Support the channel by getting Wings of Heroes on your iOS/Android device for free woh.onelink.me/WXir/ghozerim, and use my gift code DARKSKIES to get a unique skin for your first plane!
The story of an absolute dog pressed into service and made to do some level of work by the bravery and valor of the men who flew them. A flying pig and every pilot who went aloft in one proved his bravery just by taking off.
A bit unfair. It had it's flaws, but it suffered mostly through issues that dogged a lot of British aircraft designs, the need to balance the development of new engine designs against the need to produce the required numbers of proven engines for front line aircraft. There was also that fact that the RAF regarded the FAA as less of a priority. The Barracuda was designed for a different engine than the one it was produced with.
Our minister Rev. Kirby from Helensville, NZ flew Barracudas in WW2. He drove on the road like a crazy man. Perhaps it takes a little crazy to fly these planes.
A great deal of overstatement. No bombs penetrated the deck armour. The main damage was from the shock of two near misses damaging the hull and turbines. The bravery of the flyers is not in question, but the impact on the war was actually limited and by no means any kind of saving. The Germans were very short of heavy fuels and their surface navy was already in tatters.
...and the Grand Fleet was ready for Tirpitz. I don't know how many battleships Britain needed to destroy the Tirpitz, but I do know how many they were going to use!
Tirpitz, by its very existence, tied up considerable resources. The failure to take her out, shows just how hard it was to do any significant damage to a battleship.
The air strikes did not penetrate the main armour, but nonetheless caused significant damage to the ship's superstructure and inflicted serious casualties. Reports vary, but the attack killed around 130 men and wounded around 300 others, including the ship's commander, Kapitan zur See Hans Meyer. Two of the 15 cm turrets were destroyed by bombs, and both Ar 196 floatplanes were destroyed. Several of the bomb hits caused serious fires aboard the ship. Concussive shock disabled the starboard turbine engine, and saltwater used to fight the fires reached the boilers and contaminated the feed water. Some 2,000 tonnes of water flooded the ship, primarily through the two holes in the side shell created by shell splinters from near misses.
@@DraftySatyr I doubt that the Barracudas caused much of that. The Tall Boys did penetrate the deck and with the earlier side-saddle mines from X-craft mini subs, did most to disable Tirpitz. Finally a Tallboy near miss rolled her over with its masive shock wave
Seeing a Gannet with its wings folded, and not being very familiar with the aircraft type, was a really WTF moment for me at the Moorabbin Air Museum, Melbourne, Australia. It was an ungainly, chaotic looking aircraft, but still looked better than the Barracuda. Mark from Melbourne Australia
@@jeannotschumacher1024 The Firefly was an excellent aircraft, it was not the fault of IT, that the Navy thought that fighters should have two crewmen.
"Terrorised the Arctic".....hardly, the truth is German Kreigsmarine barely had any fuel, which is one reason why Scharnhorst sailed with an inadequate escort in 1943. Yes it was a major distraction to the war effort with Winston Churchill, who demand that the RN and RAF sink "The Beast", as hell called her- which between Operation Source in 1943, the operations covered here and the final Coup-de-Gras of 617 and 9 squadron in 1944
@@michaelturner5050 I’m a Professor at Disneyland. What does that prove? He lists facts, you say he’s wrong- however, you offer no corrections. Troll.
Scharnhorst sailed in 1943 without Tirpitz , because she'd been damaged by the x-subs HMS Duke of York wouldn't have fared very well against both of them together
If i am not mistaken this is the only plane of WWII we don't have a working model due to all of them being scrapped after the war. There is an ongoing group that is actually looking for crashed planes and planes buried by the RAF to rebuild a working model.
The carrier landing crash @ 16:35 is a Mosquito. Eric Winkle Brown proved it was technically possible to loaded a DH98 on a carrier but almost nobody else was capable. In fact his CO had expected to never see him again when he first went to try the feat.
I learned from another video about this aircraft that leaks of the hydraulic fluid in the cockpit would cause the pilot to become unconscious. This was due to ether in the hydraulic fluid.
If you're talking about at 13:19, they're in the back. You can tell by their four bladed props and lack of upward folded wings as they fold to the rear.
@danielcoffey2632 still a pretty poor video selection, looks like a deck full of Corsairs. This video title is misleading and verging on click bate. This channel can produce good videos, I don't know why it needs over dramatic and misleading titles to get keen viewers to watch.
Not that any aircraft manufacturer ever had a perfect record, but Fairey Aviation really did have a bit of a hit or miss history of aircraft design and production: Successful: Swordfish, Firefly, Gannett Mediocre: Fulmar, Barracuda, Flycatcher Substandard: Hendon, Albacore Failure: Battle
What splendid names for aircraft carriers! HMS Formidable, HMS Indefatigable and HMS Furious. Our two current aircraft carriers are HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. Not so impressive...
The modern British military mate... Royal Navy are afraid of coming across as too agressive with their modern ship naming. I think they forget their main mission aims.
Don't knock the "Prince of Wales" It's predecessor of that name was sacrificed against Japan due the the British Admiralty's incorrect belief that it & the Repulse could protect themselves against land-based air attack. For all the good they did, they could have been kept in the Atlantic or Med, & a large number of brave men may have survived.
As far as I remember it was 617 squadron which finally sank the Tirpitz using Tallboy bombs. Admittedly the smokescreen generators had not been recharged since earlier raids.
