Eric Brown was tiny in stature, but he was MASSIVE in accomplishment He was a supreme aviator, brave, immensely skillful and with more flying hours, on aa vast variety if types. What increases my respect for him even more is that he was a modest, courteous and unassuming man. He was the top gun without the bullshit and attitude. May he rest in peace.
You are correct that his flight test contributions to the war effort were enormous . And yes he was a fighter pilot and THE test pilot .... “Top gun” though ? I think not ... He flamed two German bombers in a Grumman F4F -that’s it - his skills were needed and best utilized elsewhere ... his contributions were most noteworthy as an aircraft evaluator than merely a fighter jockey , wouldn’t you agree ?
He's right about the Me-262. The first day that they showed up, they shot down 2 Mosquito(British wooden plane with 2 Spitfire engines, the fastest Allied plane), and air warfare was changed forever.
*There is a myth that the Germans were way ahead of the British in jet engines and planes in WW2, when the opposite is true.* The WW2 German jet engines were extremely unreliable with low performances and very high fuel consumption. The German *axial-flow* turbojets never worked properly and were developed up to 1953 by the French to obtain a usable engine. The French lost a lot of time playing around with the German engines, instead of working with the British. The French and Soviets after WW2 tried to improve the German axial-flow engines and largely failed. The British in order to get a usable and reliable jet engine, with the technology of the time, went for a *centrifugal* design rather than the troublesome axial-flow design. This design produced less thrust than an axial-flow but was quicker to develop and reliable. It took 5 months to develop, while the first _reliable_ axial-flow engine was the 1950 Rolls Royce Avon, which took 5 years to get right. In 1945 the French made and tested some German designed turbo jets made with quality steel unavailable to German industry in WW2. They ran for 25 hours instead of 10 hours to the Germans engines that used poor quality steel. Not much better. The German axial-flow engines failed because of heavy design faults. The centrifugal compressor used by the first British Meteor plane was fine and much more reliable, but unable to reach high compression ratios. This limited performances. Centrifugal compressors were used up to the 1960s. In 1945 the team from the French ATAR laboratory plus some BMW and Junkers engineers, were engaged by the French SNECMA research bureau, with the objective to built a new reliable and performing axial-flow turbojet. The BMW 003/Jumo004 was considered unusable. It was tested on the first French jet aircraft, the 1946 So6000 Triton, overheating and exploding. The plane only flew with a Rolls Royce Nene centrifugal turbojet. The ATAR project took 6 years to produce the first acceptable axial-flow turbojet (ATAR 101 B1), produced in 1953. So 8 years research and developments by the French using the German jet engines as the base. It was installed on the first French jet fighter, the Dassault Ouragan. The French lost a lot of time because the German jets had poor efficiency and some concept fails. Essentially in the combustion chambers and fresh air circulation to reduce the external temperature of the engine. The BMW jet was known for overheat problems which precluded fuselage installation. The question at the end of WW2 was what is the most efficient way to produce jet fighters. The answer is clearly not adopting the German design of engine and fuselage. The build costs for a jet engine were much higher than a piston engine, with the fuel consumption near 3x. The centrifugal compressor the British adopted in some planes was the best choice with 1944-45 technology, more compression pressure was not an advantage when the hot turbine was unable to resist higher temperatures. The German turbojets had big overheat problems as the engine would not work in an enclosed fuselage for single engined fighters. This defect was immediately noted by the French on the 1946 "SO 6000 Triton" prototype, and by the Soviets on the 1946 Mig 9. The Soviets quickly replaced the BMW 004B2 by the centrifugal Rolls Royce Nene which worked without problems, dismissing the BMW engine for fighter planes. The Rolls Royce Nene was copied to the last nut by the USSR being installed in the Mig 15 being used effectively in the Korean war. About 10 years ago the USSR eventually paid royalties to Rolls Royce. The Meteor was the first proper fully developed jet plane introduced. The 262 was slightly faster than the Meteor F3, but extremely unreliable. *The British would never put into the sky such an undeveloped plane as the me262.* The British could have had a jet fighter operational in 1941, but it would have been as bad as the me262. The Germans advanced R&D on jets after they interrogated captured British RAF men. They learned the British were advanced in jet technology and flying prototype planes. Until then the Germans had no intention of mass producing jet planes. The rushed together Me262 started claiming kills on 26 July 1944, the Meteor claimed its first V1 kill a few days later on the 4 August 1944. *But the Meteor was a proper fully developed jet plane, not a thrown together desperate effort as the me262 was.* The me262 fuselage was similar to a piston plane with the pilot over the wings obscuring downward vision, while the Meteor was a proper new design fuselage specifically for jet fighters with a forward of the wings pilot position with superior vision, as we see today. The cockpit was very quiet. The sweptback wings of the me262 were to move the engines further back for better weight distribution, not for aerodynamic reasons as is thought the case. Centrifugal compressors were not obsolete being used in turboprops. Between a turbo jet and a turboprop, the only difference is the turbine, not the compressor. The last centrifugal compressor jet engine still in service on a handful of commercial aircraft like the Fokker 27, is the Rolls Royce Dart turboprop. A very reliable engine made in 27 versions, but with high fuel consumption to modern engines. The Rolls Royce Dart Turboprop turbo jet engine was produced the longest, being a comparable design turbojet to the likes the Rolls Royce Nene. The rugged engine was produced from 1946 up to 1987.
@@johnburns4017 absolutely correct John, I was going to say all that. sniff, No doubt you know the sad and bloody typical story, of Sir Frank Whittle's attempt to get Government /RAF support for his world changing brilliant Jet engine ? ''TOO ADVANCED, they said, we've already spent all our money on obsolete Bi-Planes 'Darts'? Marvelous at airshows doncha know, the public love em ''. As has been the case throughout our history, we have the genius working alone, who makes a brilliant discovery, and nobody with the brain cells, or purse string power, who has the slightest idea of what has been presented to them. That German guy, who is credited with inventing their Jet engine, and got a plane in the air, 2 years before us ?? Well, on his deathbed ,a few years ago, he is credited with confessing that despite all the denials over the years, the Nazis DID, covertly steal the unprotected TOP SECRET info about Whittles great invention. Was I surprised ?
♦ German engineer Ohain did not design a reverse flow engine. His engine had a centrifugal compressor and a radial inflow (centrifugal turbine - a design never used in any production engine - this was a patent filed by Whittle). Ohain even commented on its unusual design when he read Whittle's patent prior to filing his own: From Ohain's biography: _"When I saw Whittle’s patent I was almost convinced that it had something to do with boundary layer suction combinations. It had a two-flow, dual entrance flow radial flow compressor that looked monstrous from an engine point of view. Its flow reversal looked to us to be an undesirable thing, but it turned out that it wasn't so bad after all though it gave some minor instability problems."_ ♦ Whittle's reverse flow design is the basis for almost all turboprop engines in production; ♦ Britain had axial-flow engines running in 1941 - the same time that Franz had his Jumo running. The Metrovick F.2 flew in a Meteor in 1943. The F.2 transpired into the Sapphire which the US built under licence as the J-65 and then modified it as the J-47; ♦ Westinghouse in the US was given a Whittle engine, and plans for improvements. They made such a hash of it that Whittle had to go to the US to assist. The US government gave the project to GE who made the I-16 which transpired into the first US built jet engine. The US licensed the Ghost for the P-80/T-33 and the RR Nene. The Nene was used by the Soviets in the MIG 15; ♦ Ohain's engine was not produced being shelved by 1943. No engine was built using his design; ♦ Whittle also R&D'd axial-flow engines. The metallurgy was not advanced enough at the time. Whittle's engines produced far more thrust than the German axial-flows and far more reliable; ♦ The PT-6, PWC 100/150 are derivatives of Whittle's designs being still produced; • Whittle's centrifugal-flow engines were built under licence in the US after WW2 - the J-33, J-42 and J-48; • The Olympus was the world's first 2 shaft turbojet and the first to exceed 10,000 pounds of thrust; • The 1950 Avon was the first reliable axial-flow engine. Also the longest produced gas turbine in history being still in production as a land based generator; • The RR Conway was the world's first turbofan; • The RB-211 was the world's first 3 shaft turbofan; • The Rolls Royce Trent was the world's first turboprop to fly; • British axial-flows led the post war world in technology and power; • The axial-flow Sapphire was built in the US as the J-65. The GE J-47 was based on the Sapphire. *Frank Whittle invented the modern turbojet.*
This man is so impressive in so many ways. Even in his old age, his mind was still sharper than many people half his age. Among the many things I admire about him is how he spoke. How a person speaks is a glimpse into his character and his was that of a giant.
its kinda sad sometimes when we eventually find out, that many of our so-called hero's, either actually werent, or it was just all about the timing.. even yeager often says, i had the skillsets alright, but i was just in the right place at the right time at WPAFB....but not "winkle"...he was the real-deal holyfield, worthy of all attention he got...still miss the guy....a genuine aviation icon.....
