@@sandervanderkammen9230 Literally says replica in the title, how is it that they'd get their hands on an ever more rare version of an already rare plane?
@@Sapphiresoul2 Well it's wrong, this is a brand-new Messerschmitt Me-262 C made in Everett Washington under license by DASA (Messerschmitt) and issued with a consecutive serial number with the 1940s production aircraft.
imagine ww2 you are sitting on the Russian frontlines. cold as shit watching a dogfight above Berlin. when all you hear in the distance is that howl you wont go ow a jet because you never heard one before. it would be like hearing the the end of the world ( and i don't know if any flew in the finale days of the war i was using the example for dramatic effect ) xxx
The replicas were copied from an original two-seat trainer version. Two of the new replicas can be configured as dual-cockpit or single-seat by changing a few canopy parts.
I got to sit in an ME 262 about 10 years ago. My Dad was a volunteer at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. Back then they had an employees appreciation day once a year & opened up the cockpits & let us climb in a bunch of planes this was one of them. The current director there now says NO WAY! to this anymore.
Two-seat Me262s were constructed for training aircraft and for night-fighter versions. The replica above was a copy made from an original two-seat trainer during restoration. It can also be converted to single-seat configuration by swapping a few canopy parts.
Is this one of the aircraft that were built at Everett Field in Everett, Washington? I ask, because those particular aircraft were NOT replicas, they were built with the blessing of Messerschmidt in Germany and continued on with the next available serial numbers from Messerschmidt. They were, however, upgraded with things like the turbojet engines from an early LearJet, and a few other minor modifications. I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to visit the production facilities when I was at Everett for a Collins Foundation show of a B-17 and a B-24. Someone told me about the Me-262s being built on field, and I was able to get in and see them. No photos allowed, at the time, unfortunately.
+Gary C Yes, you are very correct, these are not replicas... but rather brand new production 262s.. Like the few Gloster Meteorites that still fly, none use the original WW2 era engines and all have had numerous major design improvements over the course of its production...
The real doktorbimmer They can probably be considered second generation Me262s with production serial numbers and their own type designations and some improvements. The new production models are typed Me262A-1c (single seat), Me-262B-1c (dual cockpit), and Me-262A/B-1c (convertible between dual and single cockpit.)
FiveCentsPlease Yes, just as there are no "original" Gloster Meteors for example still flying today, the type had many model generations and variations during and post war from F.1 to NF.14 Numerous updates, completely different engines, cockpits, numerous major structural improvements and avionics upgrades...
FiveCentsPlease And also like the new model Me262's Many later post war production Meteors were not produced by the Gloster company itself... Yet they are still considered real Meteors... Not replicas
Are you sure? I know a quite a bit on WWII aviation, but I don't really know much about trainers. So to me it just looks like a modified 300S or some other stunt aircraft. lol
from the Me 262 V5 a tricycle undercarriage was planned from the outset. The Me 262 V6 was the first Maschiene with hydraulically a retractable undercarriage. One had installed a tail dragger undercarriage of sides of the construction for weight reasons for the first experimentel plane.
This jet,# 1, flew over in the air show on 10/23/2016, at Ellington airport, Houston, Texas. Just a beauty as it is looked on the ground. How gracefully as it is taking off and flying.
A restoration agreement with the US Navy allowed the restoration team to copy an original two-seater and construct five new examples, with four airworthy. Engines are modern GE CJ 610 turbines and small improvements to landing gear and brakes allow safe flight. Two-seat and single-seat variants were constructed, with two replicas modified to fly as either version.
For the ME 262 overhaul they used a original Me 262 built in Leipheim at the Kuno Factory near the former Leipheim Air Force Base. They started the planes on the Highway, the so calles A8 from Stuttgart to Munich. Over 800 ME 262 were built in Leipheim.
OK; same aircraft... I thought Stormbirds was only the name of the website. I followed the progress of the building of these aircraft on that site over the years, as well as White One and the Bf109 Project. Thanks for the explanation; it makes sense to me now. I'm not surprised that those kinds of development issues would take a long time to sort out.
Wow ! - Suprised that, as this amazing aircraft took of those engines sounded like a conventional rotory engine - Not the whoosh of those jets while it was stood there ! Thankyou for sharing
To add to the comments. This was the first plane completed by CFI and I recall that it had a gear collapse on an early test flight which punctured the wing structure to the top of the wing. CFI repaired the damage and actually researched and redesigned a weak point in the landing gear. I believe that this plane had a second gear collapse which required more repairs at Sanders Aeronautics.
@andgate2000 It had two landing gear collapses as I understand it, once under testing and another later. It's been under repairs and close inspection. The Collings Foundation was wanting FAA permission for limited passenger flights, so it's a fair assumption that all systems are being checked and re-checked.
Actually Ryan I was referring to the Lockheed P-80 - the only allied jet to see WW2 service was the Gloster Meteor . The Me 262 flew very early on but was disabled by Hitler wanting it to be a bomber
On Aug. 19th 1944, Luftwaffe pilot Heinz Herlitzius took off from Flugplatz Leipheim and reached a record top speed in level flight for air breathing combat aircraft of 624mph (1004km/h) in a Messerschmitt Me 262. This was the fastest flight of a production combat aircraft until the F-86 Sabre in Sept 14, 1948 at 670mph
Clayton Not for an air-breathing aircraft.. the Me-163 was rocket powered. Heini Dittmar broke 700mph on July 6th 1944 (702mph / 1130 km/h) in the Messerschmitt-163 it was the worlds fastest (rocketpower) aircraft until Chuck Yeager Nov.6 1947 in the Bell X1
Clayton No worries.. since we don't see rocket powered aircraft in military service we often forget the distinction.. in the 1940's rockets were still more capable in producing thrust than jets but soon fell out of favor when jet engine technology improved significantly
The real doktorbimmer Honestly it was a safety issue. Me-163s exploded often and the fuel was highly corrosive, The ki-200 (japanese 163) had two fully built versions and one of them exploded on landing during a test flight,
Re-engineering the weak landing gear was part of the improvements in the replica, though not without problems and gear collapses in the testing phases. The modern engines offer more power and performance but the aircraft must be flown within the original design limits since it was not improved to handle the extra speed and power available. Data cards in the cockpit are used to reference safe engine settings.
