@@MaticTheProto tank means tank in English ..🤘 the British titled any paperwork for their land ships as water tank to keep them secret..glad the name stuck ...land ship is just silly
@@stop-the-greed the Germans were like: „Hmm this is like a shell… like on a turtle… or armor… yes let’s just name it like that!“ And that’s how the Panzer got its name
@@MaticTheProto infact they called it panzerkampfwagen ... but the real german engeneering genius is make extreme long words than short them down as much as possible and forgett that they where redicolus long in the first place
It’s a good thing that Hitler was more obsessed with megalomaniac projects and untested but groundbreaking technology than with actually realistic projects like this one.
@@Farweasel Hitler didn't have much impact on the development of single types of aircraft. His effect has been played up by designers who survived the war and wanted to bury/downplay their own mistakes.
@@EneTheGene oh he absolutely did impact designs. two famous ones would be the Me262 which he insisted required bombs. then there is the STG44 which had to be developed as a machine pistol as Hitler had banned any more self loading rifle projects. however his nonsense pales in comparison to Goering and Erhard Milch's meddling.
The twin engined Focke Wulf fighters are my favourite German designs; the 57, the 187, the 189, and the 154 are such cool aeroplanes and so often forgotten.
I read Hungarian pilots' stories how they made fool of the Soviet fighter pilots in tight maneuvering in the Fw-189 'Uhu' at the Eastern Front. It was a quite well turning aircraft in experienced hands.
@fockewulf2352 the plane somehow prefigures the lines of the argentine's pucará. i wonder if the argentinian design owes some genes to kurt tank, who was a designer in argentina's airplanes industries post ww2.
@@steveperreira5850 : Yes, but it depends on having the right engine. The British Westland Whirlwind was beautiful, but it had the wrong engine (Rolls Royce Peregrine) which lacked development potential, and it was too small to be upgraded to Merlin engines. But the pilots loved flying the few (114) that were produced.
At 7.30, the test pilot's name was Hans SANDER, not Safer. He's one third of a remarkable team: Kurt Tank, Rudi Blaser & Hans Sander. Blaser was fully qualified as a test pilot (and Tank famously did a lot of his own test flying), while Sander was a qualified aero engineer. These three were cross skilled, and were central to the development of the FW-190 and Ta-152.
Considering the HUGE numbers of BF-109s that were lost due to their narrow-track landing gear, the higher cost and longer manufacture time of the FW-187 would have been non-issues, had it being chosen
Point made, as they may have rivaled F100 for unfortunate landing attempts. In regard to FW-197 and many others one thing the BF-109 always had going for it was that as among the 'muscle car'-type fighters it inspired it was very economical to produce. Willy knew how to leverage that.
That story of 'huge numbers' of 109s lost due to narrow landing gear is a 109' bashers favorite argument, the only problem with it is that it is almost completely false, the Spitfire had marginally narrower gear, the Wildcat also had narrow landing gear, you never hear that those aircraft suffered huge losses due to norrow landing gear!? 🤣
Ratio of 1,500 BF109 losses in the first two years of ww2 is around 10% takeoff and landing losses, spitfires numbers where all over the place, just over 10% early on, almost 20% in mid 1940, but lower during the late war. This mirrors training time (9months >100hours in type early, 6months >20hrs in type mid, 12months >150hours in time late) without any real reflection of aircraft type... hurricanes had simlar rates to spitfires, BF109's to FW190's, despite widely different wheel arrangements, technological maturity and pilot visibility,
@@janmale7767 1. 10% lost out of over 30K produced is not an insubstantial number for you to be air-quoting “huge”. 2. My comment is in the scope of the video (Fw-187 vs Bf-109), I don’t understand why you mix other airplanes into the discussion, as it has no bearing on my point. 3. I was not bashing on the 109, I consider it to be a great airplane, but the intentional design feature of having the landing gear be outward-retracting and connected to the fuselage had negative consequences, despite its benefits; that’s fact, not opinion. I’m not saying cons outweighed pros, just stating a fact. 4. As long as you bring up other airplanes, adding the Wildcat into the mix is misleading, as it was designed from the beginning as a naval fighter, meant to be flown from the heaving deck of an aircraft carrier; this means that the landing gear assembly was built to withstand harder landings than land-based planes. Moreover, the Wildcat had experience and pedigree behind it, as Grumman had long been building fighters for that purpose. Messerschmitt had never built a high-performance fighter before, and based his plane on the Bf-108, a lighter airframe, designed for a totally different purpose, and much of his experience before that had been designing gliders… aircraft without landing gear, so there is that. I wouldn’t know about the Spitfire, but Reginald Mitchell had a lot more experience building military aircraft than Willy Messerschmitt by the mid-1930s, and maybe (and I know I’m guessing on this particular point) he had a better grasp on how strong a landing gear had to be to endure the mostly grass airfields of the day. 5. I’m aware the numbers of 109s lost to undercarriage failure improved 1942-onwards, but the point stands.
@@SheepInACart i love when somebody comes up with the cold hard stats, rather than parroting some propaganda based BS just to be able to say something, if you cannot comment on something you do not have in deph knowledge on, rather don't comment at all!
The RML wasn't the only procurement team to get it wrong. The British equivalent did exactly the same with the Westland Whirlwind, a single seat, twin engined heavy fighter. It too was lumbered with a poor engine choice as all the RR Merlin's were earmarked for the Spitfire and Hurricane production lines. At least it did see service, mainly as a 'back stop' defence fighter to mop up the German bombers that did get through and was later relegated to training units for converting pilots to multi engined aircraft. Eventually some Merlin's were found and the aircraft showed what it could have done if equipped from inception but by then the airframe was dated and needed too many upgrades to make it viable in its original role so they were withdrawn and scrapped before the invasion of Europe.
Ironically, the DH Hornet and Sea Hornet proved the concept about two years too late. When you have that much power, maneuverability is simply unbelievable.
Whirlwind was uneconomic. Could make 2 spitfire or hurricanes for the price of 1 whirlwind, maintenance also costlier, performance similar, so no point in it existing.
You forgot to mention the phenomenal performance of the FW-187 V6 when it was finally fitted with the originally intended Daimler Benz 600A engines. It achieved 394.5 MPH in October 1939.
I first saw pictures of this aircraft in the 1960’s . There was a board game based on the TV show “12 O’clock High” that had cards with aircraft pictures and this was one. I wished that I would have been able to keep those cards.
The WWII TV show “12 O’clock High” was a total favorite of mine back in those days, as were "Combat" and "The Gallant Men". Anyway, IMO it'd be something indeed to have the whole game set and play it.
I found an eBay auction for a cardgame that does indeed have the 187, but it's called 'Ground Support'. I wonder if they mistook it with the Hs-129, but sadly that card isn't in the the foreground and you can only see the 'header'. Such old board / card games are really interesting time capsules.
@@fonesrphunny7242 I have several old board games. Including one from Avalon Hill game company “Starship Troopers” that was endorsed by Robert Heinlein and closely based on the book.
Willy Messerschmitt had the ear of major figures in the 3rd Reich, so his aircraft were often preferred over others. This was almost certainly a factor in this case.
@@jlv2335 A very intertaining anecdote but when the technical specifications of competing Heinkel and Messerschmitt aircraft Projekts are compared, Messerschmitt's aircraft consistently proved to be significantly better. The case of the Projekt 1065, the He-280 v Me-262 is an excellent example. While the He-280 did outperform every Allied aircraft, the Me-262 was an exceptional design with stellar performance that completely overshadowed the He-280.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Being a person who likes detail, is that trend consistent throughout all aircraft proposed by the two companies for specific roles?
