The F-82 saw only limited combat in Korea. The number one problem, which you totally missed in this video, was that the two-stage supercharged Allison V-1710-100 which the USAF forced North American to use in the production versions of the F-82 had high mechanical failure rates and was a maintenance nightmare, as Allison had NEVER devoted enough engineering resources to make the two-stage supercharger versions of the V-1710 work well without eventually breaking something. Allison at the time was run by corporate bean counters at GM and was only interested in corporate profitability, not good engineering design. The V-1710 by that point was a dead end with no further corporate profits in sight, and Allison would only work on a project if the government paid it to do the work. The USAF instead, in the era of post-war budget cuts, needed to save money (which is why it did not want to pay Rolls Royce the licensing fee for the Packard-Merlins - this fee did NOT go up post war - the new USAF's budget had simply gone down) and so ordered North American to take the USAF's huge stock of surplus Allison V-1710s and parts that it already owned and put that into the F-82. Edgar Schmued just absolutely raged about the USAF's decision to force the Allison engines onto this plane, in his biography "Mustang Designer", which totally ruined what had been a promising design.
You are of course correct and yes forcing the Allison to replace the Merlin basically ruined a most promising design, however the coming of the jet age (already here by then) makes it a moot point. I would have loved to see the production F-82s powered by the Merlins but unfortunately even if they had of been used I doubt we would have seen much if any difference in the career of this most amazing design. Much better if it had of been built early enough to see the last year or so of the war, I think it would have made a big impact and would have been a major player!
That's a shame the U.S. didn't see the benefit of the Rolls Royce engines. Especially since right after the war Britain sold the Rolls Royce jet engine to Russia they used for the MIG 15. Talk about irony. Of course, Russia promised to only use the engine in nonfighter aircraft and for "peaceful purposes" only. Which is hard to believe after everything Britain went through with Germany and Hitler that they would accept that $3 bill. lol
This would be the ultimate "Take a flight in a historical bird". You in one cockpit, and the pilot in the other! Not a 2 seater version, like they have for the spit and mustang, and also the 109. Getting a ride in one of these would be so cool!!!
Are you sure? For example the shot at 04:01 is quite clearly a radar-equipped Twin Mustang. P38's gondola is much bigger and protrudes more to the front. Also the stabilizers and wing shapes or the fronts of the fuselages point to P/F-82.
@@alexandroczayanek8561 at 11:43 the difference is rudder shapes between the two is quite clear, with the spear shaped P-38 rudder seen, instead of the angular (square) shape of the F-82. And P-38 twin radiator bulges in the booms are quite clear.
I was living at Howard Field in the Canal Zone when the first squadron of overseas F-82s arrived. Back then when they arrived I actually climbed up on the wing and asked the pilot if they could be flown from the other side. I believe it was 1947 and I was eight years old. I lived in the Canal Zone from 46-51 and 55-58. From 51-55 I lived on Governors Island, NY.
F-82's got 4 air to air kills, all against piston engine soviet aircraft flown by the North Korean Air Force (LA-7, Yak-11), no jets were shot down in air to air combat by them, so not sure what the "Twin Monster that took down Jets" means in the title?
Fun fact: Bettie Joe was a test aircraft at NASA Glenn Research Center for years. It was taken back by the Air Force, sent to the National Museum of the Air Force and restored to how it looked when it set the records.
I like that the horizontal stabilizer between the twin tails did NOT have the Lockheed-style out-sticky bits at each end. (Like the stubby outer stabilizers that the Lightning and the Constellation both had.) Even the German twin in the drawings didn't have that.
Yep, they only look similar, but hardly any shared components. The airframe is quite a bit longer, and the cockpit is in a different position among many other differences.