5 mins of this could have been edited out ! and for another thing the Me -262 original engines had oiling problem for main shaft bearings they didn't explode to say they just seized up and failed. The British had a working model and found that flaw and they also changed the way they designed the engines as well.
The original aircraft were sound, it was the Junkers Jumo engines that weren't. The design of the engine was advanced for it's time, but lack of strategic metals (cobolt, nickel, etc) that were preferred were sustituted for lower grade alloys (mild stee)l- which had a very short engine life.
I think the "lack of strategic materials" is just an excuse. The best temp resistant alloys Germany had were Tinidur and Cromadur and both were used on the engines. High Nickel alloys, like Nimonic, were first seen around 1943 in Britain, Germany simply had no knowledge of them. As for parts having to be made from mild steel - that is common for production variants of the time. The RR Welland had aluminium coated mild steel combustion chambers just as the Jumo. Truth is the Germans attempted an engine that was technically too much for them. Even today small diameter axial flow compressors aren't the design of choice.
Well Done !. Beautiful aircraft. I am curious , is this a rebuild to original or a modern rebuild ? I always wanted to see a 262 that was rebuilt with upgraded engines , modern metals , electronics , ect. to see exactly what that airframe is capable of.
The original aircraft they copied to build the replicas was a two-seater. In total they build one new single-seater, two 2-seaters, and two that can be switched between singe-seat and two-seat configuration by changing a few parts.
Lovely stuff - the first 7 minutes can be skipped - as a British birder i struggled with the background song but realised it must be in the US, is it Western Meadowlark singing?
Lots of issues with the birds. These are actually from Stormbirds. The first issue they had was the J-85's and getting them proper airflow and proper exhaust exit, and it took a while to fit. They constantly had issue with the intakes and the fitment of the engine pods. The latest issue which has been causing lots of issues was the landing gear not working 100% properly, including pieces of the doors falling off in flight and not 100% retraction when in the stowed position.
I agree with John Perry about a little editing, but, everybody hears the "clicking" before the engines light, correct? Those were the spark-igniters "kicking-it-in-the guts". Good thing that the Luftwaffe had one-to-many Germans (Hitler) on this project! They could have been way ahead of everybody in the air war. Look at the experience of the pilots in JG 26 during the opening of the "Battle of Britain", hey! They were kicking ass using prop-driven planes like everyone else. Oops, I forgot about "The Fat One", also (call me Meyer).
The Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was the first jet fighter used operationally by the United States Army Air Forces.[2] Designed and built by Lockheed in 1943 and delivered in just 143 days from the start of the design process, production models were flying but not ready for service by the end of World War II. Designed with straight wings, the type saw extensive combat in Korea with the United States Air Force (USAF) as the F-80. Green and Swanborough 2001, p. 345 *drops mic*
actually, it did fly in the war. There are interviews with american servicemen who explain about the first time they saw it and how fast it moved over their plane, but you are right it was very late in the war and did little to prevent the allies.
The original Jumo 004s were started by a small two-stroke flat twin petrol donkey that sat behind the front nozzle cone. I've seen a video of the original startup procedure and the little engines which involved a ground mechanic pulling a start chord!! Just like a lawn mower. I wonder how the starters were shut down? Or did they simply stop after running out of a small fuel supply? Must've had a centrifugal clutch?
+Marc Conyard The Reidel starters can be operated with the pull start or with electric motors from the cockpit. And they can be shut down from the cockpit. There is a fuel supply tank inside the front of the 004 engine.
AWESOME! Thanks! To the guy who said the canopy was wrong: This is the two seat night fighter version. Willow Grove (PA) Naval Air Station had one (original-captured end of WWII) on display years ago, it has since been moved to a museum somewhere. BTW...How come no gear retract?
cruisinthefifties The project to build the new Me262 examples made an agreement with the US Navy to restore the Willow Grove two-seat trainer example (Wik. No. 110639) and they would be allowed to use it as a pattern to copy (since original blueprints are incomplete.) It had deteriorated very badly at Willow Grove. The original was fully restored and now is on display at the Nation Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, FL. See here: www.timstanleyphoto.com/HDR/2013/i-Vfw8Dbf/0/L/ME-262-L.jpg The first new-build example to fly suffered two landing gear collapses. The original Me262 prototype was a tail-dragger configuration, while production models were tricycle configuration. It was found that changing the landing gear configuration for WW2 production created weak areas in the landing gear attachment points in the wing. So for the new-build Me262s, the wing box structure and landing gear attachments had to be redesigned and strengthened. The video above is a test flight after repairs, and it is common to leave the gear down for test flights while handling and systems are checked first.
Thanks much for this terrific reply! I have a pic/pix of the 262 when it was parked at Willow Grove (outside----UGH) in the early '60s. There were also several other German and Japanese airplanes in the same condition there. I am so glad someone took this airplane into their care.
Disregarding its intended purpose for a moment, I consider the me262 to be a beautiful aircraft which still looks surprisingly contemporary nearly sixty years after its inception.
