Aircraft Turrets And Defense Tactics | Interesting Historical Facts You Might Not Know | FULL VIDEO
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 вер 2023
- Aircraft turrets and defense tactics used during the war. An interesting account of the ideas, and engineering behind them | FULL ViDEO
Join this channel to support it:
/ @dronescapes
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions: / @dronescapes
During World War I, air gunners initially operated guns that were mounted on pedestals or swivel mounts known as pintles. The latter evolved into the Scarff ring, a rotating ring mount that allowed the gun to be turned to any direction with the gunner remaining directly behind it, the weapon held in an intermediate elevation by bungee cord, a simple and effective mounting for single weapons such as the Lewis Gun though less handy when twin mounted as with the British Bristol F.2 Fighter and German "CL"-class two-seaters such as the Halberstadt and Hannover-designed series of compact two-seat combat aircraft. In a failed 1916 experiment, a variant of the SPAD S.A. two-seat fighter was probably the first aircraft to be fitted with a remotely-controlled gun, which was located in a nose nacelle.
As aircraft flew higher and faster, the need for protection from the elements led to the enclosure or shielding of the gun positions, as in the "lobsterback" rear seat of the Hawker Demon biplane fighter.
The Boulton & Paul Overstrand biplane was the first RAF bomber to carry an enclosed turret
The first British operational bomber to carry an enclosed, power-operated turret was the Boulton & Paul Overstrand twin-engined biplane, which first flew in 1933. The Overstrand was similar to its First World War predecessors in that it had open cockpits and hand-operated machine guns. However, unlike its predecessors, the Overstrand could fly at 140 mph (230 km/h) making operating the exposed gun positions difficult, particularly in the aircraft's nose. To overcome this problem, the Overstrand was fitted with an enclosed and powered nose turret, mounting a Lewis gun. Rotation was handled by pneumatic motors while elevation and depression of the gun used hydraulic rams. The pilot's cockpit was also enclosed but the dorsal (upper) and ventral (belly) gun positions remained open, though shielded.
A Martin YB-10 service test bomber with the USAAC - the first flight of the B-10 design occurred in mid-February 1932
The Martin B-10 all-metal monocoque monoplane bomber introduced turret-mounted defensive armament within the United States Army Air Corps, almost simultaneously with the RAF's Overstrand biplane bomber design. The Martin XB-10 prototype aircraft first featured the nose turret in June 1932-roughly a year before the less advanced Overstrand airframe design-and was first produced as the YB-10 service test version by November 1933. The production B-10B version started service with the USAAC in July 1935.
A B-24 Liberator rear turret
In time the number of turrets carried and the number of guns mounted increased. RAF heavy bombers of World War II such as the Handley Page Halifax (until its Mk II Series I (Special) version omitted the nose turret), Short Stirling and Avro Lancaster typically had three powered turrets: rear, mid-upper and nose. (Early in the war, some British heavy bombers also featured a retractable, remotely-operated ventral/mid-under turret). The rear turret mounted the heaviest armament: four 0.303 inch Browning machine guns or, late in the war, two AN/M2 light-barrel versions of the US Browning M2 machine gun as in the Rose-Rice turret. The tail gunner or "Tail End Charlie" position was generally accepted to be the most dangerous assignment. During the war, British turrets were largely self-contained units, manufactured by Boulton Paul Aircraft and Nash & Thompson. The same model of turret might be fitted to several different aircraft types. Some models included gun-laying radar that could lead the target and compensate for bullet drop.
Cover Credit (colorized by @Dronescapes): Yorkshire Air Museum
#aircraft #airplane #history - Наука та технологія
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
Join this channel ➤ ua-cam.com/channels/TTqBgYdkmFogITlPDM0M4A.htmljoin
➤ IG: instagram.com/dronescapesvideos/
➤ TWITTER (X): tinyurl.com/m86k2ypf
loved the ending , thanks for sharing !
😮😮😮😊😊😊😊
😂😮
i am so happy that he was able to tell his story and not have it all edited out; it was a great way to end the video.
The fact that they made all these machines during the war without using computers is just mind-boggling
Oh, they used computers -- when the job title of _computer_ meant one who used an electromechanical calculating machine.