What a grand old Gent Winkle was. When you read his books, you don't get the syntax of the ways his words fit together, Even at 95 years old, His commentary and insights are joy for any airplane nut! See you on the other side, Captain Brown.
Why did we fight that damn war.We always got on with Germans and Hitler always admired the British and the British Empire.We guaranteed the freedom of Poland but declared war on Hitler but stood aside when the mass murderer Stalin ,invaded from the Eastern side under the terms of the Molotov- Ribbentrop Pact.Stalin then just embarked on mass murder from then on ,eg,Katyn!.We fought the wrong lot.
@@djangorheinhardt I feel the same. It stems from Kaiser Wilhelm's inferiority complex, the catastrophe of WW1 and the conditions in Germany after the defeat. We would have been so much better off cooperating with Germany. I remember reading that a Royal Navy squadron visited Kiel harbour in June 1914. When they left, the German ships signaled "Friends yesterday, friends today, friends forever". Such a tragedy
@@djangorheinhardt If the British had formed an alliance with the Germans, instead of the French and Russians, they would have won the war in a few months and could have added even more lands to both of their empires. The British would not have been fatally weakened by the war thus allowing themselves to be overtaken by the USA, would have kept their empire for decades longer than actually happened and communism would probaly never taken root in Russia. Best of all a million British empire men would not have been killed.
RIP Captain Eric Winkle Brown Flew 487 different types (including Luftwaffe types) First Carrier landing first jet carrier landing The greatest test pilot ever
Both articulate and knowledgeable, Captain Brown was a worthy interviewee. An excellent segment and especially interesting for his admiration for the Me 262 and Horten 9. Nicely done and thanks for posting, you lot!
Given that 99+% of the world has zero knowledge of these vintage military aircraft, it's not exactly a big deal. Currently scratch building an EDF HP Victor, as if most anyone I know has any idea of what it is.
Very interesting. And now we have 5th gen fighters, and we are starting to think about 6th gen. 6th gen will look a whole lot like a Horton flying wing, and they will not have a man in the cockpit. There is a technology demonstrator called the XB-47, which gives a peek. Like the Reaper drones, they will be capable of acting autonomously, completing their mission and flying home in the case of lost radio contact, but unlike the Reapers they will be very stealthy, quite agile and maneuverable, and very much able to operate in a high tech / high threat environment. The Horton brothers were 75 years ahead of their time...
Thanks for the video. It is good to see the Pilots telling their stories in what they did in the second world war. The real warriors of the sky and the planes they fly.
As impressive as his accomplishments in the air you should read up on his experiences on the ground. He met EVERYBODY. He was like Forrest Gump. He was there when Hitler met Jesse Owens at the Olympics. And I mean THERE. In Hitler's private box. (He said Hitler was friendly and cordial, and shook Owens' hand, contrary to myth.) He was at at least one Nazi Nuremberg rally because his dad was a British diplomat.
@@pepecohetes492 If you mean the aircraft carrier HMS Audacity, after the ship sank, destroyers and corvettes in the convoy escort returned to pick up survivours. During the pickup, one of the ships detected an asdic ping which suggested that the U-boat that had sunk Audacity was still nearby. Standing orders in that situation were for ships to leave the area immediately - an identical event occurred when British ships were picking up some 400 survivors from the Bismarck and a lookout saw what he thought was a U-boat. With only 110 Bismarck crew rescued, the ships had to leave the remaining survivours in the water. A U-boat and a German trawler later rescued another five. In the case of Brown and the Audacity sinking: when the British ships left, Brown, his flight commander and twenty-six sailors were left in the water. During the night the sailors drowned one by one - Brown put it down to the type of car tyre inner tube type of life preservers they were wearing, which couldn't keep their heads out of the water when they either went to sleep or passed out. Because the Brown and his flight commander were wearing the more efficient Mae West life jacket issued to aircrew they were still alive when the ships returned the next morning. All together, both in the torpedo attack that sank Audacity and the aftermath, when survivours had to be left in the water, 73 of the carrier's crew died.
Jack Tattis,The one person who did refuse to shake Owens's hand was Roosevelt .When Owen's got back to America and Roosevelt was asked if he was going to meet him he said No.I can't be seen shakin' hands with no *****r " .Ah those lovable septic tanks again : don't you just hate them.....er.... I mean love them.
The greatest and most accomplished pilot in the history of flight. I regret I never had the privilege of meeting this legend. Makes Chuck Yeager look like an amateur. R.I.P. "Winkle." (salute)
@@phlodel Maybe not Yeager was the Pilot who broke the sound barrier with the knowledge that Brown and the Miles team had accumulated on the Miles project that was given to the Americans, The Brits were 18 months ahead and ready to go until the Govt forced them to to give all their info to the Americans[ Coercion from the US at the highest levels]
@@jacktattis143 yeah ? and ? because they didn't want to lend a Commie ---er---Labour, government billions of dollars for their Socialist programme. Especially after booting out hero Churchill. So that was part of the deal, I'm sure. Americans value top propaganda more than anything.
A bit of early post-war arselicking by the Labour Government---to push through the US loan we desperately needed. The Yanks thought we had gone Commie.
There were 3 flyoffs between the 262 and the Horten wing. The 262 had an experienced Luftwaffe pilot and the Horten had an inexperienced test pilot. The Horten wing made the 262 look like target practice in 2 of the flights. One flight was called off because of nose wheel problems with the 262. The Horten wing had a higher top speed, outclimbed, out turned and out dove the 262 with ease. It's quite possible that Nazi politics made a bad choice in allocating resources.
Eric Brown: 'The pilot I briefed crashed and died before our eyes, which kind of spoiled things a bit, but it was still a marvellous day, and the afternoon nibbles were wonderful.'
Great that the Brits were rattled by the jet 262 because if they would have only woken up to Whittles invention and potential far away lead in the 30s there would have been game set and match for the allies. But, the Germans saw the jet potential and didn’t look back. Foresight is a wonderful thing.
He didn't have clue about the me262 jet plane. It was fast because it was using a axil-flow engine that constantly killed its pilots. If the pilot pushed the throttles too hard the engines would stall. The British rejected them in WW2, using them later when they developed them properly. The first properly reliable axial-flow was the RR Avon in 1950.
@@johnburns4017 Jeezus, just think, if Eric Brown hadn't died, he could have come to you for an education on the flying characteristics of the Me 262....What a bummer!
Where are all the British racists and their Anglophile sycophants on this story??? This man said the Me262 was a "quantum jump" in aircraft technology and it "rattled" the British to know that it could fly 120 miler per hour faster than the best British fighter. And had the aircraft not been introduced so late (because of Hitler's meddling) and with a severe shortage of pilots and fuel, it could have swept the skies of British and American aircraft.
I'm British and will admit some of these German aircraft and technologies were far superior to the allies. Hence Operation paperclip was formed and the Russians had similar operations.
Without getting much back? So you think keeping some gadgets and assorted technology wasn't worth trading for, essentially, the continued existence of the British empire? I wish you luck in life, you'll need it, with critical thinking skills like that.
Howard Chambers If you read my comment, you'll notice I didn't say we 'gave' you lot a damn thing... I have to guess no one has taught you how a trade/deal/treaty/etc. works... The Crown 'gave' the USofA some tech and money, and in return we 'gave' the Crown it's only hope for continued existence.
I think you might be rewriting history. As I recall the only reason you entered WW2 was the attack on Pearl Harbor. I'll be forever grateful that you did fight with the allies but that choice was made for you by the Japanese in 1941 (WW2 had already been going for two years at that point).