9 squadron and 617 squadron put the Tirpitz down in November 1944, but earlier in the year, on a 617 raid led by Leonard Cheshire, Sargent Daniels, the bomb aimer on Cheshire's aircraft, put a bomb through the ship's foredeck which exploded on the seabed, making the ship virtually unrepairable, so it was intended to use it as a stationary fort. Daniels had sighted the ship and put the crosshairs on it before losing sight of the target in the smoke screen, but the bombsight's gyro system maintained the target and allowed the hit. On the November raid, it appears that one of 9 squadron's bombs scored the fatal hit, incidentally the RN claimed that Tirpitz was not sunk as it's capsized hull was above the surface, talk about petty!
@ probably but it was in Kafjord near Tromso and the propaganda impact of actually sinking it probably outweighed everything else. Perhaps I should state my grandparents and father were in occupied Norway throughout the war.
So many aircraft that we have never heard of have existed and then vanished. The most common aircraft of all time remains the Cessna 172. It can climb, I'll tell you that.
The Barracuda looked like it was designed by amateurs. It was ungainly, woefully underpowered, and was virtually defenceless against enemy aircraft. It lacked the range for long-range patrolling, yet the requirement of carrying a 3-man crew precluded their use as fighters. Designed to perform multiple roles, the Barracuda failed to perform any of them adequately.
Against all odds, this underappreciated plane turned out to be a game-changer. By stepping up when it mattered most, it became a symbol of resilience, proving that sometimes, even the most unlikely machines can make a world of difference in the fight for victory.
This I did not know this until today. I have just assumed they were flying Lancasters. Hence, why I love this channel 👍. As an added note; I can believe this thing even took off with a bomb load … or even without one
In Port Sodderick in the Isle of Man we have a Barracuda bench to commemorate those who lost their lives in training flying these aircraft. It was just made recently.
Fairey got it right with their last wartime design, the Firefly, which used a Griffon. If there ever was a "Barracuda with a Griffon", this was it. Though it was supposedly a fighter, being a replacement for the Fulmar, in reality it was used as a ground attack and ASW aircraft rather than a fighter, so even if it didn't carry torpedoes it was more of a replacement for the Barracuda.
The old Swordfish, although obsolete by the outbreak of the war, still went on to do things that other planes could not. Plus, it served until the end of the war, and also was able to carry air to surface radar.
@@longrider42 Well... because it was better than anything it was replaced with.. It's little wonder we ended up using the American Avenger- we couldn't make naval aircraft properly at all.. the best we came up with was the Seafire, and that was an obvious adaptation and had it's own weaknesses (undercarriage). The Swordfish was solid, and did great service but it really was obsolete, and it's shameful that in 1940- 45 we couldn't even design a plane that was genuinely superior to a biplane. Reminds me of our tank design of WW2.. took us until the final 3 months of the war to make an actual decent tank >.>
@@tonyennis1787 Okay, but look at the P-40, it wasn't really fast by the standards of WW2, but it was well built, and good at low altitude, and it served till the end of the war, and it only had that stupid single speed Turbo.
@@stevenread1676while I’d agree with you I think it’s more nuanced. No one had fought carriers before the war and Britain was extremely stretched in its developmental requirements. Fulmars were a very good stop gap and the Firefly’s were excellent. As for tanks I’d just say that they at least didn’t cripple our logistics infrastructure like German tanks did.
As R.J.Mitchel was well aware, select the engine FIRST, then design the plane around it, having first decided what you want the plane to do together with intended speed, altitude, range, and anticipated load plus armaments' etc.
The 'X' engine was called the Vulture and was indeed an X24 configuration. This engine did cost a few more planes their careers. For example the Westland Whirlwind, the Avro Manchester, the split hull Blackburn flying boat and probably a few more.
Yes. A interesting aircraft. Knew about the attack on the Tirpitz. But not the history of the aircraft. A group of people are rebuilding one in Britain. Or have.?. Am sure I saw a fleet of Corsair when you said Barracuda. But saved yourself with a picture with a Barracuda and Corsair together later on. I'm glad you did this documentary. The Lancaster get most the credit. A lot of history shows don't mention the aircraft. 👽👍
The Mustang (P51) was built for the British to RAF specifications. With it's original Alyson engine its performance was "dissappointing" at altitudes above 15,000 feet. Once equipped with a RR Merlin engine however its performance was totally transformed. Equipped with drop tanks its range was extrodinary and proved an invaluable escort fighter capable of escorting US Bombers "all the way to target". A very capable fighter it dramatically reduced US Bomber Crew losses which had been, up to that point, truly horrendous. Undoubtedly one of the key fighter aircraft of the WW2 ! 🇬🇧🇺🇸
Agreed, mostly. Not a lovely plane, but it could be made to work under certain circumstances. Personally, I thought you were going to talk about the Tiffy, a plane that really failed - then found it's niche SPECTACULARLY! (but was still temperamental)😅
"Saving the War"? I hardly think so. As you state, the allies "were closing in on victory", before the operation you mention and Barracudas did not sink Tirpitz. Lancasters capsized 'Tirpitz' using Tallboy 120,000lb bombs (the Barracuda could only take a 2,000lb bombload in comparison). As for the effectiveness of Tirpitz, though involed in some actions, it never itself sank any ships or even fired upon them.
