Many inventors have their creations stolen by those with more money, more attorneys and or due to political clout. Whittle’s ideas were dismissed as have many creative ideas for years or decades.
Captain Brown in this as in the other documentaries he appears in, is a veritable fountain of priceless information on the aircraft of the era. Despite being far from young he has an amazing memory and seems as sharp as he must have been 80 years ago. That's the most sad thing about losing the older generation, their extensive knowledge is to a large extent lost with them.
Mr Browns humility is perfect as he knows how long ago things were. And if he has any reservation, he uses the terms, I beleive, or if I recall correctly... always leave room for correction if needed. He knows if he pretends to have perfect recall, some will refute him.. smart man,
The skullduggery of greedy more powerful company leaders never changes so typical at least Sir Frank Whittle finally got the recognition deserved! A genuine soul what a huge contribution to humanity. may he R.I.P.
If the british air ministry had taken his vision seriously in the 30s, the battle of britain wouldn't have happened. The batte for France may have even gone differently. A man ahead his time. Sir Frank Whittle!
Sir Frank Whittle eventually married an American woman and moved to Maryland, ironically his next door neighbor was Franz Von Ohern, the inventor of the modern AXIAL flow turbojet gas turbine which was the precursor of all modern AXIAL FLOW gas turbines !
I have had the privilege of watching 2 P-51s fly over Southern Orlando, FL USA from Kermit Weeks' Museum. Unforgettable sound of TWO side-by-side Rolls-Royce Merlin Engine-powered war birds. Of course 999 out of 1000 people would not recognize that sound in 2019!
When another WW2 video comes up in your feed, you can't help but think: there's nothing else to see. I've it all. You'd be wrong. Good, interesting video here.
@Jagtone & @zacsmith. When Kurt Tank was designing the Fw 190A he wanted a Daimler Benz Engine for its better high altitude performance but the German Air Ministry insisted on a radial that was non Daimler Benz so as to diversify their supply. It worked out well as the BMW 801 turned out to have fairly good altitude performance though it couldn't compete with two stage or turbo charged engines. Note there was a two stage version of the BMW 801. 1 BMW 801 C,D,TS,TH and E. Single Stage two speed supercharger used on Fw 190A series. None of these had an intercooler. 2 BMW TJ-1, TJ-2 and TQ. Turbocharged with integral turbo charger used on Ju 388 and planned for Ju 290 and Ju 488. These engines had wildly good performance not suitable for fighters as the exhaust was over the top of the engine. These were respectively BMW 801D2 and E engines compete with supercharger with a turbocharger and intercooler built onto the engine (integral rather than separate as the American designs). Ju 488 was supposed to have operational ceiling of 48500ft. 3 BMW 801R. The was a BMW 801 engine with a two stage 4 speed intercooled supercharger. It was as long as a liquid cooled engine and though it could have been fitted to a Fw 190D with some effort it was to be used on a version of the Ta 152C onto which it was easily fit. The BMW factory was bombed, and they lost several months' worth of work, drawings and prototypes and it was no longer possible to make up this lost material in time to contribute to the German war effort, so the program was scrapped. 4 BMW 801F this was a single stage 3 speed version of the basic BMW 801 engine but with completely new tech such as vacuum cast heads, stronger crank case etc and could produce about 2600hp using water methanol. Meant to be used on the Fw 190A-10. For the Jumo 213 engine there was 1 Jumo 213A which had a single stage 2 speed supercharger. This was a bomber engine but was modified for the Fw 190D9 by incorporation of boost methods and water methanol injection. It has reasonable high altitude performance but not up to the 2 stage merlin or the American turbocharged engines. 2 The Jumo 213B was optimised for higher octane C3 fuel and the Jumo 213C was the same engine but had provision for a motor canon. These really should have been the Fw 190D fighter engines but none entered serious production. 3 The Jumo 213E and E1 had two stage 3 speed superchargers with intercooler. These were used on the Ta 152H 4 The Jumo 213F and F1 was the same engine made more compact by the deletion of the intercooler. It used the same radiator as the Jumo 213A which was too small forcing the cooling gills open and reducing speed. It was used on the rare Fw 190D12/D13 and could achieve 455mph. 5 Jumo 213EB was an improved Jumo 213E with a new compact intercooler system so that it could be used on both the Ta 152H and Fw 190D12/D13 EB. With this engine the Fw 190 was expected to achieved 478 mph and the Ta 152H could achieve 472mph without MW50
Thanks, @@bernhardzunk7402 , for the detailed & erudite response. It's true that the early 801-powered FW-190s came up somewhat short at altitude, and that ultimately FW's high altitude variants, the D9 and Ta152, when inline. But as you note, there were 801 variants that had greatly improved high altitude performance, and other radial engined planes did just fine at high altitude (where the portly profile of radials was also less of a drag issue) with suitable aspiration. Also, your speed figures are not as useful without indicating what altitude these speeds could be achieved at.
Liquid cooled engines which are inline are better at cooling it’s just a fact which means less detonation which allows for higher cylinder pressure which means they can have more boost/ higher compression ratios. The big radial engines like the 28 cylinder that had 4 rows of cylinders were prone to overheating and overheating equals detonation which means less boost to run without engine damage air cooled engines run hotter by design the only reason planes get away with it is how cold the air is at altitude. Liquid cooled engines don’t have have cylinders cracking all the time like radial engines that commonly cause fires but they also don’t have a cooling system that one bullet can cause a liquid cooled engine to leak it’s coolant and cause the engine to fail. Liquid cooled engines are far better in the terms of performance it’s not an argument at all it’s just fact but it depends on the engine if the liquid cooled engine doesn’t have 2 stage blower I’d rather have a radial because the plane will be slower and not have the altitude.
In 1974 I attended a lecture by Sir Frank Whittle...very informative. Among his comments were that any engine for a fighter must have a quick throttle response to be effective. I asked a question during there Q&A and he said that after the war they didn't use any of the German technology for their engines.
The biggest advantage of the Allies: their ability to use 130 octane aviation gasoline that used the controversial tetraethyl lead additive. I believe the Germans could get at best 92-93 octane for their aviation gasoline, hence the German interest ins using methanol 50%/water 50% (MW 50) injection to allow engines to run safely at higher power.
-The Germans made B4 "yellow dyed" fuel of nominal 87 RON via the Bergius Hydrogenation process by pressurising a pulverised coal oil slurry at 700 atmospheres pressure in the presence of an iron catalyst. A special alloy bondur resisted hydrogen embrittlement. The product that came out was fractionally distilled and produced a fuel of just over 72-74 RON. By adding TEL "Tetra Ethyle Lead" it could be brough to B4 fuel standard of 87 RON. The more highly rated "green dyed" C3 fuel was tinkered with several times and grew in RON throughout the war. It was created by adding about 22% synthetic iso-octane. The iso-octane was created by passing coal derived syngas over a chromium catalyst that produced iso-butanol. The iso-butanol was dehydrated to iso-butylene over a hydroxide and this was polymerised to iso-octane. It was a fairly cumbersome process that cost about 30% production of fuel. Latter on butylene was obtained from the Bergius hydrogenation plants. -The US had access to oil which when catalytically cracked produced good quality fuel and also butylene for conversion to iso-octane by a similar process. The US (Shell Oil) had developed acid alkylation which produced a very high octane fuel. Cracking and acid-allylation produced a lot of 100 then 100/130 fuel. -Germany started construction of acid alkylation plants in 1940 but only completed 1 so this efficient source was not available to them. -Germany had another method of fuel production called fischer-tropsch which produced only poor quality (about 45-55 RON) gasoline but produced very good quality diesel and potentially jet fuel. These plants were much smaller and easier to hide. Experiments with novel catalysts (Uranium based) that showed promise for producing good RON fuel. A lot of information on this at fischer-tropsch , org -The big increases in Boost rating of the BMW 801 1.57/1.68 ata in 1943 were in part made possible by and upgrade in RON of green dyed fuel from 94/115 to 97/125 (latter even more)
Jimmy Doolittle “…did more for the Allied effort in World War II as a scientist than as an airman because of his push for the development of 100-Octane fuel.”
I heard something similar from Prof. Gabor Somerjai who specialized in Catalytic Chemistry. The airwar was won by the Allies due to access to superior fuel quality, more so than engine/aircraft themselves which were relatively comparable.
