What do *you* think about the difference between the He 162 and Me 262? *If you enjoyed it, considering supporting the channel for more:* - Patreon www.patreon.com/join/Bismarck -Channel Membership th-cam.com/channels/mpahmxWXajV0-tuMMzSzAg.htmljoin
I think its all about remaining duration of war they could expect in late 44. Shorter war supports W. Messerschmitt's opinion but longer war could justify investment into He-162. With those huge differences in cost etc., its numbers would overtake 262 soon if Germany could still mass-produce anything when 162 was ready for production.
It seems obvious to me that after 1942 German manufacturers were convinced the war was lost and were simply milking the scenario to develop and test new weapons that they thought would be good sellers after the war assuming Germany would still exist. With time fast running out the Me262 made no sense at all while the He162 was with its huge speed advantage on hit and run type of attacks either against ground targets or bombers, cheap and fast construction and single engine made total sense. Had the He162 been developed a few years earlier, and used in ground attack mode, it would have had a significant impact on the progress of the war. It would have been like having thousands of A10 Thunderbolts with no allied equivalent. Put bluntly, German manufactures hastened the end of the war as did the Nazi elite who had selfish, naive and childish emotional preferences.
You mentioned electricity shortages. If there was a power shortage for running the machines, imagine for melting the aluminium from which the 262 was made. About the 162, its fuselage could be made on the sawmills scattered through the forest. By the way, the 162 blueprints survived? Seems a nice poor man's warbird choice.
@@LuqmanHM My guess is: betting on different horses? If one type of engine ran into production problems, the other could take over. And it's also unclear how far an engine's development can 'stretch' (allow for improvement of) its design while the performance of enemy planes steadily increases: having two different designs would quadruple the chances that you have this covered. For example, the Fw-190 allegedly owes part of its existence to the fact that Germany foresaw a shortage of the inline engines used in the Bf-109 and He-111. The use of inline engines itself was a solution to designers believing the rotary engine design was pretty much obsolete because of its drag.
You mean they would have been entirely stuck solid to the runway. Because everything would be well and truly stuck. Now if they had a reasonable supply instead of a massive surplus... Maybe they would have held their planes together.
As a retired industrial engineer I'm amazed that they could build one of these engines with only 700 hours of labor. Especially since WW2 Germany didn't have CNC machines, automation, or decent cutting tools.
Having used a German gear mill from 1943 in my training, I have to say that tools were ok. In my view, the greatest problem was the disturbance of production and sourcing of materials due to the war unfolding overhead. Resorting to forced labour did not improve the situation.
@@daszieher I agree that the machine tools were well built and accurate but they would have had to use high speed steel for their cutters instead of modern carbide and ceramics. This would have resulted in a much longer cycle time. Given that I don't think you could duplicate this engine with modern technology with less than 700 man hours of labor.
When Messerschmitt wrote about this being "beyond company politics", my brain immediately conjured up a black-and-white scene of a German officer reading that statement, turning around and shouting, "Gunther! Bring the grain of salt!". And then an aide would run off and open a large bulkhead door through which two frazzled scientists would usher a cart with the grain of salt. That was it basically, but I still found that image mildly amusing.
@@Rasgonras G'day, Ah, really, eh - what ? (!). Clearly, that'll be your problem then, a nation of manically obedient Anal Retentives...; as neurotic as Buggary, by Jove and by Jingo ! Just(ifiably ?) you all get a good big Tablespoonful of Epsom's Salts into ye, and purge y'selves of all that there Goosey-Steppin's, and suchlike Drama-Queenish pretentiousness.... If ye had been a Nation of Anal Expletives, like the Imperial Brutish ; why then, ye might very well have clung onto your Empire, instead of forfieting the lot in the Great War of One...(?) ! Jokularis jokulii, y'know actually (lol), olde Bean ! Happy Solstice Festival... Have a good one. Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@Rasgonras A broad and flexible sense of self-deprecating sardonic humour helps, considerably, when attempting to underconstumble Australians when we're trying to be funny ,(!). Take it easy... ;-p Ciao !
“I’m not a fan of these ‘what if’ scenarios...” Well said Chris. Since about the 1970s we have been so focused on speculation about what might have happened had the war gone on longer. Even games like Il2 Sturmovik 1946 have contributed to this and a lot of people obsess over “late war German tech”. I know I’m not going to win many friends with this remark but all this has led to a loss of proportion by a lot of people. It doesn’t take a lot of research to realise that German industrial capacity wasn’t just limited by bombing facilities but also by bombing the supply network. The entire German rail system at the end was shambolic. Even the oft-quoted lack of fuel - frequently cited as “the reason why Germany lost the war” - was affected by this. It wasn’t just that there was only limited production, the means by which it would be transported was also under attack. Even Speer says so in his memoir. The reason? The Allies intended it to be this way. People seem blind to this fact. If only they had more pilots. If only they had more fuel. Even the comment about time is likely to be misrepresented at some point. The strategy was to limit and eliminate German industrial capacity. That’s it. That means everything from bombing factories to rail yards to ports and oil refineries. There is close link between these “what if” scenarios and the notion of “the weapon that could have changed the course of the war”. It was never that simple. Once you recognise that, “what if” becomes a sideline. It’s fun but it should never be a substitute for understanding that the defeat of Germany was a much more complex matter.
I think it's actually quite simple: as you said, the Allies were blowing the German logistical network (never one of Germany's strong suits anyway) to smithereens. Battles are won with tactics, campaigns are won with strategy, but wars are won with logistics. Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly. The only real complicating factor is the ingenuity of Germany's methods of mitigating the logistical collapse.