There have been a lot of warplanes designed for a new, cutting edge engine that hadn't even left the prototype stage, but built with an inferior one, because the new, cutting edge engine program was unsuccessful. Almost all of theses combat planes were failures. There have even been a couple of commercial airliners that met this exact fate.
Yes should gone time for a totally different design to fit the engine we can use and forget multi purpose and build different designs for each role. Or just tell HQ let’s build nothing and use the American planes. That might get actual effort to get the engine they actually needed. And once the battle of Britain was won fighter command did not need top priority anymore after all they got a failure of a raid done primarily to get fighter command something to do. The raid to force the Germans to use their planes against it thus giving fighter command targets.
This "Rolls Royce X' he mentions was the Exe, named after the river Exe in Somerset. Surprisingly, to me, it IS pronounced "Ex". Also surprisingly, it was small displacement wise (23 liters, versus the Merlin's 27), slightly lighter than the Merlin, being a 24 cylinder X engine (4 banks of 6 cylinders arranged around a single crankshaft), and used sleeve valves. The other Rolls Royce X engine, the Vulture, used in the Avro Machester, was a lot bigger (42 liters). Not sure why the Exe was named after a river - all of the other Rolls Royce internal combustion engines of the time period were named after birds of prey. The Exe weighed slightly less than the Merlin, and made about the same amount of power, so I suppose using a Merlin in its place makes sense, as did cancelling the project.
This appears to be well researched with good footage, the narrator is easy to understand. However the music track is unnecessary and irritating. The only computer game that I didn't disable the music track was the GTA series where the music did add to the game. Unfortunately there are too many factual TH-cam channels that believe you have to have music and it is impossible to turn the noise off other than skipping the video.
The Corsairs alone could've carried out bombing attacks against the Tirpitz, it was 10 times the combat aircraft than the Baracuda, faster, more maneuverable and capable of carrying two 500 lb. bombs. It defies logic some of the decisions the FAA made about fighting the war. Alas, nowadays, net even a faint shadow of what they once were.
AFAIK AT THE TIME the US considered the corsair too dangerous for a carrier operations, and stuck to Hellcats, so there were corsairs to sell they didn't care if Brits killed themselves using it, the RN (that had sorted the Seafire's tendency to "float" on landing) sorted the corsair into an effecting carrier fighter, but I doubt anyone was going to hang a torpedo on one , and Dive-bombing requires a aircraft built for the stress from the ground-up
@@farmerned6 Actually that was a problem, but the biggest issue was logistic. The Hellcat used the same engines as the other carrier types plus as a Grumman product had a more robust design. the Corsair had a different model of engine and many more different parts.
@@Charles-k9g5y The original Alison engine would have worked great in it, with the addition of a multi staged turbo super charger, just look at the P-38.
@@longrider42 A turbocharger would have entailed a massive redesign of the P51. The P47 had a turbocharger & it was a monster compared to the P51s slender fuselage.
@@bryanwheeler1608 The original P-51 Mustang did not have a turbocharger, but later versions did: Original P-51 The original P-51 Mustang was designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which lacked a high-altitude supercharger. This limited the plane's performance at high altitudes, and it was primarily used for low-altitude operations. Rolls-Royce Mustang X In mid-1942, the Rolls-Royce Mustang X development project replaced the Allison engine with a Rolls-Royce Merlin 65 engine that had a two-stage inter-cooled supercharger. Turbocharged Allison engine Later versions of the Allison engine were turbocharged, which significantly improved the plane's high-altitude performance. The P-51 Mustang was a fighter plane that played a key role in World War II. It had a top speed of nearly 390 miles per hour and a combat range of about 750 miles. With external drop tanks, its range could be extended to 1,375 miles.
I agree with other comments about the start. It doesn’t become clear that this video is about the Barracuda until we are a couple of minutes into it. What ruins the video for me, once again, however, is the cringeworthy way that Tirpitz is pronounced. It is “tir” as in “sir” not tier as in pier. For goodness sake. How I wish the voiceover artist would check his pronunciations before releasing his videos. It’s just so unprofessional. Quite what a crashing DH Mosquito is doing in this video is also beyond me. Apart from all that the video was quite interesting. Keep going but do please take the fair criticism on board. If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing well. Very best wishes, Adrian
The Barracuda was loathed by all of its crew who were sacrificed on the alter of the Fairy company, the people that should never have been allowed to waste desperately needed resources. It did no damage to the Tirpitz which was attacked by the Lancaster's of IX and 617 Sqns and sunk. Don't forget the awful Fairy Battle. They also made a Naval version of the Defiant, another waste of lives.
There were no real issues in the Exe program headed by Arthur Rowledge. At the time of its cancellation, it was producing about the same power as the Merlin but out of 22 litres versus 27 litres for the Merlin. The prototype engine was very reliable. It was a compact engine with a relatively low frontal area and more importantly air-cooled so no radiators (apart from oil) and thus no chin. The Exe was only about 100lbs lighter than the Merlin but required considerably less "support systems" weight. Like everyone else, silly clickbait title, get some perspective.
It should always have had two engines. Underpowered and with limited firepower, it was a lame duck. Pilots should have received a medal just for taking off. Two engines were needed. The later Gannet, was a superb aircraft
Saving the war? A little hyperbole is fine for the indigestion, but by 1944, that antique kite didn't "save the war," nor would the Tirpitz have won it. Both speculations are ridiculous conjecture. By 1944, sinking the Tirpitz that had only fired once in anger in 1943 and had rotted in the fiord for over a year since then was nothing more than pest control.