Back in the day when kids had to learn math instead of coming up with this new system and that.
Metal wrapped wood modeled in clay 🤓
I’m curious what we can do with carbon-flax metal wrapped diamond coated
And they did it quickly
The planes had balls, just like our brave flight crews who we love and remember with reverence.
Air Commodore Phil Wilkinson - What a legend!
Absolutely loved the Bear story at the end.
Yes!
This was really two documentaries in one but it was quite good during both of them. The turret history and information was something new that few talk about in depth and the bear story was brilliant and insightful
I disagree...why is the default in strory telling a need to rehash the distant past?
And c'mon ..enough with "decimated" it doesn't make you sound smarter
@@ronferrari8103geez…. Why don’t you make your own then?
the bit about the bear at the end, fascinating.
The airshow part was so cool. And the storyteller is awesome. It almost like I am on the trip.. 😊
Great video, this. Probably the best YT video on defensive aerial gunnery. I caught Ep 1 and Ep 2 separately, but fantastic work in releasing both in one.
31.49 "The FW 200 known as the Scrooge of the Atlantic." I may well have been "mean" but I think the word may be "scourge" That said, great doco10/10
I'd probably cry too bro, to think all them BOYS who flew anything ! The ones came home and the ones still on patrol, Bravery , courage & selflessness OUR RESPECT AND THANK YOU À DEBT FOREVER OWED 😔❤️🇨🇦
Can’t say the same for politicians, always war somewhere Sanding our sons to die, for politicians? 1 day we will have to pay for all these wars
Fabulous story of the 2 bears and their flight crews 🏴👍🏻
The final story, about the Tupolev's visit to the UK was very interesting. While entertaining, it was also almost poignant to hear, considering the present war in Ukraine. How disappointing that international relations have sunk to such depths after such a hopeful period of growing trust and cooperation.
When certain people are controlling all the media, it's easy for them to put us against each other. But they found someone who can fight back, lately.
I enjoyed the whole vid. But I especially enjoyed the visit to the UK part.
Look at the difference now. I was glad to hear the Russians had a good time. And additionally they were welcomed very well. We're not that different as ordinary people.
Good comment from you! Thanx....
I suspect are old ww2 friend that is Russia will one day be just that once again. Are love hate relationship has endured far worse and is important to note that although political tensions are high. I still believe those inroads of friendship still endure as a collective in both are societies. Glory to ukraine though😂
As a Ukrainian it breaks my heart about the current situation. We are all related by blood somewhere down the line our ancestors fought in the great war together and now we are just killing each other our ancestors must be rolling in there graves right now. Some many soviet citizens dead millions all for us to kill each almost 100 years later? What a pointless war
It's all manufactured wealth transfer, with our children as the Canon fodder. This won't change until people understand what reality actually is, not what is presented on the t.v.
Fantastic documentary.
The last story of the british man flying in the bear and hanging out with the russians and vice versa was awesome. Imagine the incredible things that could happen if Nato/Russia continued to get along. The technologies and inventions of both, along with the similarities and unique differences of the people, could be an incredible friendship.
Makes you wonder how much happier everyone could be...
yep that was awesome
@@Dronescapesmore nations would hold a heck of a lot more wealth
Yes I never get how countries keep the tradition of not getting along with countries that their older leaders didn't either. Most of all countries that don't get along is all because of their past they had. Even if they aren't the same people in charge and they have nothing to do with it. Specially the biggest countries like Russia,China,USA,Japan and United Kingdom. Just imagine what the world can be if they all got along and shared inventions. When those 5 countries get along and no others get to that power the world will become a way better world to live on.
Not with that pig STALIN.
I was at the Fairford show. Great to learn all that background.
If you say "fervent belief, the bomber would always get through" one more time, I'm going to scream.
The Death of the Ball Turret Gunner
From my mother’s sleep I fell into the State,
And I hunched in its belly till my wet fur froze.
Six miles from earth, loosed from its dream of life,
I woke to black flak and the nightmare fighters.
When I died they washed me out of the turret with a hose.
-Randall Jarrell
The interview with the man who set up the deal between the U.K. and the Russians was actually extremely interesting to be honest.