Does anyone notice a resemblance between this aircraft and the FMA IA 58 Pucará? Interesting since Kurt Tank was working in Argentina postwar. Also the Pucara has a T-tail, which Tank had also been exploring.
What a beautiful looking fighter! Professor Tank was a pretty amazing chap. I remember reading about him flying a Ta 152C-0 prototype, and being pursued by "Indians at the garden gate" in the form of two P 51s, and hitting the MW 50 tit for full WEP and leaving the Mustangs standing! But such an important man doing standing patrols? Like I said, he was quite the laddy. As always a terrific video. Thank you.
There's a lot of similarities to the HS129 in the overall fuselage shape and the original wing/engine design (@ 3:09). Tank was really 5-10 years ahead of everyone else in that game. Even the FW190 had some very clever kit for it's time.
Many of Tank's designs boasted clean lines and relatively excellent performance. Fortunately, I don't think anything could have changed the ultimate outcome of the war, but a capable craft such as this could've made things that much more difficult.
Imagine this long range aircraft as the bomber escort during the battle of london (an aircraft that for what I read before, the Fw 187 could fight the Bf 109 in similar performance), instead of the Bf 110, maybe the outcome of that battle could had been diferent, but like other bad decitions the RLM was one ot the best allied to the british, americans and soviet during the war
Very interesting, and reminds me a bit of the Mosquito. Also, a quick fact, Mick Taylor who was The Rolling Stones guitarist, his dad worked for De Havilland.
As the 20 yr old singer in a classic-esque rock band, and fellow military machinery/history enjoyer, i find that fascinating and super awesome. thanks for sharing.
Great video yet again Rex, I've always had a thing for the 187 and the even weirder 189, Tank was a mad genius! Minor errata regarding engines: at 6:42 you show a DB600 engine upside down, they were an inverted V12 like all German designs of the period as mandated by the RLM in 1928. At 6:59 when you mention the Jumo 210, Jumo should be pronounced with the the same J sound as Junkers since it is just short for "Junkers Motorenwerke"
Top quality stuff. Kurt Tank aircraft could have been very difficult for the Allies. Willie Messerschmitt may have been a really good thing for the Allies.
@@paulnutter1713 The P-38 did a great deal especially in the pacific theater. Also it suffered many of the same problems FW-187 encountered. It had a rather slow development cycle because the AAF felt that they could build 2 P-51's for the same cost as a P-38
I wonder why when building the Ta 154 Kurt Tank didn't ape this low wing design more. In the later fighter the position of the engines seriously hampered visibility. The Fw 187 is a tidy little design, but the foward opening design of the cockpit canopy in the pre-preduction models would have been so difficult to open of the piolot needed to bail out.
In, say, 1934, your fighter was even a little faster than the bombers it might not help. With standing patrols you might be 5 miles away from the bombers when spotting them and even if your margin of speed was theoretically 10mph in your favour the fighter would be out of fuel before you got close enough to fire given the fuel consumption at full power. This happened in war games.
Also, time-to-climb. The bombers could cruise-climb from the moment they took off, but from a scramble-on-visual-warning, the fighters didn't have time to get up to their altitude. This is why radar was so vital in the Battle Of Britain: it gave enough advance warning time for the fighters to get up to the bombers' altitude and be waiting for them.
@@MrHws5mp where fighter twins had an advantage was the potential for loiter time at altitude, provided you had the engine power. That gave us the P-61 but in A and B versions it wasn't considered to be fast enough. For efficient interception they considered more like 50mph to be the margin required. It's also about manoeuvre - if a 10 mph advantage in a tail chase is all you have as a fighter then something like a G4M with a 20mm cannon in the tail is doom. If you try a head on, you might only get one pass before you turn round and are back to a tail chase.
@@wbertie2604 Indeed, but you still had to get up to that altitude to loiter there. Maintaining relays of standing combat air patrols would mean fewer fighters in the air at the time the bombers arrived and so more would get through. Yes, maneuver matters in all sorts of ways. The wider the turn radius of a fighter, the more time and fuel it takes to turn onto the tail of a bomber having intercpted it.
@@MrHws5mp all true. From 1937 onwards the RAF wanted to concentrate on cannon-armed fighters to maximize the effectiveness of even single squadron attacks, starting with two but rapidly moving to a requirement for four
Its a mistake to believe the FW 187 would have cleared the sky during the BoB - the fighters speed would have been tied to that of the bombers - no advantage there. Once the Luftwaffe went to night bombing there would have been no role for the 187.
Tank was a legend. We in England were lucky he didn't get too many types into service. Also get well soon buddy. A Bob Fleming clip to make you chuckle: ua-cam.com/video/MvuCTM2o-EY/v-deo.html
It was faster than a BF109B imagine if it had wooden components ie wooden tail and wings. The Germans had a habit of neglecting good aircraft or putting them aside and dithering until the last minute when they realized they actually needed them.
Today's video was made with the help of my friend Alex from @aviationdeepdive F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
It was the groupthink across most of the world ~1920-1940. And true, if not for the invention of radar… which not all nations had the scientific and industrial oomph to invent and implement.
They had to learn the lesson all over again over Korea. To be fair, they didn't anticipate the Mig-15, though during earlier practice B-29 "attacks" on England RAF Meteors shredded their formations.
Th Fw187 looks a lot like am F7F Tigercat! It could have probably been modified to have a second crewman and a radar to be a nightfighter, too. It makes the Bf110 look like a pile of wolfturd. Or wulfturd.
@@MrHws5mp you'd hope it could have been made SLIGHTLY lighter than a 110 with the same kit. But yes, a performance hit and hard to see where the Schrage Musik would go
For all the praise of Tank, in WW2 only the 190 made any impact, and both twin engined fighters were failures. Yet no one much talks about Camm who managed three solid designs in the same period.
Tbh honest, comparing this to a 109 is like comparing apples and pears. They both fly, but realistically they will both have strong points in different situations and be used for different things all together. (I feel you some what mention this with the bias but people have selective hearing with this topic around WwII era germany.)
If the Fw 187 made it to production powered by two Daimler-Benz DB 601 engines, it would have been a major scourge against the RAF with a top speed around 400 mph. That would have forced Rolls-Royce to develop a version of the Merlin engine for the Spitfire with the dual-stage supercharger earlier for starters.
@@mpetersen6Primarily as a counter to a fast-flying Fw 190A's at low altitude. They were Spitfire Mk. IX's fitted with Merlin 61 engines and clipped wings for optimized low altitude operations.
Germany didn't have industrial capacity to set up new production lines for every vaguely promising design - they were flat out already, producing inadequate numbers of existing inadequate designs. They went to war on the understanding that France and Britain wouldn't actually honour their commitment to Poland just as they'd abandoned Czechoslovakia - easy in hindsight to recognise the merits of a fast fighter that can escort bombers across most of southern England!
This is a beautiful design , and yes as commented the glazed floor of cockpit is a superb feature if you wish to dive down upon enemy aircraft. I opine the rear - gunner requirement is from " out dated " air combat theory. Imagine a ME 262 Jet with a rear facing gun pod , this was a fast aircraft and it's speed and maneuverability would be it's greatest defense and if it had gotten the original high output engines , would have been a terror to Spitfires and even P 40 thunderbolts ...with 2 cannon mounted underneath. Politics and cronyism destroyed many good ideas in the Luftwaffe , and encouraged absolute waste and folly in some heavy tank designs too. Elephant ...
As others have said this resembles the Whirlwind - the more I learn about aviation the engines are just so utterly important - it’s so easy to assume a new set can be slapped on but bad engines have damed so many good designs to the also rans list
Great plane! But the writing on the Spitfire float plane vid seemed much more interesting and engaging. Also, the 187 was a twin engine aircraft not a single engine.