I always thought that the very early Cessna 310 had some visually familiar germanic design heritage.. tell if i am not wrong please ..was an exWW11 german aeronautical design engineer from Messerschmidt given a design position after the war at Cessna Wichita Kansas in the late forties/early fifties?? It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case when you look at the design of the front undercarriage particularly and the wing and rudder fin aspects. Does the earliest 310 look vaguely like a piston-engined baby cousin..???
Difficult to say who really invented radar, but the germans certainly started to develop it from the late 20's/early 30's (Weimar republik) onwards. They just never managed to develop it to its full potential. Richard Scherl and Hans Dominik already had the idea of using radiowaves for detection in 1916. They built a prototype but it was dismissed as unusable for war purposes. Got this from Wiki, so no guarantee of absolute correctness :)
jesus .......sólo imaginate ser el desafortunado piloto de una avioneta... y ver esa cosa detrás de ti tratando de cazarte......pero bueno de que el avión es bello..100% de acuerdo xD
a re these the same type of engines that was used on the plane in WW-II or modern engines? It looked like it didn't take to much run way to get the 262 in the air? Thanks for a very good video.
Modern engines (GE CJ610) installed in engine nacelles that look original and to keep the weight and CG correct. It is one of five new-build replicas constructed for the collector market, both single seat and dual cockpit. A few changes to the replicas included modern brakes, some modern cockpit instrumentation, and redesigned landing gear to correct a problem from WW2. One original Me262 is in restoration to fly with the WW2 Jumo turbines that have been extensively remanufactured with better materials for short flight displays, and it should hopefully fly in the next year or two if there are no problems.
I assume this is one of the Classic Fighter Industries aircraft, which means that it was built fairly recently. I'm wondering why it required a 5-year overhaul; is that the length of time required to do the overhaul, or the length of airworthy time after which the overhaul was required?
Everyone who flew both (and there were a lot of pilots that did), liked the gun platform the Me-262 provided, but the P-80 was more pilot friendly, had more reliable engines and was easier to fly. The Me-262 was (or rather could have been) faster, but the P-80 was more maneuverable and better in the climb rate.
P-80 was designed and built in 1943 and was flying in Europe in '44 and '45 but never was used in action. Lockheed wanted to build a jet fighter in 1939 but was turned down by the army.
Mike VanIn Everythings better in murica ? I just say Trump and you muricans wouldn't have been on the moon yet if, wouln't have the stealth fighter tech etc if germany wouldnt exist
This is GREAT ! Extraordinary job ! God I would have been with you during the restoration... and this magic moment ! I enjoyed to the last second ! Where and when do this bird will fly again ? The sound is also great ! ... different from the genuine Jumo's, but also less problems in sight ;-) Was he "easy" to fly ? ... landing seems not to problematic, did you re-inforce the nose wheel ? Bruno / Ex-Belgian AF ( Mirage VBR / F16 A), Sabena (B 767 & A330/340) & SABCA A/C technician and QC
Whether or not a German plane in the U.S. (either replica or original) wears a swastika is decided by the owner of the aircraft. Just because a FW-190 has one doesn't mean this 262 had one.
"Bad Guys" is a relative term. And because the Germans were much more advanced, the only advantage the Allies had were better leaders, numbers, and resources.
Emu Clan I watched a video with British World War II veterans, tankmen, one of them said: "When you see a Tiger aiming it's gun at you, you realize that you have to do something immediately. At the same time, you know that you can't do much".
it was because that the Germans where really smart back then and then tada their is the first jet and then the first stealth plane and the biggest rail cannon ND they were the ones that cent us to space and a lot of other things like the maus and ratte
Not a crash, but the gear collapsed and punched through the wing on rollout after landing. This was on one of the first test flights years ago. CNN was documenting the test flight and did capture that on video, but I have not seen that footage in years. The project documented the repairs, but the links to their photos don't appear to work anymore. The problem was a design flaw in the main gear attachments from the original Me-262 from switching from tail dragger configuration on the prototype to a tricycle gear. So the main leading gear had to be redesigned for the replicas.
Understood. I read where they saw the flaw and fixed it with braces. The article just gave the impression that it ended up on one gear and the pilot climbed out exclaiming, "well that was rough."
As an avid enthusiast on Luftwaffe period fighters, I remember reading with joy several years ago about a " Texas Airplane Factory " that got their hands on a borrowed original from a museum to reverse engineer. I knew they were going to update the avionics and go with more reliable GE engines. I also know that both types (less than 8 or 10 total) were already sold to individuals and museums worldwide. I tried to keep up with the project but thought they were dealing with delays. BUT, my biggest WISH is that they use at least a few of them collectively, along with maybe 1/2 scale RC models as well as the ME 163 Komet to make a super accurate movie about the entire German jet - rocket projects with the quality of acting we saw in Band of Brothers. They should start with the glider program that got a lot of German youth involved since they had been forbidden from producing military aircraft and offensive arms due to the Treaty of Versailles. Of course, much was done in secrecy and they were far more advanced in about everything as far as war capability as the world would soon see.
As it came into land, I was half expecting it to be 'straffed' by a P51 D, or a Hawker Typhoon.... just to add a bit of authenticity. I understand that an American company made about six of these beauties. Five were double seaters and just one single seater. Took me a while to realise that the reason for that is that they can make money out of charging people to sit as a passenger in a double seater.
It's amazing that you could build such a complex piece of machinery. Do you think the Swallow was superior to our P-80? I do realize that the P-80 was the next generation of jet fighters, but I was just curious.