@@benjaminmiddaugh2729 *_"Battles are won with tactics, campaigns are won with strategy, but wars are won with logistics. Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly."_* Hardly simple. We'd have to go into all the different bits they won and lost. I don't know who said wars were won with logistics. Yes, they are the things that keep commanders awake at night but they are far from the only things. The point is that logistics are not the only things that win wars. *_"Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly."_* Yes but don't get the idea that it was simple matter. If it had been simple, the Allies wouldn't have needed Eisenhower to run it. Just getting people to work together in a common goal was one thing: Montgomery and Patton; Harris and Spatz, are just a few examples (personally, I think Harris should have been replaced). Then there are the supply lines, which were never going to be an easy matter. There is a difference between goals and objectives. A goal can be simple enough: to win the war against Germany. The objectives are the roadmap to the end goal and they measure the success or otherwise of the overall campaign. The point that I'm making is that if you simplify to a matter of, "Germany lost the war because X", then there are those who will look for something that might have solved X. Chances are, a single entity to solve that problem doesn't exist. There are people who think that if Germany had build more Maus tanks then the war would have turned out differently. There are those who say the same about German jets. Some point to oil as the biggest problem, others to wrecked infrastructure. There was no, one, single, identifiable factor.
@@thethirdman225 You're right that it's never just one thing. I just wanted to respond to this: "I don't know who said wars were won with logistics." I think it was Gen. Pershing, and the verion of the quote that I'm used to hearing is this: "infantry win battles, logistics win wars."
@@jeffbenton6183 Pershing wasn't the first, though I'm sure you're right that he said it. Sun Tzu takes it even further than that. While logistics and supply chains keep generals awake at night, grand strategy is usually a major player. It starts with decisions made by governments about who they are likely to fight, where it's likely to happen and how well industry and the population can support it. So for example, while Germany had a very competent army and good morale, their grand strategy failed for any number of reasons. Perhaps the one that's overlooked the most is their underlying belief in their own infallibility. Not only did they believe that the lands they were conquering were theirs and the people to be subjugated according to German will but they also believed they were superior to anyone else. It wasn't just Hitler, as everyone says. Ultimately, in the Sun Tzu interpretation, Germany simply didn't have the manpower or industry to support such a war indefinitely. JMHO.
@@drinksnapple8997 Left, I mean *wrong* . Winkle shot down at least 2 aircraft but even better, he flew 487 different aircraft types so was in a unique position to be able to compare the performance of each of these aircraft against the others that he had test flown.
@@drinksnapple8997 Um... you do realise he is more valid in his statements comparing german and allied aircraft than LITERALLY ANYONE ELSE at the time...?
@@drinksnapple8997 yes, he did, I don’t know why you ask this question: he was at one point flying Navy carrier operations. He was a superlative pilot. He was the only survivor when his carrier was sunk, he did the seemingly impossible, working out how to take off and land a Mosquito on a carrier. You need to read more. I suggest Wings on my Sleeve by Capt Eric Brown.
@@drinksnapple8997 Wrong, Brown did have s combat career flying off carriers, and had a number of victories flying Martlets and worked out a successful for fighting the heavily armed Fw Condor. As you may not know, Brown flew and evaluated the flying characteristics of all UK and German advanced types at the RAE. And your bone fides are?
Not so sure just a question of time. Heinkel mentioned how folks at Hirth seem to have consistently underestimate the difficulties of mastering the engineering of jet engines. Jumo 004 was a problematic piece of hardware, and the HeS 0011 was coming along only very slowly. And time was pretty much up for the Germans by August 1944 ...
TIme was just many of the resource issues the Germans faced. Time, skilled labor, raw materials, particularly the strategic metals, the fact that their factories were being bombed repeatedly, etc. etc. And let's not forget how much of that "time" was wasted in the intrigues that characterized the Luftwaffe fighter development program.
I knew a guy about 15 years ago who said he was 262 ground crew and that the machining capabilities by the end of the war was so degraded, the fuel fittings leaked like a sieve so they drew straws to see who had to be the one to go refuel them. He never struck me as a guy that lied about anything and I believe his account.
By the last 2 month of the year this was true about pretty much everything But this was really in the spring of 1945, in the early 1945 (januari and feburary) the industrial capacity was still resonable. Many People belive germany was just brokem.after invasion of normandy. This was far from true. Really the quality was on the way down alreddy since early 1943, but it was still not catasteoficallt bad in february of 1945. What really happened after invasion of normandy was that germany had to split its land power 2 (or really 3) ways, showing the lack of capacity. In the same but opposite way, germany start conserving there fighters in late 1943 early 1944, same as UK did in 1940, making it seam like germany had much worse airpower tha n they really did. This was a rud awakaning i augusti of 1944. There are a buch of reports that ground comandets of the allies thought they would lose the war i the winter of 1944. But germany was using material much faster than it could be replaces making the downfall of 1935 prett är fast
Likely the trouble was the use of "ersatz" rubber for the O-rings on those fuel line fittings. Problems with "Buna" and other "ersatz", or substitute materials (which Germany had also needed to resort to in WWI, and they did some amazing things thanks to having some of the world's greatest chemists) also plagued their AFVs, especially in the freezing weather of the Eastern Front.