Support the channel by getting Wings of Heroes on your iOS/Android device for
free woh.onelink.me/WXir/ghozerim, and use my gift code DARKSKIES to get a unique skin for your first plane!
It was better before a few updates ago, all the same it is a fun game with respectable graphics and game play.Have had it over a year at least.
Stop the psycho music
The story of an absolute dog pressed into service and made to do some level of work by the bravery and valor of the men who flew them. A flying pig and every pilot who went aloft in one proved his bravery just by taking off.
A bit unfair. It had it's flaws, but it suffered mostly through issues that dogged a lot of British aircraft designs, the need to balance the development of new engine designs against the need to produce the required numbers of proven engines for front line aircraft. There was also that fact that the RAF regarded the FAA as less of a priority. The Barracuda was designed for a different engine than the one it was produced with.
Useles aircraft
the Navy was always slow to change doctrine... "it's not how Nelson did it" mentality.
@bobsakamanos4469 very true 👍
Mighty big stretch with that whole saved the war thing....
Just a tad.
more like an "We Aint" getting those great Yank Planes on credit!
This site clickbaits like mad...
This is about the 5th aircraft, 3rd boat, 6th gun that "saved the war"
Hey Man, That Was A Really Nice Way To Put It! So I'm Gonna Make It #22. Thank You. (Like #22)
Our minister Rev. Kirby from Helensville, NZ flew Barracudas in WW2. He drove on the road like a crazy man. Perhaps it takes a little crazy to fly these planes.
He was probably hoping to crash to avoid flying the plane.
Nah, he was just proving that he could be faster on the ground in a car than that thing could fly in a straight line.
@@drew65sep Neither he like so many other young flying men had a wild spirit and a lack of fear.
Love the videos, hate the titles,. Too click baity, less informative. Start with the plane make and model, then the click bait.
click-bait is offensive - quality doesn’t need it
Clickbait sex 🔥
It's because the videos he's been putting out have been lower and lower quality, so he's adding click bait titles to increase clicks.
Using a lot of ai filler as well it's weird @@14thCenturyHare
Yeah that’s TH-cam now if you didn’t catch on a decade ago …..
A great deal of overstatement. No bombs penetrated the deck armour. The main damage was from the shock of two near misses damaging the hull and turbines. The bravery of the flyers is not in question, but the impact on the war was actually limited and by no means any kind of saving. The Germans were very short of heavy fuels and their surface navy was already in tatters.
...and the Grand Fleet was ready for Tirpitz. I don't know how many battleships Britain needed to destroy the Tirpitz, but I do know how many they were going to use!
@@tonyennis1787 its called the "Home Fleet" by WWII but essentially you are correct
Tirpitz, by its very existence, tied up considerable resources. The failure to take her out, shows just how hard it was to do any significant damage to a battleship.
The air strikes did not penetrate the main armour, but nonetheless caused significant damage to the ship's superstructure and inflicted serious casualties. Reports vary, but the attack killed around 130 men and wounded around 300 others, including the ship's commander, Kapitan zur See Hans Meyer. Two of the 15 cm turrets were destroyed by bombs, and both Ar 196 floatplanes were destroyed. Several of the bomb hits caused serious fires aboard the ship. Concussive shock disabled the starboard turbine engine, and saltwater used to fight the fires reached the boilers and contaminated the feed water. Some 2,000 tonnes of water flooded the ship, primarily through the two holes in the side shell created by shell splinters from near misses.
@@DraftySatyr I doubt that the Barracudas caused much of that.
The Tall Boys did penetrate the deck and with the earlier side-saddle mines from X-craft mini subs, did most to disable Tirpitz. Finally a Tallboy near miss rolled her over with its masive shock wave
I apologize for being petty, but I’m still waiting for the part where this woefully under powered machine save the war.
Everything that did its part contributed to the victory.
That was just a hook to get you to watch a puff piece with an advertisement inserted in the middle.
You already gave a Click
You're NOT getting a Cupcake
Now Sit Down and Be Quiet
I had never heard of this aircraft. Thank you
In defence of Fairey the Firefly and Gannet were pretty good and I've always liked their Christmas tree lights, cakes and washing up liquid.
Their washing-up liquid deffo "won the war"
Seeing a Gannet with its wings folded, and not being very familiar with the aircraft type, was a really WTF moment for me at the Moorabbin Air Museum, Melbourne, Australia. It was an ungainly, chaotic looking aircraft, but still looked better than the Barracuda.
Mark from Melbourne Australia
Firefly another useless aircraft
@@jeannotschumacher1024 The Firefly was an excellent aircraft, it was not the fault of IT, that the Navy thought that fighters should have two crewmen.
@colinmartin2921 so it wasn't excellent. No match for any fightet worth the name.
There was already an airplane that fit all the Barracuda's requirements. It was the Grumman Avenger.
Even the Dauntless would have been far superior and was flying in '41
@@tonyennis1787 Dauntless wouldn't meet the requirement for a torpedo bomber, would it? (Don't try and sell me the Devastator)
@@DraftySatyr Nope. Devastator was still better than this plane however.