Read Pat Buchanan whose book is named just that " The Unnecessary war" Churchill was the architect of the demise of this country.The greedy yanks bled us dry and charged us for every last bullet we bought and Churchill moaned in private but still signed every demand the yanks served upon us.That damned war was a complete disaster for us British and we should have kept our interfering snout out of it.For us financially ,it was a catastrophic defeat.
*The Me262 was overrated.* Yes, when it got up-to-speed it was untouchable and had very heavy firepower ... _but_ ... It needed a vast amount of fuel to get up-to-speed, during which time it was a dead duck- easy to shoot down and practically incapable of returning fire. The same was true for landings - the landing consumed a lot of fuel, and it couldn't fight while trying to land. If it was attacked while trying to land, again it was a dead duck unable to fight back, and also at grave risk of running out of fuel if it tried to maneuver to save itself. In addition to its massive fuel consumption, their takeoffs needed squadron of Bf109s and FW190s flying overhead to protect them while they got up-to-speed. If you add the fuel consumption of the piston engined fighters needed to protect their takeoffs, then the net result was a massive amount of extra fuel to get the 262s to reach combat speed. *And the Germans were perilously low on fuel.* The fuel the Me262 used competed with the rest of the military, meaning that trucks, tanks and all other aircraft had much less fuel for then to fight with. Then there was the issue of engine reliability - at less than 30 hours before each engine gave up, it was expensive to keep replacing them. So for only about 20 minutes of unrivaled combat time, the Me262 was unreliable and consumed a massive amount of fuel that was desperately needed by the rest of the military, and outside of those effective combat minutes it was a hopelessly vulnerable aircraft that needed constant protection. If the Germans tried to field even more Me262s, they would have lost the war even sooner just because of the massive extra fuel consumption.
@MrHallodri1 - perhaps your best option is to learn to read English, _then_ read what I wrote, before you comment. I'm assume that you aren't an idiot, and that your first language isn't English, and I'll repeat the salient points. _Read carefully:_ *Germany was critically low on fuel.* That means that there wasn't enough fuel to fly all the ME262s that had _already_ built. That means that each ME262 flight consumed a vast amount of fuel that would otherwise have gone to tanks and trucks trying to prevent the Red Army, the US and British Armies from crushing German ground forces. Each ME262 flight made the situation on the ground worse for the German infantry. And the gain for Germany from each flight was marginal. That means that even if Germany had built a million ME262s and had a million pilots to fly them, their situation was no better off. That means that if Germany had prioritised flights of their already built ME262s, they would have lost the war even sooner. That means the ME262 was the wrong weapon for Germany from late 1944 to the end of the war. It was practically useless, and likely worse than useless.
@@pauligrossinoz Thanks. Good to know we've got a first-class armchair engineer on our side. I worked for Boeing for 35 years, and I knew guys who actually flew the 262 after the war. They were staggered by its performance, just as Eric was. That thing impressed the hell out of our engineers, let me tell you. Our P-51 was old school compared to it. Sure you might take it down on landing or take-off, but a plane that was over 100mph faster than any of ours, well you gotta admire that technology. Ol' Willi M knew what he was doing, that's for sure.
@@guydoe1666 - yeah ... The kids playing Top Trumps are impressed by speed. But in the _real_ world it was an overrated airplane with serious flaws in combat, that was ultimately just a waste of fuel.
@@guydoe1666 - Okay, good to know that I'm conversing with somebody who bothers to actually read what I wrote, instead of dismissing it and saying that some people after the war said the 262 was very fast. There is much more to air combat that merely speed, but if you can't read, then you obviously wouldn't understand anything more nuanced.
Ironic that. because the Horton Bros, hated the indiscriminate murderous strategic bombing of the allies, and designed their bombers as revenge weapons
@@Schimml0rd I don't believe the total bombing of civilian targets was Churchill's original idea. Others in the air ministry thought this would be the only way to demoralize the German people and bring about the nazi menace. The effect was just the opposite.,
Have a look at Coventry (amongst all those other British towns bombed) if you wish to discuss indiscriminate bombing (not that many of the British people were ever really in favour of anyone murdering civilians from the air after the zeppelin raids of WW1 or the Spanish civil war with Luftwaffe support!)
I come from Portsmouth. I went to school among the bomb sites left by the Germans and many were miles from the dockyard, which would have been a legitimate target. Street after street cleared by bulldozers and left as rubble even years later. Remember Sir Arthur Harris' statement, as best I recall, "The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else and nobody was going to bomb them!" But of course, you were only trying to provoke a reaction. You couldn't be so ignorant of the early years of WW2, could you?
the Horton brothers were cranks. They didn't hold with the notion of an elliptical lift distribution, thinking that it was rather more parabolic. The Horton 9 required 500 lbs of ballast (a huge amount) because the Center of Gravity was wrong. That would have limited its payload.
no i mean he was only a lucky guy who had the opportunity to fly many different enemy planes to england.....nothing more ;-) I have the same book the way around from a german test pilot who flew all enemy planes which they captured and keep operational......was the same lucky guy .
The me 262 was a deeply flawed plane. The British dropped the axial-flow engines, which was faster, as it was extremely unreliable. The 262 was highly uncontrollable. If you tried to fly it under control, the engines would stall.
*There is a myth that the Germans were way ahead of the British in jet engines and planes in WW2, when the opposite is true.* The WW2 German jet engines were extremely unreliable with low performances and very high fuel consumption. The German *axial-flow* turbojets never worked properly and were developed up to 1953 by the French to obtain a usable engine. The French lost a lot of time playing around with the German engines, instead of working with the British. The French and Soviets after WW2 tried to improve the German axial-flow engines and largely failed. The British in order to get a usable and reliable jet engine, with the technology of the time, went for a *centrifugal* design rather than the troublesome axial-flow design. This design produced less thrust than an axial-flow but was quicker to develop and reliable. It took 5 months to develop, while the first _reliable_ axial-flow engine was the 1950 Rolls Royce Avon, which took 5 years to get right. In 1945 the French made and tested some German designed turbo jets made with quality steel unavailable to German industry in WW2. They ran for 25 hours instead of 10 hours to the Germans engines that used poor quality steel. Not much better. The German axial-flow engines failed because of heavy design faults. The centrifugal compressor used by the first British Meteor plane was fine and much more reliable, but unable to reach high compression ratios. This limited performances. Centrifugal compressors were used up to the 1960s. In 1945 the team from the French ATAR laboratory plus some BMW and Junkers engineers, were engaged by the French SNECMA research bureau, with the objective to built a new reliable and performing axial-flow turbojet. The BMW 003/Jumo004 was considered unusable. It was tested on the first French jet aircraft, the 1946 So6000 Triton, overheating and exploding. The plane only flew with a Rolls Royce Nene centrifugal turbojet. The ATAR project took 6 years to produce the first acceptable axial-flow turbojet (ATAR 101 B1), produced in 1953. So 8 years research and developments by the French using the German jet engines as the base. It was installed on the first French jet fighter, the Dassault Ouragan. The French lost a lot of time because the German jets had poor efficiency and some concept fails. Essentially in the combustion chambers and fresh air circulation to reduce the external temperature of the engine. The BMW jet was known for overheat problems which precluded fuselage installation. The question at the end of WW2 was what is the most efficient way to produce jet fighters. The answer is clearly not adopting the German design of engine and fuselage. The build costs for a jet engine were much higher than a piston engine, with the fuel consumption near 3x. The centrifugal compressor the British adopted in some planes was the best choice with 1944-45 technology, more compression pressure was not an advantage when the hot turbine was unable to resist higher temperatures. The German turbojets had big overheat problems as the engine would not work in an enclosed fuselage for single engined fighters. This defect was immediately noted by the French on the 1946 "SO 6000 Triton" prototype, and by the Soviets on the 1946 Mig 9. The Soviets quickly replaced the BMW 004B2 by the centrifugal Rolls Royce Nene which worked without problems, dismissing the BMW engine for fighter planes. The Rolls Royce Nene was copied to the last nut by the USSR being installed in the Mig 15 being used effectively in the Korean war. About 10 years ago the USSR eventually paid royalties to Rolls Royce. The Meteor was the first proper fully developed jet plane introduced. The 262 was slightly faster than the Meteor F3, but extremely unreliable. *The British would never put into the sky such an undeveloped plane as the me262.* The British could have had a jet fighter operational in 1941, but it would have been as bad as the me262. The Germans advanced R&D on jets after they interrogated captured British RAF men. They learned the British were advanced in jet technology and flying prototype planes. Until then the Germans had no intention of mass producing jet planes. The rushed together Me262 started claiming kills on 26 July 1944, the Meteor claimed its first V1 kill a few days later on the 4 August 1944. *But the Meteor was a proper fully developed jet plane, not a thrown together desperate effort as the me262 was.* The me262 fuselage was similar to a piston plane with the pilot over the wings obscuring downward vision, while the Meteor was a proper new design fuselage specifically for jet fighters with a forward of the wings pilot position with superior vision, as we see today. The cockpit was very quiet. The sweptback wings of the me262 were to move the engines further back for better weight distribution, not for aerodynamic reasons as is thought the case. Centrifugal compressors were not obsolete being used in turboprops. Between a turbo jet and a turboprop, the only difference is the turbine, not the compressor. The last centrifugal compressor jet engine still in service on a handful of commercial aircraft like the Fokker 27, is the Rolls Royce Dart turboprop. A very reliable engine made in 27 versions, but with high fuel consumption to modern engines. The Rolls Royce Dart Turboprop turbo jet engine was produced the longest, being a comparable design turbojet to the likes the Rolls Royce Nene. The rugged engine was produced from 1946 up to 1987.