Turing, Flowers, Whittle - the list goes on. Hardly makes you proud to be British. We could have achieved so much and so quickly had it not been for...well, you tell me.
Greed & Lust for power killed the tremendous advantage that Frank Whittle had given the British. Rolls-Royce keeps the British at the forefront of Aviation as does GE in the States
I was watching this in the background while playing a video game. When Sir Whittle started telling his story it caught my attention enough that I turned off the game and watched the rest of the video. Amazing man, those were the heroes that won the war.
The crown took over ??? He was an officer working for the RAF it was there project they where stupid but it was there project apple engineers just can’t patent projects themselves apple owns it it’s how business works Robert Goddard had the same problem
Fantastic documentary, if the air ministry had the foresight in the 1930s of Frank Whittle and his jet engine,we could have had jet aircraft at the start of the war, thousands of lives would have been saved and the war shortened by a few years, great documentary ,👍
Whittle is proof that a good idea is the cruelest of taskmasters. I have read histories of Whittle before, but something new I got from this video is that he patented the turbofan engine in 1936. Whittle's mind had been totally occupied thinking about jet propulsion since the 1920's, and his thinking was far ahead of his time. And didn't that Miles M52 model look a lot like the Bell X-1? But the Miles came first.
You cannot talk about great WW2 engines without mention of the P&W R-2800 radial. Also, don't tell the Germans and Japanese about all those single engine fighters show down by the P-38!
The P-38 was very successful against Japanese fighters, against whom it enjoyed a >50 mph speed advantage. It didn't do very well as a fighter in Europe, where the FW-190A and Me-109G were both about the same speed, with better turn, roll and diving performance and - for the 109 - better climb as well. It had an extremely high loss rate in the Mediterranean, and was rapidly removed from the 8th AF in England in favour of P-51s. By mid-1944 the air forces in England were requesting no further P-38s be sent there.
@@Splattle101 Pretty simplistic take on the p 38 drawbacks in Europe, which marginalizes the P 38's contributions. The p 38 was never a turn fighter, even in the Pacific. So kind of silly to say that the German planes turn better, the p 38 would not have fought a turn fight with them, the same way the BF 109s didn't dare turn with the Spitfires. The Also the Allison engines were extremely temperamental in the colder European weather, as well as early P 38s having compressability issues when diving.... not good in a theatre with lots of high altitude work. The issues were resolved with later models. The P 38 could climb far faster than both german fighters, and had better firepower. Another factor you're forgetting... the P 38 was full of newer pilots at the beginning of the war, while german pilots already had combat experience in Spain, Poland and France. novices against vets. By the time the p 51s came into action over Europe, it was the opposite. Many of Germany's vet pilots were already dead, leaving green German pilots to face allies, while the p 51s were now being flown by battle hardened vets. Final point, let's compare apples to apples. How would the German twin engine fighters do against the P 38? 😉
Your presentation is first class. In a World War many decisions, designs and ideas are compromised by such factors as economics, the availability of materials and fuels, production capacity and not least, national interests. Your video clearly explains why and how the P-51 became such a success. Its development overcame most, if not all, the obstacles mentioned above. There is little doubt that the P-51 Mustang remains the best fighter aircraft of its time, ever. No other plane, before or since, has been as dominant, given the wartime restrictions under which it was designed, built and operated. The F-22, for example, was/is equally dominant but its design and construction were not limited by budgetary or material concerns. The Mustang is the greatest.
The kommandogerat mechanical computer in the FW190 was an utterly brilliant piece of engineering, perhaps more so than the engines of these two planes themselves.
Whittle could take consolation that the Purchasing department during the war made many mistakes, for instance the D. H. Mosquito. They laughed at it but it ended up being one of our best planes. Again the manufacturer had to go it alone without government help, we were very lucky they did. Purchasing should have been sacked.
Having only watched only half of your video so far, I can only say that this is one of the most comprehensive and unbiased productions that I have ever seen. Excellent. I have subscribed
What a fantastic story. My love and respect and admiration for a genius is unbounded. Rest in peace, sir. How can anyone not feel admiration and respect for such accomplishments. Sir, in your honor, I salute you.
You failed to mention the main issue of poor fuel level in Germany....Mustangs flew on a 125 Octane gasoline which enabled a much much higher intake manifold pressure and thus higher power to weight ratio from a 27 liter Merlin comparing to the 36 liter Benz
The Allison V-1710 and the Rolls-Royce Merlin were technically not strictly "in-line" engines. Depending on whom you ask, an inline or "straight" engine is characterized by a single row of cylinders. The Allison and Rolls-Royce engines were of course configured in twin rows of six cylinders each, making a "Vee" shape when viewed from either end.
Looked at from an automobile engineering viewpoint, yes. A more accurate distinction would be between 'liquid-cooled' and 'air-cooled'. The only application for radial engines outside of aircraft, would have been the Wright radial powerplants used in some US tanks in WW2.
When ever the Merlin engine is mentioned one woman requires special thanksgiving and attention. Dame Fanny Lucy Houston is truly the mother of advanced RR Merlin engines. She financed RR development and engineering when government would not step in. Thankyou Lady Houston.
In this video about aero engines, you could have at least mentioned the Napier-Sabre engine which powered the Hawker Typhoons which saw off the Fw190 from their low level raids over southern England.
Many Napier Sabres in Hawker Typhoons caught fire simply when the engine was started and lacked reliability big-time.An extremely undependable engine that also cannot absorb any battle damage at all.Best engine in WW2 was the P&W R-2800 and the aircraft that won the war in the ETO was the P-47 Thunderbolt.If the Pacific Theater would have went on a little longer you would have seen the P-47N totally replace the P-51D as the had 5600 on order.
I can say that these are excellent pilots and for me personally it means the 1 spitfire 2 messerschmitt 262 and 3 Concord is for me the pinnacle of engineering, not to mention the Wright brothers and of course Wilhelm Otto Lilienthal pioneer of aviation. But the arrow wings on Me 262 !with whom he has the opportunity to meet ILA 2016 are just out of this world
I live by Merlin Drive which is named because it is the site of an old Rolls Royce factory where the engine was designed and made. They still have the frontage to the old building and I can see the Rolls Royce sign from my kitchen window.
@@gibson617ajg hey up. I don't know of that pub, but I've only lived here for 10 years cause used to live the other side of Derby. There's a whole new housing estate on the site of the old Rolls Royce now. I don't know how they've sold them to be honest cause some have sold for £300,000 which seems a bit steep for Allenton.
@@rather_be_a_cat Hold on, you live in Allenton? If so, that explains the confusion. I'm on about Rolls Royce Hucknall. It has a great history. They used to have airshows there, during the very last one I was able to stand right on the threshold of the grass runway as a P51 came into land. The prop nearly gave me a haircut! I'll never forget it!
@@gibson617ajg when I was at uni I worked for a marquee company during my breaks and one time I put them up for the airshow at RAF Cosford and I was able to walk around all the planes. They had WWII era planes right up to modern day so that was a bit of an experience.
Another Brillant documentary that is keeping me pin to my chair, perfectly narrated too, your channel is now my favourite channel of WW2 air history by FAR I like to thank you ALL
Very accurate video. Except that both, the Ju 88 and Do 17 started with in-line V-12 engines (despite the radial-like nacelles). Later on, the two of them did have versions with radials. The crux is that the radials are lighter but create more drag versus the in-line. Advantages and disadvantages are balanced; that´s why both types were to be found in all air forces. Except the US Navy: in 1921 announced that only radial-engined airplanes would be purchased. Radials allow for more compact planes and are not so fussy about swallowing a bullet or two.
You would think the row of exhaust stubs at the bottom of the cowling would be a giveaway but most people just see the round shape of the Junkers version of the "power egg" concept. The Rolls-Royce Eagle 22 H24 went into a not-too-dissimilar setup. The Pennine air-cooled X24 also went into a round cowling, but I think that had more to do with the fan-forced cooling air. The video is reasonably accurate for the things it includes, but it misses so much. It is another video obsessed with 4 types of aircraft with a few mentions (some quite small) of other types. Sidney Cam would be upset, the Hurricane gets a brief mention despite it having the major role for British aircraft in the Battle of Britain, The Typhoon and Tempest with the very powerful Napier Sabre are missing, despite their success against both the FW190 and the ME262. For the jet part, the Meteor shot down very few V1s compared to the Tempest V and the Mosquito, but of course, ground-based guns using proximity fuses got the most. And nothing on the Mosquito or any other night fighter.!!!