Your right about the engines, that was its biggest drawback. That and the proper fuel was very hard to come by at the time. The Me262 was designed as a bomber killer to attack large bomber formations, hitler wanted to implement it as a ground attack plane, which was not what its designers had intended it to do. But hitler got whatever he wanted, so they went to work making it the best bomber it could be but it would never meet expectations as a A-G plane because of its purpose to hunt planes.
+Mongo L I bet it certainly is. It was a very early jet, it had its characteristics from a prop fighter (which were much better turnfighters than jets) but with much more speed under their wings than a prop plane, althought it is nowhere near as fast as the F35, it pretty much can just turn inside it or juke away from it's armaments. I'm not saying the 262 would have a chance against the F35's guided rockets/missiles or far superior speed, but it would easily win a dogfight against a F35 if we are only talking about the cannons, and the two pilots of the planes are matchingly skilled. On the other hand, only a stupid F35 pilots would engage in a dogfight with a 262, a smarter one would just use the missiles onboard, or energyfight the crap out of it.
+John Anderson That's what we thought in Vietnam so we didn't put a gun on the F-4 Phantom, this resulted in the aircraft being much worse in a dogfight than the Vietnamese aircraft. Dogfighting will never be obsolete. What do you do when you run out of missiles? You dogfight, and the F-35 sucks deep fried ass through a straw at dogfighting.
Can anyone tell me where to get drawings and specs for that kind of thing??? By the way that is outstanding guys....lots of work and research there!!! Beautiful!!!
The original engineering drawings for the Me262 were incomplete and/or missing (just like other rare German types.) Or you can sometimes find parts of them in private collections. The Me262 replicas were possible because the project agreed to restore an original example for the US Navy and copied the aircraft part-for-part to build the replicas. Classic Fighter Industries built the replicas and probably now have modern drawings and specs from the reverse engineering, but I do not know if they make them available (probably not.) If you are looking for drawings and blueprints, both the US Air Force Museum and the Smithsonian have original drawings for many aircraft in their archives and those are available. Historically, the Smithsonian has required you to sign a waiver that you will not construct a flying example with the blueprints. If you are looking for drawings for more common types like a P-51, then those are in the public domain now and are available on DVD from several providers. There is a European website that offers drawings and flight manuals for the WW2 German aircraft, but I do not remember the name.
FiveCentsPlease what is more amazing to me is that it took the USA and Britain years after the war before they used back swept wings like the Germans had
I honestly think this is one of the best looking aircraft ever produced.
have you seen the Ho 229 V3 (horten 229 V3)
And the Arado 234 Blitz from WW2
I agree
umm nope
Yeah
Amazing to watch such a historical aircraft fly again.
*REPLICA
@@Sapphiresoul2 Not a replica... brand new Messerschmitt Me-262 'C' model
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Literally says replica in the title, how is it that they'd get their hands on an ever more rare version of an already rare plane?
@@Sapphiresoul2 Well it's wrong, this is a brand-new Messerschmitt Me-262 C made in Everett Washington under license by DASA (Messerschmitt) and issued with a consecutive serial number with the 1940s production aircraft.
Absolutely beautiful replica. Good to see historic designs take to the skies again.
Yeah
That is a crazy looking jet, I would be scared if I saw that fly over my house :P
IT PROBABLY DID
Air Force 1 buzzed my house the other day...
Jacob Denzin
Im positive, I live near a place it goes frequently to practice landings
Jacob Denzin Near Andrewes.
imagine ww2 you are sitting on the Russian frontlines. cold as shit watching a dogfight above Berlin. when all you hear in the distance is that howl you wont go ow a jet because you never heard one before. it would be like hearing the the end of the world ( and i don't know if any flew in the finale days of the war i was using the example for dramatic effect ) xxx
way ahead of it's time- so amazing
it looks alot better with the original singeseater cockpit
The replicas were copied from an original two-seat trainer version. Two of the new replicas can be configured as dual-cockpit or single-seat by changing a few canopy parts.
I got to sit in an ME 262 about 10 years ago. My Dad was a volunteer at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. Back then they had an employees appreciation day once a year & opened up the cockpits & let us climb in a bunch of planes this was one of them. The current director there now says NO WAY! to this anymore.
Even now, after eighty years, it looks like an alien.
There was an incredible leap in aviation technology from 1939 to 1945, clearly as the the Me-262 shows.
Two-seat Me262s were constructed for training aircraft and for night-fighter versions. The replica above was a copy made from an original two-seat trainer during restoration. It can also be converted to single-seat configuration by swapping a few canopy parts.
This was fantastic. To recreate such a historical warbird must have been a momumental effort by supremely talented professionals. Salute !
Batt Masterson america and talented 😂
Is this one of the aircraft that were built at Everett Field in Everett, Washington? I ask, because those particular aircraft were NOT replicas, they were built with the blessing of Messerschmidt in Germany and continued on with the next available serial numbers from Messerschmidt.
They were, however, upgraded with things like the turbojet engines from an early LearJet, and a few other minor modifications.
I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to visit the production facilities when I was at Everett for a Collins Foundation show of a B-17 and a B-24. Someone told me about the Me-262s being built on field, and I was able to get in and see them. No photos allowed, at the time, unfortunately.
Yes, this is the first replica that was completed and this is a test flight after repairs.
+Gary C Yes, you are very correct, these are not replicas... but rather brand new production 262s..
Like the few Gloster Meteorites that still fly, none use the original WW2 era engines and all have had numerous major design improvements over the course of its production...
The real doktorbimmer
They can probably be considered second generation Me262s with production serial numbers and their own type designations and some improvements. The new production models are typed Me262A-1c (single seat), Me-262B-1c (dual cockpit), and Me-262A/B-1c (convertible between dual and single cockpit.)