No dive bombing just level bombing for the avenger but man the rockets they could pit on her to go with the bombs.
Yes, but maybe the TBF Avenger were all in the Pacific theatre?
That dam single speed turbo charger was the bane of so many aircraft that could have been great.
"Terrorised the Arctic".....hardly, the truth is German Kreigsmarine barely had any fuel, which is one reason why Scharnhorst sailed with an inadequate escort in 1943. Yes it was a major distraction to the war effort with Winston Churchill, who demand that the RN and RAF sink "The Beast", as hell called her- which between Operation Source in 1943, the operations covered here and the final Coup-de-Gras of 617 and 9 squadron in 1944
Everything you said is factually wrong, I’m a professor of history at Yale.
@@michaelturner5050
I’m a Professor at Disneyland.
What does that prove?
He lists facts,
you say he’s wrong-
however,
you offer no corrections.
Troll.
@@michaelturner5050
And I'm a Professor of Bovine Scatology...and you're a textbook example.
@@michaelturner5050 Then US knowledge of history is worse than I feared.
Scharnhorst sailed in 1943 without Tirpitz , because she'd been damaged by the x-subs
HMS Duke of York wouldn't have fared very well against both of them together
If i am not mistaken this is the only plane of WWII we don't have a working model due to all of them being scrapped after the war. There is an ongoing group that is actually looking for crashed planes and planes buried by the RAF to rebuild a working model.
Can we really afford the risk of losing (yet) another Merlin engine? Not to mention the poor pilot.
Theres a business concern pulling one out of the English channel now
Shorts Stirling too.
The carrier landing crash @ 16:35 is a Mosquito. Eric Winkle Brown proved it was technically possible to loaded a DH98 on a carrier but almost nobody else was capable. In fact his CO had expected to never see him again when he first went to try the feat.
The roll of this aircraft in the demise of the Tirpitz is misrepresented in this video.
I think you mean role, rather than something produced by the ailerons.
It had a poor roll rate.
Gregs planes , trains and automobiles is a far superior channel to learn about important war winning aircraft.
How much did they pay you?
@donyoung1384 A crate of guiness and half an hour with his auntie . 🤣
I love any WW2 video. I don’t read the title or really look at the picture I just enjoy the information.
In an episode of Expedition Unknown, they found one that had crashed in the hills above the Norwegian fjord the Tirpitz was sunk inside.
When the narrator mentioned Fairey Youngman flaps, I grabbed my violin and shouted, “TAKE MY FLAPS - PLEASE!”
I learned from another video about this aircraft that leaks of the hydraulic fluid in the cockpit would cause the pilot to become unconscious. This was due to ether in the hydraulic fluid.
Amazing how those Barracudas looked like a deckful of Corsairs...
If you're talking about at 13:19, they're in the back. You can tell by their four bladed props and lack of upward folded wings as they fold to the rear.
Also what looks like a Mosquito coming to grief at 16m35s.
@@donquixote3927 It was.
@danielcoffey2632 still a pretty poor video selection, looks like a deck full of Corsairs.
This video title is misleading and verging on click bate.
This channel can produce good videos, I don't know why it needs over dramatic and misleading titles to get keen viewers to watch.
Not that any aircraft manufacturer ever had a perfect record, but Fairey Aviation really did have a bit of a hit or miss history of aircraft design and production:
Successful: Swordfish, Firefly, Gannett
Mediocre: Fulmar, Barracuda, Flycatcher
Substandard: Hendon, Albacore
Failure: Battle
What splendid names for aircraft carriers! HMS Formidable, HMS Indefatigable and HMS Furious. Our two current aircraft carriers are HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. Not so impressive...
Esp when the last Prince of Wales was sunk by the Japs
The modern British military mate... Royal Navy are afraid of coming across as too agressive with their modern ship naming. I think they forget their main mission aims.
I agree, Invincible, Indomitable Illustrious Victorious, great names for carriers. Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales - obsolete battleship names.
@@philWastell Prince of Wales should have stayed at the bottom.of the sea.
Don't knock the "Prince of Wales" It's predecessor of that name was sacrificed against Japan due the the British Admiralty's incorrect belief that it & the Repulse could protect themselves against land-based air attack. For all the good they did, they could have been kept in the Atlantic or Med, & a large number of brave men may have survived.
As far as I remember it was 617 squadron which finally sank the Tirpitz using Tallboy bombs. Admittedly the smokescreen generators had not been recharged since earlier raids.
US made Corsairs flown by RNFAA flew top cover for those Tirpitz attacks.
9 squadron and 617 squadron put the Tirpitz down in November 1944, but earlier in the year, on a 617 raid led by Leonard Cheshire, Sargent Daniels, the bomb aimer on Cheshire's aircraft, put a bomb through the ship's foredeck which exploded on the seabed, making the ship virtually unrepairable, so it was intended to use it as a stationary fort.
Daniels had sighted the ship and put the crosshairs on it before losing sight of the target in the smoke screen, but the bombsight's gyro system maintained the target and allowed the hit.
On the November raid, it appears that one of 9 squadron's bombs scored the fatal hit, incidentally the RN claimed that Tirpitz was not sunk as it's capsized hull was above the surface, talk about petty!
@ Absolutely correct and it did indeed make the subsequent rain unnecessary. Although nobody knew that at the time.
@@owencarlstrand1945 Lack of intel, the mother of all f k ups.