These comments, by its very nature must be, above all, short. That´s why I will limit myself to mention the so-called NACA ring. Testing all kinds of configurations in the wind tunnel, by accident, they found an oddity: a streamlined fuselage brings about so much drag and a ring facing the wind, another drag. The surprise was that, if they combined a fuselage with a ring in the nose, the resulting total drag was... the addition of the two? No, the subtraction! This brought about the popularity of the radial engine. So much so that the Germans went for the best of the best: the minimal frontal area of the in-line engine, with the drag reducing effect of the ring.@@robertnicholson7733
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 The A6M flew in April 1939, and the FW-190 in June 1939, meaning the Focke-Wulf was designed long before the Zero flew. I would have been more correct to say, "Design of the FW-190 antedates any western knowledge of the Zero."
Stanley Hooker needs to be recognised for his development of the Merlin's two stage supercharging that powered the Mustang and Mk 9 Spitfire. THEN, he was recalled from retirement to sort out the problems with the Jet engine/s that were sending Rolls Royce broke. He was a brilliant problem solver who was never given the credit and almost overlooked. He also worked with Whittle in the early jet development. "Not much of an Engineer" is the title of his life with Rolls Royce.
Great reaction, you are the best for a genuine reaction. Clint Eastwood is one who genuinely deserves the title of Hollywood legend, you really can't go far wrong with any of his films
In 1903, the engine was not capable of launching the Wright flyer into the air. By the Wright brothers own admission, they wouldn't be able to achieve a powered flight until they can fly over 830 ft without having to land on the ground the reason being, they had already flown that far from the launching system alone. An interesting addition to the story would be that the Germans had actually taken a mildly damaged Spitfire and put a German 601 engine into it as well as the BF 109 propeller, and Not only was it faster, it flew over 5,000 ft higher than the mark 9 Spitfire that had had been. Kind of makes you wonder if somebody shouldn't shoe horn a 601 engine into a Mustang?
Meanwhile Martin Baker was developing the ultimate piston engined fighter from its MB3 airframe which crashed in 1942 after the 2340 bhp Rolls Royce Griffon had been installed , to be known as the MB5 . This fighter outperformed everything during its test flight in May 44 , which sadly never went into production . The MB5 marks the end of an era for both Rolls Royce aero engine design and British piston engined fighters and eventually Martin Baker aircraft production , but the ejector seat legacy lives on til this very day .
@@happyinfidel1 Your right , the Napier Lion was a monster that pulled the Typhoons and Tempests fast enough to run down V1s if they broke through the first defence line .
Another good docco. Well done. I wonder if Hedy Lamarr ever got proper recognition for her contribution to the success of the P-51, & virtually all air- planes built since then?
Very much so. The problem with any 'establishment' is that it seems to preserve various individual's pre-eminence independent of merit. The ideal way is devoid of such weaknesses (read the opening verses of St John's epistle, about how the Almighty selects His chosen sons and leaders).
No it wasn't. The corsair's oil cooler placement made it very vulnerable to enemy fire. a vulerability the f6f hellcat didnt have, and thus saved more pilots lives. The Hellcat was also easier to fly, and had the highest kill ratio on the pacific theatre, and 2nd highest in the entire war.
“Best” is nearly impossible to quantify. It’s more an opinion than a factual matter. Obviously some magnificent machines in that era. All of them an exercise in selecting the sacrifices to be made, for the purpose of intended mission. The debate of “best” will be eternal. Seems that the pilots tended to live the plane they were flying. But I do think that it’s obvious that the Allies had more variety of models. And the winning team always gets the trophy.
I’d mention that Corsairs were mainly used in the Pacific theater and not used much against Germany. If you ask the Germans what aircraft they feared you’d also need to ask the Japanese and the Japs didn’t fight against a lot of the planes the Germans fought against. Did Zeros ever face Spitfires ? Did the Me109 ever fight against Hellcats or Wildcats ? I don’t think they did but I honestly don’t know but I think figuring out the “best” would be hard to do.
The assertion that it was "national pride" that saw the Allison engine installed in the P-51A is just b.s. It was simply the best available engine at the time. In its first roles as low level photo recon and ground attack, the P-51A proved very useful, indeed. Faster than the Spitfire at low altitudes. Its shortcomings as a high altitude interceptor were enough for the RAF to seek a power upgrade. They found it in the Merlin, license built by Packard. Thus a legend was born. Low drag fuselage, laminar flow wing, greater fuel storage, self sealing fuel tanks and the Packard built Merlin produced a war winner. Speed, range, agility and firepower in one package. Brilliant.
All P-47's had more powerful turbosuperchargers and could fly higher than anything else including the Mustang. In fact you could just lay back and perform a stall and look down at other aircraft that can't even reach you. But the P-47M and "N" model had the even more powerful CH-5 turbosuperchargers and could even fly higher. And of course ,when entering the combat area at 31,000 to 33,000ft. ,10 times out of 10 you are coming down stairs. And the P-47 was second to none as it out dove everything.This is how the Thunderbolt gained back airsuperiority over German occupied France from the Folke Wulfe FW-190 that took it from the Spitfire Mk.5. Abbeville boys who tried to outrun a Thunderbolt soon found out they were a gone goose.
I saw 20+ spitfires in formation at duxford. But the mustangs because they are cheaper and more are left were run much harder, guessing they were pretty close to full throttle and they are chucking them around. Greats stuff.
The axial flow German engine design was so far ahead of the centrifugal compressor design and only are found in propjets today. Interesting that today Rolls, Pratt & GE build most of the gas turbine aircraft engines. The new geared design by Pratt-whitney is likely the most fuel efficient design. The holy grale of fuel efficiency is #1 today!
“Was” is misleading, as it took forever to be develop to a properly functional, and reliable engine. Whittle, if you are familiar with his story, was fully aware of that even in 1930, so he aimed for a reliable, and easy to develop solution. You might not be aware that the person that rejected and delayed his project by years, Mr. Griffith, was also the author of an important paper on axial compressors in 1926, when Von Ohain was still a teenager, and had no interest in jet engines. The truth is that Britain was not nearly as interested in devoting much effort in developing a jet engine at the time, going as far as halting research on the subject in the 30s. Germany squandered resources, and involved several companies to develop an engine that at the time proved to be utterly useless, other than short lived propaganda, but also unreliable, delicate to operate, and had a ridiculous scrap life. Do not be mistaken, Britain, as you should know, was still working on axial turbojets at the same time, just not as obsessively as Germany was. For the record, Whittle’s engine equipped aircraft such as the MiG 15 in the 50s. If you know anything about that aircraft, you also know how effective, and feared it was. The Soviets ditched precisely the Jumo German engine as unrealiable, and used the British centrifugal engine instead. Do not make the mistake of thinking that Whittle was not fully aware of which engine would have prevailed. He was smarter than his counterparts precisely because he realized how wrong it would have been, in times of war, to waste so much time on an engine that was too com0lex to develop properly. If he had been supported by his government even 1/4 of Von Onain, Heinkel, Junkers, and BMW, Britain would have had a jet engine, and aircraft by the beginning of the war, and a reliable one. Germany, in the last days of 1944 had an impressive, but useless and unrealiable jet engine that equipped a very good aircraft, the Me 262. By the way, as you probably know, Von Ohain also had access to Whittle’s work, it the contrary is not true, as Whittle was clearly ahead of the German that later became his friend and graciously credited Whittle as the sole inventor of the turbojet. It was merely a question of funding, and policies, nothing more. Britain had all the brains,many ability to build both engines, but did not care nearly as much as the Germans did, also for strategic reasons.
@@Dronescapes Well said sir, it also didn’t hurt that in Sir Stanley Hooker Rolls Royce had one of the foremost designers of centrifugal compressors. As the design and production technology for the early jet centrifugal compressors was identical to that used for piston engine superchargers it would make perfect sense to use the technology. Sir Stanley held Frank Whittle in high esteem both as a friend and as an engineer.