FiveCentsPlease Yes, just as there are no "original" Gloster Meteors for example still flying today, the type had many model generations and variations during and post war from F.1 to NF.14
Numerous updates, completely different engines, cockpits, numerous major structural improvements and avionics upgrades...
FiveCentsPlease And also like the new model Me262's
Many later post war production Meteors were not produced by the Gloster company itself...
Yet they are still considered real Meteors...
Not replicas
A beautiful aircraft with an evil grin.
Need to win the lottery. Would order one tomorrow.
"Evil grin...", so true...it always reminded me of a shark !
oh my god !!! what a cool sound of starting engine. Thanks guys
Never thought I'd live to see one these flying again! Incredible. Thanks for sharing.
Beautiful! It needs the nightfighter paint scheme and a set of false radar antennae to match. Terrific job.
That's marvelous, for the first 7:40 min happens: NOTHING!
Not nothing - you get the imcomparable thrill of watching the engine run-up.
'Loud' is an understatement! I love the clicking with gradual spin-up.
The Me-262 look really great.
It's beautiful seeing a Me-262 and a P-51 flying so peacefully next to each other :)
That's not a P-51 mate...
It's a trainer version of one.
Are you sure? I know a quite a bit on WWII aviation, but I don't really know much about trainers. So to me it just looks like a modified 300S or some other stunt aircraft. lol
Ryan Ballenger I'm 100% positive. Watch the other video they uploaded, in that it's landing and it's clearly a mustang
Alright cool, I'll check It out.
from the Me 262 V5 a tricycle undercarriage was planned from the outset. The Me 262 V6 was the first Maschiene with hydraulically a retractable undercarriage. One had installed a tail dragger undercarriage of sides of the construction for weight reasons for the first experimentel plane.
awesome footage!
Must have taken place way up north, for it to be that bright out at 4:00AM! :-)
This jet,# 1, flew over in the air show on 10/23/2016, at Ellington airport, Houston, Texas. Just a beauty as it is looked on the ground. How gracefully as it is taking off and flying.
Perhaps even more beautiful is that the non-replica engines last longer than the ten hours of the originals.
A restoration agreement with the US Navy allowed the restoration team to copy an original two-seater and construct five new examples, with four airworthy. Engines are modern GE CJ 610 turbines and small improvements to landing gear and brakes allow safe flight. Two-seat and single-seat variants were constructed, with two replicas modified to fly as either version.
For the ME 262 overhaul they used a original Me 262 built in Leipheim at the Kuno Factory near the former Leipheim Air Force Base. They started the planes on the Highway, the so calles A8 from Stuttgart to Munich. Over 800 ME 262 were built in Leipheim.
A dozen Me262s were manufactured in Czechoslovakia at a former Luftwaffe factory and flew as the Avia S-92 from 1948 to 1951 for the Czech Air Force.
What a rush to be able to bring that plane back to life for the first time in 60 years. Sweet.
Absolutely amazing! Love it !
OK; same aircraft... I thought Stormbirds was only the name of the website. I followed the progress of the building of these aircraft on that site over the years, as well as White One and the Bf109 Project. Thanks for the explanation; it makes sense to me now. I'm not surprised that those kinds of development issues would take a long time to sort out.
Wow ! - Suprised that, as this amazing aircraft took of those engines sounded like a conventional rotory engine - Not the whoosh of those jets while it was stood there !
Thankyou for sharing
+Stephen Birks
There is also a prop-powered chase plane.
That is a sight to behold.
WOW.. love the sound on that.... Awesome video thanks for posting!
Ausgezeichnet! Lovely plane.
Beautiful lines...very nice
To add to the comments. This was the first plane completed by CFI and I recall that it had a gear collapse on an early test flight which punctured the wing structure to the top of the wing. CFI repaired the damage and actually researched and redesigned a weak point in the landing gear. I believe that this plane had a second gear collapse which required more repairs at Sanders Aeronautics.
@andgate2000
It had two landing gear collapses as I understand it, once under testing and another later. It's been under repairs and close inspection. The Collings Foundation was wanting FAA permission for limited passenger flights, so it's a fair assumption that all systems are being checked and re-checked.
Actually Ryan I was referring to the Lockheed P-80 - the only allied jet to see WW2 service was the Gloster Meteor . The Me 262 flew very early on but was disabled by Hitler wanting it to be a bomber
On Aug. 19th 1944, Luftwaffe pilot Heinz Herlitzius took off from Flugplatz Leipheim and reached a record top speed in level flight for air breathing combat aircraft of
624mph (1004km/h) in a Messerschmitt Me 262.
This was the fastest flight of a production combat aircraft until the F-86 Sabre in Sept 14, 1948 at 670mph
I do believe that the me-163 actually holds the record.
Clayton Not for an air-breathing aircraft.. the Me-163 was rocket powered.
Heini Dittmar broke 700mph on July 6th 1944 (702mph / 1130 km/h) in the Messerschmitt-163 it was the worlds fastest (rocketpower) aircraft until Chuck Yeager Nov.6 1947 in the Bell X1
The real doktorbimmer ah ok. i skipped over the "air breather" part.
Clayton No worries.. since we don't see rocket powered aircraft in military service we often forget the distinction.. in the 1940's rockets were still more capable in producing thrust than jets but soon fell out of favor when jet engine technology improved significantly
The real doktorbimmer Honestly it was a safety issue. Me-163s exploded often and the fuel was highly corrosive, The ki-200 (japanese 163) had two fully built versions and one of them exploded on landing during a test flight,
Re-engineering the weak landing gear was part of the improvements in the replica, though not without problems and gear collapses in the testing phases. The modern engines offer more power and performance but the aircraft must be flown within the original design limits since it was not improved to handle the extra speed and power available. Data cards in the cockpit are used to reference safe engine settings.