Thomas Godehus It's a 'interview' .......still you could follow it up by reading a few of his popular and well detailed books...Or are you one of those illiterate guys that just likes books with 'pictures'..........
Try to get over the Scots accent Old Chap - the man is an unsung Superstar of our time - you can probably find the cold technicals elsewhere to supplement what he is sharing with us ;)
tSp289 Hardly. Bombers crews spent the later part of 1944 training with the 616SQN Meteors on anti-jet tactics. They would have just followed their training.
Put a pilot with insufficient training in ANY aeroplane and it will be a suicide machine. The young lads that were supposed to fly these Heinkels had only received basic training on gliders; the most experienced fighter pilots had been shot down by that time.
"The Horten Brothers"... I'm tired of the worship of these machines. Jack Northrop's designs pre-dated them, and they were NOT stealth aircraft. Low observable by accident, but absolutely not stealthy. Regardless, RIP Mr Brown, you were amazing.
Northrop got the ideas from the Horton. Live with it. Horton's was way ahead of Northrop 2.bp.blogspot.com/-tOYK2yPCWI0/Vx0KXcO7tFI/AAAAAAAAAl0/znfIynl0vzMdFY2I6ujAIInc4_ErajNnQCLcB/s1600/output_g7mfJv.gif They found the magic balanced 40 degress back swept wing already during the war. Which Northrop took decades to figure out with the B2 The other version he made got discarded. To unstable in flight.
If you want really early flying wing designs, check out the British Dunne D5 (1910) and D8 (1913) and the US Navy version, the Burgess-Dunne AH-7 (1914) They are biplanes and, admittedly have vertical control surfaces but with a 35 degree sweep back can be considered the forerunners of Horton and Northrop.
John Brooks 225 have 40 degree and B2 43 degree, not 35. The difference is that the Hortons really did the research with all there versions. How many did they build? 10-20 versions from 33 degree to 40.
Tbonyandsteak The optimal angle may have been calculated in the 1930s but the more important point is that a flying wing was in the air 20 or more years earlier. It didn't come from the brains of the Horten brothers or Northrop and it succeeded after four partially successful test machines, coming just seven years after the recognized first flight of a heavier than air machine. The (US built) Burgess-Dunne AH-7 was also the first aeroplane flown by the Canadian military. You may have a 'favourite' but should still give some credit to the real instigator of the concept a generation earlier.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Eric Brown was tiny in stature, but he was MASSIVE in accomplishment He was a supreme aviator, brave, immensely skillful and with more flying hours, on aa vast variety if types.
What increases my respect for him even more is that he was a modest, courteous and unassuming man. He was the top gun without the bullshit and attitude.
May he rest in peace.
Jay Igaboo :spot on...
A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y.
You are correct that his flight test contributions to the war effort were enormous . And yes he was a fighter pilot and THE test pilot .... “Top gun” though ? I think not ... He flamed two German bombers in a Grumman F4F -that’s it - his skills were needed and best utilized elsewhere ... his contributions were most noteworthy as an aircraft evaluator than merely a fighter jockey , wouldn’t you agree ?
I met him a Shoreham Air show, a privilege. Too bad about the Hunter crash.
@@dank630 No not by a long chalk
Great he spread his knowledge and experiences.
Gonna buy his books
Capt.Brown, a classic sort of guy .Sure got to have a load of fun Id say,lol.
RIP Capt Eric Brown. A legend.
What a mind ....... so clear and cognitive.... makes me feel quite pathetic
An amazing career, his Book is worth a read.....😎
Jack Northrop thought highly of the Horten brothers too.
Ol winkle landed a mosquito on a carrier...very skilled pilot...
You should have asked him about the Heinkel Lerche!!
RIP Eric.
He's right about the Me-262. The first day that they showed up, they shot down 2 Mosquito(British wooden plane with 2 Spitfire engines, the fastest Allied plane), and air warfare was changed forever.
David : The Mossie was NOT the Fastest allied plane
*There is a myth that the Germans were way ahead of the British in jet engines and planes in WW2, when the opposite is true.* The WW2 German jet engines were extremely unreliable with low performances and very high fuel consumption. The German *axial-flow* turbojets never worked properly and were developed up to 1953 by the French to obtain a usable engine. The French lost a lot of time playing around with the German engines, instead of working with the British. The French and Soviets after WW2 tried to improve the German axial-flow engines and largely failed.
The British in order to get a usable and reliable jet engine, with the technology of the time, went for a *centrifugal* design rather than the troublesome axial-flow design. This design produced less thrust than an axial-flow but was quicker to develop and reliable. It took 5 months to develop, while the first _reliable_ axial-flow engine was the 1950 Rolls Royce Avon, which took 5 years to get right.
In 1945 the French made and tested some German designed turbo jets made with quality steel unavailable to German industry in WW2. They ran for 25 hours instead of 10 hours to the Germans engines that used poor quality steel. Not much better. The German axial-flow engines failed because of heavy design faults. The centrifugal compressor used by the first British Meteor plane was fine and much more reliable, but unable to reach high compression ratios. This limited performances. Centrifugal compressors were used up to the 1960s.
In 1945 the team from the French ATAR laboratory plus some BMW and Junkers engineers, were engaged by the French SNECMA research bureau, with the objective to built a new reliable and performing axial-flow turbojet. The BMW 003/Jumo004 was considered unusable. It was tested on the first French jet aircraft, the 1946 So6000 Triton, overheating and exploding. The plane only flew with a Rolls Royce Nene centrifugal turbojet.
The ATAR project took 6 years to produce the first acceptable axial-flow turbojet (ATAR 101 B1), produced in 1953. So 8 years research and developments by the French using the German jet engines as the base. It was installed on the first French jet fighter, the Dassault Ouragan.
The French lost a lot of time because the German jets had poor efficiency and some concept fails. Essentially in the combustion chambers and fresh air circulation to reduce the external temperature of the engine. The BMW jet was known for overheat problems which precluded fuselage installation.
The question at the end of WW2 was what is the most efficient way to produce jet fighters. The answer is clearly not adopting the German design of engine and fuselage. The build costs for a jet engine were much higher than a piston engine, with the fuel consumption near 3x. The centrifugal compressor the British adopted in some planes was the best choice with 1944-45 technology, more compression pressure was not an advantage when the hot turbine was unable to resist higher temperatures. The German turbojets had big overheat problems as the engine would not work in an enclosed fuselage for single engined fighters. This defect was immediately noted by the French on the 1946 "SO 6000 Triton" prototype, and by the Soviets on the 1946 Mig 9. The Soviets quickly replaced the BMW 004B2 by the centrifugal Rolls Royce Nene which worked without problems, dismissing the BMW engine for fighter planes.