It was the P-47 Thunderbolt that got control of the air over German -occupied France. P-47 which was designed for high altitude could fly higher than anything that flies.Killed off most of the experienced pilots including the "Abbeville" boys. By the time the Mustang came out General Doolittle had the P-51B take over the escort because the P-47 was now needed over here,here being a great tactical fighter bomber creating a whole new air force,the 9th airforce for it. Big Week was a "Thunderbolt show".
A good fighter made to British specifications by a small but brilliantly inventive team of Americans and brought to life by the magnificent Rolls Royce Merlin engine.
In most cases, the Spitfire had better performance as an all-purpose fighter. The all-important climb rate for a P51D sat at 3200ft per minute whilst the Spitfire could climb at an impressive 3650ft per minute. The maximum speed of a P51D was 437mph whilst the Spitfire was slightly faster at 448mph. For interception, this was clearly quite important. However, the P51D was generally more specialized than the Spitfire. In it's main role, the Mustang proved itself as a superb escort fighter in Allied bombing raids over Germany. For this role, the American aircraft didn't really need the Spitfire's versatile performance. Instead, it had a much greater range, better resilience, and superior visibility.
I beg to disagree on several points. First the Spitfire, a specialist interceptor, adapted to other jobs. While the Mk XIV did indeed exceed 440mph, it had limited combat range, at 460 miles. The Spitfire was always limited by short legs. Only 957 Mk XIV's were produced, out of the 20,000 produced. Conversely, the P51 was the more versatile aircraft as proven by its operational deployments in War 2 and Korea. The P51 had more than double the amount of internal fuel aboard which offered greater range at roughly 650 miles on internal fuel, which could be extended with drop tanks. BTW, the US produced more than 13,000 P51 B and D models. The Spitfire was very good, but the P51 was better.
ахинею пишешь про свой спидфаер. Лучшая аэродинамика была у мустанга . Возьми поляру крыла спидфаера и сравни ее с суперламинарной полярой мустанга . Разница в характеристиках составляет порядка 20 процентов . Глотает пыль твой спидфаер за мустангом по всем показателям . Особый идиотизм это эллипсное крыло в плане , дорого и глупо . В то время как мустанг имел уже корневой напрыв и радиатор с нулевым сопротивлением .
From 13.30 to 15.00 the narrator talks about German fighter development as if they were looking for an escort fighter. This is nonsense, and a beautiful example of projection: in this case an American writer taking a later American requirement for a long-range escort fighter and projecting it backward onto German fighter requirements. In fact, the Focke-Wulf 190 was developed before the war, its first flight being June 1939!
Hmmm. Projection or not, perhaps the narrator should have worked on German aircraft development. They certainly could have used some proper escort fighters with some actual combat range and fight time over the target, eh? Maybe could have even won the Battle of Britain.
It is only now at this date, did I know about Whittle. We always thought the German Messerschmitt ME-262 was the first jet-powered plane. It is too bad sometimes updates can always come too late.
One thing this video does not mention, is that the Allison's lack of turbochargers - except in the p-38 - was due to a decision made by the Army Air Corps. This GUARANTEED, that the P-39 and P-40 lacked high altitude performance.
The long-range P-51 Mustang fighter was invaluable to the Allied victory, enabling resumption of strategic bombing after heavy losses suffered by unescorted bombers in 1943. Developed for export to Britain, models modified by the British to use Rolls-Royce Merlin engines became America's most capable wartime fighters.
This man deserved so much more publicity money and success than he got the industry shunned his idea until it proved amazing then they used it Perpetuity
When the Korean War started there was no military response available, except for a squadron of Australian (made) Mustangs at the base they occupied in their portion of Japan. Those pilots were attacking the North Koreans nine days before MacArthur was appointed, particularly troop trains. Truly a substantive design.
The RR Merlin and later Packard Merlin became a successful practical proposition thanks to the mass production skillsets already present in the British automotive sector. Three more modern Mustangs with Packard engines could also be delivered at similar cost vs two P-47 "Jugs" which had done the real heavy lifting to acquire air superiorty early on. The Luftwaffe liked some of their fighter engines mounted upside down...
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions: www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
Such disgraceful treatment of a great man. Thank you Sir Frank Whittle
Many inventors have their creations stolen by those with more money, more attorneys and or due to political clout. Whittle’s ideas were dismissed as have many creative ideas for years or decades.
Captain Brown in this as in the other documentaries he appears in, is a veritable fountain of priceless information on the aircraft of the era. Despite being far from young he has an amazing memory and seems as sharp as he must have been 80 years ago. That's the most sad thing about losing the older generation, their extensive knowledge is to a large extent lost with them.
Brown is amazing to listen to. We are blessed to have quality recordings of him and many others.
Not quite lost! We have these interviews that wonderful people thought to make and publish! We owe these documentarians a big thank you!
Only if we dont listen and remember 😊
Mr Browns humility is perfect as he knows how long ago things were. And if he has any reservation, he uses the terms, I beleive, or if I recall correctly... always leave room for correction if needed. He knows if he pretends to have perfect recall, some will refute him.. smart man,
The wonderful Winkie, may he RIP.
The skullduggery of greedy more powerful company leaders never changes so typical at least Sir Frank Whittle finally got the recognition deserved! A genuine soul what a huge contribution to humanity.
may he
R.I.P.
I must say, that I knew of Whittle as the father of the jet engine, but never knew his story. This is a fantastic video.
Sadly he was niave to the scumbags of industry & politics.
Hans von Ohain says hi...
If the british air ministry had taken his vision seriously in the 30s, the battle of britain wouldn't have happened. The batte for France may have even gone differently.
A man ahead his time. Sir Frank Whittle!
What a great human being..I feel like his country undermined his achievements. I do hope he had a happy life..both personally and financially.
BE Lightning is a classic and I love the Vulcan. Much respect from across the pond.. RIP Frank W. He belongs to the ages now.
This was truly one of the most enjoyable documentary productions I've had the pleasure of watching. Thank you.
Wow, thank you!
The way Whittle was used and then discarded by his own govt is deplorable. Not surprising though.
US betrays its own too.
I agree. It is appalling to learn of the uphill battles Whittle had to fight. He must have had enormous reserves of persistence!
Typical British mentality. Use up the heroes then discard them unceremoniously
Brits were good at that. Think of the way they drove Turing to suicide.
Sir Frank Whittle eventually married an American woman and moved to Maryland, ironically his next door neighbor was Franz Von Ohern, the inventor of the modern AXIAL flow turbojet gas turbine which was the precursor of all modern AXIAL FLOW gas turbines !
I have had the privilege of watching 2 P-51s fly over Southern Orlando, FL USA from Kermit Weeks' Museum. Unforgettable sound of TWO side-by-side Rolls-Royce Merlin Engine-powered war birds. Of course 999 out of 1000 people would not recognize that sound in 2019!
When another WW2 video comes up in your feed, you can't help but think: there's nothing else to see. I've it all. You'd be wrong. Good, interesting video here.
🙏👍
Interesting, in aeronautics a V engine is considered an inline engine. You learn something new every day
@md8590
Same here, fron an ole hot rodder!
The issue at high altitude was never radial vs. inline, it was about 2-stage turbochargers. The P-47 did just fine at altitude.
If it was about radial vs inline, Focke-Wulf would’ve only built the 190 with the engine that performed best at that alt…
@Jagtone & @zacsmith. When Kurt Tank was designing the Fw 190A he wanted a Daimler Benz Engine for its better high altitude performance but the German Air Ministry insisted on a radial that was non Daimler Benz so as to diversify their supply. It worked out well as the BMW 801 turned out to have fairly good altitude performance though it couldn't compete with two stage or turbo charged engines. Note there was a two stage version of the BMW 801.
1 BMW 801 C,D,TS,TH and E. Single Stage two speed supercharger used on Fw 190A series. None of these had an intercooler.
2 BMW TJ-1, TJ-2 and TQ. Turbocharged with integral turbo charger used on Ju 388 and planned for Ju 290 and Ju 488. These engines had wildly good performance not suitable for fighters as the exhaust was over the top of the engine. These were respectively BMW 801D2 and E engines compete with supercharger with a turbocharger and intercooler built onto the engine (integral rather than separate as the American designs). Ju 488 was supposed to have operational ceiling of 48500ft.