8:30 I absolutely disagree, the impact of the airplane on the WW1 battlefield was not minimal at all. Aerial recon had a huge impact from as early as 1914, and control of the skies was deemed essential by the allies at both Verdun and the Somme.
Agreed, and a lot of the classic air battles just a little later on in WW1 was due to one side trying to stop the other from doing such air recon!
The final story regarding the "bear" just highlights to me that wars are highly manufactured by the few and given the choice the majority of the world's populous would all rather get along and party, the whole thing is a racket and a nonsense. Great video.
Great documentary!
Thank you!
I really enjoyed the documentary. It was well produced and very interesting. I have to say that I loved the story at the end. It goes to show that in the end we are all people and we feel the same things no matter what part of the world we are from.
Absolutely brilliant documentary, never realised there was a radar jamming version of the iconic Lancaster.That is the paradox of war it forces technical advancement which after the war could be used for peaceful means For example the Enigma Code breaking machine developed at Bletchley Park,which was the Worlds first computer.Also loved the story of the Russian Bear visit when Glasnost initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev led to more open relationships with the West.
some of the auto turret systems shown here are computer controlled, so i guess it depends how you define "computer" and "worlds first"
You're wrong!. It was developed by poland! Before the 2nd world war!.
Great doc. You produced this yourself? Easily as good or better than anything I’ve seen on TV
It was made by our partners, they owned a now defunct production company
Make sure you listen to the old English guy telling his story about the bear. This bloke probably had a license to kill!
Me-210, though a disappointment, already had the rear defence system used on the improved Me-410.
Royal Canadian, Australian and New Zealand air forces also flew turret equipped bombers
Fantastic video !
Glad you liked it!
That picture of the gunner and 50 s freaks me out 😮 lol 😊 puts me in mind of the mad machine gunner out of Waterworld the movie 😅
I Concur .. 😅
The biggest problem with the B-29 was its engines, which were highly prone to catching fire. In fact twice as many B-29's were lost to engine fires and other 'operational losses' than to enemy action.
Surprised they didn't mention the A3/B-66. They were built after the B-52 and they had tail guns.
Hugh Trenchard was NOT a major-general. Such a rank does not exist in the RAF. In 1939, Trenchard was a semi-retired Air Chief Marshal, and was not the head of the RAF.
He was. Promotion officially recorded in the Gazette here www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/30591/page/3636/data.pdf
You are right, but he was made major general of the RFC in 1916. The rank was briefly used in the Royal Air Force for about eighteen months during 1918 to 1919.
Hopefully more countries could come together for air shows in the future like the gentleman at the end was describing, all about the air craft and history, all other stuff left behind
The sad thing is we have the best countries going against each other. Only if all of them can come together and build machines for humanity instead of weapons to kill one another. The world will never be better until the most powerful come together and leave everything behind.
The sad thing is petty, power mad dictators messing everything up.
@@9richy6bram8maybe one day we'll all stop letting our governments fight each other so we as citizens can work together since we as people are all the same .
It's the corrupt governments that cause the conflicts, not us!
Am I the only one who thinks those kidney turrets like on early B17s and PBYs look cool?
When I was a kid I thought the ball turret gunner hung upside down like an acrobat.
It must’ve been a thrill to be the first guy to mount a machine gun to an airplane
I salute you people in the service in the ones that fought years ago love you my fellow Americans good job in protecting America love seeing this videos God bless
My great grandfather was a fighter pilot in WW1 said he was flying in less than 5 weeks. by the 5 week he was out fighting the war in his plane.
Bless him!
What was his name?
Thanks , U.S.A. army ~~!!!
Well no wonder the external mounted RF84-Fs didn't defend them very well. The RF84-F is a photo recon plane.
what an interesting mash-up video. I greatly enjoyed the documentary and the story at the end! Thanks for sharing.
Interesting evolution of the self contained gun turret bombers. My father was employeed fabricating turret canopies made of plexiglass in san diego war plant. The early 1942 assembly lines were humming along. It was the best job my father had up to that point in his young life. Soon he and a group of friends were inducted and on their way to maritime accademy to be 90 day wonders if you made the rigorous cut and he graduated and sent to sail on a norwegian frieghter. His maritime career sent him alll the way to JAPAN which had surrendered in 1945.