With a top speed of 470MPH the Twin Mustang pushed the performance of piston engined technology to the limit. Unfortunately it was still a 100MPH slower than the jets that were just starting to come on stream in the mid 1940s. If it was not for the mechanical unreliability of its Allison engines the F 82 might have made a decent ground attack aircraft. One of its main advantages in this role would have been its ability to loiter over the battlefield far longer than any of the new jets. The F 82 also could have been configured to carry a significant load of bombs, rockets, and napalm, in addition to its 6x50cal armament. It therefore would have proved formidable aircraft in the night and bad weather interdiction role.
f-82's were credited with 4 air to air kills in Korea, all Soviet piston engine aircraft flown by the North Korean Air force. No jets were shot down by F-82's
An Early flyable model of the P-82 could only do Taxi Runs! It needed a 'swap', Left to Right, of it's engines to get Airborne! N/A Engineers had Not anticipated the Vortex that the Merlins' Propellers made upon the Center Wing-Spar that CANCELLED LIFT. Once the engines were Swapped, the P-82 flew 'as expected'. Like the Lighting before it, these had Engines 'Turned' to the Left or Right, such that the Torque of the Props spiraled in opposite directions, eliminating 'Torque-Roll' that other twin-engine planes experienced.
273 were built. Only thing it ever did right was it flew from Hawaii to New York on Feb. 27-28, 1947, a distance of 5,051 miles, the longest non-stop flight ever made by a propeller-driven fighter. Seems it was a really great non-fighter Fighter.
it's two planes stuck together and i start to laugh but then the aerospace engineers clap me on stage, wheel out the whiteboard and say: whatcha got billy? well, i don't know, would three be silly? 1:34 oh, hang on, i just might have an idea
I have seen several of these at the National Museum of the US Air Force in Dayton, Ohio but what's up with the version in the beginning with a short offset fuselage sticking out forward? Some Lighting P-38's had a second crewman in the forward part of the nose to do reconnaissance photography, instead of having the five guns/cannon.
The inward rotating props did not increase drag - it increased effective angle of attack - past CLmax. In effect it was stalling on rotation. Also, not often stated is that the -23/-25 was rated for 80" dry and 90" wet. The future castrated P-82D and Subs were inflicted with the Allison V-1710-119 which was the same as in the Xp51J. Allison never solved the backfire issues encountered above 67"MP and were placarded at 61". I haven't seen a flight test at full rated power for the P-82B, but it easily should outrun and outclimb the P-51H with 4400HP at SL/90"MP
@@justincase1575 true. In the case of the P-38 the tricycle LG permitted a lower relative attack on takeoff run so the additional upwash effect was reduced and actually helpful. The P-82 stalled on TO, until the rotation was changed to cause downwash.
Please don't refer to the ammunition in millimeters , but by caliber in inches , it's American and the Browning is 50 caliber . The design was begun 7 years after that of the P-38 lightning , of which 10,000 were built & used in WWII . Total F-82's built were 273 .
@@gandalfgreyhame3425 P-38 @ 00:30 seconds and 11:40, there may be others. The aircraft at the very beginning is an F-82 with a center mounted fuel tank or radar system.
The F-82 never shot down a jet, but the single monsters, P-51s, as well as other aircraft, shot down ME 262s in WWII. My father was responsible for one of them, ending that Swallow's successful 2 kill day (the plane had already lost one engine, but them's the breaks, all's fair...). Granted, the 262s were problematic, and put into service too soon, but the Mustang was a jet killer.
@@tomkenney5365 your not getting it. me 262 had to come in slow to land. with those early engines you couldent firewall the engines. they had to move the throttles up slowly or would flame out. fighters would wait and pounce at airfields. bye bye 262. many were shot down at takeoff or esp. landing.
Not the first double fuselage American fighter (as stated). That honor would belong to the P-38. Much footage in this video is actually of a P-38 while they claim it as a F-82. I would take everything stated in this clip with a grain of salt.
Also one turned clockwise and the other counterclockwise and you had two sets of eyes. Oh and could more than double the fuel carried. Could have been the earlier version of the Wart Hog.
Yea, I hate this. Unfortunately, it is very common with this type of content. "We need clips of planes in the air!" "Fine, here's som aircraft." I have decided to withhold likes from vids like this, even if the basic subject is interesting.
Did you notice the P-38 footage mixed in?
And the radial and jet engines!
@@leifvejby8023 AND "twin filets" as like a filet mignon? Filet vs. fillet.
@@jrgreiner ???
@@leifvejby8023 One is pronounced "fill- IT" and the other "fill-ay". Make sense?
@@jrgreiner More like filé and fillet, but what does that have to do with me commenting on jet and radial engines?
I detest these vids that use random film clips that have nothing to do with the actual subject.
I couldn’t agree more.