Congratulations! That was a lot of work over a long period of time.
5 mins of this could have been edited out ! and for another thing the Me -262 original engines had oiling problem for main shaft bearings they didn't explode to say they just seized up and failed. The British had a working model and found that flaw and they also changed the way they designed the engines as well.
The original aircraft were sound, it was the Junkers Jumo engines that weren't. The design of the engine was advanced for it's time, but lack of strategic metals (cobolt, nickel, etc) that were preferred were sustituted for lower grade alloys (mild stee)l- which had a very short engine life.
I think the "lack of strategic materials" is just an excuse. The best temp resistant alloys Germany had were Tinidur and Cromadur and both were used on the engines. High Nickel alloys, like Nimonic, were first seen around 1943 in Britain, Germany simply had no knowledge of them. As for parts having to be made from mild steel - that is common for production variants of the time. The RR Welland had aluminium coated mild steel combustion chambers just as the Jumo. Truth is the Germans attempted an engine that was technically too much for them. Even today small diameter axial flow compressors aren't the design of choice.
agt155 is that not the type of engine for the Tomahawk cruise-missle? Lasts long enough to get to the target, and then.. WHAM!!
RIVERINE
Yeah, I think they use small turbofans.
Any chance to see an Arado 234 coming out from you guys in the future? :D
They need to make some replica Tallboys for the Lancs to drop at air shows. That would wake up the crowd!
Fascinating aircraft, the ME162.
Well Done !. Beautiful aircraft. I am curious , is this a rebuild to original or a modern rebuild ? I always wanted to see a 262 that was rebuilt with upgraded engines , modern metals , electronics , ect. to see exactly what that airframe is capable of.
same. that's one of my dreams. heck if I can get my hands on one, you can bet I am gonna fly it
The original aircraft they copied to build the replicas was a two-seater. In total they build one new single-seater, two 2-seaters, and two that can be switched between singe-seat and two-seat configuration by changing a few parts.
Lovely stuff - the first 7 minutes can be skipped - as a British birder i struggled with the background song but realised it must be in the US, is it Western Meadowlark singing?
Lots of issues with the birds. These are actually from Stormbirds. The first issue they had was the J-85's and getting them proper airflow and proper exhaust exit, and it took a while to fit. They constantly had issue with the intakes and the fitment of the engine pods. The latest issue which has been causing lots of issues was the landing gear not working 100% properly, including pieces of the doors falling off in flight and not 100% retraction when in the stowed position.
I agree with John Perry about a little editing, but, everybody hears the "clicking" before the engines light, correct? Those were the spark-igniters "kicking-it-in-the guts". Good thing that the Luftwaffe had one-to-many Germans (Hitler) on this project! They could have been way ahead of everybody in the air war. Look at the experience of the pilots in JG 26 during the opening of the "Battle of Britain", hey! They were kicking ass using prop-driven planes like everyone else. Oops, I forgot about "The Fat One", also (call me Meyer).
Amazing aircraft !!
Such a sexy aircraft
Meh... F-14 looks even better.
Yes its sexy
Beautiful!
Guess they couldnt afford a tripod to hold the camera steady?
James Cooper guess all money went to build that thing
The Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was the first jet fighter used operationally by the United States Army Air Forces.[2] Designed and built by Lockheed in 1943 and delivered in just 143 days from the start of the design process, production models were flying but not ready for service by the end of World War II. Designed with straight wings, the type saw extensive combat in Korea with the United States Air Force (USAF) as the F-80.
Green and Swanborough 2001, p. 345
*drops mic*
actually, it did fly in the war. There are interviews with american servicemen who explain about the first time they saw it and how fast it moved over their plane, but you are right it was very late in the war and did little to prevent the allies.
The original Jumo 004s were started by a small two-stroke flat twin petrol donkey that sat behind the front nozzle cone. I've seen a video of the original startup procedure and the little engines which involved a ground mechanic pulling a start chord!! Just like a lawn mower. I wonder how the starters were shut down? Or did they simply stop after running out of a small fuel supply? Must've had a centrifugal clutch?
+Marc Conyard The Reidel starters can be operated with the pull start or with electric motors from the cockpit. And they can be shut down from the cockpit. There is a fuel supply tank inside the front of the 004 engine.
AWESOME! Thanks! To the guy who said the canopy was wrong: This is the two seat night fighter version. Willow Grove (PA) Naval Air Station had one (original-captured end of WWII) on display years ago, it has since been moved to a museum somewhere. BTW...How come no gear retract?
cruisinthefifties
The project to build the new Me262 examples made an agreement with the US Navy to restore the Willow Grove two-seat trainer example (Wik. No. 110639) and they would be allowed to use it as a pattern to copy (since original blueprints are incomplete.) It had deteriorated very badly at Willow Grove. The original was fully restored and now is on display at the Nation Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, FL. See here: www.timstanleyphoto.com/HDR/2013/i-Vfw8Dbf/0/L/ME-262-L.jpg
The first new-build example to fly suffered two landing gear collapses. The original Me262 prototype was a tail-dragger configuration, while production models were tricycle configuration. It was found that changing the landing gear configuration for WW2 production created weak areas in the landing gear attachment points in the wing. So for the new-build Me262s, the wing box structure and landing gear attachments had to be redesigned and strengthened. The video above is a test flight after repairs, and it is common to leave the gear down for test flights while handling and systems are checked first.