3 BMW 801R. The was a BMW 801 engine with a two stage 4 speed intercooled supercharger. It was as long as a liquid cooled engine and though it could have been fitted to a Fw 190D with some effort it was to be used on a version of the Ta 152C onto which it was easily fit. The BMW factory was bombed, and they lost several months' worth of work, drawings and prototypes and it was no longer possible to make up this lost material in time to contribute to the German war effort, so the program was scrapped.
4 BMW 801F this was a single stage 3 speed version of the basic BMW 801 engine but with completely new tech such as vacuum cast heads, stronger crank case etc and could produce about 2600hp using water methanol. Meant to be used on the Fw 190A-10.
For the Jumo 213 engine there was
1 Jumo 213A which had a single stage 2 speed supercharger. This was a bomber engine but was modified for the Fw 190D9 by incorporation of boost methods and water methanol injection. It has reasonable high altitude performance but not up to the 2 stage merlin or the American turbocharged engines.
2 The Jumo 213B was optimised for higher octane C3 fuel and the Jumo 213C was the same engine but had provision for a motor canon. These really should have been the Fw 190D fighter engines but none entered serious production.
3 The Jumo 213E and E1 had two stage 3 speed superchargers with intercooler. These were used on the Ta 152H
4 The Jumo 213F and F1 was the same engine made more compact by the deletion of the intercooler. It used the same radiator as the Jumo 213A which was too small forcing the cooling gills open and reducing speed. It was used on the rare Fw 190D12/D13 and could achieve 455mph.
5 Jumo 213EB was an improved Jumo 213E with a new compact intercooler system so that it could be used on both the Ta 152H and Fw 190D12/D13 EB. With this engine the Fw 190 was expected to achieved 478 mph and the Ta 152H could achieve 472mph without MW50
@@flyonbyya mine was bigger and faster - made in Galway by Spanish Slaves
Thanks, @@bernhardzunk7402 , for the detailed & erudite response. It's true that the early 801-powered FW-190s came up somewhat short at altitude, and that ultimately FW's high altitude variants, the D9 and Ta152, when inline. But as you note, there were 801 variants that had greatly improved high altitude performance, and other radial engined planes did just fine at high altitude (where the portly profile of radials was also less of a drag issue) with suitable aspiration. Also, your speed figures are not as useful without indicating what altitude these speeds could be achieved at.
Liquid cooled engines which are inline are better at cooling it’s just a fact which means less detonation which allows for higher cylinder pressure which means they can have more boost/ higher compression ratios. The big radial engines like the 28 cylinder that had 4 rows of cylinders were prone to overheating and overheating equals detonation which means less boost to run without engine damage air cooled engines run hotter by design the only reason planes get away with it is how cold the air is at altitude. Liquid cooled engines don’t have have cylinders cracking all the time like radial engines that commonly cause fires but they also don’t have a cooling system that one bullet can cause a liquid cooled engine to leak it’s coolant and cause the engine to fail. Liquid cooled engines are far better in the terms of performance it’s not an argument at all it’s just fact but it depends on the engine if the liquid cooled engine doesn’t have 2 stage blower I’d rather have a radial because the plane will be slower and not have the altitude.
In 1974 I attended a lecture by Sir Frank Whittle...very informative. Among his comments were that any engine for a fighter must have a quick throttle response to be effective. I asked a question during there Q&A and he said that after the war they didn't use any of the German technology for their engines.
Frank Whittle really is underappreciated , and he never got the credit he deserved.
The UK have an MO of punishing those who gave them their best service , while rewarding the idiots. I have a long list.
For me the whole FW190-TA152 line up ticks all the boxes, more than any other fighter aircraft...
The biggest advantage of the Allies: their ability to use 130 octane aviation gasoline that used the controversial tetraethyl lead additive. I believe the Germans could get at best 92-93 octane for their aviation gasoline, hence the German interest ins using methanol 50%/water 50% (MW 50) injection to allow engines to run safely at higher power.
-The Germans made B4 "yellow dyed" fuel of nominal 87 RON via the Bergius Hydrogenation process by pressurising a pulverised coal oil slurry at 700 atmospheres pressure in the presence of an iron catalyst. A special alloy bondur resisted hydrogen embrittlement. The product that came out was fractionally distilled and produced a fuel of just over 72-74 RON. By adding TEL "Tetra Ethyle Lead" it could be brough to B4 fuel standard of 87 RON. The more highly rated "green dyed" C3 fuel was tinkered with several times and grew in RON throughout the war. It was created by adding about 22% synthetic iso-octane. The iso-octane was created by passing coal derived syngas over a chromium catalyst that produced iso-butanol. The iso-butanol was dehydrated to iso-butylene over a hydroxide and this was polymerised to iso-octane. It was a fairly cumbersome process that cost about 30% production of fuel. Latter on butylene was obtained from the Bergius hydrogenation plants.
-The US had access to oil which when catalytically cracked produced good quality fuel and also butylene for conversion to iso-octane by a similar process. The US (Shell Oil) had developed acid alkylation which produced a very high octane fuel. Cracking and acid-allylation produced a lot of 100 then 100/130 fuel.
-Germany started construction of acid alkylation plants in 1940 but only completed 1 so this efficient source was not available to them.
-Germany had another method of fuel production called fischer-tropsch which produced only poor quality (about 45-55 RON) gasoline but produced very good quality diesel and potentially jet fuel. These plants were much smaller and easier to hide. Experiments with novel catalysts (Uranium based) that showed promise for producing good RON fuel. A lot of information on this at fischer-tropsch , org
-The big increases in Boost rating of the BMW 801 1.57/1.68 ata in 1943 were in part made possible by and upgrade in RON of green dyed fuel from 94/115 to 97/125 (latter even more)
Jimmy Doolittle “…did more for the Allied effort in World War II as a scientist than as an airman because of his push for the development of 100-Octane fuel.”
I heard something similar from Prof. Gabor Somerjai who specialized in Catalytic Chemistry. The airwar was won by the Allies due to access to superior fuel quality, more so than engine/aircraft themselves which were relatively comparable.
And the higher octane made high boost pressure possible. Thus much greater power for a given displacement
The (illegal) secret rupply of 100+ octane fuel for the BoB was a godsend to us and evened the odds Spit vs 109 in terms of engine power.
Thank you Mr. Whittle!
Turing, Flowers, Whittle - the list goes on. Hardly makes you proud to be British. We could have achieved so much and so quickly had it not been for...well, you tell me.
Greed & Lust for power killed the tremendous advantage that Frank Whittle had given the British. Rolls-Royce keeps the British at the forefront of Aviation as does GE in the States
Not to often you hear the name Tommy Flowers in regards to British history... how different would WW2 have been without him?
5:45 that splash sound sure made the stock footage more authentic.
What an absolute patriotic, hard working genius Mr. Whittle was.
The significance of Frank Whittle can not be overstated! Genius!!🙏💪❤️
I enjoyed this video. It was a pity Sir Whittle wasn't allowed to work on his vision after the Crown took it over.
I was watching this in the background while playing a video game. When Sir Whittle started telling his story it caught my attention enough that I turned off the game and watched the rest of the video. Amazing man, those were the heroes that won the war.
👍👍
What ?
The crown took over ??? He was an officer working for the RAF it was there project they where stupid but it was there project apple engineers just can’t patent projects themselves apple owns it it’s how business works Robert Goddard had the same problem
@@thethirdman225 thanks, I never knew that there was a correct way to use a knights name. I learned something new. 👍
Fantastic documentary, if the air ministry had the foresight in the 1930s of Frank Whittle and his jet engine,we could have had jet aircraft at the start of the war, thousands of lives would have been saved and the war shortened by a few years, great documentary ,👍
Outstanding video. I never heard of Frank Whittle until it. He was a true genius. It is apparent that nefarious people existedthen as they do now
Whittle is proof that a good idea is the cruelest of taskmasters. I have read histories of Whittle before, but something new I got from this video is that he patented the turbofan engine in 1936. Whittle's mind had been totally occupied thinking about jet propulsion since the 1920's, and his thinking was far ahead of his time.
And didn't that Miles M52 model look a lot like the Bell X-1? But the Miles came first.