The F-82 saw only limited combat in Korea. The number one problem, which you totally missed in this video, was that the two-stage supercharged Allison V-1710-100 which the USAF forced North American to use in the production versions of the F-82 had high mechanical failure rates and was a maintenance nightmare, as Allison had NEVER devoted enough engineering resources to make the two-stage supercharger versions of the V-1710 work well without eventually breaking something. Allison at the time was run by corporate bean counters at GM and was only interested in corporate profitability, not good engineering design. The V-1710 by that point was a dead end with no further corporate profits in sight, and Allison would only work on a project if the government paid it to do the work. The USAF instead, in the era of post-war budget cuts, needed to save money (which is why it did not want to pay Rolls Royce the licensing fee for the Packard-Merlins - this fee did NOT go up post war - the new USAF's budget had simply gone down) and so ordered North American to take the USAF's huge stock of surplus Allison V-1710s and parts that it already owned and put that into the F-82.
Edgar Schmued just absolutely raged about the USAF's decision to force the Allison engines onto this plane, in his biography "Mustang Designer", which totally ruined what had been a promising design.
You are of course correct and yes forcing the Allison to replace the Merlin basically ruined a most promising design, however the coming of the jet age (already here by then) makes it a moot point. I would have loved to see the production F-82s powered by the Merlins but unfortunately even if they had of been used I doubt we would have seen much if any difference in the career of this most amazing design. Much better if it had of been built early enough to see the last year or so of the war, I think it would have made a big impact and would have been a major player!
The Allison flying Bomb....
@@catman4644 I think having RR Griffon engines would have made more sense for the F-82 in the long run, tbh.
Imagine this aircraft with PT-6 engines on it.
That's a shame the U.S. didn't see the benefit of the Rolls Royce engines. Especially since right after the war Britain sold the Rolls Royce jet engine to Russia they used for the MIG 15. Talk about irony. Of course, Russia promised to only use the engine in nonfighter aircraft and for "peaceful purposes" only. Which is hard to believe after everything Britain went through with Germany and Hitler that they would accept that $3 bill. lol
This would be the ultimate "Take a flight in a historical bird". You in one cockpit, and the pilot in the other! Not a 2 seater version, like they have for the spit and mustang, and also the 109. Getting a ride in one of these would be so cool!!!
Yeah, well said..
Lots of good information, but what's with the film clips of P-38s, a fighter with a radial engine, and the manufacturing of jet engines??
Several shorts show a P-38 lightening. Even in silhouette, the difference is obvious as the P38 had a cental gondola which the F82 lacked.
Are you sure? For example the shot at 04:01 is quite clearly a radar-equipped Twin Mustang. P38's gondola is much bigger and protrudes more to the front. Also the stabilizers and wing shapes or the fronts of the fuselages point to P/F-82.
And a P-61
@@alexandroczayanek8561 at 11:43 the difference is rudder shapes between the two is quite clear, with the spear shaped P-38 rudder seen, instead of the angular (square) shape of the F-82. And P-38 twin radiator bulges in the booms are quite clear.
I noticed that as well, but some appear to be the F-82 variant that had a central pod for radar, or additional armament.
I was living at Howard Field in the Canal Zone when the first squadron of overseas F-82s arrived. Back then when they arrived I actually climbed up on the wing and asked the pilot if they could be flown from the other side. I believe it was 1947 and I was eight years old. I lived in the Canal Zone from 46-51 and 55-58. From 51-55 I lived on Governors Island, NY.
I wish I could’ve seen the Hughes XF11 in action. That was a beauty.
F-82's got 4 air to air kills, all against piston engine soviet aircraft flown by the North Korean Air Force (LA-7, Yak-11), no jets were shot down in air to air combat by them, so not sure what the "Twin Monster that took down Jets" means in the title?
Fun fact: Bettie Joe was a test aircraft at NASA Glenn Research Center for years. It was taken back by the Air Force, sent to the National Museum of the Air Force and restored to how it looked when it set the records.
Very similar design to the p38 lightning,the lightning had a central cockpit and weapon platform,it was a hell of a plane😊😊😊😊😊😊
Yeah did you see the clips of the P38s he was trying to pass of as video of the F82?
@catman4644a video of a P-61 also
Great documentary ! Thanks for sharing!
