The Luftwaffe's Disastrous & Deadly "Flaming Coffin" | Heinkel He 177
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2024
- Play World of Warships here: wo.ws/3T5Qgq0
Thankyou World of Warships for sponsoring this video.
During registration use the code HPPYNWYR2024 to get a huge holiday starter pack!
Applicable to new users only
The Heinkel He 177 is perhaps a masterclass in what not to do if you happen to be a leading member on the Air Ministry of a country gearing up to war. Messed around from a strategic bomber into a dive bomber and then back again, the He 177 was undoubtedly an interesting aircraft for it's time, but one that was utterly plagued with issues from day one.
Consider supporting us on Patreon: / aviationdeepdive
Feel free to join our Discord community! - / discord
Donations to support the channel: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
Sources:
Dinan, T., Colacitti, N., Dady, B., & Marie, G. (2010). He 177 Greif: Design, Production and Operations. Amber Books Limited.
Smith, J. R., & Creek, E. J. (2009). Heinkel He 177 Greif: Heinkel's Strategic Bomber. Classic.
www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/he177a...
0:00 - 1:08 Introduction
1:09 - 4:26 Early Requirements
4:27 - 10:19 Development & Design Stage
10:20 - 12:42 Prototype and Pre-Production
12:43 - 15:20 Early Service Life
15:21 - 18:16 Later Variants and Late War Use
18:17 - 19:25 Conclusion - Фільми й анімація
Play World of Warships here, and use code HPPYNWYR2024 to get a huge holiday starter pack!: wo.ws/3T5Qgq0
Feel free to join our Discord community! - discord.gg/WCevgcufwJ
Consider supporting us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/AviationDeepDive
is gud game tbf
Can't give you enough praise for this one. Of your more technology-themed videos, it's perhaps the best. The overheating was explained and depicted exceptionally well, and I enjoyed seeing all the original footage and photos - after all, this plane had killer looks!
Thanksyou!
Always been fascinated by this type since I got the Airfix kit of it in the 80s and the vastly better Revell kit a few years ago. Good video but maybe a brief mention of the He177B-He277 could have been made.
Thanks, I actually intend to a do a deep dive on the 277 in the future as I have some really good resources on it, hence why I didn't include it in this video
That old Airfix kit was a favorite! Certainly far exceeded by that Revell tooling, but the box art alone was worthy. :-)
Oh, good I'll look forward to that. @@aviationdeepdive
In Montreal during WW2 they had concerns about He 177 being able to bomb the city, so air-raid precautions were taken, such as night time blackouts & turning out the lights on the huge cross stop Mount Royal.
He 177 losses in 1942 were heavy because the aircraft and their aircrews were sacrificed to help support the Stalingrad airlift operation. By 1944, most of this aircraft's numerous technical problems had been overcome. On combat missions over Great Britain, the He 177 loss rate was much lower than Ju 88, Ju 188, Do 217, and He 111 aircraft. KG 1 flew this aircraft effectively against Soviet targets without incurring significant losses. But by mid-1944, the Luftwaffe no longer had sufficient fuel reserves to conduct large-scale bomber operations on all fronts. Thus, most He 177s ended up providing target practice for Allied fighter pilots who braved German Flak to score victories against aircraft grounded for the lack of fuel.
I think one crashed in Whitmore Vale near Haslemere in Surrey… Really interesting work.
I've never heard its issues described so well. Excellent Video!
Glad it was helpful!
They should have done the Do 335, still only the drag of 2 engines but with the power of 4.
Apparently they were very hard to shoot down. They were well armed with 4 20mm cannons, and one remote turret with 7.9 mm . There is an account somewhere of a Mosquito night fighter shooting down a He 177 and he stated that he had to use all his ammunition up on one plane to get the B down!
Thank you for making your videos 20 minutes or longer.
The proposal for lower drag by using 2 instead of 4 engines lead to the unfortunate construction of the Avro Manchester and the Heinkel He 177 . The Rolls Royce Vulture engines (coupled Peregrine) of the Manchester had the same problems with overheating. Btw. another flying burning coffin for the crews was the famous but dangerous Boeing B29 Super Fortress. Check out the report here one YT. During the whole production time the Wright R3350 engines had overheating and burning incidents with high loss rates. Finally solved with the new engined B50.