Did Eric Brown, that famous Royal Navy test pilot [he got to fly just about every type of captured German, and Japanese aircraft], get to fly the Fw-187? If so, what was his opinion of the machine?
Wow. I would be interested to learn more about human factors when it comes to long-range single seater fighters - and bombers, for that matter. Have a good move, bless your new home.
Your butt gets sore. You have to pee, which can be very inconvenient. You may need a snack. Eight hours at high altitude in an unpressurized aircraft is tiring. So is hand flying all that time if you don't have an autopilot. These guys had a very hard job. Luckily most were very young and physically resilient. (BTW, most don't know the P-38 had an autopilot, a fact lost amid all the online badmouthing of the airplane.)
@@gort8203 I think the p38 is a good plane and Im willing to bet most people who bad mouth it are gamers who dont have to worry about resources,money (except money wasted on video games), logistics, training, numbers, and maintenance.
@@peterbrown6224 At least you're on oxygen so you can't smell the gas. On serious note, too much gas that can't be vented quickly enough can be incapacitating. Aircrew learn to not eat certain foods before flying in an unpressurized aircraft. Back in the day USAF alert dining facilities and flight kitchens that provided inflight meals served from menus approved by a flight surgeon.
It looks like it would have been better than the Bf 110, but I still don't think it would have been that great in service in its intended role. Kurt Tank may have been prophetic when he pointed out the advantage in range the Fw 187 would have, but the RLM was equally prophetic in their skepticism of the performance of this aircraft in light of coming technical advancements for single engine fighters. The concept of using twin-engine heavy fighters as long range bomber escorts failed in practice during the war. The Germans tried it with the Bf 110 and the Japanese tried it with the Ki-45. Sure, they had the range to stick with the bombers, but by the outbreak of war single engine fighters were too fast and too maneuverable to for them to compete. The Fw 187 would have been faster and more maneuverable than the Bf 110 but would it have been enough to compete with Spitfires and Hurricanes? I doubt it. These twin-engine heavy fighters ended up finding their true role in ground support, interception of un-escorted bombers, and most famously, night interception.
I think it had a role just not over Britain. Safe as long as more than 100k from a spitfire base. Hard for rn to suprise anybody in Mediterranean . Nasty for liberators and Sunderlands in battle if Atlantic
At 6:50 the DB600 engine is shown upside down. As I recall, it was an inverted V-12 engine, looking like a capital letter A. This led to the low placement of the exhaust stacks on aircraft using the DB 6 series engines, such as the Bf-109.
True, but it was much more complicated to build due to its shapes and pieces. War is won by numbers. Even the He 113, really named He 100 (cuz unlucky number or whatever) was much better to produce with it’s straight wings and less unique pieces. Tho I don’t remember why it wasn’t taken… if anyone does…
The 110 was a good aircraft. Just because it faced modern single seat single engine fighters of the RAF and lost doesn't mean anything. English always forget that the much vaunted Spitfire and Hurricane were out performed by the Japanese Fighters of the time, does that mean they were bad? Or how about the Mosquito and Beaufighter vs the 109 or 190? How about the 110s service on the Eastern Front where 110s were dominant at the start of the war until the Soviets designed more modern aircraft than it's design.What was the British equivalent to the 110 at the start of the war? The Blenheim fighter version out performed by everything.... enough said.
@rodneypayne4827 It was a terrible aircraft because the heavy fighter concept was a terrible idea. Besides lacking maneuverability compared to their single engined counterparts, heavy fighters were much bigger targets for enemy aircraft and antiaircraft guns. The USA was only able to develop successful twin engine fighters in the P38 Lightning and the F7F Tigercat, the UK in the De Haviland Mosquito and Hornet, and the Germans with the Dornier 338 Pfeil and (arguably) the Messerschmitt 410. This doesn't count all of the failed aircraft in those countries, plus Soviet, Japanese, French, and Italian aircraft. Edit: I should add one more British fighter to the successful list: Bristol Beaufighter.
@@rodneypayne4827 Just what are your criteria for a "good aircraft". Let's say a good aircraft is one that can perform its role well. You seem to misunderstand the primary purpose of the heavy twin-engine fighter as advocated by Kurt Tank and Benjamin Kelsey among others, which was speed with longer range and more firepower than single-engine fighters. A twin-engine fighter that can't face single-engine fighters when it gets deep into enemy territory can't do its job and is a waste of the resources allocated to fighter production. As early as the Battle of Britain the Bf-110 could not do its job without assistance from the Bf-109, which vitiated the contribution of the 110 in that campaign. The Luftwaffe would have been better equipped if it had more 109s in place of the 110s, whose poor performance hamstrung the escorted range of the German bombers. The P-38 on the other hand, while suffering from some technical issues, actually performed well as a fighter and didn’t need protection from enemy single-engine fighters. I’m sure Adolf Galland would have traded the Bf-110 for the P-38 given such a choice (or even better, the Dh Hornet). The preponderance of opinion is that the 110 was not good at its design role, and neither were the 210 and 410 that were supposed to replace it. How can all these airplanes be bad? The answer is in the design configuration. When you add the weight and drag of accommodating defensive guns and a gunner you don’t really have a fighter, you have a plane that is a target for a real fighter.
@@petergray2712 The heavy fighter was not a terrible concept, it was the execution of the concept here that was terrible. Benjamin Kelsey got it right with the P-38, and De Havilland got it very right with Hornet. Single seat is the key, not single engine. The Westland Whirlwind would probably have worked if the UK had stuck with it and given it better engines, but they didn't see the need for such a fighter given other priorities and no need to escort long range bombers in daylight. They did eventually get back to the twin engine fighter concept with the Hornet but too late. If that plane had seen action it would be the subject of uncountable UA-cam videos today.
@@gort8203 When I say terrible concept, I meant the original 1930s idea of it as either an escort fighter or a bomber destroyer. Unshackled and placed in the fast attack role, the heavy fighter excelled. But until they figured it out, the original concept destroyed a lot of aircraft designs, the Bf110 being the most egregious example.
And again, great content, thank you! I got a proposal for a video: Jumo engines vs the Daimler Benz ones, what's the difference, technology-wise? I think that would be interesting. Keep up the good work, you got a fascinating thing running here!
The USA had a heavy twin engine fighter with long range and a great climb rate and excellent speed.. the P38 lighting.. the 187 could have been the German equivalent.. if the Germans had 500 of these with DB 601s the battle of Britain may have gone differently
Indeed, and if the FW 187 would be put in production beginning 1939 instead to the ME 110 with DB 601 engines, it would have been possible. Not 500 but 200-300!
Thanks for an interesting video on this pretty and potentially significant plane. Had it been available in place of the BF110, it might have made a significant difference for escorting bombing raids into Britain. Spitfires would have been able to give it a hammering, but nothing like the mauling Spits and Hurricanes gave the BF110. We somehow often think of the P38 Lightning for its exploits against the Japanese, forgetting how effective and valuable it was as an escort for the daylight bombing attacks into Germany where a long range heavy fighter was the right design. With adequate operational tweaking while in service the FW187 could have filled that role very well. As a night fighter, the BF110 proved to be a significant threat to our bombers, and even more of a threat was the Ju88. The FW187 would not have had the advantage of radar, so would have been non-competitive in this role.
The 187 looks like it could have been the German equivalent to the British Mosquito or the American P-38. The BF 110 was almost a total disaster as a long-range escort fighter.
i have the theory that the luftwaffe was so agressively keeping the 110 around because it was likely the last fighter plane where goering could fit in the pilot seat. context: he actually was a ace of WWI but at WWII was to fat for most planes.
