the German Technical Museum offer to restore it for free in exchange for the right to display it for 5 years. I'll take a wild bet and say the gleider and the Ta are in horrible state. Another point of anger is the way they sell you ship lines. You have to buy catalogs first to then write them which set of lines you want to buy. And that is not the only BS about them.
*World's Only Flying Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet (Kraftei)- The First Rocket-Powered Fighter Aircraft!*
ua-cam.com/video/BNIpJcOZPlA/v-deo.html
My first reaction: _"Are they insane?"_
Then I watched the video: _"Oh ... it's a glider ..."_
.
Apparently it makes a darn good glider.
One of the other rocket powered planes Germany developed was the Bachem B339 Natter. Eric Brown mentioned the Me 163 in his book Wings Of The Luftwaffe
The comments are probably full of this one already, I can't go through them all, but upward firing guns had great success in the Me110 in the form of SchrageMusik - brought down quite a lot of Lancasters, who never knew what hit them. These were conventional guns, though, and fired and aimed by the crew, not automatically.
Also, putting a word in for the famous Eric 'Winkle' Brown, a test pilot with many claims to fame including the man who flew the most different marques of aircraft. He test flew a Me 163 just after the end of the war as part of a programme of Allied testing of German advanced aircraft, as I remember just the once, and as I remember was terrified by it. I've never understood how he managed this, now after your videos I guess they must have given him some unpowered, towed flights to at least get the idea. This was the first man to land a jet on a boat, so he clearly had skills.
Lol...Doc, all we need is some speed.
An something to soak up the pee... 🤣
In the 1980’s my Dad and I used to go to the Florida gulf to fish for Red Fish. When there, we would seen F-15’s and F-106’s from Tyndall AFB doing dissimilar air combat maneuvering with F-16’s from Elgin AFB. You can’t miss seeing an F-15 in afterburner at any altitude. You could get a glimpse of an F-16, but as soon as he rolled or turned, you’d lose him. Both of those aircraft roar, the F-15 More so. The F-106 hummed or moaned. You could pick it out for a second or two because of to size, but, like the F-16, in hard maneuvers it just disappeared.
I enjoy your channel. Thank you very much for taking the time and effort that you do take, it's always excellent.I trust you and yours remain happy, safe and well. Bon Chance sir
I remember the F-106 very well, there was even one at the Midland Air Show, along with an F-104.
I wonder if Alexander's P-13A design made it into the hands of AVRO Canada in the design of the Avro Arrow? Now that is a subject I'd love to place the weight of your considerable insight and research ability upon. You can see by my avatar photo the similarities. Fantastic video as usual Greg... thank you.
I think the designers of the Arrow must have at least looked at Lippisch's work. Considering he built some of the very few tail less planes to fly, I don't see how they couldn't have.
there was a s-version of the 163, in glider version only, replacing the fuell tank (for the t-stof) for an seat where an instructor could sit.
a bit akin too the 2 seat p-38.
+bibia666 The Russians had a captured Me-163 trainer, likely scrapped when Stalin ordered everything scrapped for his new air force. I would have to do some looking to see if the AAF or RAF captured one. plane-encyclopedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Messerschmitt-Me-163S-Habicht-8.jpeg