Interesting that the Germans made no attempt to do what Avro did and simply go to 4 engines in 4 nacelles, sacrificing a little speed but gaining a lot in reliability. Similarly the Boeng B29 could have been fixed by using (say) six or eight smaller engines e.g. Pratt and Whitney R2800 in separate nacelles.
I believe the using of more than four engines increases the wheight of the aircraft drastically. A critical point for the B29 because they operated constantly overloaded with fuel and ammunition to reach japanese targets within this large pacific theater of war.
@@apis_aculei Yes I agree that was a large part of the problem. The B29s were (over)loaded to the extent that a single engine failure on take-off would almost certainly result in a crash.
A very good synopsis.
The B29 was a success. High failure rate but acceptable. Crew recovery was very good too-which goes a long way to continuing usage.
It was designed to do what it was supposed to do and it it did it.
Lot of myths surrounding technology from that period generated from the rose colored glasses of hindsight.
There were 3900 B29s built. There was a total of 430 or so lost from all causes.
That's not that bad.
What I don't quite get is how people in high positions can constantly disrupt development and production of "stuff" without realising how they have a negative influence on the overall goal, I have been typically "lead" in projects in my company for some ~30 years, and me and my managers are well aware of this phenomenon, so what we always did/do was introduce "freeze dates" early in projects, constantly referring to our "freeze dates" to our suppliers and customers, it was pretty easy to get accepted by everyone and reduced much of the headaches crazy changes caused, to find those dates are pretty easy, you know the process, you know the delivery date, so you simply calculate "backwards" when design would "freeze" something I would recommend everyone involved in projects to implement and enforce
Great, informative content - I am always looking forward to your next installment 🤙🏼
Great video, as always. Very informative, I have always loved the look of the He177.
Making a strategic bomber, to be a dive bomber insanity…
Cool video!
Never knew anything about this aircraft. So, I appreciate this "lesson" on the bomber. Facts are always cogent and numerous.
Thanks for sharing your data and research to allow a well-presented and entertaining video.
🙈🙉🙊 😎 🇺🇸
The propellers of the Heinkel He 177 were driven by double-coupled engines. The rear engines could not be sufficiently cooled and they caught fire due to overheating. The crews' nickname for this aircraft was "Reichsfeuerzeug".
There were no ‘rear’ engines with the He 177s engines, they were side by side, as explained in the video
The dive-bombing requirements were due to Ernst Udet. He'd been a successful WWI fighter pilot, serving under von Richthofen and later Göring. He was also a Nazi party member, and when Walther Wever was killed, took his place as Chief of the Technical Office of the Reich Air Ministry. He was an enthusiast for dive-bombing, but quite incapable of running aircraft development programs, having neither engineering or organisational skills. However, he was now in charge of all the Luftwaffe's development, and deserves much of the blame for the lack of new aircraft coming into German service in the early part of WWII.
His response to this problem was to become an alcoholic, but he wasn't fired. He was promoted to Luftwaffe Generalluftzeugmeister (Chief of Procurement and Supply), responsible for all aircraft production, armament and supply in February 1939, and was even less capable of doing that job. When Hitler complained about the Luftwaffe, Göring blamed Udet, but did not replace him. Udet killed himself in November 1941. This was covered up, with claims he'd died testing an aircraft, and he got a hero's funeral.
Corruption and the consequent incompetence were fundamental parts of Nazism, just as they are of any authoritarian political system. It's strange that people seem so keen to adopt such systems just at present, but they seem to believe it will be different this time. Spoiler: it won't.
Still ,very cool looking.
Thanks for explaining the engine configuration. I misunderstood, and thought that it was two 12 cylinder engines linked end-to-end on a single crankshaft, not two side-by-side on a single shaft. It sounds more like a RR Vulture engine (only different). It might have made more sense to go with 24 cylinders in a V configuration, but an engineer can explain better why that's not practical. Too much torque on the shaft?