You cannot talk about great WW2 engines without mention of the P&W R-2800 radial. Also, don't tell the Germans and Japanese about all those single engine fighters show down by the P-38!
The P-38 was very successful against Japanese fighters, against whom it enjoyed a >50 mph speed advantage. It didn't do very well as a fighter in Europe, where the FW-190A and Me-109G were both about the same speed, with better turn, roll and diving performance and - for the 109 - better climb as well. It had an extremely high loss rate in the Mediterranean, and was rapidly removed from the 8th AF in England in favour of P-51s. By mid-1944 the air forces in England were requesting no further P-38s be sent there.
@@Splattle101Well Said..
British people get that feeling every time we watch a documentary or go the cinema.
He was covering Fighter engines, not ALL engines of ww2...
@@Splattle101 Pretty simplistic take on the p 38 drawbacks in Europe, which marginalizes the P 38's contributions. The p 38 was never a turn fighter, even in the Pacific. So kind of silly to say that the German planes turn better, the p 38 would not have fought a turn fight with them, the same way the BF 109s didn't dare turn with the Spitfires. The Also the Allison engines were extremely temperamental in the colder European weather, as well as early P 38s having compressability issues when diving.... not good in a theatre with lots of high altitude work. The issues were resolved with later models. The P 38 could climb far faster than both german fighters, and had better firepower. Another factor you're forgetting... the P 38 was full of newer pilots at the beginning of the war, while german pilots already had combat experience in Spain, Poland and France. novices against vets. By the time the p 51s came into action over Europe, it was the opposite. Many of Germany's vet pilots were already dead, leaving green German pilots to face allies, while the p 51s were now being flown by battle hardened vets. Final point, let's compare apples to apples. How would the German twin engine fighters do against the P 38? 😉
I absolutely love hearing anything that Winkle Brown has to say. Such an amazing individual. Much love from across the pond
Thanks for listening
Winkle brown what a pilot what a man what a Scot 🏴,up with the best of the best
A great story. Thank you for remembering their sacrifice.
Your presentation is first class.
In a World War many decisions, designs and ideas are compromised by such factors as economics, the availability of materials and fuels, production capacity and not least, national interests. Your video clearly explains why and how the P-51 became such a success. Its development overcame most, if not all, the obstacles mentioned above.
There is little doubt that the P-51 Mustang remains the best fighter aircraft of its time, ever. No other plane, before or since, has been as dominant, given the wartime restrictions under which it was designed, built and operated.
The F-22, for example, was/is equally dominant but its design and construction were not limited by budgetary or material concerns.
The Mustang is the greatest.
The kommandogerat mechanical computer in the FW190 was an utterly brilliant piece of engineering, perhaps more so than the engines of these two planes themselves.
*Kommandogerät
@@j.m.5995 Command device
😊😊😊😊
Whittle could take consolation that the Purchasing department during the war made many mistakes, for instance the D. H. Mosquito. They laughed at it but it ended up being one of our best planes. Again the manufacturer had to go it alone without government help, we were very lucky they did. Purchasing should have been sacked.
Military procurement people generally have head up ass syndrome. Their limited vision is looking back.
Having only watched only half of your video so far, I can only say that this is one of the most comprehensive and unbiased productions that I have ever seen. Excellent. I have subscribed
Wow, thank you!
If it's American...it's GUARENTEED to be Bias
The Frank Whittle documentary was excellent.
Really good to have interviews with the men themselves. Lots of great insights from both sides of the jet engine race.
Anything with Mr. Brown, should be Sir Brown, gets a thumbs up from me!!!!
We just posted a new video with him an hour ago 😉
What a fantastic story. My love and respect and admiration for a genius is unbounded. Rest in peace, sir. How can anyone not feel admiration and respect for such accomplishments. Sir, in your honor, I salute you.
Wonderful story of Planes, Engines and Flyboys!!
You failed to mention the main issue of poor fuel level in Germany....Mustangs flew on a 125 Octane gasoline which enabled a much much higher intake manifold pressure and thus higher power to weight ratio from a 27 liter Merlin comparing to the 36 liter Benz
it wasn't about the machines but the man.
@@derhamw3267 don't forget the Sheilas
It was a 150 octane for america and 80 octane for german syntetic fuel ectracted from coal.
If German or japan had enough proper fuel and enough raw material which america hava abundantly, things will turned out very differently.
true
Frank Whittle shrunk the world.
Ever fill like a piece of chewing gum on the bottom of a shoe. And just scraped off on the curb. Good job Frank. Outstanding.
The Allison V-1710 and the Rolls-Royce Merlin were technically not strictly "in-line" engines. Depending on whom you ask, an inline or "straight" engine is characterized by a single row of cylinders. The Allison and Rolls-Royce engines were of course configured in twin rows of six cylinders each, making a "Vee" shape when viewed from either end.
Oh no, a bit of hair-splitting, a somewhat dangerous pasttime. Then riddle me this, what was the Junkers Jumo 222, radial, inline, ??
🤔🤔🤔
The documentary was full of errors until Whittle began to speak.
Looked at from an automobile engineering viewpoint, yes. A more accurate distinction would be between 'liquid-cooled' and 'air-cooled'. The only application for radial engines outside of aircraft, would have been the Wright radial powerplants used in some US tanks in WW2.
When ever the Merlin engine is mentioned one woman requires special thanksgiving and attention. Dame Fanny Lucy Houston is truly the mother of advanced RR Merlin engines. She financed RR development and engineering when government would not step in. Thankyou Lady Houston.
In this video about aero engines, you could have at least mentioned the Napier-Sabre engine which powered the Hawker Typhoons which saw off the Fw190 from their low level raids over southern England.
Many Napier Sabres in Hawker Typhoons caught fire simply when the engine was started and lacked reliability big-time.An extremely undependable engine that also cannot absorb any battle damage at all.Best engine in WW2 was the P&W R-2800 and the aircraft that won the war in the ETO was the P-47 Thunderbolt.If the Pacific Theater would have went on a little longer you would have seen the P-47N totally replace the P-51D as the had 5600 on order.
There was one other issue was the plumbing around the radiator. Hard deck landings could break the pipes and connections.
I can say that these are excellent pilots and for me personally it means the 1 spitfire 2 messerschmitt 262 and 3 Concord is for me the pinnacle of engineering, not to mention the Wright brothers and of course Wilhelm Otto Lilienthal pioneer of aviation. But the arrow wings on Me 262 !with whom he has the opportunity to meet ILA 2016 are just out of this world
Please remember also Traian Vuia, Alberto Santos-Dumont, Clément Ader and Samuel Pierpont Langley.
*SR-71 Blackbird* 😨
The RAFs own reply to the Fw190 was the Spitfire Mk 9 and 16.
Yes, for a while.
But it was the P-47C that won back control of the air over German occupied France, not the Spitfire Mk.IX.
Bravo Whittle, you've achived so much through thought and determination!
I live by Merlin Drive which is named because it is the site of an old Rolls Royce factory where the engine was designed and made. They still have the frontage to the old building and I can see the Rolls Royce sign from my kitchen window.
Hi neighbour. I live down the road - the 'Flying Bedstead' pub used to be my local until it was turned into a Co Op.
@@gibson617ajg hey up. I don't know of that pub, but I've only lived here for 10 years cause used to live the other side of Derby. There's a whole new housing estate on the site of the old Rolls Royce now. I don't know how they've sold them to be honest cause some have sold for £300,000 which seems a bit steep for Allenton.
@@rather_be_a_cat Hold on, you live in Allenton?
If so, that explains the confusion.
I'm on about Rolls Royce Hucknall. It has a great history.
They used to have airshows there, during the very last one I was able to stand right on the threshold of the grass runway as a P51 came into land. The prop nearly gave me a haircut! I'll never forget it!
@@gibson617ajg when I was at uni I worked for a marquee company during my breaks and one time I put them up for the airshow at RAF Cosford and I was able to walk around all the planes. They had WWII era planes right up to modern day so that was a bit of an experience.
Another Brillant documentary that is keeping me pin to my chair, perfectly narrated too, your channel is now my favourite channel of WW2 air history by FAR I like to thank you ALL
Thank you!