I've read that the cockpit of the 110 was actually quite a tight fit, even for an average sized pilot. The 109 was very tight. Goering would have needed something a bit larger.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_323_Gigant
@@jamesharmer9293 well i would file it under maybe given that he actually could fit in a fiseler storch spotter plane. so maybe they used shoehorns and a small crane to get him into a bf110.
@@Irobert1115HD You forget that the Storch had those side windows that flared outwards to allow downward visibility. Thay would also give more room for a better fed gentleman...
despite the reich being full of intelligent and educated people it’s pretty crazy to look back with hindsight at all the decisions they made that were clearly stupid.
But why they need one? If they had a lighting instead, it will be a disaster, as it will be usless at any point later in war. That shit cant even mount radar!
Costing twice as much as a single engine is a no brainer. Twice as much cost in engines, more material costs in the airframe and man hours in construction. While this would likely be better than the Bf-110 in daylight operation the Bf-110 probably had more growth potential as a night fighter
I do have the feeling that there are too many myths surrounding this plane. Normally the RLM did have a good process to compare designs. Please remember that the 109 was selected in spite that Milch hated Messerschmitt. So there must be arguments against this Fw. Maybe when Milch's records are finally published we could have more light on it. Or at least some primary sources from the RLM and not hearsay
Well germans already had plans to install a radar on plane. And if this thing (as i think) have just as much space inside as Hs129...looks like no brainer.
It's a good looking aircraft, I'll give it that. I like that flat bottom fuselage look it has. Just like the ME 262. That look reminds me of a shark. I'm pretty sure that's what they were going for.
Westland Whirlwind, anyone? Once upon a time, I nearly bought the Airfix kit of this 'what if' product of prescient genius, but went for the Lysander instead. Enjoyed making and painting it. Here in the UK, we're probably fortunate that the RLM had such poor judgement, as it had the potential to make a big difference to the Battle of Britain. Oh well, such is history. Thanks for yet another well-researched and well-presented vid. Glad to have subscribed.
Lucky yes, but we can’t get too carried away. Lots of "nearly" aircraft had flaws that just weren’t exposed as they were never tested in war. More still were made with compromises, hampering their potential. If every British design had access to the top notch Merlin for instance, or if the brits had a half decent radial, freeing up more merlins. Just a big what if.
@@samuelgordino you seem to be one of those people for whom no answer is satisfactory, like some 12 year old who knows about nothing except bicycle gears and will correct people pedandically and endlessly for not using *exactly* the right term for some obscure part or function.
The Battle of Britain could have ender differently had the Luftwaffe Bf 109-E been equipped with jettisonabe external fuel tanks , or drop tanks as they are known. Changing the subject a bit, I wonder how much better the performance of the Bf 110 would have been as a single seat fighter. No rear gunner, cockpit, guns etc.
This is a great expose! Thanks for your research! Could you please share more details about the armament, and the glass floor? It sleek lines reminds me and feels like it has similar to the Grumman F-7 Tigercat...
![The Fighter That Tried To Replace The Spitfire | Martin-Baker MB.5 [Aircraft Overview #82]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1CJWEc_sQkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well
Yeah! And it ain't a 87 - it's a 187 😛
Hey! It's just numbers!.I didn't write Ju or Fw...
The Pe-2 and Me 410 also had transparent floors.
@@FirstDagger ..both later - ain't they?
@@dallesamllhals9161 ; Didn't realize we were having a competition about introduction date. You can keep that goalpost.
@@FirstDagger ..erh..thanks? (FIRST-Dagger) 🙃
For someone with the last name "TANK", Kurt was a genius in the aviation world
Tank means… tank in german. Not the vehicle, the storage unit
@@MaticTheProto tank means tank in English ..🤘 the British titled any paperwork for their land ships as water tank to keep them secret..glad the name stuck ...land ship is just silly
@@stop-the-greed the Germans were like:
„Hmm this is like a shell… like on a turtle… or armor… yes let’s just name it like that!“
And that’s how the Panzer got its name
@@MaticTheProtoIndeed
@@MaticTheProto infact they called it panzerkampfwagen ... but the real german engeneering genius is make extreme long words than short them down as much as possible and forgett that they where redicolus long in the first place
Evidently Goering had his Mosquito equivalent all along. Good thing he was stupid and high as a kite. A most excellent video, Rex.
It’s a good thing that Hitler was more obsessed with megalomaniac projects and untested but groundbreaking technology than with actually realistic projects like this one.
@@therealspeedwagon1451How did you draw Hitler to this?
@@EneTheGene Yeah .... What did he have to do with WW2 & Germany's armmament policies eh?
Oh, hang on.......
@@Farweasel Hitler didn't have much impact on the development of single types of aircraft. His effect has been played up by designers who survived the war and wanted to bury/downplay their own mistakes.
@@EneTheGene oh he absolutely did impact designs. two famous ones would be the Me262 which he insisted required bombs. then there is the STG44 which had to be developed as a machine pistol as Hitler had banned any more self loading rifle projects. however his nonsense pales in comparison to Goering and Erhard Milch's meddling.
The twin engined Focke Wulf fighters are my favourite German designs; the 57, the 187, the 189, and the 154 are such cool aeroplanes and so often forgotten.
I read Hungarian pilots' stories how they made fool of the Soviet fighter pilots in tight maneuvering in the Fw-189 'Uhu' at the Eastern Front. It was a quite well turning aircraft in experienced hands.
The FW-154 is such a beautiful aircraft. German Mosquito, therefore called Moskito.
@fockewulf2352 the plane somehow prefigures the lines of the argentine's pucará. i wonder if the argentinian design owes some genes to kurt tank, who was a designer in argentina's airplanes industries post ww2.
Beautiful means “capable” when it comes to airplanes.
@@steveperreira5850 : Yes, but it depends on having the right engine. The British Westland Whirlwind was beautiful, but it had the wrong engine (Rolls Royce Peregrine) which lacked development potential, and it was too small to be upgraded to Merlin engines. But the pilots loved flying the few (114) that were produced.
At 7.30, the test pilot's name was Hans SANDER, not Safer. He's one third of a remarkable team: Kurt Tank, Rudi Blaser & Hans Sander. Blaser was fully qualified as a test pilot (and Tank famously did a lot of his own test flying), while Sander was a qualified aero engineer. These three were cross skilled, and were central to the development of the FW-190 and Ta-152.
Considering the HUGE numbers of BF-109s that were lost due to their narrow-track landing gear, the higher cost and longer manufacture time of the FW-187 would have been non-issues, had it being chosen
Point made, as they may have rivaled F100 for unfortunate landing attempts. In regard to FW-197 and many others one thing the BF-109 always had going for it was that as among the 'muscle car'-type fighters it inspired it was very economical to produce. Willy knew how to leverage that.
That story of 'huge numbers' of 109s lost due to narrow landing gear is a 109' bashers favorite argument, the only problem with it is that it is almost completely false, the Spitfire had marginally narrower gear, the Wildcat also had narrow landing gear, you never hear that those aircraft suffered huge losses due to norrow landing gear!? 🤣
Ratio of 1,500 BF109 losses in the first two years of ww2 is around 10% takeoff and landing losses, spitfires numbers where all over the place, just over 10% early on, almost 20% in mid 1940, but lower during the late war. This mirrors training time (9months >100hours in type early, 6months >20hrs in type mid, 12months >150hours in time late) without any real reflection of aircraft type... hurricanes had simlar rates to spitfires, BF109's to FW190's, despite widely different wheel arrangements, technological maturity and pilot visibility,
@@janmale7767
1. 10% lost out of over 30K produced is not an insubstantial number for you to be air-quoting “huge”.
2. My comment is in the scope of the video (Fw-187 vs Bf-109), I don’t understand why you mix other airplanes into the discussion, as it has no bearing on my point.