P.S. the Fiat AS.6 was a 50 litre V-24 of the 1930's and reportedly produced 2,900hp which is far in excess of the minimum requirement of the HE177.
G'day,
Yeah,
The He-177 was
VASTLY worse.
Two V-12 Aero Engines,
With Crankshafts feeding a
Gearbox running one
Huge 4-blade Propeller,
And the Centre-Bank of
Both
V-12 Engines
Exhausted through a
COMMON
Manifold, of
Cast Iron.
Which used to crack due to
Disparate
Vibrations
Across the two
Powertrains.
Such is life.
;-p
Ciao !
The Engine fires which
Crippled the He-177
We're
F
DESIGNED IN.
It's very similar to a Vulture and had much the same problems. From what I have read, one of the most serious problems was that the cowlings on this aircraft were very closely fitted in order to reduce drag. This in turn led to overheating in a very complicated installation full of and covered by flammables. Failure to produce good, large engines during WW2 is a common thread throughout many German aircraft (and tank) projects.
Are you sure Bobby Caldwell didn't sit in on this session, lol.
I suspect the main priority for 177 pilots was to get to 200m altitude as quickly as possible before the inevitable engine light up, in order to safely bail out.
ask the Manchester`s crews
@@michaelpielorz9283Good that you mention the Manchester, as it's a fine demonstration of how much more sensible the British were than the stupid Germans who persisted with the He 177.
When the issues arose on the Manchester the British made reasonable efforts to solve them but quickly realised that the four engine Lancaster was a better option and thereby by 1942 had a bomber in operation that could very effectively pound the nazis whilst they were still fannying about with that twin engine crap heap until 1944 when it was far too late.
Genau! Dies ist ein faszinierendes Video, das einen weiteren Fall skizziert, in dem nur eine Demokratie (im Gegensatz zu einem unheilbar korrupten totalitären Regime) ein solch komplexes Projekt zum Erfolg führen kann. (und auf Englisch...) Exactly! This is a fascinating video, outlining yet another case where only a democracy (as opposed to a terminally corrupt totalitarian regime) can bring such a complex project to fruition.
The lunacy of wanting a heavy 4 engines (technicaly 2) bomber to be able to to dive-bomb... Germany lost the war the moment they totally abandoned the Ural Bomber, in the 30s, to get only a tactical air force. London, and the British and Soviet industrial centers were never seriously menaced by air and the V weapons costed an enormous amount of ressources to not get any strategic effects. This bomber is also a good remedy to the ''Nazi Germany was more advanced than anybody'' crowd.
RIP Walter Weber, the benefit of the Allies.
I suspect that MI6 sent women spies to turn Udet into a drunken fool.
I disagree about your statement about Germany lost the war, then they abandon the ural bomber, what decisive impact will a few hundreds of conventional heavy bombers do in the early war (battle of Britannia) and a few thousand in mid war (war in USSR) Germany did lose then US enter the war.
V1 was very cost effecte, if we acount the enormus resureces that was "spent" in stoping them. V2 that was a wast of titanic propotions.
@@kirgan1000 A strategic bomber (coupled with a strategic plan like they finally did with the submarines in 1940) would have put a lot of pressure on the British heavy industries, ports etc.. during the first blitz ,much more than the medium bombers. Then the Soviet industries, much of wich was evacuated in 1941 could have been attacked, in a very bad moment of transition just when in 1942 the Soviets needed anything to fight and their aviation was not in a position to rapidly have hundreds of high altitude interceptors. Germany needed some strategic blows, a part the submarine campaign there was nothing, and the V weapons were a total waste. The V1 could have been useful if used in masse, for the first time, against the major invasion ports of GB in 1944, it was more a propaganda/terror weapon. The means to defeat them didn't crippled the allied fighting force, a part some reinforcement of the AA and use of interceptors, as after the succesfull invasion that any of those weapons or lack of it didn't prevent, the British just bombed or liberated the territories and instalations used to lauch them. The V2 was a Manhattan Project in costs without any A-bomb or anything really useful, even more a terror weapon. The problem, and thank god for that, is that the Nazi elite was very bad at any serious strategic thinking.