Very accurate video. Except that both, the Ju 88 and Do 17 started with in-line V-12 engines (despite the radial-like nacelles). Later on, the two of them did have versions with radials. The crux is that the radials are lighter but create more drag versus the in-line. Advantages and disadvantages are balanced; that´s why both types were to be found in all air forces. Except the US Navy: in 1921 announced that only radial-engined airplanes would be purchased. Radials allow for more compact planes and are not so fussy about swallowing a bullet or two.
You would think the row of exhaust stubs at the bottom of the cowling would be a giveaway but most people just see the round shape of the Junkers version of the "power egg" concept. The Rolls-Royce Eagle 22 H24 went into a not-too-dissimilar setup. The Pennine air-cooled X24 also went into a round cowling, but I think that had more to do with the fan-forced cooling air.
The video is reasonably accurate for the things it includes, but it misses so much. It is another video obsessed with 4 types of aircraft with a few mentions (some quite small) of other types. Sidney Cam would be upset, the Hurricane gets a brief mention despite it having the major role for British aircraft in the Battle of Britain, The Typhoon and Tempest with the very powerful Napier Sabre are missing, despite their success against both the FW190 and the ME262. For the jet part, the Meteor shot down very few V1s compared to the Tempest V and the Mosquito, but of course, ground-based guns using proximity fuses got the most. And nothing on the Mosquito or any other night fighter.!!!
These comments, by its very nature must be, above all, short. That´s why I will limit myself to mention the so-called NACA ring. Testing all kinds of configurations in the wind tunnel, by accident, they found an oddity: a streamlined fuselage brings about so much drag and a ring facing the wind, another drag. The surprise was that, if they combined a fuselage with a ring in the nose, the resulting total drag was... the addition of the two? No, the subtraction! This brought about the popularity of the radial engine. So much so that the Germans went for the best of the best: the minimal frontal area of the in-line engine, with the drag reducing effect of the ring.@@robertnicholson7733
Probably my favourite documentary ever, i felt every emotion.
At 16.30 the film cites the A6M as an influence on the FW-190. The Focke-Wulf plane antedates the Zero.
The Zero was active two years earlier.
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 The A6M flew in April 1939, and the FW-190 in June 1939, meaning the Focke-Wulf was designed long before the Zero flew. I would have been more correct to say, "Design of the FW-190 antedates any western knowledge of the Zero."
The never-ending technological arms race between countries. thank you sir frank whittle
Stanley Hooker needs to be recognised for his development of the Merlin's two stage supercharging that powered the Mustang and Mk 9 Spitfire. THEN, he was recalled from retirement to sort out the problems with the Jet engine/s that were sending Rolls Royce broke. He was a brilliant problem solver who was never given the credit and almost overlooked. He also worked with Whittle in the early jet development. "Not much of an Engineer" is the title of his life with Rolls Royce.
Great reaction, you are the best for a genuine reaction.
Clint Eastwood is one who genuinely deserves the title of Hollywood legend, you really can't go far wrong with any of his films
Extraordinary how the outcome of these aerial conflicts was due to the smallest differences in engineering
In 1903, the engine was not capable of launching the Wright flyer into the air. By the Wright brothers own admission, they wouldn't be able to achieve a powered flight until they can fly over 830 ft without having to land on the ground the reason being, they had already flown that far from the launching system alone.
An interesting addition to the story would be that the Germans had actually taken a mildly damaged Spitfire and put a German 601 engine into it as well as the BF 109 propeller, and Not only was it faster, it flew over 5,000 ft higher than the mark 9 Spitfire that had had been. Kind of makes you wonder if somebody shouldn't shoe horn a 601 engine into a Mustang?
A Droney video? Fabulous.
Meanwhile Martin Baker was developing the ultimate piston engined fighter from its MB3 airframe which crashed in 1942 after the 2340 bhp Rolls Royce Griffon had been installed , to be known as the MB5 . This fighter outperformed everything during its test flight in May 44 , which sadly never went into production . The MB5 marks the end of an era for both Rolls Royce aero engine design and British piston engined fighters and eventually Martin Baker aircraft production , but the ejector seat legacy lives on til this very day .
But no mention of the powerful Napier in the Typhoon..weird.
@@happyinfidel1 Your right , the Napier Lion was a monster that pulled the Typhoons and Tempests fast enough to run down V1s if they broke through the first defence line .
how did the MB5 end rolls royce aero engine design? don't they still make the ones for commercial craft
@@davisalvarado8960 The last of the piston powered aero engines in the raptor series .
What an amazing documentary. I devoured each and every factoid.
Another good docco. Well done. I wonder if Hedy Lamarr ever got proper recognition for her contribution to the success of the P-51, & virtually all air- planes built since then?
The P-51D was arguably the best propeller-driven fighter ever designed and produced.
After the installation of a Merlin 61 on it, I agreed with you !
Negative. P-47 D through N's were the best fighter-bombers of WW 2
Wow, that was just amazing, finally an accurate account of such events, priceless, thank you.
Glad you liked it!
Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore.
The machinations of the establishment class system with their geniuses. Alan Turing was totally destroyed by it...
Very much so. The problem with any 'establishment' is that it seems to preserve various individual's pre-eminence independent of merit. The ideal way is devoid of such weaknesses (read the opening verses of St John's epistle, about how the Almighty selects His chosen sons and leaders).
not only is the 190 among the best fighters of the war, I think it was the most beautiful
The castor oil lubrication also caused incontinence in aviators.
WW1 stuff
Great channel, the best information available, I watch it every day.
SO HUMAN KIND WENT FROM FLYING 100 FEET TO LANDING ON THE MOON IN UNDER 70 YEARS!!!??? WOW
...... 'landing on the moon'? Landing on a Sound Stage, more like.
Yeah? What about the P-47 and F4u Corsair? The Corsair especially was the best fighter of WW2.
No it wasn't. The corsair's oil cooler placement made it very vulnerable to enemy fire. a vulerability the f6f hellcat didnt have, and thus saved more pilots lives. The Hellcat was also easier to fly, and had the highest kill ratio on the pacific theatre, and 2nd highest in the entire war.
“Best” is nearly impossible to quantify. It’s more an opinion than a factual matter. Obviously some magnificent machines in that era. All of them an exercise in selecting the sacrifices to be made, for the purpose of intended mission.
The debate of “best” will be eternal.
Seems that the pilots tended to live the plane they were flying. But I do think that it’s obvious that the Allies had more variety of models. And the winning team always gets the trophy.
I’d mention that Corsairs were mainly used in the Pacific theater and not used much against Germany. If you ask the Germans what aircraft they feared you’d also need to ask the Japanese and the Japs didn’t fight against a lot of the planes the Germans fought against. Did Zeros ever face Spitfires ? Did the Me109 ever fight against Hellcats or Wildcats ? I don’t think they did but I honestly don’t know but I think figuring out the “best” would be hard to do.
P38 ……..
And the first to fly 400 mph
In unity, there's strength the P51 was evidence of this calibration 🇺🇲🇬🇧✌️💯
Great chats; you put the meat on the bones
The assertion that it was "national pride" that saw the Allison engine installed in the P-51A is just b.s. It was simply the best available engine at the time. In its first roles as low level photo recon and ground attack, the P-51A proved very useful, indeed. Faster than the Spitfire at low altitudes. Its shortcomings as a high altitude interceptor were enough for the RAF to seek a power upgrade. They found it in the Merlin, license built by Packard. Thus a legend was born. Low drag fuselage, laminar flow wing, greater fuel storage, self sealing fuel tanks and the Packard built Merlin produced a war winner. Speed, range, agility and firepower in one package. Brilliant.
Como me recuerdan a mi padre estos documentos que buenos momentos
Loved the true and real stories, and this one I'll never forget ❤
So, I reckon Henry Ford considered the B24 a " defensive" weapon. Hmmmmm !
There was a revolt amongst his family who were also major stockholders.
All P-47's had more powerful turbosuperchargers and could fly higher than anything else including the Mustang. In fact you could just lay back and perform a stall and look down at other aircraft that can't even reach you. But the P-47M and "N" model had the even more powerful CH-5 turbosuperchargers and could even fly higher. And of course ,when entering the combat area at 31,000 to 33,000ft. ,10 times out of 10 you are coming down stairs. And the P-47 was second to none as it out dove everything.This is how the Thunderbolt gained back airsuperiority over German occupied France from the Folke Wulfe FW-190 that took it from the Spitfire Mk.5. Abbeville boys who tried to outrun a Thunderbolt soon found out they were a gone goose.