@ probably but it was in Kafjord near Tromso and the propaganda impact of actually sinking it probably outweighed everything else. Perhaps I should state my grandparents and father were in occupied Norway throughout the war.
I love this. Old planes like old people are great. Super tucano comes to mind
That looked like a mozzie that disassembled on the deck of the carrier.
It'd be interesting to hear what happened there
Winkle probably had something to do with that. 😊❤😊
I'm glad that this aircraft saved the war, and not the Spitfire and P51
Hawker Hurricane and Republic Thunderbolt have entered the chat.
Why would you want to save the War?
It would be better to stop it.
And the Lancaster, Hurricane, Beaufighter, Mosquito, and every other allied aircraft.
My friend was a TAG in these wrote a book on it RIP Alan back with Buzz who died on operation Tungsten
How did I know it was a Fairey? One look at it and up from the depths of my subconscious, 'it's a Fairey' something or other.
So many aircraft that we have never heard of have existed and then vanished. The most common aircraft of all time remains the Cessna 172. It can climb, I'll tell you that.
The Barracuda looked like it was designed by amateurs. It was ungainly, woefully underpowered, and was virtually defenceless against enemy aircraft. It lacked the range for long-range patrolling, yet the requirement of carrying a 3-man crew precluded their use as fighters. Designed to perform multiple roles, the Barracuda failed to perform any of them adequately.
The fate of most multirole aircraft is that they don't do any of them well.
Granted, so your point is?
@@kenjones2973 Didn't "save the war" isn't point enough for you?
It's like the good ship Kamchatka with wings, but useful and with an outstanding crew.
Wild. While I can identified most planes from WWII, I have never heard of it.
Against all odds, this underappreciated plane turned out to be a game-changer. By stepping up when it mattered most, it became a symbol of resilience, proving that sometimes, even the most unlikely machines can make a world of difference in the fight for victory.
Just a very important side show. it didn't save the war.
This I did not know this until today. I have just assumed they were flying Lancasters. Hence, why I love this channel 👍.
As an added note; I can believe this thing even took off with a bomb load … or even without one
In Port Sodderick in the Isle of Man we have a Barracuda bench to commemorate those who lost their lives in training flying these aircraft. It was just made recently.
Fairey got it right with their last wartime design, the Firefly, which used a Griffon. If there ever was a "Barracuda with a Griffon", this was it. Though it was supposedly a fighter, being a replacement for the Fulmar, in reality it was used as a ground attack and ASW aircraft rather than a fighter, so even if it didn't carry torpedoes it was more of a replacement for the Barracuda.
Each plane has its own meaning, I see that pilots are always the strongest warriors, this is a good video I like this video 😶😶😶😶
Would you look at that its already dark skies o'clock. I have never been this early to one of your videos, looking foreward to it!
SBD and Swordfish crippled their opponents and replaced with two FUBAR aircraft.
The old Swordfish, although obsolete by the outbreak of the war, still went on to do things that other planes could not. Plus, it served until the end of the war, and also was able to carry air to surface radar.
@@longrider42 Well... because it was better than anything it was replaced with.. It's little wonder we ended up using the American Avenger- we couldn't make naval aircraft properly at all.. the best we came up with was the Seafire, and that was an obvious adaptation and had it's own weaknesses (undercarriage). The Swordfish was solid, and did great service but it really was obsolete, and it's shameful that in 1940- 45 we couldn't even design a plane that was genuinely superior to a biplane. Reminds me of our tank design of WW2.. took us until the final 3 months of the war to make an actual decent tank >.>
The fact that the Swordfish was used in 1940 says more about the decrepit nature of British aircraft design and manufacturing capability.
@@tonyennis1787 Okay, but look at the P-40, it wasn't really fast by the standards of WW2, but it was well built, and good at low altitude, and it served till the end of the war, and it only had that stupid single speed Turbo.
@@stevenread1676while I’d agree with you I think it’s more nuanced. No one had fought carriers before the war and Britain was extremely stretched in its developmental requirements. Fulmars were a very good stop gap and the Firefly’s were excellent. As for tanks I’d just say that they at least didn’t cripple our logistics infrastructure like German tanks did.
As R.J.Mitchel was well aware, select the engine FIRST, then design the plane around it, having first decided what you want the plane to do together with intended speed, altitude, range, and anticipated load plus armaments' etc.
Yay! The editor slowed down the AI voice!
Wonderful introduction video about Successful designed Barakuda plane for RF force during the WW2.
Tirpitz did NOT have triple gun main turrets. Couldn't you find footage of Tirpitz to use?
I swear that the continual mistakes in every video are a deliberate ploy to drive comment numbers.
The 'X' engine was called the Vulture and was indeed an X24 configuration. This engine did cost a few more planes their careers. For example the Westland Whirlwind, the Avro Manchester, the split hull Blackburn flying boat and probably a few more.
The Whirlwind had Rolls Royce Peregrine engines not Vultures.
@@bassetdad437
Yep, correct. Thanks for the heads-up.
It killed the Hawker Tornado. Hawker's first attempt at replacing the Hurricane too.
@@bassetdad437 Indeed and in fact two of these combined into an X configuration, became the failed and unlamented Vulture.
This is the first I've ever even heard of the Fairey Barracuda.