@@Devantejah Yes, I'm quite "sure". Buna was actually a BRAND, so obviously there'd been improvements in the makings of gaskets, bushings, o-rings, seals, and other parts utilizing rubber. Most of that came from coal TAR, which Germany did have plenty of. Still, most of the synthetics of the time were inferior to natural rubber products under extreme temperatures. It was actually the United States, facing similar problems when the Japanese took the Dutch East Indies, that made enormous strides in development of synthetic rubber products. Most had already been developed, but didn't have a market due to the higher cost until the imported raw material was cut off. Natural rubber was still a very prized commodity by both sides, as is the basis for the 1965 film "Morituri", involving a German armed freighter, flying the Swedish flag, blockade running from Singapore back to Europe, in 1943.
Here is the impression of the He 162 flown by Captain Eric Brown from "Wings of the Luftwaffe" ..."the aircraft had excellent directional snaking characteristics making it a good gun platform. From this aspect it was the best jet fighter of it's time, and I was certainly in a position to judge, having flown every jet aircraft then in existence. A check on the rate of roll at 400 mph revealed the highest that I had ever experienced outside of the realm of hydraulically-powered ailerons, and the stick force demanded to produce these exhilarating gyrations was delightfully light. Leveling off at 12,000 feet I settled down to another spell of the pleasures of the phenomenal roll rate of this delightful little aeroplane ... I had never met better flying controls ... Even if somewhat underpowered it had a good performance - it could certainly have run rings around the contemporary Meteor. I was to fly the little aeroplane quite frequently"...
Thanks, you've also explained to me why some articles claimed the He 162 had hydraulic controls. It didn't, Eric Brown merely said the He 162 was almost as good. The Germans did use hydraulic boosted controls on the Dornier Do 335 and expected to need to do so with some of the swept wing aircraft they were developing. The BMW 003A would likely have been replaced by the more powerful BMW 003B (900kg thrust) and 003D (1100 kg thrust) both of which featured improved compressors while the 003d received a new turbine and combustion chamber as well)
Had to stop and laugh at 2:35. You can't build a cheap ANYTHING with a BMW engine and nothing is more expensive than a cheap BMW. Sincerely, BMW Car Club member for 15 years and owner of several current and older Bimmers...
You are absolutely right. Read Norbert Hannig, Luftwaffe Fighter Ace: Chapter 4 Fighter Instructor in the Homeland. Hannig tried to teach new pilots to fly fighters when there is a chance they would be shot down while trying to land. Good book.
@@hlynnkeith9334 Hannig was, at the time as a flight instructor, in Prussia (West, East?) so USAAF incursions were rare (though he did experience about 3 of them, I think); that being said, Jet Airfields were VERY heavily defended by flak. Making a strafing on a German airfield was NOT conducive to a Long Career==but that of course meant the 8th AAF made those airfields prime targets for heavy bomber raids.
@@PassportToPimlico - Not if the Me 262 used Rolls Royce engines as Galland suggested. The 262 was let down by the engines, which were hampered by the lack of “Strategic Materials”.
@@TraditionalAnglican Indeed. The allies were fully aware of the strategic materials issues and ensured that they were exacerbated to the upmost. The Germans had the engines that they had and so that was that.
@@zJoriz I think that the issue would be that the RAF could keep more of their jets in the air. Even if the war had continued, that and the fact that the piston engined fighters were staking out the airfields would have neutralised the effectiveness of German jets.
While stationed on a German airfield in 1945 with her unit in the British Army, my mother took a great picture of an ME-262 sitting in a partially collapsed hangar. We still have it in our family photo album. Must be one of the 497 ME-262s that were never repaired.
@@CarlosPF94 Sadly, I don't think I can attach images to this feed. If you know of a way to get the images to you, I can try t find the picture and scan it.
Although I’m not well read on the subject, this makes me wonder how different an attitude and process the Japanese had working out their jet projects (like the Kikka) using the limited technical documentation, resources, and construction knowledge supplied from Germany. Would there have been any similarities in figuring out where to focus production energies, or did the increasingly desperate war situation prohibit thoughts from even getting that far? Kinda had the cartoonish vision of the IJAAF/IJNAF building a 262 from the box art, with a few pages of the instruction manual missing.
I would say that the war would prohibit efforts in trying to deploy the Kikka. IMO if they had the time and resource to produce the Kikka, they should have instead put those resources on to the already existing piston aircraft. Namely the N1K, Ki-84, and Ki-100 which were comparable if not superior in certain respects to late-war allied fighters. Maybe throw the A7M in the list if they got that ready but since at that point they have no viable carrier fleet anyways, I would focus on the existing 3 piston aircraft. Although yes the A7M can still be used from land, but why complicate production if you don't need to? The Kikka is a completely different type of aircraft as it's a jet fighter so existing production is incompatible. Jets are fuel guzzlers, in which Japan is already lacking in. As mentions existing aircraft can already do the job. Even if Kikka is technically superior performance wise, it's not worth the resource compared to the high performance piston aircraft Japan could instead focus on.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 Jet engines run on really crap fuel - piston engines just can’t. Jet engines will run just fine on pine turpentine for example. Japan was supplied a full set of drawings for the Me262 and a sample Jumo engine. The submarine they were sent on was however sunk just outside Singapore - in a spectacular own goal by the Japanese...
For some reason the Japanese just dropped the ball on putting in place an integrated air defense, despite seeing what was happening to the Germans in early 1944. Note: Saipan fell in July of 1944 - so they had time to prepare. AS for the Kikka, the Japanese got pretty far with limited resources/limited knowledge. If there was a bigger effort earlier on in knowledge transfer and prioritization of resources, they could maybe have made more progress, and say gradually build up capability out of reach of bombers/fighter aircraft (say in Korea, or on the western side of the Home Islands).