I like that the horizontal stabilizer between the twin tails did NOT have the Lockheed-style out-sticky bits at each end. (Like the stubby outer stabilizers that the Lightning and the Constellation both had.) Even the German twin in the drawings didn't have that.
B-roll of P-38 LIghtnings used rather than the Twin Mustangs.
See "Betty Joe" at Wright Patterson AFB,Air Force Museum in Dayton.
There is also a second one in the Korean War area painted as a night fighter, but missing the radar pod.
It was two new airframes. It was not two P-51’s bolted together. At least this is what I know from reputable sources. Perhaps you’re correct?
Yep, they only look similar, but hardly any shared components. The airframe is quite a bit longer, and the cockpit is in a different position among many other differences.
@@spinnetti I read somewhere that they only had 3 or 4 common parts with the P-51. Don't know if that is true.
I built a bulsa wood model of one of these back in the seventies when I was a teen. Its really a nice lookinng plane.
Saw this ship at Lackland in my Basic days 1966...
The "12.7mm" M2 machine guns are more popularly known as .50 caliber or 1/2 in. bore.
Fuel capacity almost doubled... but so is fuel consumption.
GM did not add the compressors the RR engine had.
Wonder how tri-props would have done , even duel prop? Being a twin would still have some climb and would have gave it more top end
With a top speed of 470MPH the Twin Mustang pushed the performance of piston engined technology to the limit. Unfortunately it was still a 100MPH slower than the jets that were just starting to come on stream in the mid 1940s. If it was not for the mechanical unreliability of its Allison engines the F 82 might have made a decent ground attack aircraft. One of its main advantages in this role would have been its ability to loiter over the battlefield far longer than any of the new jets. The F 82 also could have been configured to carry a significant load of bombs, rockets, and napalm, in addition to its 6x50cal armament. It therefore would have proved formidable aircraft in the night and bad weather interdiction role.
What about shooting down jets?
Exactly. More deceptive click bait titling.
11:50
f-82's were credited with 4 air to air kills in Korea, all Soviet piston engine aircraft flown by the North Korean Air force. No jets were shot down by F-82's
Lots of shots of P-38s there. Why didn't they learn from the experience with the Allinson engine in the P-51A v the RR Merlin powered P-51B?
Always thought this was the P-38 lightning, I see there were multiple designs.
This has given me a clever idea - a car with 2 steering wheels so man and wife can both drive
at the same time what could possibly...
see, what ya wanted to do here was... flip the wing 180 deg on the P-38, making it a pusher with a canard (Curtis had it figured from the start)
Thanks
“Backbone like a ramrod.” Willie Brown may be able to define this.
The F-82 is still a static display and is still on the parade field, at Lackland. Unlike Wilford Hall.
And one on display at Lackland AFB in San Antonio, Texas...
An Early flyable model of the P-82 could only do Taxi Runs! It needed a 'swap', Left to Right, of it's engines to get Airborne! N/A Engineers had Not anticipated the Vortex that the Merlins' Propellers made upon the Center Wing-Spar that CANCELLED LIFT. Once the engines were Swapped, the P-82 flew 'as expected'. Like the Lighting before it, these had Engines 'Turned' to the Left or Right, such that the Torque of the Props spiraled in opposite directions, eliminating 'Torque-Roll' that other twin-engine planes experienced.
Can't tell the difference? Don't confuse the P-38 with the F-82!
273 were built. Only thing it ever did right was it flew from Hawaii to New York on Feb. 27-28, 1947, a distance of 5,051 miles, the longest non-stop flight ever made by a propeller-driven fighter. Seems it was a really great non-fighter Fighter.
He was going to Iceland but the drop tanks got stuck and flew to new york with them hanging off the wings.
There was a plethora of different aircraft films shown in this video....
This is how to develop a twin on the cheap. Simply use two existing single engine designs and combine them. Literally.
The P-82 could be brutal for the second pilot if the command pilot did a roll around his axis.
*The P-82 was known for its ability*
*to Fly all the way to Moscow from Britain and back without Refueling.*
I believe the Commemorative Air Force is the one that has the restored,flying one!
it is actually Tom Reilly and it is hangared at the Valiant Air Command in Titusville, FL.
Confederate Air Force changed its name out of political correctness foisted upon it by the Woke establishment.
It seems Pierre Lavalle was involved in the design, which seems unlikely. Maybe just showing any old stock footage isn't the way to go.