A huge THANK YOU to your father I hope his life after the war was nothing but happiness and joy. I hope you and your family all loved the presence of one another. I really respect all vets that gave up their freedom to fight the evil leaders. Without them the world would literally be a different world with more evil surrounding us.
@@9richy6bram8 👍❤️
@9richy6bram8 in the Persian gulf while his ship was loading oil bound for the u.s. refineries a member of the crew was absent when they got underway. Due to regulations the ship wasn't allowed to stop. 22 yrs. later my dad was in his favorite pool hall with his buddies and in walked a familiar face. You guessed it . The ex shipmate addressed my dad as you would any merchant marine officer AYE AYE SIR!!!
Many a round was bought that day.
I toured a beautiful example of these Tu-95 Bears at the Oleg Antonov State Aviation Museum in Kyiv in 2018. The enormous Kuznetsov coupled turboprops, each with 2 four-bladed contra-rotating props, were amazing to behold. The interior of the aircraft was a delight from a designer's standpoint - well laid out and roomy, with pastel green interior and teal blue operational stations panels. It looks like the Officer in blue mentioned by Capt. Brown is at the outboard Port side of the formation in the photograph at 1:18:41.
Really enjoyed your program
Wish I was a part of it
Actually watched again
Thanks
I can just imagine what those Russian men got up while they were on this assignment, much fun!
"O tempora, o mores " the 90s, what a beautiful time we had ...
Got to love how one of the historians quotes the fact that the B29 has the Norden bomb sight as some marvel. It was shit and utterly inaccurate, but still the myth of its magic power persists.
My father was raf and ran airfields the night bombers crew could be heard screaming and having nightmares during the day when they"slept".
He went on a mission as navigator just to gain an appreciation of the crews ordeal he told me he had never been so frightened in his life and he had experienced german bombing. His brother a pathfinder pilot lasted seven missions before being killed
Really cool that story at the end about the bears
The one statistic that was inaccurate was about the MiG-15's vs. the B-29's firepower. While its true that the cannon armed MiG had harder hitting weapons than the .50 calibre or 20 mm. guns of the B-29, this came at a cost of a less effective range than the M-2 machine guns. When the jets closed in on the bombers to their effective striking distance, they would already be inside the killing zone of the .50 cal. bullets. This is why the .50 cal. machine guns were still being used in the F-86 Sabres that primarily fought and destroyed the MiG-15s instead of adopting the 20 mm. cannons as used on the F9F-Panthers and some other jets. The USAF found that six massed .50 cal. guns with their greater reach and amount of available rounds was preferred over three cannons that also had a slower rate of fire and smaller load of rounds due to the MiG's limited storage space for it's larger shells. The 23 mm. cannons were also notorious for their jamming.
The main reason why the gun turrets weren't very effective against the MiGs was not because the bomber's guns were lighter, but rather the B-29's gun turret tracking capabilities couldn't keep up with the speed of the jets and therefore were harder to lock on to and hit. These weapons systems were designed to deal with slower propeller driven aircraft of WW2 and the appearance of the MiGs were a nasty surprise that was not planned for. Still though, probably because of luck at least one or two MiGs were confirmed destroyed by B-29 gunners during the Korean War.
In ww2, wasn’t it the USAAF? I’m genuinely asking lol
The P47 thunderbolt with external tanks could have provided long range escort for the ENTIRE strategic bombing campaign. The fact that the US air force stuck to their bombing doctrine out of pride was criminal.
Kolejny dobry odcinek, ale brak napisów pl. Szkoda. Będę czekał. Pozdrawiam.
My father's cousin was a gunner in a B-17. He was a tail gunner, then was moved to ball turret. Didn't make it home. Was killed in October of 44.
The last kill involving a tail gunner: A friendly fire incident occurred during ODS when a BUFF tail gunner thought an Iraqi plane was closing in. The plane was actually an Air Force F-4G Wild Weasel.
Yes, the U.S. Army Air Corps was renamed the U.S. Army Air Forces on June 20th 1941 and lasted until September 18th 1947.