3. I was not bashing on the 109, I consider it to be a great airplane, but the intentional design feature of having the landing gear be outward-retracting and connected to the fuselage had negative consequences, despite its benefits; that’s fact, not opinion. I’m not saying cons outweighed pros, just stating a fact.
4. As long as you bring up other airplanes, adding the Wildcat into the mix is misleading, as it was designed from the beginning as a naval fighter, meant to be flown from the heaving deck of an aircraft carrier; this means that the landing gear assembly was built to withstand harder landings than land-based planes. Moreover, the Wildcat had experience and pedigree behind it, as Grumman had long been building fighters for that purpose. Messerschmitt had never built a high-performance fighter before, and based his plane on the Bf-108, a lighter airframe, designed for a totally different purpose, and much of his experience before that had been designing gliders… aircraft without landing gear, so there is that. I wouldn’t know about the Spitfire, but Reginald Mitchell had a lot more experience building military aircraft than Willy Messerschmitt by the mid-1930s, and maybe (and I know I’m guessing on this particular point) he had a better grasp on how strong a landing gear had to be to endure the mostly grass airfields of the day.
5. I’m aware the numbers of 109s lost to undercarriage failure improved 1942-onwards, but the point stands.
@@SheepInACart i love when somebody comes up with the cold hard stats, rather than parroting some propaganda based BS just to be able to say something, if you cannot comment on something you do not have in deph knowledge on, rather don't comment at all!
The RML wasn't the only procurement team to get it wrong. The British equivalent did exactly the same with the Westland Whirlwind, a single seat, twin engined heavy fighter. It too was lumbered with a poor engine choice as all the RR Merlin's were earmarked for the Spitfire and Hurricane production lines. At least it did see service, mainly as a 'back stop' defence fighter to mop up the German bombers that did get through and was later relegated to training units for converting pilots to multi engined aircraft. Eventually some Merlin's were found and the aircraft showed what it could have done if equipped from inception but by then the airframe was dated and needed too many upgrades to make it viable in its original role so they were withdrawn and scrapped before the invasion of Europe.
What!!!!!
Ironically, the DH Hornet and Sea Hornet proved the concept about two years too late. When you have that much power, maneuverability is simply unbelievable.
And the Mosquito was essentially pushed through by the persistence of Geoffrey de Havilland.
Whirlwind was way to small for Merlins - high altitude version (Welkin) had merlins.
Whirlwind was uneconomic. Could make 2 spitfire or hurricanes for the price of 1 whirlwind, maintenance also costlier, performance similar, so no point in it existing.
Thank you for covering this aircraft, I have long admired it for its racy looks.
You forgot to mention the phenomenal performance of the FW-187 V6 when it was finally fitted with the originally intended Daimler Benz 600A engines. It achieved 394.5 MPH in October 1939.
I first saw pictures of this aircraft in the 1960’s . There was a board game based on the TV show “12 O’clock High” that had cards with aircraft pictures and this was one. I wished that I would have been able to keep those cards.
Cool.
The WWII TV show “12 O’clock High” was a total favorite of mine back in those days, as were "Combat" and "The Gallant Men". Anyway, IMO it'd be something indeed to have the whole game set and play it.
I found an eBay auction for a cardgame that does indeed have the 187, but it's called 'Ground Support'. I wonder if they mistook it with the Hs-129, but sadly that card isn't in the the foreground and you can only see the 'header'.
Such old board / card games are really interesting time capsules.
@@fonesrphunny7242 I have several old board games. Including one from Avalon Hill game company “Starship Troopers” that was endorsed by Robert Heinlein and closely based on the book.
Willy Messerschmitt had the ear of major figures in the 3rd Reich, so his aircraft were often preferred over others. This was almost certainly a factor in this case.
Messerschmitt aircraft were also preferred because they were significantly better than others..
And cheaper. Me's were a good buy. @@sandervanderkammen9230
Yes and General Milch the only high rank opponent to WM was driven to suicide ...
@@jlv2335 A very intertaining anecdote but when the technical specifications of competing Heinkel and Messerschmitt aircraft Projekts are compared, Messerschmitt's aircraft consistently proved to be significantly better.
The case of the Projekt 1065, the He-280 v Me-262 is an excellent example.
While the He-280 did outperform every Allied aircraft, the Me-262 was an exceptional design with stellar performance that completely overshadowed the He-280.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Being a person who likes detail, is that trend consistent throughout all aircraft proposed by the two companies for specific roles?
Does anyone notice a resemblance between this aircraft and the FMA IA 58 Pucará? Interesting since Kurt Tank was working in Argentina postwar. Also the Pucara has a T-tail, which Tank had also been exploring.
Hilariously I made the same comment before seeing you had already made this comment. They are VERY similar.
It shows a greater resemblance to the Hs129
10:55 twin engined, not single engined. Excellent video for a little known aircraft.
I believe he meant if the 187 became a single-engined craft due to engine failure.
@@reinbeers5322 , it's clear from the rest of the text that he did not mean that.
What a beautiful looking fighter! Professor Tank was a pretty amazing chap. I remember reading about him flying a Ta 152C-0 prototype, and being pursued by "Indians at the garden gate" in the form of two P 51s, and hitting the MW 50 tit for full WEP and leaving the Mustangs standing!
But such an important man doing standing patrols? Like I said, he was quite the laddy.
As always a terrific video. Thank you.
There's a lot of similarities to the HS129 in the overall fuselage shape and the original wing/engine design (@ 3:09). Tank was really 5-10 years ahead of everyone else in that game.
Even the FW190 had some very clever kit for it's time.
Many of Tank's designs boasted clean lines and relatively excellent performance. Fortunately, I don't think anything could have changed the ultimate outcome of the war, but a capable craft such as this could've made things that much more difficult.
This thing may have given allied bomber formations hell, but I think you're right, Germany never had the juice to achieve a total victory.
Imagine this long range aircraft as the bomber escort during the battle of london (an aircraft that for what I read before, the Fw 187 could fight the Bf 109 in similar performance), instead of the Bf 110, maybe the outcome of that battle could had been diferent, but like other bad decitions the RLM was one ot the best allied to the british, americans and soviet during the war
@fockewulf2352 Username checks out. LoL
@@scullystie4389 The fact Germany didn't develop proximity fuses really hurt their ability to prevent allied air superiority.
Relatively excellent?
The Henschel Hs 129 Panzerknacker looks a lot like this. So the design lives on! Very good video thank you
I thought I'd seen something very similar before!
The description didn't match my memories, and now I understand why. ;-)
Was thinking exactly the same! I love the Duck!
Hs 129 is the fat duck and the FW 187 is the slim swan.
This is closer to the German version of the Westland Whirlwind, even down to the engine issues and cost concerns.
Now, I know the Hs129 as the Battlebus - so it had two other nicknames?
The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well. The cockpit floor being transparent is quite an amazing feature as well.
Yeah, these thing are very helpful when you pilot stuka from cabine.
Very interesting, and reminds me a bit of the Mosquito.
Also, a quick fact, Mick Taylor who was The Rolling Stones guitarist, his dad worked for De Havilland.
As the 20 yr old singer in a classic-esque rock band, and fellow military machinery/history enjoyer, i find that fascinating and super awesome. thanks for sharing.
Looks like the props both turned the same way instead of counter rotating which made a difference in the later P-38 models. Great vid as always❤❤❤❤❤
@MrLBPug some models such as the P322 Lightning 2 had props that turned both props to starboard.
Great video yet again Rex, I've always had a thing for the 187 and the even weirder 189, Tank was a mad genius!