The Rolls Royce Nene was copied to the last nut by the USSR being installed in the Mig 15 being used effectively in the Korean war. About 10 years ago the USSR eventually paid royalties to Rolls Royce.
The Meteor was the first proper fully developed jet plane introduced. The 262 was slightly faster than the Meteor F3, but extremely unreliable. *The British would never put into the sky such an undeveloped plane as the me262.* The British could have had a jet fighter operational in 1941, but it would have been as bad as the me262. The Germans advanced R&D on jets after they interrogated captured British RAF men. They learned the British were advanced in jet technology and flying prototype planes. Until then the Germans had no intention of mass producing jet planes.
The rushed together Me262 started claiming kills on 26 July 1944, the Meteor claimed its first V1 kill a few days later on the 4 August 1944. *But the Meteor was a proper fully developed jet plane, not a thrown together desperate effort as the me262 was.* The me262 fuselage was similar to a piston plane with the pilot over the wings obscuring downward vision, while the Meteor was a proper new design fuselage specifically for jet fighters with a forward of the wings pilot position with superior vision, as we see today. The cockpit was very quiet. The sweptback wings of the me262 were to move the engines further back for better weight distribution, not for aerodynamic reasons as is thought the case.
Centrifugal compressors were not obsolete being used in turboprops. Between a turbo jet and a turboprop, the only difference is the turbine, not the compressor. The last centrifugal compressor jet engine still in service on a handful of commercial aircraft like the Fokker 27, is the Rolls Royce Dart turboprop. A very reliable engine made in 27 versions, but with high fuel consumption to modern engines. The Rolls Royce Dart Turboprop turbo jet engine was produced the longest, being a comparable design turbojet to the likes the Rolls Royce Nene. The rugged engine was produced from 1946 up to 1987.
@@jacktattis1190 not by then, no. but 4 of the 6 years it was, so not bad for a fighter -BOMBER, with or without it's incredible range of armoury.
@@johnburns4017 absolutely correct John, I was going to say all that. sniff, No doubt you know the sad and bloody typical story, of Sir Frank Whittle's attempt to get Government /RAF support for his world changing brilliant Jet engine ? ''TOO ADVANCED, they said, we've already spent all our money on obsolete Bi-Planes 'Darts'? Marvelous at airshows doncha know, the public love em ''. As has been the case throughout our history, we have the genius working alone, who makes a brilliant discovery, and nobody with the brain cells, or purse string power, who has the slightest idea of what has been presented to them. That German guy, who is credited with inventing their Jet engine, and got a plane in the air, 2 years before us ??
Well, on his deathbed ,a few years ago, he is credited with confessing that despite all the denials over the years, the Nazis DID, covertly steal the unprotected TOP SECRET info about Whittles great invention. Was I surprised ?
♦ German engineer Ohain did not design a reverse flow engine. His engine had a centrifugal compressor and a radial inflow (centrifugal turbine - a design never used in any production engine - this was a patent filed by Whittle). Ohain even commented on its unusual design when he read Whittle's patent prior to filing his own: From Ohain's biography: _"When I saw Whittle’s patent I was almost convinced that it had something to do with boundary layer suction combinations. It had a two-flow, dual entrance flow radial flow compressor that looked monstrous from an engine point of view. Its flow reversal looked to us to be an undesirable thing, but it turned out that it wasn't so bad after all though it gave some minor instability problems."_
♦ Whittle's reverse flow design is the basis for almost all turboprop engines in production;
♦ Britain had axial-flow engines running in 1941 - the same time that Franz had his Jumo running. The Metrovick F.2 flew in a Meteor in 1943. The F.2 transpired into the Sapphire which the US built under licence as the J-65 and then modified it as the J-47;
♦ Westinghouse in the US was given a Whittle engine, and plans for improvements. They made such a hash of it that Whittle had to go to the US to assist. The US government gave the project to GE who made the I-16 which transpired into the first US built jet engine. The US licensed the Ghost for the P-80/T-33 and the RR Nene. The Nene was used by the Soviets in the MIG 15;
♦ Ohain's engine was not produced being shelved by 1943. No engine was built using his design;
♦ Whittle also R&D'd axial-flow engines. The metallurgy was not advanced enough at the time. Whittle's engines produced far more thrust than the German axial-flows and far more reliable;
♦ The PT-6, PWC 100/150 are derivatives of Whittle's designs being still produced;
• Whittle's centrifugal-flow engines were built under licence in the US after WW2 - the J-33, J-42 and J-48;
• The Olympus was the world's first 2 shaft turbojet and the first to exceed 10,000 pounds of thrust;
• The 1950 Avon was the first reliable axial-flow engine. Also the longest produced gas turbine in history being still in production as a land based generator;
• The RR Conway was the world's first turbofan;
• The RB-211 was the world's first 3 shaft turbofan;
• The Rolls Royce Trent was the world's first turboprop to fly;
• British axial-flows led the post war world in technology and power;
• The axial-flow Sapphire was built in the US as the J-65. The GE J-47 was based on the Sapphire.
*Frank Whittle invented the modern turbojet.*
Wow
Who would downvote this?
Ender: Wilbur Finnigan/ Soaring Tractor
This man is so impressive in so many ways. Even in his old age, his mind was still sharper than many people half his age. Among the many things I admire about him is how he spoke. How a person speaks is a glimpse into his character and his was that of a giant.
its kinda sad sometimes when we eventually find out, that many of our so-called hero's, either actually werent, or it was just all about the timing.. even yeager often says, i had the skillsets alright, but i was just in the right place at the right time at WPAFB....but not "winkle"...he was the real-deal holyfield, worthy of all attention he got...still miss the guy....a genuine aviation icon.....
What a grand old Gent Winkle was. When you read his books, you don't get the syntax of the ways his words fit together, Even at 95 years old, His commentary and insights are joy for any airplane nut!
See you on the other side, Captain Brown.
Arguably the greatest pilot in history.
Marseille?
Remarkable career
Remarkable pilot
Remarkable man
A good adversary. My father flew ME 110s and he knew this Brit. Bless them both. Von Kleiga.
There was a professional respect there. Galland and Bader were good friends after the war. Hals und beinbruch!
Why did we fight that damn war.We always got on with Germans and Hitler always admired the British and the British Empire.We guaranteed the freedom of Poland but declared war on Hitler but stood aside when the mass murderer Stalin ,invaded from the Eastern side under the terms of the Molotov- Ribbentrop Pact.Stalin then just embarked on mass murder from then on ,eg,Katyn!.We fought the wrong lot.
@@djangorheinhardt I feel the same. It stems from Kaiser Wilhelm's inferiority complex, the catastrophe of WW1 and the conditions in Germany after the defeat. We would have been so much better off cooperating with Germany. I remember reading that a Royal Navy squadron visited Kiel harbour in June 1914. When they left, the German ships signaled "Friends yesterday, friends today, friends forever". Such a tragedy
@@kevinchappell3694 Good job Uncle Joe didn't do any of that.
@@djangorheinhardt If the British had formed an alliance with the Germans, instead of the French and Russians, they would have won the war in a few months and could have added even more lands to both of their empires. The British would not have been fatally weakened by the war thus allowing themselves to be overtaken by the USA, would have kept their empire for decades longer than actually happened and communism would probaly never taken root in Russia. Best of all a million British empire men would not have been killed.
1:40 "That rather marred the last part of the exhibition ..." Typical British understatement to recall an aircraft fatality.
Millions had died in the years before, people were hardened
RIP Captain Eric Winkle Brown
Flew 487 different types (including Luftwaffe types)
First Carrier landing
first jet carrier landing
The greatest test pilot ever
Omg,respect to the great fellow.
He is truly a great British hero.
spottydog4477 Eric Brown and Bob Hoover, 😭
Winkle Brown RIP. Never got the recognition he deserved.
THE legend. He flew them all. Cool & lucky guy he was.
It is always cool hearing from somebody who knows what they are talking about.
Great insights.
“But the thought of them having enough fuel, pilots and these jets (Me 262) was a bit sobering.” Indeed Captain Brown!
This man will always be a legend. No other pilot will match his achievements.
Erik Brown, what a great authority to listen to! No BS, no politically correct PR. Just the facts!