I saw 20+ spitfires in formation at duxford. But the mustangs because they are cheaper and more are left were run much harder, guessing they were pretty close to full throttle and they are chucking them around. Greats stuff.
The axial flow German engine design was so far ahead of the centrifugal compressor design and only are found in propjets today. Interesting that today Rolls, Pratt & GE build most of the gas turbine aircraft engines. The new geared design by Pratt-whitney is likely the most fuel efficient design. The holy grale of fuel efficiency is #1 today!
“Was” is misleading, as it took forever to be develop to a properly functional, and reliable engine. Whittle, if you are familiar with his story, was fully aware of that even in 1930, so he aimed for a reliable, and easy to develop solution. You might not be aware that the person that rejected and delayed his project by years, Mr. Griffith, was also the author of an important paper on axial compressors in 1926, when Von Ohain was still a teenager, and had no interest in jet engines. The truth is that Britain was not nearly as interested in devoting much effort in developing a jet engine at the time, going as far as halting research on the subject in the 30s.
Germany squandered resources, and involved several companies to develop an engine that at the time proved to be utterly useless, other than short lived propaganda, but also unreliable, delicate to operate, and had a ridiculous scrap life. Do not be mistaken, Britain, as you should know, was still working on axial turbojets at the same time, just not as obsessively as Germany was. For the record, Whittle’s engine equipped aircraft such as the MiG 15 in the 50s. If you know anything about that aircraft, you also know how effective, and feared it was. The Soviets ditched precisely the Jumo German engine as unrealiable, and used the British centrifugal engine instead. Do not make the mistake of thinking that Whittle was not fully aware of which engine would have prevailed. He was smarter than his counterparts precisely because he realized how wrong it would have been, in times of war, to waste so much time on an engine that was too com0lex to develop properly. If he had been supported by his government even 1/4 of Von Onain, Heinkel, Junkers, and BMW, Britain would have had a jet engine, and aircraft by the beginning of the war, and a reliable one. Germany, in the last days of 1944 had an impressive, but useless and unrealiable jet engine that equipped a very good aircraft, the Me 262. By the way, as you probably know, Von Ohain also had access to Whittle’s work, it the contrary is not true, as Whittle was clearly ahead of the German that later became his friend and graciously credited Whittle as the sole inventor of the turbojet. It was merely a question of funding, and policies, nothing more. Britain had all the brains,many ability to build both engines, but did not care nearly as much as the Germans did, also for strategic reasons.
@@Dronescapes Well said sir, it also didn’t hurt that in Sir Stanley Hooker Rolls Royce had one of the foremost designers of centrifugal compressors. As the design and production technology for the early jet centrifugal compressors was identical to that used for piston engine superchargers it would make perfect sense to use the technology.
Sir Stanley held Frank Whittle in high esteem both as a friend and as an engineer.
Since it was a war of attrition, engine differences did not really matter. Basically by the time the P-51 came out the war in Europe was already won.
When did the US ever turn up on time for a war?
The P47 and Spitfires had already broken the back of the Luftwaffe fighters before the P51s arrived.
It was the P-47 Thunderbolt that got control of the air over German -occupied France. P-47 which was designed for high altitude could fly higher than anything that flies.Killed off most of the experienced pilots including the "Abbeville" boys. By the time the Mustang came out General Doolittle had the P-51B take over the escort because the P-47 was now needed over here,here being a great tactical fighter bomber creating a whole new air force,the 9th airforce for it. Big Week was a "Thunderbolt show".
Very true.
What a great documentary
A good fighter made to British specifications by a small but brilliantly inventive team of Americans and brought to life by the magnificent Rolls Royce Merlin engine.
In most cases, the Spitfire had better performance as an all-purpose fighter. The all-important climb rate for a P51D sat at 3200ft per minute whilst the Spitfire could climb at an impressive 3650ft per minute. The maximum speed of a P51D was 437mph whilst the Spitfire was slightly faster at 448mph. For interception, this was clearly quite important. However, the P51D was generally more specialized than the Spitfire. In it's main role, the Mustang proved itself as a superb escort fighter in Allied bombing raids over Germany. For this role, the American aircraft didn't really need the Spitfire's versatile performance. Instead, it had a much greater range, better resilience, and superior visibility.
I beg to disagree on several points. First the Spitfire, a specialist interceptor, adapted to other jobs.
While the Mk XIV did indeed exceed 440mph, it had limited combat range, at 460 miles. The Spitfire was always limited by short legs. Only 957 Mk XIV's were produced, out of the 20,000 produced.
Conversely, the P51 was the more versatile aircraft as proven by its operational deployments in War 2 and Korea. The P51 had more than double the amount of internal fuel aboard which offered greater range at roughly 650 miles on internal fuel, which could be extended with drop tanks. BTW, the US produced more than 13,000 P51 B and D models. The Spitfire was very good, but the P51 was better.
The P-51 was better because designers could start from the weaknesses of Spits and 109s - except - the wrong motor 🤦🏻
ахинею пишешь про свой спидфаер. Лучшая аэродинамика была у мустанга . Возьми поляру крыла спидфаера и сравни ее с суперламинарной полярой мустанга . Разница в характеристиках составляет порядка 20 процентов . Глотает пыль твой спидфаер за мустангом по всем показателям . Особый идиотизм это эллипсное крыло в плане , дорого и глупо . В то время как мустанг имел уже корневой напрыв и радиатор с нулевым сопротивлением .
After the Battle of Britain in which the Hawker Hurricane carried the load the Spitfire was pretty much out of the war.
As well as numbers and the deterioration in quality of the Luftwaffe pilots by 1944.
Interesting documentary, I was hooked to my screen couldn't even go do anything lol
Awesome Documentary. Rest in Peace Sir Frank Whittle
GREAT STORY OF A GREAT MAN. THANK YOU , SIR.
I'm Lovinit....what a channel!
From 13.30 to 15.00 the narrator talks about German fighter development as if they were looking for an escort fighter. This is nonsense, and a beautiful example of projection: in this case an American writer taking a later American requirement for a long-range escort fighter and projecting it backward onto German fighter requirements. In fact, the Focke-Wulf 190 was developed before the war, its first flight being June 1939!
Hmmm. Projection or not, perhaps the narrator should have worked on German aircraft development. They certainly could have used some proper escort fighters with some actual combat range and fight time over the target, eh?
Maybe could have even won the Battle of Britain.
As an American, I must say that the Whittle documentary is much much interesting than the P-51 one.
It is only now at this date, did I know about Whittle. We always thought the German Messerschmitt ME-262 was the first jet-powered plane. It is too bad sometimes updates can always come too late.
I was a ww2 p51 mustang pilot, killed 3000 germans and my p51 was running a GM LS 427 swap from a Corvette. No wonder I killed so many enemy.
One thing this video does not mention, is that the Allison's lack of turbochargers - except in the p-38 - was due to a decision made by the Army Air Corps. This GUARANTEED, that the P-39 and P-40 lacked high altitude performance.
The long-range P-51 Mustang fighter was invaluable to the Allied victory, enabling resumption of strategic bombing after heavy losses suffered by unescorted bombers in 1943. Developed for export to Britain, models modified by the British to use Rolls-Royce Merlin engines became America's most capable wartime fighters.
This man deserved so much more publicity money and success than he got the industry shunned his idea until it proved amazing then they used it Perpetuity
When the Korean War started there was no military response available, except for a squadron of Australian (made) Mustangs at the base they occupied in their portion of Japan. Those pilots were attacking the North Koreans nine days before MacArthur was appointed, particularly troop trains. Truly a substantive design.
An excellent documentary!
Many thanks!
The RR Merlin and later Packard Merlin became a successful practical proposition thanks to the mass production skillsets already present in the British automotive sector. Three more modern Mustangs with Packard engines could also be delivered at similar cost vs two P-47 "Jugs" which had done the real heavy lifting to acquire air superiorty early on. The Luftwaffe liked some of their fighter engines mounted upside down...
Packard had to convert all the RR drawings with their hand fitting tolerances to high accuracy, repeatable specifications to enable mass production.
Very informative
Glad you liked it
Great video!---Thanks for sharing ☝