I've always wondered why the powers to be in the RAF didn't switch over to 50cals from the 303. Seems like penny pinching over lives from those who never faced combat. I believe Bomber Harris later tried to set 50cal production for his planes. I do recall reading that the Luftwaffe pilots had heard a rumor of British 20mm rear turrets which worried them.
I really enjoyed the last part , the story was told superbly
Great ‘bear’ story at the end! 👍👍
Good coverage and editing, this is cool. I learned somethings
I heard that the belly turret was 1 of the most dangerous places to be in the bomber. I heard that the belly turrets were bad about getting jammed & the gunner couldn't get out until they landed. There are stories about this happening combined with a landing gear malfunction & when it landed it would completely crush the belly turret along with the gunner inside.
Imagine that... the same company that made little sports cars, made turrets for the Lancasters. It's always the quiet ones you gotta worry about.
As a semi truck mechanic hearing that the first powered turret used compressed is pretty cool. I wonder what kind of mechanism they used.
Interesting video! Is that a cutaway of a Me-410 behind that guy talking at the 47 minute mark?Does anyone know where to look for such pictures or posters?Thanks.
Great video! I loved the story at the end 👍
"Buckminster Fuller estimates that since 1910 the governments of the world have spent 3 1/2 trillion dollars on airplanes. That is 62 times the existing gold supply of the world."
[Understanding Media: The Extension of Man, Marshall McLuhan, 1964, Ch. 4: The Gadget Lover; Narcissus as Narcosis]
Great interview.Thanks.
In a documentary about turret gunners and their effectiveness or otherwise, the statistic that the USAAF lost X bombers due to 'fighters, flak, and accidents' is worthless. However many bombers were lost to flak and accidents should be deducted from that total, because they aren't relevant to defence against fighters.
Perspective: Not even a whole decade after one of man's greatest and proudest achievements (flight) we started strapping guns to it.
Afternoon Again budah.5.50.here in the uk
All I can say is WOW !
Amazing content
A good story telling. A lot of humour.
Very cool aspect I never knew happened. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for watching!
“Over refreshed?” I pissed myself.
pronounciation of Blenheim was killing me..
Well, it is UA-cam, so the budgets are not the same as HBO, or the BBC, etc.
Perhaps imperfections should be expected (and so can be expected by mainstream networks with million dollars budgets).
Also, one of the differences is that on UA-cam you can point them out, on HBO your remark will never see the light of day, what a wonderful opportunity, isn’t it?
You don't need millions to use a free pronounciation guide.
@tedthesoundguy obviously you do not, What that means is that it is not a tight production as a mainstream one with large budgets would have.
Considering that networks make typos, and also often mispronounce names, I would not be shocked if a UA-cam video on a small channel would not be perfect, I always actually expected that, as it makes some sense with the resources available.
If you have a UA-cam production you personally made that is perfect, please share it with us 😉
I suspect your videos might now be perfect either, but perhaps you did not have 10 people helping you proof it, or that day you did not have time or were tired, and distracted.
I am always quite surprised at how petty people can be these days, focusing on minute details rather than content value, and on a revolutionary platform like UA-cam that allows hundreds of millions to express themselves, rather than that privilege being owned by a few networks.
Demanding perfection is just plain silly.
I give you a rather interesting example: hardly anyone, besides Italians, can pronounce Michelangelo correctly. As much as you have every tool available to achieve perfection, and given the fact that Michelangelo is, and will forever be more famous than say, Blenheim, you should wonder if Italians spend their entire life being petty about the horrible ways that the great artist's name is being pronounced, but for some reasons, they live with it, and they have done that for centuries. The same of course goes for a million other names.
the most ironic aspect of all this is that this video is from the archives of a defunct production company, one that has partnered with us. The video was made many years ago, and it cannot obviously be corrected anymore, as the "voice" has long gone.
On the other hand, they had exclusive access to archive footage that had never been seen before, so I would expect people to appreciate that, rather than complaining about a mispronunciation of a British aircraft with a name that ends up sounding German, which quite honestly sounds funnier than anything.