The greatest pilot ever.
Both articulate and knowledgeable, Captain Brown was a worthy interviewee. An excellent segment and especially interesting for his admiration for the Me 262 and Horten 9. Nicely done and thanks for posting, you lot!
William Cox it's HORTEN, not Horton...
Given that 99+% of the world has zero knowledge of these vintage military aircraft, it's not exactly a big deal. Currently scratch building an EDF HP Victor, as if most anyone I know has any idea of what it is.
And it's 229 not 9.
Very interesting. And now we have 5th gen fighters, and we are starting to think about 6th gen. 6th gen will look a whole lot like a Horton flying wing, and they will not have a man in the cockpit. There is a technology demonstrator called the XB-47, which gives a peek. Like the Reaper drones, they will be capable of acting autonomously, completing their mission and flying home in the case of lost radio contact, but unlike the Reapers they will be very stealthy, quite agile and maneuverable, and very much able to operate in a high tech / high threat environment. The Horton brothers were 75 years ahead of their time...
I love listening to these old chaps recounting their experiences,whether they be allied or ex axis powers my fascination with them is just as valid!!!
An amazing man. Superb achievements in pretty much every aspect of his career.
RIP, you lived a magnificent life
Thanks for the video. It is good to see the Pilots telling their stories in what they did in the second world war. The real warriors of the sky and the planes they fly.
An amazing aviator and as a bonus - we're both from Leith
I WISH I HAD MET HIM. NOBODY WILL EVER BE ABLE TO MATCH HIS ACHIEVEMENTS AND ABILITIES. R.I.P ERIC
I could listen to this gentleman talk all day long. What a wonderful wealth of knowledge. Excellent videos.
As impressive as his accomplishments in the air you should read up on his experiences on the ground. He met EVERYBODY. He was like Forrest Gump. He was there when Hitler met Jesse Owens at the Olympics. And I mean THERE. In Hitler's private box. (He said Hitler was friendly and cordial, and shook Owens' hand, contrary to myth.) He was at at least one Nazi Nuremberg rally because his dad was a British diplomat.
Mickey Bitsko apparently not saying it's fact but Adolf treated him better than your own president. assuming you're American
Mickey NO he was not in Hitlers Private Box.
He also was one of the only two survivors of a British ship sunk by Nazi submarines. This guy had the right stuff!
@@pepecohetes492 If you mean the aircraft carrier HMS Audacity, after the ship sank, destroyers and corvettes in the convoy escort returned to pick up survivours. During the pickup, one of the ships detected an asdic ping which suggested that the U-boat that had sunk Audacity was still nearby. Standing orders in that situation were for ships to leave the area immediately - an identical event occurred when British ships were picking up some 400 survivors from the Bismarck and a lookout saw what he thought was a U-boat. With only 110 Bismarck crew rescued, the ships had to leave the remaining survivours in the water. A U-boat and a German trawler later rescued another five.
In the case of Brown and the Audacity sinking: when the British ships left, Brown, his flight commander and twenty-six sailors were left in the water. During the night the sailors drowned one by one - Brown put it down to the type of car tyre inner tube type of life preservers they were wearing, which couldn't keep their heads out of the water when they either went to sleep or passed out. Because the Brown and his flight commander were wearing the more efficient Mae West life jacket issued to aircrew they were still alive when the ships returned the next morning.
All together, both in the torpedo attack that sank Audacity and the aftermath, when survivours had to be left in the water, 73 of the carrier's crew died.
Jack Tattis,The one person who did refuse to shake Owens's hand was Roosevelt .When Owen's got back to America and Roosevelt was asked if he was going to meet him he said No.I can't be seen shakin' hands with no *****r " .Ah those lovable septic tanks again : don't you just hate them.....er.... I mean love them.
✈
✈
✈ ✈
....
✈
last fly by - ein letzter Fliegergruss
...my cordial condolences...
A great man who served his country.
truly the greatest generation....
'....other than the fatal accident it was a great success'.
The best summary of Health and Safety culture as it was in the British Empire.
Oh, how times have changed!
It is a privilege to be able to hear the opinions of such a brilliant expert as this.
Awesome to hear him tell it like it is. I'm sure It ruffled a few feathers at the RAF to say how good the Germans stuff really was
Clever Guy, he didnt just jump in and fly by the seat of his pants. He did his homework and didnt assume things. Very interesting Career.
The greatest and most accomplished pilot in the history of flight.
I regret I never had the privilege of meeting this legend.
Makes Chuck Yeager look like an amateur.
R.I.P. "Winkle."
(salute)
I don't know if Yeager and Winkle ever met but I think they would have regarded each other as equals.
@@phlodel Maybe not Yeager was the Pilot who broke the sound barrier with the knowledge that Brown and the Miles team had accumulated on the Miles project that was given to the Americans,
The Brits were 18 months ahead and ready to go until the Govt forced them to to give all their info to the Americans[ Coercion from the US at the highest levels]
@@phlodel I think that's what he's hinting at, the arrogant yank, daring to consider himself an equal to our great Engishman hahahahahha.
@@jacktattis143 yeah ? and ? because they didn't want to lend a Commie ---er---Labour, government billions of dollars for their Socialist programme. Especially after booting out hero Churchill. So that was part of the deal, I'm sure. Americans value top propaganda more than anything.
@@MrDaiseymay he's from Scotland not England, they should probably name Edinburgh airport after him.
Anybody ever asked him which one were his favourite aircrafts? Thanks.
..wasn't it the DH. Hornet.
IF OLD-school propellers, that is ;-)
WHAT A MAN
If the British government hadn't cancelled the Miles M52 program he could have been the first man to break the sound barrier.
A bit of early post-war arselicking by the Labour Government---to push through the US loan we desperately needed. The Yanks thought we had gone Commie.
66 no
Rest in Peace sir. You will be missed.
There were 3 flyoffs between the 262 and the Horten wing. The 262 had an experienced Luftwaffe pilot and the Horten had an inexperienced test pilot. The Horten wing made the 262 look like target practice in 2 of the flights. One flight was called off because of nose wheel problems with the 262. The Horten wing had a higher top speed, outclimbed, out turned and out dove the 262 with ease. It's quite possible that Nazi politics made a bad choice in allocating resources.
larry My info is that the Horten only flew 4 times. It is highly unlikely the Horton would have been ready to take on the Me 262 after only 4 flights
I’d love to have a browse through his log books.
love this guy . what a life he had .
Eric Brown: 'The pilot I briefed crashed and died before our eyes, which kind of spoiled things a bit, but it was still a marvellous day, and the afternoon nibbles were wonderful.'
AND A FELLOW SCOT
+234cheech Aye he wiz that!
Great that the Brits were rattled by the jet 262 because if they would have only woken up to Whittles invention and potential far away lead in the 30s there would have been game set and match for the allies. But, the Germans saw the jet potential and didn’t look back. Foresight is a wonderful thing.
What a legend..... Amazing stories....
Dads CO at Fulmar! Not omly a great commander, a genuinely nice guy?
The amazing HORTEN………
looks like an UFO❤
An absolute legend of a man. Total respect.
Great interview, Brown makes some excellent commentary.
He didn't have clue about the me262 jet plane. It was fast because it was using a axil-flow engine that constantly killed its pilots. If the pilot pushed the throttles too hard the engines would stall. The British rejected them in WW2, using them later when they developed them properly. The first properly reliable axial-flow was the RR Avon in 1950.
@@johnburns4017 Jeezus, just think, if Eric Brown hadn't died, he could have come to you for an education on the flying characteristics of the Me 262....What a bummer!
@@MrBiggoolie He did miss out. I would like to see him in a dog fight in the plane. I think it would be an ex Eric.
Where are all the British racists and their Anglophile sycophants on this story??? This man said the Me262 was a "quantum jump" in aircraft technology and it "rattled" the British to know that it could fly 120 miler per hour faster than the best British fighter. And had the aircraft not been introduced so late (because of Hitler's meddling) and with a severe shortage of pilots and fuel, it could have swept the skies of British and American aircraft.
the thing is the RAF Gloster Meteor was 40 MPH quicker than the ME262(600 MPH v 559MPH), both Introduced in 1944.Sorry Harold no cigar
That's not true! Post war Meteor yes, 1944 Meteor no. In 1944 the meteors acceleration was abysmal.