I saw Pétain as well! I had no idea those 2 were North American Aviation engineers! 🤣
@@sidetrippingwithcary I had noticed Laval at first but your comment made me watch again and, what do you know, there's Pétain also! Small world...
it's two planes stuck together and i start to laugh but then the aerospace engineers clap me on stage, wheel out the whiteboard and say: whatcha got billy?
well, i don't know, would three be silly?
1:34 oh, hang on, i just might have an idea
Did it really take down jets? If not, the headline is misleading.
They used .50 cal brownings right? What's this 12 .7 business ?
Ah, ronaldarmstead2521, my calculator says .50 in and 12.7mm are equivalent.
If 2 P51 planes are joined together, shouldn’t it be called the P102??😀😀. Great video and I’d love to see one of these at an air show!
Except it's NOT simply two P-51's joined.
I see what you did there...
I am not sure it is the only one, but there IS an airworthy one at Valiant Air Command in Titusville Fl.
It is 2 newly manufactured fuselage that are not the same as the P-51 fuselage. So you can't take old P-51's and then mate them with the new wing.
At 11.43 minutes the aircraft are Lockheed Lightnings P38's.
Does the video actually state what the range and top speed were? Only "better"?
I saw 46-0262 when I joined the AF in 1975; it's still on the parade field there 50 years later.
An airplane who's time had passed by the time it went into service.
I have seen several of these at the National Museum of the US Air Force in Dayton, Ohio but what's up with the version in the beginning with a short offset fuselage sticking out forward? Some Lighting P-38's had a second crewman in the forward part of the nose to do reconnaissance photography, instead of having the five guns/cannon.
Any of them still around??
Wasn't the p38 similar, except it had a single center cockpit.
around 11:50 shows a scene of p38 planes instead of f82
They have one flying with the merlins in it. They found the backwards turning merlin so that was one of the things that was different.
The clash of egos must have been epic. The copilot in a separate cockpit must have lost his mind.
I can't imagine having two "fighter pilots" both on the controls at the same time. Nightmare.
The plane had to fly 12,000 miles.
So one pilot could sleep, while the other flew the plane.
Don’t know why they went back to Allison engines. Cost and availability should not be an excuse in my opinion
Rolls Royce post war royalty requirements.
@@drgondog Yes , thank you Rolls Royce !
It was designed as a night fighter .the second cockpit was the radar intercept officers station .
The P-38 Lighting is the plane You're thinking about!
why did they keep showing pictures of a turbine instead of the allison?
god bless the military
The inward rotating props did not increase drag - it increased effective angle of attack - past CLmax. In effect it was stalling on rotation. Also, not often stated is that the -23/-25 was rated for 80" dry and 90" wet. The future castrated P-82D and Subs were inflicted with the Allison V-1710-119 which was the same as in the Xp51J. Allison never solved the backfire issues encountered above 67"MP and were placarded at 61". I haven't seen a flight test at full rated power for the P-82B, but it easily should outrun and outclimb the P-51H with 4400HP at SL/90"MP
Maybe but the counter rotating engines were also used so there was no adverse p factor on take off. P38 also used this feature.
@@justincase1575 true. In the case of the P-38 the tricycle LG permitted a lower relative attack on takeoff run so the additional upwash effect was reduced and actually helpful. The P-82 stalled on TO, until the rotation was changed to cause downwash.
might have been cheaper to just pay the merlin licensing costs. probably cheaper overall when counting development and maintenance.
@@andrewbaluk1663 I agree 100% but there were also political factors. The Secy AF was closely connected to GMC
Please don't refer to the ammunition in millimeters , but by caliber in inches , it's American and the Browning is 50 caliber .
The design was begun 7 years after that of the P-38 lightning , of which 10,000 were built & used in WWII . Total F-82's built were 273 .
yankee doodle yippie kay yay CRAP
@@tellyonthewall8751 not our fault you folks measure wrong and have penguins on your telly.
It's not 50 caliber. Try .50.
@@phallbergyou beat me to it!😁
QUESTION...they needed a 2000 range, but what happens when you get there? Not enough fuel to get home
range is round trip.
With the extra fuselage, why didn't they adapt the lightning's two stage turbo supercharger system
P=38 Lightning "Hey! forgetting something?"
cannot even imagine what the enemy thought when they saw these badass planes coming at em... fuck!