Bomber Command and 8th airforce promised two things. Destroying the German economy and braking the German Moral. None of which ever happened and Germany was actually increasing its amrs output throughout 1944.
Bomber Mafia fooled everyone!!!
Bribing Spain and other nations to stop delivery of Tungsten and Manganese and the loss of the Mines in Ukraine in 1944 did more damaged to the german arms industries, than bombing raids like Schweinfurt ever could.
In 1943 the US needed 186 Bombers dropping over 600 Bombs to have two hits on a 1000 by 1000yard target zone.
And you really wonder why Germany, a Nation with the size of Texas with limited natural resources decided, strategic high altitude Bombing is not for us, we trust in Boots on the Ground.
A B17 costs 300.000 US dollar, a Tiger tank is nothing compared to this.
Lancasters had a 50% loss rate in aircraft and 75% cassuletie rate in crews.
Ural Bomber was not going to happen.
Further more having to engine in one nacelle was a US idea. Douglas XB 19.
British Lancaster came to birth as the Manchester also with 2 engines in one nacelle, it became the 4 engine Lancaster later.
So it was not an uncommen thing to do in late 1930s early 40s.
In late 1943 and 1944 He 177 had less aborted sorties than the B29 because of engine issues. The He 177 also achieved the lowest loss ratio of all german Bombers taking part in Operation Steinbock.
Even if the Germans had a b29 equivalent, it would have meant little. For every heavy bomber they built, they would have NOT built several other aircraft.
Replacing all the he177 with a b29 equivalent would have helped a bit, but only a bit.
Excellent vid on a very advanced failure.
I remember a quote from legendary British test pilot Eric "Winkle" Brown in which he said that of all the hundreds of aircraft types he flew, only the He-177 truly frightened him.
Not surprised!
Bullshit
Even in “Operation Blockade” they used this rather notorious plane.
Interesting to note that the British Air Ministry had also favoured the idea of twin engined heavy bombers, but their plans were also derailed by engine problems. The Avro Manchester struggled due to the poor reliability and underperformance of the Rolls Royce Vulture engines and, when that engine was cancelled, it looked like Avro would be made to produce the Handley Page Halifax (itself initially designed to use two Vultures, but redesigned to use four Merlins as insurance against problems with the Vulture), but Avro were able to persuade the Air Ministry to allow them to redesign the Manchester to also use four Merlins, which became the Lancaster. The career of Vicker's Warwick was also heavilly restricted due to development problems with the Bristol Centaurus, though this did become an excellent engine😎
I thoroughly enjoyed this video.
It certainly makes one wonder how much further ze Germans eould have gotten had they not chopped and changed plans every five minutes.
I wonder if had the Engines been given properly larger nacelles and invested in a better combined cooling set up, Letting majority of the engine cool through the Annular Radiators as well as a separate evaporative cooling system combined would have maybe done the trick. Also it might sound like a horrendous idea, But because Evaporative cooling systems are already very fragile and susceptible to fire, Why not attempt to cool them by passing a pipe or two.. directly through the fuel..(which might be cold enough to y’know to cool the coolant?) at altitude it might help since the whole wing is kind of *cold.* idk my stupid ideas and what ifs for an aircraft 80 years ago.
The Ju-287 used the cockpit and nose of the 177.
Drag advantages aside, why would the RLM propose a 2 engine solution when they knew that the only engines capable of meeting that requirement was the Jumo-222 and DB-604, both of which were still in development?
Heinkel had shown impressive results with the DB-606 coupled engines in his radical He-119 experimental bomber, so I could imagine him proposing this for the He-177A
06:04
"... wouldn't be so stupid as to try and turn a strategic bomber into a dive bomber ..."
In Ernst Heinkel's autobiography (and yes, one must take caution with what you read in autobiographies) he claims that early on during He-177A development Generalluftzeugmeister Ernst Udet added further requirements that the 4 engine bomber under development be also capable of dive bombing. Udet had held up the Ju-88 program with this demand, reducing its performance and payload and substantially delaying its service introduction. According to Heinkel Udet pointed out that Junkers had been able to get the Ju-88 to dive bomb and as far as he was concerned the He-177A was like 'Ju-88 with 4 engines'.