Anyway, there is nothing that can be done to fix it, so it will forever be a mistake in the video until AI takes over the world and everything is perfect, and artists, like singers for example, will not serve any purpose anymore, as AI will be better, sing in perfect tune, write perfect songs, and execute them equally perfectly.
Hopefully, AI will not be able to re-create original vintage footage, but it will certainly be able to sign like John Lennon, and imitate him to absolute perfection, and without making an effort.
Perhaps the irony is that imperfection will be celebrated as a human trait, who knows.
Good luck in your endeavor to police small pronunciation mistakes, and forgive the often sarcastic rant.
Peace!
It's UA-cam! What would one expect. Truth, facts, details hmmmm. Not from many channels unless you find some good ones pertaining to your own taste.
Very neat and sad at the same time.
A little off subject towards the end, however its still a very well produced documentary.
Interesting/informative/entertaining. Excellent photography job enabling viewers to better understand what the orator is describing. Special thanks to guest speakers sharing personal information/knowledge pertaining to the ( B-17 ). Enjoying this presentation from my computer room. Along the " Space Coast " 🚀 of Florida 🐊🐊🐊. ( 2-7-24 ). Wishing viewers a safe/healthy/prosperous ( 2024 )🌈🎉.
I had a model of a B 36 of an average model scale, and it was so big I had to put it an an angle to keep all the landing gear on the top of my dresser. It was the only model I had that looked like it could just fly if you threw it hard enough. I love America!
I need 3000 boxes of those to buy ok
I wonder if they had accurate enough radar controlled turrets they could act like a phalanx to defend against missiles, they could make a comeback?
Maybe small laser turrets, if the tech ever gets that good.
The De Havilland Mosquito proved the most efficient and effective bomber. It was fast, carried no defensive armament and used a two man crew. Two of these could carry more bombs than one B17 drop them accurately and use four crew vs 11 in the B17. They had four machine guns in the nose making this bomber an effective fighter as well.
Mosquito had a range of 1500 miles, the b-29 nearly 6000 miles. Different roles.
Great content. I have a question though. Not the case of heavy bombers, but in the small dive bombers, what kept the rear gunners from shooting their own tails off? In the movie 'the mummy', Brandon Frazier shot his own tail off. That really a rhing?
I don't know for certain, but I think that the leading edges of the horizontal and vertical stabilizers were armored against the possibility of the rear gunner's fire severing them.
Background music too loud!
I liked this video so much I even left a like 😉
Thank you!
muy interesante. Gracias.
awesome
This could have been 25% shorter without losing any content. Please tighten the editing. Good documentary.
1:09:30 Why are the both flying wth their gear out? Is it some sort of friendly code or was it Ju 87 Stuka fest day?
My grandfather was a belly gunner in ww2 they were shot down behind enemy lines, everyone left alive bailed out and the plane crash landed and he was captured and spent years in bougamwa prison camp before escaping.
Bless him, Eric
Sounds like in WWII Mosquito was the way to go!
Brilliant episode. I was intrigued by the Bear story at the end. A very interesting coda to the documentary. If only the Ukraine had just left things be and not started its move to join NATO all would be well over there.
Them animated lancasters are cursed
WITley and BlenIM!
"Self-defending bomber" is a misleading choice of words when referring to USAAF doctrine in WW2 strategic daylight bombing...the principle behind these designs was the collective defense of bomber formations, as the survivability of any individual aircraft in a formation was significantly enhanced by the massed firepower of gun positions/turrets on multiple bombers covering any particular attack vector. Even when considering individual aircraft, the objective of defensive aerial armament in WW2 was not to necessarily shoot down attackers, but to make their attacks less effective and less lethal by putting lead in their path...
They go over and Ober the same information. It's like they wanted to make this as long as possible.
The photo of the Z-S plane at 7:47 is in Wikipedia and the caption of the photo is the VGO.III of 1916. The article clains six engines in three pairs. I don't see it either but three propellers and four engines (as the voiceover claims) means at least the nose propeller is driven by a pair of engines.
The allies used the heavy bombers as bait to force German fighters to fight. It worked giving the allies almost complete air superiority and victory. NOt cheap though successful.
My grandpa was a tail gunner from sept 41 til sept of 76... Thats three wars over 35 years... Not bad for an immigrant...