Minor errata regarding engines: at 6:42 you show a DB600 engine upside down, they were an inverted V12 like all German designs of the period as mandated by the RLM in 1928. At 6:59 when you mention the Jumo 210, Jumo should be pronounced with the the same J sound as Junkers since it is just short for "Junkers Motorenwerke"
Yes, and the drawing behind on 6:42 is not a FW-187 but and Arado 240.
10:52 he mistakenly refers to the 187 as a single engine design.
The narration sounds fine.
I would say this is an excellent example of empire building among various factions in the bureaucracy.
great looking aircraft
Never heard about this plane, thanks for the video! The audio quality is great, no hint of a cough or sudden cuts. Wishing you a speedy recovery!
Top quality stuff. Kurt Tank aircraft could have been very difficult for the Allies. Willie Messerschmitt may have been a really good thing for the Allies.
That looks like the first shark shaped fuselage later seen in the Me 262, what do you think?
I can't think of what an early war German P-38 Lightning would have done to the opposition
replace double the number of Bf 109s perhaps
@@RoamingAdhocrat Nope. Replace a slightly lower number of less capable Bf110s without affecting the number of Bf109s.
Same as an actual p38......not a lot
@@paulnutter1713 The P-38 did a great deal especially in the pacific theater. Also it suffered many of the same problems FW-187 encountered. It had a rather slow development cycle because the AAF felt that they could build 2 P-51's for the same cost as a P-38
@@paulnutter1713 The P-38 that slaughtered Zeros in the Pacific. And did well in the ETO as well. especially the Med?
An excellent informative presentation on an impressive aircraft. Thank you!
I wonder why when building the Ta 154 Kurt Tank didn't ape this low wing design more. In the later fighter the position of the engines seriously hampered visibility.
The Fw 187 is a tidy little design, but the foward opening design of the cockpit canopy in the pre-preduction models would have been so difficult to open of the piolot needed to bail out.
Good luck with the move, just moved house a few months ago myself. Thanks for all the great vids, looking forward to the next one.
In, say, 1934, your fighter was even a little faster than the bombers it might not help. With standing patrols you might be 5 miles away from the bombers when spotting them and even if your margin of speed was theoretically 10mph in your favour the fighter would be out of fuel before you got close enough to fire given the fuel consumption at full power. This happened in war games.
Also, time-to-climb. The bombers could cruise-climb from the moment they took off, but from a scramble-on-visual-warning, the fighters didn't have time to get up to their altitude. This is why radar was so vital in the Battle Of Britain: it gave enough advance warning time for the fighters to get up to the bombers' altitude and be waiting for them.
@@MrHws5mp where fighter twins had an advantage was the potential for loiter time at altitude, provided you had the engine power. That gave us the P-61 but in A and B versions it wasn't considered to be fast enough. For efficient interception they considered more like 50mph to be the margin required.
It's also about manoeuvre - if a 10 mph advantage in a tail chase is all you have as a fighter then something like a G4M with a 20mm cannon in the tail is doom. If you try a head on, you might only get one pass before you turn round and are back to a tail chase.
@@wbertie2604 Indeed, but you still had to get up to that altitude to loiter there. Maintaining relays of standing combat air patrols would mean fewer fighters in the air at the time the bombers arrived and so more would get through.
Yes, maneuver matters in all sorts of ways. The wider the turn radius of a fighter, the more time and fuel it takes to turn onto the tail of a bomber having intercpted it.
@@MrHws5mp all true.
From 1937 onwards the RAF wanted to concentrate on cannon-armed fighters to maximize the effectiveness of even single squadron attacks, starting with two but rapidly moving to a requirement for four
Its a mistake to believe the FW 187 would have cleared the sky during the BoB - the fighters speed would have been tied to that of the bombers - no advantage there. Once the Luftwaffe went to night bombing there would have been no role for the 187.
The audio was perfect !
Tank was a legend. We in England were lucky he didn't get too many types into service. Also get well soon buddy. A Bob Fleming clip to make you chuckle: ua-cam.com/video/MvuCTM2o-EY/v-deo.html
Dude even made a jet fighter for india in his old years, really was build like a tank.
It was A Very Good Thing that the RLM was so corrupt.
The RLM sleeping on this plane was one of history's greatest blunders.
5:37 Hey! That looks a bit like a Me 262 ;-)
Thanks very much from a prop enthousiast, these were the times! Keep up your great work, greetz from 🇳🇱!!
It was faster than a BF109B imagine if it had wooden components ie wooden tail and wings. The Germans had a habit of neglecting good aircraft or putting them aside and dithering until the last minute when they realized they actually needed them.
An exquisitely excellent presentation, thank you!
Around 6:45 the line drawing you're showing is an Arado AR240, not the FW187. So how about a video on the AR 240 as a comparison?
Today's video was made with the help of my friend Alex from @aviationdeepdive
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
The idea of the "A Bomber will always get through" was also a principle that the US Strategic Air Command followed post WWII too
It was the groupthink across most of the world ~1920-1940. And true, if not for the invention of radar… which not all nations had the scientific and industrial oomph to invent and implement.
They had to learn the lesson all over again over Korea. To be fair, they didn't anticipate the Mig-15, though during earlier practice B-29 "attacks" on England RAF Meteors shredded their formations.
Black Thursday rings a bell
Another beautiful Kurt Tank design.
14:43, notice the similarity of the front view of the fuselage to the ME262? Or is it my imagination?
I can see why, but I think Me 262 is slightly more...slimmer? sharper? Hard to put it
I was thinking of posting the same thing. It’s got the same triangular cross section.
Cool thanks Rex great work Sir
Th Fw187 looks a lot like am F7F Tigercat! It could have probably been modified to have a second crewman and a radar to be a nightfighter, too. It makes the Bf110 look like a pile of wolfturd. Or wulfturd.
It would have been too small to add the extra equipment, as I subsequently see, Rex noted.
The F7F Tigercat was built 13 years later and its cabin is further back
@@wbertie2604 And a back-seater and a radar would have made it as heavy as a Bf 110, and on the same engines, there goes the performance.
@@MrHws5mp you'd hope it could have been made SLIGHTLY lighter than a 110 with the same kit. But yes, a performance hit and hard to see where the Schrage Musik would go
For all the praise of Tank, in WW2 only the 190 made any impact, and both twin engined fighters were failures. Yet no one much talks about Camm who managed three solid designs in the same period.
Tbh honest, comparing this to a 109 is like comparing apples and pears. They both fly, but realistically they will both have strong points in different situations and be used for different things all together. (I feel you some what mention this with the bias but people have selective hearing with this topic around WwII era germany.)
If the Fw 187 made it to production powered by two Daimler-Benz DB 601 engines, it would have been a major scourge against the RAF with a top speed around 400 mph. That would have forced Rolls-Royce to develop a version of the Merlin engine for the Spitfire with the dual-stage supercharger earlier for starters.
Which they did anyways
@@mpetersen6Primarily as a counter to a fast-flying Fw 190A's at low altitude. They were Spitfire Mk. IX's fitted with Merlin 61 engines and clipped wings for optimized low altitude operations.
Germany didn't have industrial capacity to set up new production lines for every vaguely promising design - they were flat out already, producing inadequate numbers of existing inadequate designs. They went to war on the understanding that France and Britain wouldn't actually honour their commitment to Poland just as they'd abandoned Czechoslovakia - easy in hindsight to recognise the merits of a fast fighter that can escort bombers across most of southern England!
Another outstanding video, love the channel.
It looks like a combination of th Ta 154 and Me 410
de Havilland DH.88 Comet
They weren't developed till long after the 187 so more likely they took from the 187
What a gorgeous plane
Like a DH Hornet, but 7 years earlier!