The HE162 was one of my favorite German WWII aircraft. One of the things I had noticed was that the main landing gear (MLG) doors are nearly identical to the American F-16 MLG doors, after working on the F-16. It is nothing big, but thought it was amusing to see that door design on an aircraft being built 30 years later. With that said, I felt that the HE-162 was the better aircraft compared to the ME-262. For one, Hans Von Ohain who was working for Heinkel, took out a patient on using the Turbo Exhaust to power an aircraft. Ohain presented this idea to Ernst Heinkel who helped to develop into a working engine. Von Ohain successfully demonstrated his first engine, the HeS 1 in 1937. Heinkel then made the first jet aircraft the HE-178. All this development and testing was made in such great secrecy that the German Luftwaffe didn't know about it until Heinkel demonstrated it for them in November 1939. The big problem with that was the HE-178 was slower than the propeller aircraft of the day and it could only fly for about 10 minutes. With the Luftwaffe Generals that didn't have much forward thinking or imagination, they didn't like the aircraft or the jet engine and thought it was a waist of time. Second, the ME-262 with 2 under wing engines was slower than the HE-162 and the HE-162 or any of the other Jet Aircraft that Heinkel was developing on their own, would have been far better, faster and would have had longer flight time than anything Messerschmidt would have developed. But Messerschmidt had the political savvy and the friendship of many on the Nazi party. He was able to get the funding and any of the contracts for development and was able to put a cap on Heinkel. With all that being said, the HE-162 was a problem aircraft. It's biggest problem was that it was made out of wood and mostly glued together. The one thing the Germans lacked during that time was a good dependable glue and there are several films showing this in high speed ground tests of the aircraft coming apart. There are also many reports of the HE-163 coming apart without warning in flight. The second problem was that the HE-162 Volksjäger or Peoples Fighter was supposed to be was easy to fly and glider students in pilot training supposedly were to be able to transfer straight to the HE-162 from Glider training. But the HE-162 was unstable and needed a real good pilot to fly it. Being an unstable aircraft is not a bad thing. All fighter aircraft need to be somewhat unstable to be a good Fighter Aircraft and maneuverable but that requires good pilots to fly them. Also the HE-162 was one of the very first aircraft with an ejection seat and it was required if the pilot needed to bail out with that jet engine just behind the cockpit on top of the fuselage. The link below is of another TH-cam video of a very young German pilot, back then, that flew the HE-162. It's Harald Bauer's presentation about how he, an American by birth, was recruited into the Luftwaffe during the waning days of WWII. He was shot down in 1944 but survived and his story is a good one for those interested in aircraft or WWII history. He later winds up in the US Air Force during the Korean War. th-cam.com/video/xmJqjx9VVKM/w-d-xo.html
This was excellent. Yours is my premier channel for aviation history. As someone in the USA, I have always had a keen interest in European aviation history. The closest alternative channel here for me is "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles", also very good. I have visited the US National Archives to research the early jet testing at Edwards AFB. It is quite an experience touching actual documents, reports, etc., from that time. They allow you to photograph them in a supervised environment. Perhaps it is similar for you? Anyway, thank you so much. I always look forward to your presentations.
Hey, thanks for feedback and support! I'd love to go to NARA in the future, they have so many great documents there, I can't wait. And yes, agreed, I enjoy Greg's channel as well.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory Great. As you may know, there are many National Archives facilities in the USA. I counted roughly 30 of them on their website. An online search should tell you which location holds specific documents you may be interested in. I went to their Riverside facility, east of Los Angeles. There I found many original test documents, paper, not film, like early F-100 trials dealing with the roll coupling issue and the original small vertical tail. There seems to be a lot of stuff from Edwards AFB, perhaps because it is only 100 miles or so from there, though I don't know if proximity plays a role in which facility gets what. Hope you can make the trip.
Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles is a fantastic channel and one of the few american channels I can watch about WW2 without rolling my eyes. That guy does take his topics seriously and puts the research into it instead of just repeating history channel BS.
Very interesting as always! why I Love your channel: you Go beyond the sources and with this comparison provide new insights. And besides all tech-talk you see aspects of warfare always from the strategical viewpoint. TY!
Enjoyed the video. Imagine having to ration electricity! Could you do something similar with the British Gloster Meteor and the De Havilland Vampire sometime?
14:57 "Had there been time" is the underlying problem for all the Wunderwaffe, from the Me-262 to the Ar-234 and Natter and Volksjager and everything else. Have you yet dealt with why the He-280 never went into production? This has always seemed to me to be the greatest missed opportunity.
Same engine supply problems as the 262, but a poorer match for the engines that were available (remember Heinkel designed it for their own engines, which were behind the Jumo 004 in development). Performance of the flying example was lower than that of the 262.
Eh...the 262 development was started before WW2 and was not far behind the He280. The 262 required that much time due to engine development. The He280 would have run into exactly the same issues, with a less advanced airframe.
One aspect that I never seen discussed is the advantage of the position of the engine on top of the He 162. I believe this gave a tremendous advantage over the Me 262 which was limited to operating from concrete runways. He 162s were much safer to operate from grass airstrips...