Yes. A interesting aircraft. Knew about the attack on the Tirpitz. But not the history of the aircraft. A group of people are rebuilding one in Britain. Or have.?. Am sure I saw a fleet of Corsair when you said Barracuda. But saved yourself with a picture with a Barracuda and Corsair together later on. I'm glad you did this documentary. The Lancaster get most the credit. A lot of history shows don't mention the aircraft. 👽👍
I've heard the Barracuda called Origami in Metal
The Rolls Royce Merlin engine was the Franks Red Hot of British aviation. They put that S#@t on everything! Heck even the US P51 Mustang got one!
Yep..thanks to RAF who wondered how a Mustang would be with a Merlin up front...they tried it.....and whamo....................
The Mustang (P51) was built for the British to RAF specifications. With it's original Alyson engine its performance was "dissappointing" at altitudes above 15,000 feet. Once equipped with a RR Merlin engine however its performance was totally transformed. Equipped with drop tanks its range was extrodinary and proved an invaluable escort fighter capable of escorting US Bombers "all the way to target". A very capable fighter it dramatically reduced US Bomber Crew losses which had been, up to that point, truly horrendous. Undoubtedly one of the key fighter aircraft of the WW2 ! 🇬🇧🇺🇸
Saw a story where an American pilot standing next to a barracuda said it’s a great machine but it will never replace the aeroplane
Agreed, mostly. Not a lovely plane, but it could be made to work under certain circumstances. Personally, I thought you were going to talk about the Tiffy, a plane that really failed - then found it's niche SPECTACULARLY! (but was still temperamental)😅
"Saving the War"? I hardly think so. As you state, the allies "were closing in on victory", before the operation you mention and Barracudas did not sink Tirpitz. Lancasters capsized 'Tirpitz' using Tallboy 120,000lb bombs (the Barracuda could only take a 2,000lb bombload in comparison). As for the effectiveness of Tirpitz, though involed in some actions, it never itself sank any ships or even fired upon them.
Looks like Grumman could have taught them something about wing folding...
The only thing that America can teach others is how to brag. Usually without foundation
There have been a lot of warplanes designed for a new, cutting edge engine that hadn't even left the prototype stage, but built with an inferior one, because the new, cutting edge engine program was unsuccessful. Almost all of theses combat planes were failures. There have even been a couple of commercial airliners that met this exact fate.
Yes should gone time for a totally different design to fit the engine we can use and forget multi purpose and build different designs for each role.
Or just tell HQ let’s build nothing and use the American planes. That might get actual effort to get the engine they actually needed. And once the battle of Britain was won fighter command did not need top priority anymore after all they got a failure of a raid done primarily to get fighter command something to do. The raid to force the Germans to use their planes against it thus giving fighter command targets.
I actually like the buggers, mainly for it’s heath robinson looks
Excellent Presentation Thankyou
Gimmee a break!
This "Rolls Royce X' he mentions was the Exe, named after the river Exe in Somerset. Surprisingly, to me, it IS pronounced "Ex". Also surprisingly, it was small displacement wise (23 liters, versus the Merlin's 27), slightly lighter than the Merlin, being a 24 cylinder X engine (4 banks of 6 cylinders arranged around a single crankshaft), and used sleeve valves. The other Rolls Royce X engine, the Vulture, used in the Avro Machester, was a lot bigger (42 liters). Not sure why the Exe was named after a river - all of the other Rolls Royce internal combustion engines of the time period were named after birds of prey. The Exe weighed slightly less than the Merlin, and made about the same amount of power, so I suppose using a Merlin in its place makes sense, as did cancelling the project.
*“Old men start it, young men fight it, nobody wins, everybody in the middle dies... and nobody tells the truth!”-John Rambo*
Fairey Aviation had the ability to always be three years behind in technology!
This appears to be well researched with good footage, the narrator is easy to understand. However the music track is unnecessary and irritating.
The only computer game that I didn't disable the music track was the GTA series where the music did add to the game. Unfortunately there are too many factual TH-cam channels that believe you have to have music and it is impossible to turn the noise off other than skipping the video.
At 6:19 an F4U Corsair! At 13:19 mores Corsairs!!! At 14:17 more! They're everywhere!! Except on US Carriers.
They got there eventually in 1945.
Seriously, @ 16:33 you use a DH Mosquito to represent a problem Barracuda?
The Corsairs alone could've carried out bombing attacks against the Tirpitz, it was 10 times the combat aircraft than the Baracuda, faster, more maneuverable and capable of carrying two 500 lb. bombs. It defies logic some of the decisions the FAA made about fighting the war. Alas, nowadays, net even a faint shadow of what they once were.
Was the Corsair suitable for torpedo operations, reconnaissance and anti-submarine patrols? Could it carry 1500 pound bombs and dive bomb?
AFAIK
AT THE TIME
the US considered the corsair too dangerous for a carrier operations, and stuck to Hellcats, so there were corsairs to sell
they didn't care if Brits killed themselves using it, the RN (that had sorted the Seafire's tendency to "float" on landing) sorted the corsair into an effecting carrier fighter,
but I doubt anyone was going to hang a torpedo on one , and Dive-bombing requires a aircraft built for the stress from the ground-up
@@farmerned6 Actually that was a problem, but the biggest issue was logistic. The Hellcat used the same engines as the other carrier types plus as a Grumman product had a more robust design. the Corsair had a different model of engine and many more different parts.
well done!