Or F7F Tigercat
This is a beautiful design , and yes as commented the glazed floor of cockpit is a superb feature if you wish to dive down upon enemy aircraft. I opine the rear - gunner requirement is from " out dated " air combat theory. Imagine a ME 262 Jet with a rear facing gun pod , this was a fast aircraft and it's speed and maneuverability would be it's greatest defense and if it had gotten the original high output engines , would have been a terror to Spitfires and even P 40 thunderbolts ...with 2 cannon mounted underneath. Politics and cronyism destroyed many good ideas in the Luftwaffe , and encouraged absolute waste and folly in some heavy tank designs too. Elephant ...
There's something attractive about twin engined heavy fighters. For me, the late war British Hornet sits atop the list.
As others have said this resembles the Whirlwind - the more I learn about aviation the engines are just so utterly important - it’s so easy to assume a new set can be slapped on but bad engines have damed so many good designs to the also rans list
10:57 as the FW-187 was a single engined aircraft it was more survivable than the single engined 109's??
I heard that as well. Clearly a mistake.
noticed as well, was checking replies to see if it needed posting
I love single seat version of the falke, looks very sporty, the me-110 wasn't something like that at all
Great plane! But the writing on the Spitfire float plane vid seemed much more interesting and engaging. Also, the 187 was a twin engine aircraft not a single engine.
It's funny that with so many "What If" scenarios of WW2 featuring strange/unproduced aircraft designs, I have never seen this used.
Did Eric Brown, that famous Royal Navy test pilot [he got to fly just about every type of captured German, and Japanese aircraft], get to fly the Fw-187? If so, what was his opinion of the machine?
No he didn't. None of them was captured and none were left at the end of the war.
Saturday just got so much better👍👍👍
I think that the huge flexibility of the BF 110 in many different roles compensates its disadvantages to the FW 187.
Yeah, even if it worse now-we can slap radar on it. And germans were second only to US in radars.
Jack of all trades, master in none.
Great video. One of the very few German machines I did not know. Thank you
Wow.
I would be interested to learn more about human factors when it comes to long-range single seater fighters - and bombers, for that matter.
Have a good move, bless your new home.
Your butt gets sore. You have to pee, which can be very inconvenient. You may need a snack. Eight hours at high altitude in an unpressurized aircraft is tiring. So is hand flying all that time if you don't have an autopilot. These guys had a very hard job. Luckily most were very young and physically resilient. (BTW, most don't know the P-38 had an autopilot, a fact lost amid all the online badmouthing of the airplane.)
@@gort8203 I think the p38 is a good plane and Im willing to bet most people who bad mouth it are gamers who dont have to worry about resources,money (except money wasted on video games), logistics, training, numbers, and maintenance.
@@gort8203 Not to mention your intestinal gases 🙂
No idea that the P-38 had an autopilot, thank you.
@@peterbrown6224 At least you're on oxygen so you can't smell the gas. On serious note, too much gas that can't be vented quickly enough can be incapacitating. Aircrew learn to not eat certain foods before flying in an unpressurized aircraft. Back in the day USAF alert dining facilities and flight kitchens that provided inflight meals served from menus approved by a flight surgeon.
5:42 Beautiful aircraft. Ahead of it's time!
It looks like it would have been better than the Bf 110, but I still don't think it would have been that great in service in its intended role. Kurt Tank may have been prophetic when he pointed out the advantage in range the Fw 187 would have, but the RLM was equally prophetic in their skepticism of the performance of this aircraft in light of coming technical advancements for single engine fighters.
The concept of using twin-engine heavy fighters as long range bomber escorts failed in practice during the war. The Germans tried it with the Bf 110 and the Japanese tried it with the Ki-45. Sure, they had the range to stick with the bombers, but by the outbreak of war single engine fighters were too fast and too maneuverable to for them to compete. The Fw 187 would have been faster and more maneuverable than the Bf 110 but would it have been enough to compete with Spitfires and Hurricanes? I doubt it.
These twin-engine heavy fighters ended up finding their true role in ground support, interception of un-escorted bombers, and most famously, night interception.
I think it had a role just not over Britain.
Safe as long as more than 100k from a spitfire base.
Hard for rn to suprise anybody in Mediterranean .
Nasty for liberators and Sunderlands in battle if Atlantic
According to the rule: a beautiful bird flies beautifully. And it was a really beautiful plane!🐦
Probably would have been better than the Hs 129 in a ground role
At 6:50 the DB600 engine is shown upside down. As I recall, it was an inverted V-12 engine, looking like a capital letter A. This led to the low placement of the exhaust stacks on aircraft using the DB 6 series engines, such as the Bf-109.
As much as I love the 109, the he 112 would’ve been a better early war fighter I think. Germany had a lot of missed opportunities
I didagree. The 112 was way harder to produce and thus, the outnumberd Luftwaffe would be at even more of a disadvantage
True, but it was much more complicated to build due to its shapes and pieces. War is won by numbers. Even the He 113, really named He 100 (cuz unlucky number or whatever) was much better to produce with it’s straight wings and less unique pieces. Tho I don’t remember why it wasn’t taken… if anyone does…
Hindsight’s a marvellous thing.
Well, if NO ONE shoot holes in your wings(cooling) i'd take the He 100 anyday 😛
@@dallesamllhals9161 109 had wing cooling too?
A video on the Fw 189 Uhu would be appreciated.
Kurt Tank was right. Single-seat is the way to configure a long range or heavy fighter, and Germany committed to the wrong path with the BF-110.
The 110 was a good aircraft. Just because it faced modern single seat single engine fighters of the RAF and lost doesn't mean anything. English always forget that the much vaunted Spitfire and Hurricane were out performed by the Japanese Fighters of the time, does that mean they were bad? Or how about the Mosquito and Beaufighter vs the 109 or 190? How about the 110s service on the Eastern Front where 110s were dominant at the start of the war until the Soviets designed more modern aircraft than it's design.What was the British equivalent to the 110 at the start of the war? The Blenheim fighter version out performed by everything.... enough said.
@rodneypayne4827 It was a terrible aircraft because the heavy fighter concept was a terrible idea. Besides lacking maneuverability compared to their single engined counterparts, heavy fighters were much bigger targets for enemy aircraft and antiaircraft guns. The USA was only able to develop successful twin engine fighters in the P38 Lightning and the F7F Tigercat, the UK in the De Haviland Mosquito and Hornet, and the Germans with the Dornier 338 Pfeil and (arguably) the Messerschmitt 410. This doesn't count all of the failed aircraft in those countries, plus Soviet, Japanese, French, and Italian aircraft.
Edit: I should add one more British fighter to the successful list: Bristol Beaufighter.
@@rodneypayne4827 Just what are your criteria for a "good aircraft". Let's say a good aircraft is one that can perform its role well. You seem to misunderstand the primary purpose of the heavy twin-engine fighter as advocated by Kurt Tank and Benjamin Kelsey among others, which was speed with longer range and more firepower than single-engine fighters. A twin-engine fighter that can't face single-engine fighters when it gets deep into enemy territory can't do its job and is a waste of the resources allocated to fighter production.
As early as the Battle of Britain the Bf-110 could not do its job without assistance from the Bf-109, which vitiated the contribution of the 110 in that campaign. The Luftwaffe would have been better equipped if it had more 109s in place of the 110s, whose poor performance hamstrung the escorted range of the German bombers. The P-38 on the other hand, while suffering from some technical issues, actually performed well as a fighter and didn’t need protection from enemy single-engine fighters. I’m sure Adolf Galland would have traded the Bf-110 for the P-38 given such a choice (or even better, the Dh Hornet).