Thanks much for this terrific reply! I have a pic/pix of the 262 when it was parked at Willow Grove (outside----UGH) in the early '60s. There were also several other German and Japanese airplanes in the same condition there. I am so glad someone took this airplane into their care.
Cool pic
Disregarding its intended purpose for a moment, I consider the me262 to be a beautiful aircraft which still looks surprisingly contemporary nearly sixty years after its inception.
I always thought that the very early Cessna 310 had some visually familiar germanic design heritage.. tell if i am not wrong please ..was an exWW11 german aeronautical design engineer from Messerschmidt given a design position after the war at Cessna Wichita Kansas in the late forties/early fifties?? It wouldn't surprise me if that was the case when you look at the design of the front undercarriage particularly and the wing and rudder fin aspects. Does the earliest 310 look vaguely like a piston-engined baby cousin..???
Skip to 7:45 to see it actually start moving
looks like a small jet, but it mainly only used 4 cannons. sweet nice 2 see 1 fly
That's is amazing thanks for sharing.
Difficult to say who really invented radar, but the germans certainly started to develop it from the late 20's/early 30's (Weimar republik) onwards. They just never managed to develop it to its full potential. Richard Scherl and Hans Dominik already had the idea of using radiowaves for detection in 1916. They built a prototype but it was dismissed as unusable for war purposes. Got this from Wiki, so no guarantee of absolute correctness :)
I love the idea.
When I saw the chase plane, why did I keep thinking "remora"?
Experts have always said the me 262 was sharklike in appearance. As I'm sure you know.
nostalgia pura,una verdadera belleza!!!
jesus .......sólo imaginate ser el desafortunado piloto de una avioneta... y ver esa cosa detrás de ti tratando de cazarte......pero bueno de que el avión es bello..100% de acuerdo xD
saludos.
gracias e igualmente.
a re these the same type of engines that was used on the plane in WW-II or modern engines? It looked like it didn't take to much run way to get the 262 in the air? Thanks for a very good video.
Modern engines (GE CJ610) installed in engine nacelles that look original and to keep the weight and CG correct. It is one of five new-build replicas constructed for the collector market, both single seat and dual cockpit. A few changes to the replicas included modern brakes, some modern cockpit instrumentation, and redesigned landing gear to correct a problem from WW2. One original Me262 is in restoration to fly with the WW2 Jumo turbines that have been extensively remanufactured with better materials for short flight displays, and it should hopefully fly in the next year or two if there are no problems.
Thanks for the info.
Interesting aircraft an quite the accomplishment to get her flying. What was the chase plane, BTW? Socata Trinidad?
I assume this is one of the Classic Fighter Industries aircraft, which means that it was built fairly recently. I'm wondering why it required a 5-year overhaul; is that the length of time required to do the overhaul, or the length of airworthy time after which the overhaul was required?
Beautiful Plane!!!!!!
Everyone who flew both (and there were a lot of pilots that did), liked the gun platform the Me-262 provided, but the P-80 was more pilot friendly, had more reliable engines and was easier to fly. The Me-262 was (or rather could have been) faster, but the P-80 was more maneuverable and better in the climb rate.
And why nobody remembers the P-80, while the 262 is universally considered a wonder jet plane...?
That was awesome to see !!
P-80 was designed and built in 1943 and was flying in Europe in '44 and '45 but never was used in action. Lockheed wanted to build a jet fighter in 1939 but was turned down by the army.
the cockpit and canopy is all wrong
TrolldickOG Sr. No it isn't. This is the two seat night fighter version.
+cruisinthefifties you are absolutely correct sir... the new version can also be converted back to the single seat configuration
Thanks, doktorbimmer.
Yeah, I remember that first gear collapse... I think that video might have been on UA-cam as well, or at least on the Stormbirds website.
The sun's pretty high in the sky for 4:00 am in Seattle!! Everthaing's bedder in 'Murica, yeah!
=)
Mike VanIn Everythings better in murica ? I just say Trump and you muricans wouldn't have been on the moon yet if, wouln't have the stealth fighter tech etc if germany wouldnt exist
When they say replica, are they talking about the Czech S-92 post war variant or the modern recreation made in Washington State?
+Jagdtyderll Replica from the project in Washington State.
This is GREAT ! Extraordinary job ! God I would have been with you during the restoration... and this magic moment ! I enjoyed to the last second ! Where and when do this bird will fly again ? The sound is also great ! ... different from the genuine Jumo's, but also less problems in sight ;-)
Was he "easy" to fly ? ... landing seems not to problematic, did you re-inforce the nose wheel ?
Bruno / Ex-Belgian AF ( Mirage VBR / F16 A), Sabena (B 767 & A330/340) & SABCA A/C technician and QC
Whether or not a German plane in the U.S. (either replica or original) wears a swastika is decided by the owner of the aircraft. Just because a FW-190 has one doesn't mean this 262 had one.
wonderful aircraft! but how is the 262 to fly compare to a fighter with a piston engine?
I ask again, why do the bad guys get all the cool stuff?
Forrest Towns because it's hollywood style
"Bad Guys" is a relative term. And because the Germans were much more advanced, the only advantage the Allies had were better leaders, numbers, and resources.
Fair point. Still a cool ass plane though.
Emu Clan I watched a video with British World War II veterans, tankmen, one of them said: "When you see a Tiger aiming it's gun at you, you realize that you have to do something immediately. At the same time, you know that you can't do much".
it was because that the Germans where really smart back then and then tada their is the first jet and then the first stealth plane and the biggest rail cannon ND they were the ones that cent us to space and a lot of other things like the maus and ratte
@ba3cool
The prototype was a tail dragger.
I read (this?) one crashed on landing due to gear failure. The pilot climbed out and CNN supposedly had video of it. Is it out there?