"....their Fairey foe." Haha!
don' t tell me, his wingman was lou costello.
Yep, that was the plane that, "saved the war", from what, remains a mystery. Another dazzling bit of historical research from the team at Dark Bilge.
I thought the B17 saved the war. Wait it was the P51 that saved the war.
The B17 helped and the P51 was crap until it got the British engine.
@@Charles-k9g5y The original Alison engine would have worked great in it, with the addition of a multi staged turbo super charger, just look at the P-38.
@@longrider42 -- didn’t work well in the P51 regardless of your excuses
@@longrider42 A turbocharger would have entailed a massive redesign of the P51. The P47 had a turbocharger & it was a monster compared to the P51s slender fuselage.
@@bryanwheeler1608 The original P-51 Mustang did not have a turbocharger, but later versions did:
Original P-51
The original P-51 Mustang was designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which lacked a high-altitude supercharger. This limited the plane's performance at high altitudes, and it was primarily used for low-altitude operations.
Rolls-Royce Mustang X
In mid-1942, the Rolls-Royce Mustang X development project replaced the Allison engine with a Rolls-Royce Merlin 65 engine that had a two-stage inter-cooled supercharger.
Turbocharged Allison engine
Later versions of the Allison engine were turbocharged, which significantly improved the plane's high-altitude performance.
The P-51 Mustang was a fighter plane that played a key role in World War II. It had a top speed of nearly 390 miles per hour and a combat range of about 750 miles. With external drop tanks, its range could be extended to 1,375 miles.
Someone is full of it. The dark series has sunk low in the past few months.
If you can do better then have at it or shut up.
They'd have been better off flying Dauntless dive bombers or Grumman TBF Avengers.
It was a dive bomber mentioned in the narrative the presence of "dive brakes", and also evident in the video.
@@declanoleary1 and bloody dangerous to boottrying to pull out!!😊😊
"Saving the War"
I agree with other comments about the start. It doesn’t become clear that this video is about the Barracuda until we are a couple of minutes into it. What ruins the video for me, once again, however, is the cringeworthy way that Tirpitz is pronounced. It is “tir” as in “sir” not tier as in pier. For goodness sake. How I wish the voiceover artist would check his pronunciations before releasing his videos. It’s just so unprofessional.
Quite what a crashing DH Mosquito is doing in this video is also beyond me.
Apart from all that the video was quite interesting.
Keep going but do please take the fair criticism on board. If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing well. Very best wishes, Adrian
Both my parents worked for Fairey during the war. Maybe they shouldn't have bothered...
Should have just replaced the Barracudas with more Corsairs.
"A flying abortion." 😂
The Barracuda was loathed by all of its crew who were sacrificed on the alter of the Fairy company, the people that should never have been allowed to waste desperately needed resources. It did no damage to the Tirpitz which was attacked by the Lancaster's of IX and 617 Sqns and sunk.
Don't forget the awful Fairy Battle. They also made a Naval version of the Defiant, another waste of lives.
Looking back, we should have been allies with Germany, not enemies. Patton was right.
The old adage 'if it looks right it flies right' proved again. The Barracuda looks all wrong.
Now, now, how many planes have John Deere made? As a farm tractor it flies perfectly well.
RAF pilot Bud Abbott and his co-pilot Lou Costello.😁
yup i stoped video after a minute of game ad and wont be returning
The RAF didn't fly Barracuda's it was the fleet air arm of the Royal Navy.
Dug fights and bumming runs. A.I. inglish
Teerpitz?
There were no real issues in the Exe program headed by Arthur Rowledge. At the time of its cancellation, it was producing about the same power as the Merlin but out of 22 litres versus 27 litres for the Merlin. The prototype engine was very reliable. It was a compact engine with a relatively low frontal area and more importantly air-cooled so no radiators (apart from oil) and thus no chin. The Exe was only about 100lbs lighter than the Merlin but required considerably less "support systems" weight.
Like everyone else, silly clickbait title, get some perspective.
It should always have had two engines. Underpowered and with limited firepower, it was a lame duck. Pilots should have received a medal just for taking off. Two engines were needed. The later Gannet, was a superb aircraft
Seven+words for you, because you are great
💙💙💙🌈🌈🌈💙💙💙
Another aircraft NOT in Warthunder
8:44 - then it didn't "End up saving the war," did it??
I am sad that we had to fight our German brothers
Aerodynamic don't exist for this plane lol
*dived
When the money is tight. You settle for what works. Unfortunately someone else has ran by you. Just ask Germany and Japan.
Saving the war? A little hyperbole is fine for the indigestion, but by 1944, that antique kite didn't "save the war," nor would the Tirpitz have won it. Both speculations are ridiculous conjecture. By 1944, sinking the Tirpitz that had only fired once in anger in 1943 and had rotted in the fiord for over a year since then was nothing more than pest control.
Well, as it was British it’s an aeroplane.
*Fairey
1924?!
0:40 Allies closing in to victory in the spring of 1924???
The Swordfish was a better plane and could of been fitted with a cockpit cover and a bigger engine and was better than the Albor
If you say so. Let's call it the Swardwhale.
How about 'Albacore'?@@kenjones2973
Using 'Fairy' in the name of such an ungainly, unwieldy aircraft seems a contradiction in terms, LOL...
These videos sure have a lot of hyperbole in them when the title says, "Ended Up Saving The War".