A P-38 is NOT an F-82. Typical minimum effort click bait TH-camr.
@@gandalfgreyhame3425 P-38 @ 00:30 seconds and 11:40, there may be others. The aircraft at the very beginning is an F-82 with a center mounted fuel tank or radar system.
@@leofriedwald9901 OK, you are correct.
Did I see Pierre Laval among the so-called engineers? Who put this together?
SO, WHERE IN THIS FILM IS THE f-82 "TAKING DOWN JETS"?
The F-82 never shot down a jet, but the single monsters, P-51s, as well as other aircraft, shot down ME 262s in WWII. My father was responsible for one of them, ending that Swallow's successful 2 kill day (the plane had already lost one engine, but them's the breaks, all's fair...). Granted, the 262s were problematic, and put into service too soon, but the Mustang was a jet killer.
262 was real vernable at takeoff and landing.
@@ixlr8677 Landing was a big problem as the nose strut was weak.
@@tomkenney5365 being jumped by fighters at take off or landing. that was when most vernable.
@@ixlr8677 ALL planes are most vulnerable when they're on or near the ground. It's not their element.
@@tomkenney5365 your not getting it. me 262 had to come in slow to land. with those early engines you couldent firewall the engines. they had to move the throttles up slowly or would flame out. fighters would wait and pounce at airfields. bye bye 262. many were shot down at takeoff or esp. landing.
I always wondered why they didn't put a ball turret in place of one of those cockpits
I sure did
All of the combat footage shows P38 Lightnings.
cool
I wonder how a couple of PT6 engines would go in an F-82 😅
Excellent video. Well done. Thank you!
I did. And also, I think this plane had Alison engines not Rolls.
At least one prototype (shown at :27) used Merlins.
Isn't "dorsal fillet" a cut of salmon? LOL
that heinkel was used to tow the gigant the huge transport glider into the air. 2 or 3 of them.
@11:37 they're flying with right seat motor caged.
Hottest Siamese twins I've ever seen.
Why is this video using P-38 footage??
Not the first double fuselage American fighter (as stated). That honor would belong to the P-38. Much footage in this video is actually of a P-38 while they claim it as a F-82.
I would take everything stated in this clip with a grain of salt.
That thing hanging down is the radar .
The Mustang and the Lightning had kids?
Just wonder how can two pilots in a fighter plane will synchronize their flying during a battle without making terrible mishaps 🤔
distribution of roles : one piloting and the second one observing the surroundings to alert the pilot
Why couldn't it be a P-102 since it was 2 P-51s glued together.
@@hermanguzman1460 bcz it wasn't two P 51s glued together.
United States could drop pods from aircraft the state stationary or moving and Target aircraft that are a threat
at :34 ofthe video those pesky P38's snuck into the frame !!!!
2 pilots? One go right, one go left?
Two fuselages and two engines double the range. Uhh, two engines also double the fuel consumption.
Not what happened. The lower drag per engine increased efficiency and made each engine burn less fuel than a single engine p51.
One flew from Hawaii to New York. That's a pretty impressive range.
Also one turned clockwise and the other counterclockwise and you had two sets of eyes. Oh and could more than double the fuel carried.
Could have been the earlier version of the Wart Hog.
And drag
@@shannonterry4863ya so did an Italian trimotor almost twenty years before it
Yea, I hate this. Unfortunately, it is very common with this type of content. "We need clips of planes in the air!" "Fine, here's som aircraft." I have decided to withhold likes from vids like this, even if the basic subject is interesting.
You forgot to mention the P82 is over 7feet longer than P51.
3:42 ?
WTF is the Vichy prime minister Pierre Laval doing at around 7:00? In fact, I think that's Philippe Pétain on the right hand side of the frame.
A shame that film of aircraft/engines that have nothing to do with the P-82 / F-82 detract.
Just happened to be checking, let's check this out with no notice from screw tube.
2:18 this bit doesnt fit . two engines would use more fuel and carrying more fuel would make it heavy
This F82 would even take down Messerschmitt ME262s.
I have a model of this fine aircraft mine is painted like the photo in the opening shot
We saved the Brits but they wanted more for licensing payments. Did they ever pay that bill