@@chuckschillingvideos that's a broad generalisation. Yes, they rushed the design and took calculated risks. Yet, there was no point for them to have an unreliable combat aircraft. They were not kamikaze aircraft. Quite the opposite, they wanted to install an ejection seat. Yet, compromises had to be made.
great video as always - odd point from this I finally worked out what the line of dashes under the nose of the ME 262 are for - HIER AUFBOCKEN = JACK UP HERE. I've always liked them because from the front view it looks like the aircraft is smiling
it wouldn't be ready in 1940 it didnt receive its actual engines until 1943 the first flights in 1940 were airframe tests, while it may have been possible to accelerate the programme a little mass production before 1943 is simply out of the question and I'm saying this as a person who thinks the 280 had several advantages over the 262 that may have operationally countered it's technical deficiencies and considering the HE280 was designed for the BMW003 Engine not the Jumo so with engine production issues it could be argued that the He 280 would not have beaten the 262 into service
@@jonsouth1545 I personally think that He 280 could beat 262 into service, if Messerschmitt wasnt favorized and there wouldnt be anyone rooting for his jet even when his program was 1+ year behind
@@jankrajewski1076 It is possible for it to have done but the He280 was plagued with engine problems and none of the engines proposed beat the Jumo 004 into production, and with the Jumo 004 being significantly bigger than the proposed engines fitting them to the 280 would have needed a complete redesign of the 280 thus putting it back even further. The only way for the 280 to enter service first would be to somehow solve the issues with the proposed engines the 280 program went through 4 seperate engines before it finally got cancelled all of them failed. The 280 was plagued with engine issues the HeS8 was the original engine and was cancelled in 1942 due to its Myriad of issues then they tired the HeS11 and HeS30 Neither of them ever went into production before finally they went for the BMW003 which as stated in the video came into production significantly after the Jumo engines.
@@thebunkerparodie6368 i mean it had its problems but so did everything else. if they worked on it germnay could have had jet squads around the same time as tiger 1s...
It must be remembered that the Jumo 004 wasn't used only in the 262, but also in the Arado 234 jet recon/bomber, also requiring two engines per plane and subsequent spares for the inevitable engine failure(s).
I can't remember the exact service life of the Jumos, but I think we can all agree it was not a lot. Three engines per airframe would make sense if the planes got shot down before the engines needed to be replaced anyways, otherwise it would be insufficient...
@@zJoriz 25 hours for the production model. It needs to be said, though, that the prototype Jumos had a much higher engine life. It was mostly the lack of alloys that reduced the engine life to 25 hours....which btw is not that bad by WW2 standarts. Added, due to their complexity piston engines of that time were much harder to service. The engine nacelles of the 262 also made reaching and servicing the Jumos particulary easy.
There was actually a four-engine version of the Arada 234, the "C" version, I believe. That one had itself two variants, one with dual=engine pods on each wing, the other with four separate engine pods. What's often forgotten is that the Me262 had other innovations aside from the jet engines, the most notable being the 35 degree swept wing, itself a radical step in aviation. The Arado, being a straight-wing configuration, was about 80 mph slower at its top speed than the Me262 "Schwalbe" (Swallow), but it cruised at 430 mph, and given that it had a ceiling greater than 30,000 feet, was all but uncatchable. AFAIK, the RAF didn't even attempt to intercept their recon flights over the UK in 1945 with either the Mosquito or the Gloucester Meteor, which in theory had a chance to get the Arado.
The so called short life of the 262 Jumo 004 is exaggerated. It was a third the cost of a V12 piston engine and took only thirty minutes to change. Compared to two days plus for a V12 piston engine. By comparison the American General Electric fitted to their jets in 1949 had only a similar life.
Thanks for this chapter, I like both planes but those were needed 1 year earlier to do something in the war. For me the question is. Why they produce the He 162 when the Henschel Hs 132 was in the final stage of its development.
Different planes for different purposes..It was because the war was going badly for Germany that the He162 came into being. It wouldn't have needed to be developed if the war was going Germany's way. It was a desperation weapon and should be viewed as such. I still think it is a pretty cool plane ..bit more development it could have been a rather sweet plane - but they had no time to do that.
I read that an RAF test pilot rated the Heinkel He-162 very highly. As to the what ifs if the war had carried on, the RAF had moved Gloster Meteors over to the continent to take on the German jets just before the surrender.
Eric Brown (RN) was the test pilot. Wings on My Sleeve is a great read (his autobiography). Both the 262 and 162 were tested by the RAF and Royal Navy after the war against the Meteor and Vampire and found that the Vamp could handle both in a fight easily with the Meteor being unable to compete in a turning fight with either and marginily slower than both in speed, early Meteor F1 and F2s had snaking problems and vibration at higher speeds.
IMHO too much is made of any distinction between a fighter and an interceptor. Both these aircraft were intended to outperform prop fighters so they could get at the bombers, but they were still called fighters. The P-38 was was called an interceptor on paper only because Army policy at the time was to spend no money on development of twin engine fighters. So the officers pushing the P-38 got around that by calling it an interceptor and the label was born. The F-102 and 106 were intended to intercept bombers, only because there was no need to intercept fighters, which did not have the range to fly from the Soviet Union to the United States. But given a gun they could dogfight. The F-104 was designed as an air superiority fighter but many think it was intended as a bomber interceptor. I think interceptor is more of a role than an airframe, and the early radar and missiles that allowed for all weather targeting supported that role. USAF used to call is Air Defense Command squadrons fighter/interceptor squadrons.