I'm British and will admit some of these German aircraft and technologies were far superior to the allies. Hence Operation paperclip was formed and the Russians had similar operations.
Looks like the anglophobic wehraboo won this race.
You commented
The man Neil Armstrong looked up to
Abaut Lutwaffet only the germans must be talk.
What a man.What a hero.!
Blimey - wot a Top Geezer!
Sorry couldn't hear anything please turn up the volume thank you .
WHY DON'T YOU?
He is a legend. Great video.
And the Me 163 flight?
I think you British did give away too much stuff to the Americans, without getting much back
Without getting much back? So you think keeping some gadgets and assorted technology wasn't worth trading for, essentially, the continued existence of the British empire? I wish you luck in life, you'll need it, with critical thinking skills like that.
Sam Kovisto which we paid handsomely for. In fact we only finished paying that debt off about ten years ago. Yanks "gave" us fuck all.
Howard Chambers If you read my comment, you'll notice I didn't say we 'gave' you lot a damn thing... I have to guess no one has taught you how a trade/deal/treaty/etc. works... The Crown 'gave' the USofA some tech and money, and in return we 'gave' the Crown it's only hope for continued existence.
I suppose we could have left the Hun to have his way with you
I think you might be rewriting history. As I recall the only reason you entered WW2 was the attack on Pearl Harbor. I'll be forever grateful that you did fight with the allies but that choice was made for you by the Japanese in 1941 (WW2 had already been going for two years at that point).
Eure Hoheitsabzeichen machen die Maschinen irgendwie hässlich 🤔.....
Das ist als wenn man Fanta auf eine Cola Flasche klebt 😂😂😂
amazing fellow. thank goodness germans let a politico guide them , rather than them reading what sun TSU had to say on that strategy.
In Rechlin also mostly all Allied Planes were tested and so both sides had the information they needed
Legend.
Good old "winkle". He's was a hellova chap.
the He 162 was a widow maker. Stunting this thing was absolute suicide.
RIP Sir
Jonathan Ludgater Trams antwerpen
What happend to the US Navy pilot who attempted to match Eric Brown's number of carrier deck landings?
dEREK I believe he got to 1000+ and it wore him out
Rip that’s an impressive resumé
Cannot doubt his specialist flying abilities. German pilots, were far more skilled than the allied aircrew?
fifthof - At the start of the war.
Some were at the beginning and some were not!
Great test pilot.
Thanks Spotty
Fascinating
I believe there is a connection of some kind with Cedar Rapids, Iowa, USA
granskare :Alexander Lippisch, the German designer of the ME-162 rocket plane, worked for Rockwell Collins in Cedar Rapids, IA.
Errrm Erik, you might mean the Me 163? The 162 was a Heinkel design (the one with the jet engine on the back).
@@omepeet2006 correct, I misspoke...the ME-163 rocket intercepter ...was based on Lippisch’ tailless designs...
What a guy!
What a man!
What a class !
Crashed a Heinkel 162, crashed a Dornier 335, bloody vandals.
The unnecessary war , how true Churchill was.
@David Kopp LOONY---WHAT'S YOUR EXCUSE?
Read Pat Buchanan whose book is named just that " The Unnecessary war" Churchill was the architect of the demise of this country.The greedy yanks bled us dry and charged us for every last bullet we bought and Churchill moaned in private but still signed every demand the yanks served upon us.That damned war was a complete disaster for us British and we should have kept our interfering snout out of it.For us financially ,it was a catastrophic defeat.
What is that aircraft at 1:50?
pj8guy looks like a 3 engine design of a ju-290 probably a prototype based on the ju-52 design
That's a Junkers Ju 352, a non-pressurized version of the Ju 252, which was a development of the Ju 52.
I recommend reading his book “ Wings on my Sleeve” ...he goes into detail on the Luftwaffe planes
*The Me262 was overrated.*
Yes, when it got up-to-speed it was untouchable and had very heavy firepower ... _but_ ...
It needed a vast amount of fuel to get up-to-speed, during which time it was a dead duck- easy to shoot down and practically incapable of returning fire.
The same was true for landings - the landing consumed a lot of fuel, and it couldn't fight while trying to land. If it was attacked while trying to land, again it was a dead duck unable to fight back, and also at grave risk of running out of fuel if it tried to maneuver to save itself.
In addition to its massive fuel consumption, their takeoffs needed squadron of Bf109s and FW190s flying overhead to protect them while they got up-to-speed. If you add the fuel consumption of the piston engined fighters needed to protect their takeoffs, then the net result was a massive amount of extra fuel to get the 262s to reach combat speed.
*And the Germans were perilously low on fuel.* The fuel the Me262 used competed with the rest of the military, meaning that trucks, tanks and all other aircraft had much less fuel for then to fight with.
Then there was the issue of engine reliability - at less than 30 hours before each engine gave up, it was expensive to keep replacing them.
So for only about 20 minutes of unrivaled combat time, the Me262 was unreliable and consumed a massive amount of fuel that was desperately needed by the rest of the military, and outside of those effective combat minutes it was a hopelessly vulnerable aircraft that needed constant protection.
If the Germans tried to field even more Me262s, they would have lost the war even sooner just because of the massive extra fuel consumption.
@MrHallodri1 - perhaps your best option is to learn to read English, _then_ read what I wrote, before you comment.
I'm assume that you aren't an idiot, and that your first language isn't English, and I'll repeat the salient points. _Read carefully:_
*Germany was critically low on fuel.*
That means that there wasn't enough fuel to fly all the ME262s that had _already_ built.
That means that each ME262 flight consumed a vast amount of fuel that would otherwise have gone to tanks and trucks trying to prevent the Red Army, the US and British Armies from crushing German ground forces. Each ME262 flight made the situation on the ground worse for the German infantry. And the gain for Germany from each flight was marginal.
That means that even if Germany had built a million ME262s and had a million pilots to fly them, their situation was no better off.
That means that if Germany had prioritised flights of their already built ME262s, they would have lost the war even sooner.
That means the ME262 was the wrong weapon for Germany from late 1944 to the end of the war. It was practically useless, and likely worse than useless.
@@pauligrossinoz Thanks. Good to know we've got a first-class armchair engineer on our side. I worked for Boeing for 35 years, and I knew guys who actually flew the 262 after the war. They were staggered by its performance, just as Eric was. That thing impressed the hell out of our engineers, let me tell you. Our P-51 was old school compared to it. Sure you might take it down on landing or take-off, but a plane that was over 100mph faster than any of ours, well you gotta admire that technology. Ol' Willi M knew what he was doing, that's for sure.
@@guydoe1666 - yeah ... The kids playing Top Trumps are impressed by speed.
But in the _real_ world it was an overrated airplane with serious flaws in combat, that was ultimately just a waste of fuel.
@@pauligrossinoz Okay, good to know I was conversing with a mature, rational person.
@@guydoe1666 - Okay, good to know that I'm conversing with somebody who bothers to actually read what I wrote, instead of dismissing it and saying that some people after the war said the 262 was very fast.
There is much more to air combat that merely speed, but if you can't read, then you obviously wouldn't understand anything more nuanced.
Ironic that. because the Horton Bros, hated the indiscriminate murderous strategic bombing of the allies, and designed their bombers as revenge weapons
You know who came up with the ideology of "total warfare" and "terror bombing"?
Correct, churchill. The man who wanted a third nuke.
@@Schimml0rd I don't believe the total bombing of civilian targets was Churchill's original idea. Others in the air ministry thought this would be the only way to demoralize the German people and bring about the nazi menace. The effect was just the opposite.,
I BELIEVE IT WAS THE GERMANS AT GURNICA
Have a look at Coventry (amongst all those other British towns bombed) if you wish to discuss indiscriminate bombing (not that many of the British people were ever really in favour of anyone murdering civilians from the air after the zeppelin raids of WW1 or the Spanish civil war with Luftwaffe support!)
I come from Portsmouth. I went to school among the bomb sites left by the Germans and many were miles from the dockyard, which would have been a legitimate target. Street after street cleared by bulldozers and left as rubble even years later.