Not a crash, but the gear collapsed and punched through the wing on rollout after landing. This was on one of the first test flights years ago. CNN was documenting the test flight and did capture that on video, but I have not seen that footage in years. The project documented the repairs, but the links to their photos don't appear to work anymore. The problem was a design flaw in the main gear attachments from the original Me-262 from switching from tail dragger configuration on the prototype to a tricycle gear. So the main leading gear had to be redesigned for the replicas.
Understood. I read where they saw the flaw and fixed it with braces. The article just gave the impression that it ended up on one gear and the pilot climbed out exclaiming, "well that was rough."
As an avid enthusiast on Luftwaffe period fighters, I remember reading with joy several years ago about a " Texas Airplane Factory " that got their hands on a borrowed original from a museum to reverse engineer. I knew they were going to update the avionics and go with more reliable GE engines. I also know that both types (less than 8 or 10 total) were already sold to individuals and museums worldwide. I tried to keep up with the project but thought they were dealing with delays.
BUT, my biggest WISH is that they use at least a few of them collectively, along with maybe 1/2 scale RC models as well as the ME 163 Komet to make a super accurate movie about the entire German jet - rocket projects with the quality of acting we saw in Band of Brothers. They should start with the glider program that got a lot of German youth involved since they had been forbidden from producing military aircraft and offensive arms due to the Treaty of Versailles. Of course, much was done in secrecy and they were far more advanced in about everything as far as war capability as the world would soon see.
As it came into land, I was half expecting it to be 'straffed' by a P51 D, or a Hawker Typhoon.... just to add a bit of authenticity. I understand that an American company made about six of these beauties. Five were double seaters and just one single seater. Took me a while to realise that the reason for that is that they can make money out of charging people to sit as a passenger in a double seater.
It's amazing that you could build such a complex piece of machinery. Do you think the Swallow was superior to our P-80? I do realize that the P-80 was the next generation of jet fighters, but I was just curious.
Great to see this bird flying again
GE CJ 610 turbines, which are the civilian version of the J-85.
Your right about the engines, that was its biggest drawback. That and the proper fuel was very hard to come by at the time. The Me262 was designed as a bomber killer to attack large bomber formations, hitler wanted to implement it as a ground attack plane, which was not what its designers had intended it to do. But hitler got whatever he wanted, so they went to work making it the best bomber it could be but it would never meet expectations as a A-G plane because of its purpose to hunt planes.
Dit is geen replica maar een gerestaureerde Me 262 met maximaal behoud van originele onderdelen
@airplaneboy10 Great video! Funny....The Swearingen Sx-300 and the 262 are both "homebuilts!"
Question: Does this use the original jet engines or modern-day jets that just happen to fit into the original frame?
Sweet, Thanks! Being in Cali Makes everything better lol.
A glimpse of that could have been, freaky idea and the beginning of the Jet age.
Curien247 It was the beginning of the jet age
It's not a night fighter version. It's a trainer.
It might be a better dogfighter than the F35
+Mongo L I bet it certainly is. It was a very early jet, it had its characteristics from a prop fighter (which were much better turnfighters than jets) but with much more speed under their wings than a prop plane, althought it is nowhere near as fast as the F35, it pretty much can just turn inside it or juke away from it's armaments. I'm not saying the 262 would have a chance against the F35's guided rockets/missiles or far superior speed, but it would easily win a dogfight against a F35 if we are only talking about the cannons, and the two pilots of the planes are matchingly skilled. On the other hand, only a stupid F35 pilots would engage in a dogfight with a 262, a smarter one would just use the missiles onboard, or energyfight the crap out of it.
+Mongo L dogfighting is obsolete
+John Anderson That's what we thought in Vietnam so we didn't put a gun on the F-4 Phantom, this resulted in the aircraft being much worse in a dogfight than the Vietnamese aircraft. Dogfighting will never be obsolete. What do you do when you run out of missiles? You dogfight, and the F-35 sucks deep fried ass through a straw at dogfighting.
manned fighters will become obsolete soon. If your onboard radar can't see the stealth drone or aircraft you won't be around to dogfight.
John Anderson Unmanned aircraft will never be as good as a human piloted aircraft.
Can anyone tell me where to get drawings and specs for that kind of thing???
By the way that is outstanding guys....lots of work and research there!!! Beautiful!!!
The original engineering drawings for the Me262 were incomplete and/or missing (just like other rare German types.) Or you can sometimes find parts of them in private collections. The Me262 replicas were possible because the project agreed to restore an original example for the US Navy and copied the aircraft part-for-part to build the replicas. Classic Fighter Industries built the replicas and probably now have modern drawings and specs from the reverse engineering, but I do not know if they make them available (probably not.) If you are looking for drawings and blueprints, both the US Air Force Museum and the Smithsonian have original drawings for many aircraft in their archives and those are available. Historically, the Smithsonian has required you to sign a waiver that you will not construct a flying example with the blueprints. If you are looking for drawings for more common types like a P-51, then those are in the public domain now and are available on DVD from several providers. There is a European website that offers drawings and flight manuals for the WW2 German aircraft, but I do not remember the name.
Thanks a ton...I'm a designer and never thought to check out the Smith....DUH!!
FiveCentsPlease what is more amazing to me is that it took the USA and Britain years after the war before they used back swept wings like the Germans had
Magnificent plane! Shake down cruise, you should've retracted the gear.
Oct. 15, 2019----Is this replica one of the handful of ones that were built using engines from T-33's or T-38's? Thanks for the video.
+Old, bald fat man One of four replicas with GE civil CJ 610 turbines.
Thanks for the reply.