Not sure to what extent it factored in, but OKW saw the Luftwaffe as essentially tactical aerial support for ground forces. With Wever's death, there seems to have been no support (or perhaps understanding) of the value of strategic bombing. This feels all the more strange given Germany's use of it in WW1 to bomb military targets and to terrorize civilians in England. They say that old generals always think in terms of fighting the last war...
08:09
"... promising development of the Lotfernrohr 7bombsight ... "
I believe the Zeiss Lotfernrohr 7 (Loft 7) bomb-sight was apparently an improved version of the Norden bomb-sight.
German spies had relayed plans of the Norden's design and operation from the factory in the US.
08:16
" ... ultimately Hermann Goering would remove all of the dive bombing requirements placed on the He-177 ..."
In his book, Ernst Heinkel claims he explained to Goering how the He-177 was the victim of Udet's dive bombing demands and that Goering was surprised, even shocked to discover that. Heinkel says he tried to persuade Goering to allow him to build a more conventional 4 discrete engine version of the He-177. Having been embarrassed before Hitler by the poor combat performance of the aircraft, in a fit of pique he refused and demanded that Heinkel make it work with the coupled engines as Heinkel describes it.
Heinkel commissioned the He-177B/He-277 to be built in Vienna and the high altitude He-274 to be built at the Farman factory in occupied France. Both had 4 separate engines and performed well. The He-274 was used by France after the war in ramjet experiments. It seems then that the basic airframe was quite sound and that had the 4 separate engine configuration been adopted early enough, Germany might have seen a reborn He-177 the way the Avro Manchester (also compromised by 2 high power engines) gave birth to the successful 4 engine Lancaster.
Awesome video
The story of constant tinkering with design details, is similar to the Tiger tanks. It got so that no two Tigers were identical - an exaggeration but nearly true.
Maybe someone could answer my question. From what I have seen in the cutaway drawings, it seems that there was no provisions in its design to allow the crew to move from one end of the fuselage to another. The tail gunner seemed to be isolated in his gun position.
Thank you for a marvelous video. I was wondering...did they ever consider a Do 335 Pfeil solution to the 4 engine/2 nacelle problem🤔
As in two DB 601s in a row instead of side by side? This wouldn't have been possible in the 177, as the wing spar is in the way. The wing spar is located at or near 25% chord, as this bears the highest load in flight. Moving the wing spar significantly back to make room for two DB 601s in tandem would have significantly weakened the entire wing.
Edit: Just realised perhaps you meant one DB 601 in a pusher configuration with a second propeller at the rear of the nacelle? This could have worked, with less drag than a normal four engine bomber, it still induces a lot more drag than having two propellers, which of course they didn't want.
@@aviationdeepdive One of the major problems with pusher configurations is that it puts the engine outside cooling airflow from the prop. But the Luftwaffe had a history of trying weird configurations, so by no means impossible.
There was the Douglas MixMaster. It was fast but late in the war. That is one really interesting plane.
After Steinbock, there is to mention another, in mid of 1944 operation. This time on eastern front when in Bagration Red army destroyed german central army group and Goring foolishly ordered He 177 units to attack soviet troops on front in low level flights. It was another disaster for Greif bomber.
Also to mention is He 277 with four db 603 motors, much better variant of this plane.
Beside that, great video. Another 5 to 10 minutes would be even better.
Thanx anyway and greetings from Slovenia
The version with four engines was supposed to be a much better plane that didn’t go up like a Ford pinto.
Their service aversion to four engine aircraft ( yes I am aware of the the Ju-290 and the Messerschmitt four engines aircraft but I can’t remember the designation Me 362?). Never made a sense to me. Drag reduction? I see that as being of minimal benefit.
The HE-177's issues were no worse than the B-29's issues, and less HE-177's killed their crews than B-29s. Like the B-29, there were serious teething issues, and like the B-29 they were worked out. The last few raids by the HE-177 against Soviet rail facilities (Apparently unknown to the makers of this video) had few defects and no losses, but Germany was in no position to make full use this plane by then.