Remember Sir Arthur Harris' statement, as best I recall, "The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else and nobody was going to bomb them!"
But of course, you were only trying to provoke a reaction. You couldn't be so ignorant of the early years of WW2, could you?
the Horton brothers were cranks. They didn't hold with the notion of an elliptical lift distribution, thinking that it was rather more parabolic. The Horton 9 required 500 lbs of ballast (a huge amount) because the Center of Gravity was wrong. That would have limited its payload.
have his book....dont like it. greetings from germany
Clear orf, squarehead.
no i mean he was only a lucky guy who had the opportunity to fly many different enemy planes to england.....nothing more ;-)
I have the same book the way around from a german test pilot who flew all enemy planes which they captured and keep operational......was the same lucky guy .
The me 262 was a deeply flawed plane. The British dropped the axial-flow engines, which was faster, as it was extremely unreliable. The 262 was highly uncontrollable. If you tried to fly it under control, the engines would stall.
Based upon what John?
*There is a myth that the Germans were way ahead of the British in jet engines and planes in WW2, when the opposite is true.* The WW2 German jet engines were extremely unreliable with low performances and very high fuel consumption. The German *axial-flow* turbojets never worked properly and were developed up to 1953 by the French to obtain a usable engine. The French lost a lot of time playing around with the German engines, instead of working with the British. The French and Soviets after WW2 tried to improve the German axial-flow engines and largely failed.
The British in order to get a usable and reliable jet engine, with the technology of the time, went for a *centrifugal* design rather than the troublesome axial-flow design. This design produced less thrust than an axial-flow but was quicker to develop and reliable. It took 5 months to develop, while the first _reliable_ axial-flow engine was the 1950 Rolls Royce Avon, which took 5 years to get right.
In 1945 the French made and tested some German designed turbo jets made with quality steel unavailable to German industry in WW2. They ran for 25 hours instead of 10 hours to the Germans engines that used poor quality steel. Not much better. The German axial-flow engines failed because of heavy design faults. The centrifugal compressor used by the first British Meteor plane was fine and much more reliable, but unable to reach high compression ratios. This limited performances. Centrifugal compressors were used up to the 1960s.
In 1945 the team from the French ATAR laboratory plus some BMW and Junkers engineers, were engaged by the French SNECMA research bureau, with the objective to built a new reliable and performing axial-flow turbojet. The BMW 003/Jumo004 was considered unusable. It was tested on the first French jet aircraft, the 1946 So6000 Triton, overheating and exploding. The plane only flew with a Rolls Royce Nene centrifugal turbojet.
The ATAR project took 6 years to produce the first acceptable axial-flow turbojet (ATAR 101 B1), produced in 1953. So 8 years research and developments by the French using the German jet engines as the base. It was installed on the first French jet fighter, the Dassault Ouragan.
The French lost a lot of time because the German jets had poor efficiency and some concept fails. Essentially in the combustion chambers and fresh air circulation to reduce the external temperature of the engine. The BMW jet was known for overheat problems which precluded fuselage installation.
The question at the end of WW2 was what is the most efficient way to produce jet fighters. The answer is clearly not adopting the German design of engine and fuselage. The build costs for a jet engine were much higher than a piston engine, with the fuel consumption near 3x. The centrifugal compressor the British adopted in some planes was the best choice with 1944-45 technology, more compression pressure was not an advantage when the hot turbine was unable to resist higher temperatures. The German turbojets had big overheat problems as the engine would not work in an enclosed fuselage for single engined fighters. This defect was immediately noted by the French on the 1946 "SO 6000 Triton" prototype, and by the Soviets on the 1946 Mig 9. The Soviets quickly replaced the BMW 004B2 by the centrifugal Rolls Royce Nene which worked without problems, dismissing the BMW engine for fighter planes.
The Rolls Royce Nene was copied to the last nut by the USSR being installed in the Mig 15 being used effectively in the Korean war. About 10 years ago the USSR eventually paid royalties to Rolls Royce.
The Meteor was the first proper fully developed jet plane introduced. The 262 was slightly faster than the Meteor F3, but extremely unreliable. *The British would never put into the sky such an undeveloped plane as the me262.* The British could have had a jet fighter operational in 1941, but it would have been as bad as the me262. The Germans advanced R&D on jets after they interrogated captured British RAF men. They learned the British were advanced in jet technology and flying prototype planes. Until then the Germans had no intention of mass producing jet planes.
The rushed together Me262 started claiming kills on 26 July 1944, the Meteor claimed its first V1 kill a few days later on the 4 August 1944. *But the Meteor was a proper fully developed jet plane, not a thrown together desperate effort as the me262 was.* The me262 fuselage was similar to a piston plane with the pilot over the wings obscuring downward vision, while the Meteor was a proper new design fuselage specifically for jet fighters with a forward of the wings pilot position with superior vision, as we see today. The cockpit was very quiet. The sweptback wings of the me262 were to move the engines further back for better weight distribution, not for aerodynamic reasons as is thought the case.
Centrifugal compressors were not obsolete being used in turboprops. Between a turbo jet and a turboprop, the only difference is the turbine, not the compressor. The last centrifugal compressor jet engine still in service on a handful of commercial aircraft like the Fokker 27, is the Rolls Royce Dart turboprop. A very reliable engine made in 27 versions, but with high fuel consumption to modern engines. The Rolls Royce Dart Turboprop turbo jet engine was produced the longest, being a comparable design turbojet to the likes the Rolls Royce Nene. The rugged engine was produced from 1946 up to 1987.
If this was a good video, it would SHOW us, not only TELL us
Thomas Godehus It's a 'interview' .......still you could follow it up by reading a few of his popular and well detailed books...Or are you one of those illiterate guys that just likes books with 'pictures'..........
Try to get over the Scots accent Old Chap - the man is an unsung Superstar of our time - you can probably find the cold technicals elsewhere to supplement what he is sharing with us ;)
The He-162 was a suicide machine. Totally unfit for aerial warfare. A sad joke of an airplane.
A sad joke that'd still make you soil your undies if you were in a B-17 flying formation and it came up and gutted your plane.
tSp289 Hardly. Bombers crews spent the later part of 1944 training with the 616SQN Meteors on anti-jet tactics. They would have just followed their training.
Crag_r Training can never fully prepare you for combat. I'm sure combat with a jet was about as bad as it could get for a bomber crew.
Put a pilot with insufficient training in ANY aeroplane and it will be a suicide machine. The young lads that were supposed to fly these Heinkels had only received basic training on gliders; the most experienced fighter pilots had been shot down by that time.
"The Horten Brothers"... I'm tired of the worship of these machines. Jack Northrop's designs pre-dated them, and they were NOT stealth aircraft. Low observable by accident, but absolutely not stealthy. Regardless, RIP Mr Brown, you were amazing.
Northrop got the ideas from the Horton.
Live with it.
Horton's was way ahead of Northrop
2.bp.blogspot.com/-tOYK2yPCWI0/Vx0KXcO7tFI/AAAAAAAAAl0/znfIynl0vzMdFY2I6ujAIInc4_ErajNnQCLcB/s1600/output_g7mfJv.gif
They found the magic balanced 40 degress back swept wing already during the war.
Which Northrop took decades to figure out with the B2
The other version he made got discarded.
To unstable in flight.
If you want really early flying wing designs, check out the British Dunne D5 (1910) and D8 (1913) and the US Navy version, the Burgess-Dunne AH-7 (1914) They are biplanes and, admittedly have vertical control surfaces but with a 35 degree sweep back can be considered the forerunners of Horton and Northrop.
John Brooks 225 have 40 degree and B2 43 degree, not 35.
The difference is that the Hortons really did the research with all there versions.
How many did they build? 10-20 versions
from 33 degree to 40.
Tbonyandsteak The optimal angle may have been calculated in the 1930s but the more important point is that a flying wing was in the air 20 or more years earlier. It didn't come from the brains of the Horten brothers or Northrop and it succeeded after four partially successful test machines, coming just seven years after the recognized first flight of a heavier than air machine. The (US built) Burgess-Dunne AH-7 was also the first aeroplane flown by the Canadian military. You may have a 'favourite' but should still give some credit to the real instigator of the concept a generation earlier.
John Brooks I credit all