@@gort8203 I would say the 262 was more of an interceptor. Large cannons like the 30mm found on the 262 are really meant for larger targets, I'd say the 20mms would make more sense for fighter on fighter engagements (the 30mm had much lower velocity, too)
@@gort8203 No, interception is a very distinct mission on its own. The MiG-31, for example, is a dedicated interceptor. It isn’t designed to do anything else. Whether the argument could be made that the 262 was an interceptor or air superiority fighter is another matter.
@@oblivionguard2286 Yes, the heavy armament was installed to kill robust aircraft like bombers, but my point is that this is still a fighter mission. You don't need to label the airplane an interceptor as though it is restricted to that role. Spitfires and especially Hurricane intercepted bombers, but the RAF called these planes fighters. My point is that interception is type of mission, not not a dedicated type of aircraft.
The He-162 was a good idea on paper, but in the final analysis, the He-162 was inferior to the Me-262 and it was to little too late, and if I had a Time Machine that could travel back in time, I would not use it to help Hitler, this is theoretical thinking.
Heinkel, having been given the same development time frame as Messerschmitt, would have produced a vastly superior jet fighter: Heinkel P.1078, powered by it's own jet engine, the HeS 011.
Outstanding video! Outstanding analyses! 1. The requirements for the Me262 differed from those for the He162. Thus, the two aircraft are not comparable. At least in total. 2. Richard Franks assertion (16:50) about Nazi aircraft manufacturing capacity highlights the difference between scientists and engineers. Scientists assume that shifts are frictionless. Engineers know they are not. 3. After a quick search, I found American aircraft production for 1945 (Jan - Aug): 45,852 of all types; 21,082 fighters. In 1945, the Nazis measured aircraft production in the 100s; Americans, in the 10,000s. (You can't win. You can't break even. You can't even quit the game.) 4. I love videos about airpower logistics and aircraft production almost as much as I love in-the-cockpit videos of WW1 airplanes.
Very good comment. Even if you add sum those German "100's" over the different air frame types, their cooked. Quantity has its own unique quality. I'd love to know where you got the US production #'s. I can only piece bits together where you seem to have found "all types'. THANKS
@@jeffmoore9487 Thank you for the compliment. #s: I searched 'american aircraft production 1945' on duckduckgo.com. A Wikipedia entry came up first (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_aircraft_production_during_World_War_II) and posted the numbers in a convenient table. I confirmed Wikipedia's numbers with 3 other websites from the search page.
I watched both He 162 videos but I'm missing the part where you explain how the users and victims of these aircraft judge the planes! - How do they compare in flight, and in use?
Handley Page attempted to make AVRO manufacture the Halifax when the Manchester failed and came within an ace of doing so, these situations were far from isolated
I would guess probably the same for all intents and purposes, about 10 hours for a good one. Even in the 50's jet engine life was poor. We had some engines from that era at the A&P School I attended and times between overhauls was 50 hours or less for the most part.
@@samsmotzzz2171 As I understand it the Junker Jumo 004 expected life was around 10 hours, 20 hours if treated kindly...are there numbers for the BMW 003?
I have a couple of model gas turbine engines for RC model aircraft. Turboshaft versions are used in model helicopters and the bigger types are used in those Iron Man flying suit things. They run on normal jet fuel with oil mixed in to lubricate the bearings. They have a manufacturers service interval of 20 to 30 hours but mine usually become unreliable after 15 to 20 hours needing an expensive rebuild and new ceramic bearings. They are fun though :)
Numbers are unknown for the 003, but I do know that they were also used on the MiG-9 when the Soviets took half of Germany. The MiG-9 had a better lifespan, better thrust acceleration, and overall quality. The Yak-15 had a captured Jumo engine, and not even the Russians admired its efficiency and lifespan.
The summary is that the bombing of Germany by the Western Allies decided the war in 1942/43 when the development of new airplanes was impeded in multiple ways. At this point almost all of the German industrial output had to spend on fighting the Western Allies. The "hardening" of factories, dispersion etc. retarded everything, from research to design to production. It is inconceivable that under the circumstances any retooling and development even took place. Technically the HE162 was an excellent design (I trust Eric Browns judgment of the matter), the best fighter jet to come out of WWII. You don't need to speculate "what if", it happened. And it was not the idiotic paper only screwed up designed brandished in so many publications. All you have to do is to look at French, American and Russian developments. The Russians got the Junkers team, the French the BMW team (the result was the fabulous Mirage with the ATAR/BMW engine) and the Americans a mixture of all (including the Heinkel radial compressor jets you did not mention). The Nazis almost had to bet the war would last longer, they were doomed, thanks God, either way.
Wow🤯. Great video! I was expecting the same old kind of thing....which this most certainly is NOT! Really informative and interesting, thank you so much for doing this in English; a terrific examination of primary sources. Sadly, I know very little German, despite my unquenchable interest in every aspect of Germany from 1930-1945.
After Stalingrad the War was lost, no matter what they had. The Volksjäger was build under the Project "Jägernotprogramm" and then the SS follow with his own Projekts like the Natter. That all are improvised Things, not to win,only to keep going on. Yes, they had Blueprints of Bombers and Jets that the allied use up to decades later.But they didnt won the war with Jets or any Wunderwaffe,if the Allied were allready in the Reich in 1944.
seing that photo of the underground He-162 factory and hearing how many thousand engines were actually built, really makes me understand the idea behind the 162.