While I agree that the He 177A-5 engine problems had mostly been solved by early 1944 (as evidenced the maritime reconnaissance squadrons reporting engine intervals of 200 hours which was the same as an Me 109) the aircraft's failure to be delivered on time was a disaster for the German war effort. The He 177 first flew in November 1939 and entered service in Mid 1943 (counting the He 177 long fuselage as the first successful model and excluding the supposed He 177A1 in service in 1942) in the form of the He 177A1 and He 177A3. The Avro Manchester, which was also beset by engine problems, flew in June 1939, entered service 18 months latter in November 1940 and was re-engineered such that the Avro Lancaster entered service in Feb 1942. In other word 32 months from Manchester first flight to Avro Lancaster service (a reliable service).
-Had the He 177 followed the same trajectory (Ernst Heinkel begged to convert to 4 seperate engines in mid 1940) we would expect First Flight in Nov 1939 and service as a 4 separate engine aircraft in July 1942 only 5 months after the Lancaster. The 4 Jumo 211J, DB601E or DB605A then available would be completely reliable.
-Let's put that in context of what was going on at the time. The Big losses of Rommel in North Africa at Al Alamgein where 150,000 German troops and all their equipment surrendered came in December 1942-January 1943 almost the same time as over 250,000 troops were lost at Stalingrad. In 1943 Convoy Faith was attacked by 3 Fw 200 Condors which made 5 attack runs from 15,000ft. They sank 3 moving merchant ships and achieved near misses on 2 British war ships escorting the convoy and firing at the Fw 200. The Lotefe 7 computing bomb sight had been in service from 1942 and was as accurate as level bombing so dive bombing wasn't even needed. The StuVi 5B shallow dive bombing sight on a 4 engine bomber in a 20 degree dive.
-So with a He 177 available in July 1943 the Germans could have 1/ Used all of their reconisance Fw 200 and many He 111 as transports to support Rommel forces and the Stalingrad airlift. 2/The He 177 would have been quite dangerous to convoys that were not escorted by aircraft carriers (many around still) as it could hit moving merchant ships at will from medium altitude and 3/ would have vastly improved reconnaissance for the u-boats and 4/Been able to attack Russian factories beyond the Urals and near Moscow.
-A daresay the Germans could have done better than July 1942 entry ins service if the decision had of been take in 1940 as Heinkel had requested.
Wheraboo
you say< allied Propaganda was lying?
@@michaelpielorz9283 No Sandyboy, he's just coping badly.
At 10:10 the war was also with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland or collectively Britain
There's no good history of combined-engine powerplants for aircraft, and this is just one more example.
I had completely missed the production volumes - that’s a real Christmas load of turkeys 🦃
The propellers were not contra-rotating, they were counter-rotating Contra-rotating is two propellers running off the same crankshaft.
Ja, Sie haben recht.
The German 'lack of interest' in long range strategic bombing stemmed from two key strategic facts rather than a lack of insight. The first is that Germany was a land power with major potential enemies immediately on her land borders. A war would be won or lost by her armies long before strategic bombing had any effect. Secondly, Germany lacked the resources to produce, support and operate a fleet of heavy bombers. As noted, Germany was a land power and needed the majority of her young blokes in the army or in production. Unwillingness to conscript women into the labour force and general low-productivity in primary production exacerbated the problem. They were short of strategic metals, rubber, and - most importantly of all - oil. These shortages are underlined by the army's decision in the late 30s to ditch plans to motorize parts of army due to lack of fuel. A large fleet of big bombers was just out of the question.
And yet, it wasn't out of the question, because they did ultimately have a pretty large fleet of big bombers, over 1,000 He 177s - so in the end they did invest a huge amount of resources into this idea, just in a way that basically squandered all of it
@@Alexandros11 They never had a fleet of 1,000. They might've built 1,000 planes, but that's not the same as a fleet. A fleet needs to be crewed & maintained. It needs airfields. The crews need to be trained, the trainers need to be trained, the ground crews need to found, and trained. They all need to be fed, clothed, housed, etc, etc, etc. The planes need spares and tools, and the factories need to be tooled up to make them (not just the finished product). The combat unit in the front line is the tiny, sharp, shiny tip of a gigantic logistical iceberg, and the Germans were chronically weak in this respect. They were all tip and no iceberg.