The preponderance of opinion is that the 110 was not good at its design role, and neither were the 210 and 410 that were supposed to replace it. How can all these airplanes be bad? The answer is in the design configuration. When you add the weight and drag of accommodating defensive guns and a gunner you don’t really have a fighter, you have a plane that is a target for a real fighter.
@@petergray2712 The heavy fighter was not a terrible concept, it was the execution of the concept here that was terrible. Benjamin Kelsey got it right with the P-38, and De Havilland got it very right with Hornet. Single seat is the key, not single engine. The Westland Whirlwind would probably have worked if the UK had stuck with it and given it better engines, but they didn't see the need for such a fighter given other priorities and no need to escort long range bombers in daylight. They did eventually get back to the twin engine fighter concept with the Hornet but too late. If that plane had seen action it would be the subject of uncountable UA-cam videos today.
@@gort8203 When I say terrible concept, I meant the original 1930s idea of it as either an escort fighter or a bomber destroyer. Unshackled and placed in the fast attack role, the heavy fighter excelled. But until they figured it out, the original concept destroyed a lot of aircraft designs, the Bf110 being the most egregious example.
And again, great content, thank you! I got a proposal for a video: Jumo engines vs the Daimler Benz ones, what's the difference, technology-wise? I think that would be interesting. Keep up the good work, you got a fascinating thing running here!
The USA had a heavy twin engine fighter with long range and a great climb rate and excellent speed.. the P38 lighting.. the 187 could have been the German equivalent.. if the Germans had 500 of these with DB 601s the battle of Britain may have gone differently
Indeed, and if the FW 187 would be put in production beginning 1939 instead to the ME 110 with DB 601 engines, it would have been possible. Not 500 but 200-300!
Another great 'WhatIf...'. Makes you think about what would have happened if the production Whirlwinds had the same props as the evaluation one.
Thanks for an interesting video on this pretty and potentially significant plane.
Had it been available in place of the BF110, it might have made a significant difference for escorting bombing raids into Britain. Spitfires would have been able to give it a hammering, but nothing like the mauling Spits and Hurricanes gave the BF110. We somehow often think of the P38 Lightning for its exploits against the Japanese, forgetting how effective and valuable it was as an escort for the daylight bombing attacks into Germany where a long range heavy fighter was the right design. With adequate operational tweaking while in service the FW187 could have filled that role very well.
As a night fighter, the BF110 proved to be a significant threat to our bombers, and even more of a threat was the Ju88. The FW187 would not have had the advantage of radar, so would have been non-competitive in this role.
The 187 looks like it could have been the German equivalent to the British Mosquito or the American P-38. The BF 110 was almost a total disaster as a long-range escort fighter.
i have the theory that the luftwaffe was so agressively keeping the 110 around because it was likely the last fighter plane where goering could fit in the pilot seat.
context: he actually was a ace of WWI but at WWII was to fat for most planes.
Sounds silly, but then...maybe? 😊
I've read that the cockpit of the 110 was actually quite a tight fit, even for an average sized pilot. The 109 was very tight. Goering would have needed something a bit larger.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_323_Gigant
@@jamesharmer9293 well i would file it under maybe given that he actually could fit in a fiseler storch spotter plane. so maybe they used shoehorns and a small crane to get him into a bf110.
@@Irobert1115HD You forget that the Storch had those side windows that flared outwards to allow downward visibility. Thay would also give more room for a better fed gentleman...
@@Bird_Dog00 good point.
Note the triangular shark-like body shape , same as ME262 jet .. ;)
The fact they lost the opportunity to have their own lightning is a pretty massive "we are lucky they are so fucking stupid" moment
despite the reich being full of intelligent and educated people it’s pretty crazy to look back with hindsight at all the decisions they made that were clearly stupid.
Fortunately, the Nazis frequently screwed themselves over by being Nazis.
But why they need one? If they had a lighting instead, it will be a disaster, as it will be usless at any point later in war. That shit cant even mount radar!
@@RedXlV That's what Fascists do. Even today, they haven't changed.
I've been looking forward to this
A German Mossy?
My thoughts entirely.
It reminded me of something ....the Henschel Hs-129.
Possibly two completely different aircraft, but I can't help seeing a few similarities.
Politics....resulting in so many stupid decisions by people that don't even understand what they are deciding on.
Costing twice as much as a single engine is a no brainer. Twice as much cost in engines, more material costs in the airframe and man hours in construction. While this would likely be better than the Bf-110 in daylight operation the Bf-110 probably had more growth potential as a night fighter
Yeah, as FW187 would undoubtely have been better suited for assaulting the GB, it could not match the versatility of BF110.
I do have the feeling that there are too many myths surrounding this plane. Normally the RLM did have a good process to compare designs. Please remember that the 109 was selected in spite that Milch hated Messerschmitt. So there must be arguments against this Fw. Maybe when Milch's records are finally published we could have more light on it. Or at least some primary sources from the RLM and not hearsay
Well germans already had plans to install a radar on plane. And if this thing (as i think) have just as much space inside as Hs129...looks like no brainer.
i´m a fan of kurt tank designs, mostly just the right mix of conventional and unconventional, i love it
It's a good looking aircraft, I'll give it that. I like that flat bottom fuselage look it has. Just like the ME 262. That look reminds me of a shark. I'm pretty sure that's what they were going for.
Look at dehavilland hornett
Reminds me of the Bristol Beaufighter, probably my favourite WWII fighter/ bomber aircraft.
It certainly was a better aircraft than the BF-110
Nah. Bf-110 is the best night fighter, at least in germany. That thing? Lucky if can even mount musik, much less use it effectively.
Westland Whirlwind, anyone? Once upon a time, I nearly bought the Airfix kit of this 'what if' product of prescient genius, but went for the Lysander instead. Enjoyed making and painting it.
Here in the UK, we're probably fortunate that the RLM had such poor judgement, as it had the potential to make a big difference to the Battle of Britain.
Oh well, such is history. Thanks for yet another well-researched and well-presented vid. Glad to have subscribed.
Lucky yes, but we can’t get too carried away. Lots of "nearly" aircraft had flaws that just weren’t exposed as they were never tested in war. More still were made with compromises, hampering their potential. If every British design had access to the top notch Merlin for instance, or if the brits had a half decent radial, freeing up more merlins. Just a big what if.
So, basically, we can thank Willi Messerschmidt and his political connections for Germany not having the right fighters in 1940. 😊
Well the 109 was the right fighter for most of the situations.
@@samuelgordino Most of the situations south of London. Beyond that and the only option was the Bf110. Hardly ideal.
@@Kevin-mx1vi In 1940 there was also a small thing called the battle of France. 😁
@@samuelgordino ,considering that having the 187 over the 109 in France would've made France still loose,the 109 was barely showcasing much.
@@samuelgordino you seem to be one of those people for whom no answer is satisfactory, like some 12 year old who knows about nothing except bicycle gears and will correct people pedandically and endlessly for not using *exactly* the right term for some obscure part or function.
That really was a good looking aircraft 😮
It's Messerschmitt not Meshersmitt!
Never heard of it, an excellent video, really enjoyed it
The Battle of Britain could have ender differently had the Luftwaffe Bf 109-E been equipped with jettisonabe external fuel tanks , or drop tanks as they are known. Changing the subject a bit, I wonder how much better the performance of the Bf 110 would have been as a single seat fighter. No rear gunner, cockpit, guns etc.
This is a great expose! Thanks for your research!
Could you please share more details about the armament, and the glass floor?
It sleek lines reminds me and feels like it has similar to the Grumman F-7 Tigercat...
Expose? (I don't know how to add the accent mark.) Usually that term is applied to uncovering dirty secrets. No secrets here.
One of my absolute favourites.
I can absolutely say that I look forward to more content like the Douglas videos when you return to normal service!
Beautiful plane