The biggest problem with these designs? About two years too late. Germany realised they had to embrace mass production, but only after they had started to run deficits of equipment, machines and skilled workers. If they had embraced it as early as the start of conflict in russia they might have seen a serious solution. They didn't, and so they found no solution. Meanwhile Russia, France, Britain, the US, even Italy and Japan did see a need to ramp up for wartime production early. But italy and Japan had no resources and France fell too quickly for expansion to take hold. Germany had coal, it had mines, it had steel, it had wood. So assured they were of supremacy they went after projects like the tiger, the panther and mucking about with subs. Meanwhile the Condor was a more significant threat to shipping. Although it did use aviation fuel instead not bunker oil, so maybe it is an unfair comparison... Germany had many of the raw materials. They never had enough rare resources, nor oil to meet every desirable need. Frankly I am surprised they didn't swarm with panzer 4 and Panther backup, supported by stugs towing anti-tank and artillery. Maximum bang, minimum resources. All can do their jobs and use only what they need. Stugs supporting infantry and guarding artillery. Panzer 4s shooting up infantry with panthers in reserve against heavier armour. But German officers didn't have a bigger picture, and hindsight is better that foresight. Frankly if I were in Germany pre world war, I would encourage investment in British realms. Because we know of the oil in the middle-east. So much oil. So europe would be independent of America. But american trade sanctions? So what. The british are our friends, I wonder how the grand fleet would enjoy chewing on the standard class? And if France gets grumpy and you are bosum friends with England? Guess who gets an easy invasion? Poland? Trading partners. Pay them to buy Russian oil, to sell it to you. Although I might have to shank some of the Nazis for racial bias, sorry folks, gotta be done for world peace, but if I could persuade the Keizer to work beside Britain instead of getting into a pointless war, by simply garrisoning troops around towns as a policing force instead of full invasions leading to global conflict that'd be nice.
Hes discussed this before, its quite interesting. Junkers is pronounced Yonkers by some Germans and Yunkers by others, also as Juhnkers by most English speakers so to avoid confusion with another company with a similar nane but spelt with a Y (Yenker maybe?) he just pronounces the J as a British Juh.
Not all languages have pronunciations f letters as English speakers do. Germans pronounce J as Y Mexican speakers pronounce J as H. There are all sorts of these differences between languages.
Huey or Kiowa: which is the better helicopter? They had very different missions, for one thing, so any direct comparison is suspect. Would you want to use a Huey as a forward spotter? A Kiowa to rescue troops? Compare aircraft with similar missions, handling and performance. Just because they were both Germans jets of WWII doesn't mean they are in any way similar.
Interesting comparison, thank you. It seems neither aircraft was a good solution for the Reich’s problem at hand. That is a point Willy Messerschmidt seems to allude to. There is also the elephant in the room issue of lack of experienced pilots and lack of fuel.
Lack of fuel / kerosene/ may solved easy; Not attacked SSSR ,attacked Gibraltar and Malta; also with non-reactions after Pearl Harbour , Rommel had better chance; OKH and Kriegsmarine did amazing small things that may be good for Rommel's DAK.
Given that the Me-262 was a proven effective fighter vs the He-162 often had the annoying tendency to lose wings mid flight, I'd say the Me-262. That said, had the He-162 had the time to resolve the engineering problems, it would have made a decent short range air defense fighter.
As always, a fascinating, well researched and thoughtful analysis! I would like to see a direct comparison of the efficiency and operational lifetimes, etc. between the Junkers 004 and BMW 003 engines. Also, more interesting, I think, is the story of the German engineers from BMW who created the famous Snecma Atar series of engines, engines still in use to this day.
@@michaelharris679 Well, yes, but having hitler youths who had a small amount of training, mostly in gliders, etc., is even more crazy. A good fighter is inherently unstable, easier to maneuver that way, but deadly for the amateur pilot. The 162 probably would have been a good fighter. And having that engine over your head (and slightly to the back) couldn't have been reassuring either. Parachuting out was going to be interesting.
Production values and resources are one thing.....but performance and reliability is another. The latter is something you don't discuss here. So which was better?
Check out Henkel He 280 in late 1940 never accepted due to politics, it had tricycle undercarriage where Messerschmitt 262 had tail wheel and had change to tricycle undercarriage, the 280 had first ever ejection seat and it was used and saved test pilot.
I view the He 162 as the Reich finally realizing that quality doesn't beat quantity, but far too late to make a difference in the grand scheme of things.
Well, the Bf-109 is the most produced fighter in history. They definitely understood the value of quantity from day 1. But as the war went on, it became obvious that they couldn’t compete on that front, not with the Soviet Union, the US and the UK cranking out planes constantly. So their only choice was to go for “wonder weapons“ which could make a difference even if they’re outnumbered. Even the He-162 was such a weapon, albeit a budget one. It probably would have been easier to build more Bf-109s than to develop a new plane from scratch, even if it was a much simpler design than the 109. But no matter how many 109s they would‘ve built, they’d be picked off easily given how outnumbered they were.
@Nephalim Power there’s a difference between not valuing raw numbers and miscalculation. For example, we know that Germany vastly underestimated the amount of tanks the SU had at their disposal. Also, I seem to remember that they - at least slightly - underestimated the amount of planes the Royal Air Force had. Hitler thought that he did have more tanks than the Russians and more planes than the British when in reality it was the opposite, regarding Russian tanks significantly so. At that point, you’re correct of course, it was basically impossible for Germany to turn this around during the war, especially once the raw materials and the fuel got scarce. Which is exactly why they shifted focus during the war towards “wonder weapons“.