It’s never very sensible to get your information from Wikipedia. The original specification wasn’t for a two engine bomber, it was for four engines mounted in two nacelles. Also two pairs of contra rotating propellers produce no more drag than four single propellors, not that drag is a factor in a propellor anyway as they are obviously the source of thrust in an aircraft. The suggestion that propellors are an unwanted source of drag when dive bombing is bizarre. Drag, in whatever form, is essential when dive bombing which is why most aircraft have air brakes or spoilers fitted.
My sources are clearly linked in the description. The distinction between two and one engine when engines are linked together is famously unclear, and rhe 177s engine configuration is still occasionally referred to as both to this today. I mentioned 'four-engine' as a theoretical stage, then twin engine as it became practical, as the Germans seemed to consider the DB 606 a single engine. "The suggestion that propellors are an unwanted source of drag when dive bombing is bizarre" I agree, that would be bizarre, hence why I never said that...?
Sad that this video doesnt refelct on the He177s operations against the USSR and its maritime role.
I think the He 177 Greif was a brilliant design , the British also tried the double engine driving one propellar configuration,which was also not succesfull!,if they could iron out that engine flaming problem they had a winner, so they were on the right track!
Fortunately,
what saves us normal people is, evil people seems to be pretty stupid for some reason
Ja. Aus den gleichen Gründen haben alle Diktatoren oder Möchtegern-Diktatoren ein schwieriges Ende. (Yes. By the same reasoning, all dictators or would-be dictators come to a sticky end. )
A thing to bear in mind as well is that dive bombing (or even the halfway equivalent, glide-bombing) puts enormous stresses on the airframe, and those stresses only get worse as the aircraft gets larger. Attempting anything like dive-bombing with a B17 or Lancaster would have resulted in bits falling off very quickly! To compensate, the 177 would have required a lot of additional structural weight, compromising performance in any mission that was not dive-bombing.
France was a superpower...?!?!?
France was considered a superpower heading into ww2
@aviationdeepdive I wasn't aware of that, thanks for clearing that up. Your video does seem well researched!
They had an Empire that spanned the globe. Also a very large army, that was backwards and in political disarray. They were in deep trouble and had no national unity, but I guess that gives them superpower status.
@@electrolytics the problem was no one knew how badly rotten the core of the french military was. On paper they were very impressive the navy was up to date, the air force was considered good and they had lots of tanks. What they lacked was any kind of coherent general staff, and good communications system and commanders under 60.
RLM ??
Reichsluftfahrtministerium (Reich Air Ministry)
I knew it was Junk, but I had no idea they built that many ...
I hate to say it, but if you need to use that shallow dive technique just to fly the mission without burning up, you do not have an airplane with that range. Which to anybody but the Luftwaffe would be perfectly obvious. It would be interesting to compare the history of this aircraft to some of the Soviet failures, I think we would find the same problem when a design gets in deep water and the designers are scared to tell their supervisors that the thing is just a damn mess.
The HE-177 defines the meaning : “designed and built , by a committee “.
With stories like that of the He177 it sounds more like the allies didn’t win the war… the axis lost it through their own stupidity!
Did you overhear the later described strenghts of this aircraft in the video ?
177 was nearly as bad as the Gloster Meteor aka the Meatbox (:-)
Hell Sandyboy, that would be the Gloster Meteor that had a service career of over thirty years (two are still in service) and were purchased by more than a dozen air forces.
How many air forces purchased the He 177 and how long was it in service?
"What else is he gonna do, his entire personality is being so far left he's practically in a mass grave already"
A very cool and normal thing to say, and not at all some literal neo-nazi wetdream.
An abnormal person is not going to get normal reactions - and an attempt to bring neo-naziism into the fold is hilarious. I hate Naziism, I just hate Communism too.
The DB606 was flat out bad , just bad .
A very stereotypical Nazi German case of overdesigning and adding on more stuff to it, so much that it's funny.
German insanity = win for allies😂. This is why dictatorship suck kids.