@Nephalim Power if they did that, how did they find the time to develop jet planes? Ballistic missiles? Rocket planes? And several of each to boot? That surely took resources away from simply building planes and tanks…
Video is mis-titled. It discusses the question of whether the HE 162 should have been produced at all. As an aircraft, the ME 262 was superior in pretty much every metric.
Absolutely. The sole virtue of the 162 was that it could be produced in greater numbers. But the 262 was actually able to achieve more. Of course, by that stage of the war neither path would have been able to achieve victory for the Nazis, which makes the whole argument irrelevant - however interesting:)
The 262 was the way better airplane. Better airframe. Two engines, and that time, turbines were very independable. More firepower. And if the pilot lost the game, he had a chance to bail out and not being sucked in.
How dependable would you consider a 1944 ejection seat, kickin the pilot upwards at high speed, less than 3 ft ahead of the engine inlet? The Do 335 had a bang seat as well, and yet the rear prop and fin were blast away before ejection. He 162 was projected during the Jägernotprogramm with mainly wooden airframe and intended to be flown by poorly trained unexperienced pilots, so that seat was hardly more than a reason for hope. Insufficient armour and only 2 MGs, compared to normal protection, 4 cannons and more range of the Me 262. Despite 262 had also a flaw of going irreversible nose down above Mach .86 it was definitely the better plane. There are even some replicas around with General Electrics J85 engines, one's operated at Germany.
Heinkel probably had the right basic idea, but it begs the question: What is the point of streamlining the production of one component (airframes), when bottlenecks in other components (engines) or ressources (fuel) cannot be overcome?
@@Paciat That is an entirely different question and is beyond the scope of this video. Imo Kursk wasn't a turning point. It was just another step torward unaviodable defeat. When germany failed to knock britain out of the war by early 41, the writing was on the wall. When they failed to break the organised resistance in the east before the first winter - frankly, I doubt there was ever a serious chance of that happening in the first place - germany was doomed.
@@Bird_Dog00 No, the question is not entirely different. Both questions ask why Germans tried to do things they could not achieve. And my response that Germans replaced logic with blind faith answers your question perfectly. Nor I ever said that Kursk was a turning point. I said the opposite. After Kursk Germany couldnt achieve a turning point and start winning, no matter how much they tried.
@@Paciat The question is different as mine looks at a singe weapon developement program, while yours looks at the war as a whole. I concede that there is some similarity as in both cases they tried to find a solution for a problem that had no "good" solution. But then, that was true for a lot of things the germans did in both World Wars. When you don't see Kursk as a turning point, then why did you choose to bring up this particular battle?
Thanks for these videos. Did I hear correctly that Willy Messerschmidt say that even his own 262 was a bit questionable at this point in the war - late 1944? If so that would be a stunning recognition of reality. Had both of these been even 6 months farther along we might have had a very interesting war history. Personally although the ME 262 is obviously the superior airplane, and had been flying for awhile already I’d push for the HE 162 since it could be produced more quickly.
Nice and detailed content about these two interesting jet fighters. As to the war itself, I wonder if the U.S. would've dropped a nuclear bomb on Germany first had the war continued there past May of 1945.
I would argue no. Germany was already broken at the point that the Bombs were ready, which was June 1945. Japan only reacted after two bombs and those were on the Japanese main land. Dropping bombs on Germany would have had negligible effect.
There was no question, at the time the bombs were ready of Germany fighting on. Ground forces had captured most of Germany, and their cities had already been reduced to rubble by conventional bombing.
Nuking Germany wouldn't have been a good idea. They had stockpiles of radioactive bomb making material and could easily have sent dirty V1 and V2's in retaliation. Enriched Uranium was hard to come by. The Allies could only churn out 2-3 of these low-yield nukes per year.
Late 1944 the war was lost for germans anyway. So well I do not think it did not matter much. If they had been able to produce any of the two in a much larger scale. They would not have had enough fuel nor the needed infrastructure to get them up in the air
Very, very good. Some film clips taken of these types in operation would increase interest. I am very supportive of the fact you do your research and stick to the facts - excellent. You should consider collaborating with Mark Felton tp do a few joint videos - together you would compliment each other.
How in the world is there not more footage of the he-162? Only thing that seems to exist is the first prototype taking off. But you mean to tell me nothing exists when these aircraft were seized and tested in other countries - Russia, France, England, and the U.S. and not one piece of film when the almighty pilot Brown had flown it??
ME-262 will always be one of my favorite fighters. Speaking of jets, have you considered visiting the USA and taking a look at the AR-234 in the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy center?
You have to remember - this was all happening while the war was almost lost - it means, at every level you had problems with resources, developing and production. Mind blowing that they ws able to made it at all. 🤷♂️
The myths about the Wunderwaffen have to be destroyed. There is no way Germany could have pushed back the allies at the end of 1943, even with a large fleet of jet fighters.
I would go way further - it was doomed from September 1939. It would be to long to explain this in detail on what I base my opinion on. Only this: the moment German units crossed the border to Poland Pandora´s box was open. It more or less allowed all nation which later became the Allies to cross swords with Germany and all scenarios from this point on end with the same outcome as it happened in the real world.
@@bigbully1277 Exactly Viewed from my todays knowledge there was a lot of luck on the German side and incompetence from the other sides involded that the German forces did come as far as they did. I can say this without diminishing the real feats and on a tactical, strategic and operational level. But if viewed from a grand strategic perspective it was insane to even think about it
I think it depends what you mean by that. I think it is possible that such a fleet in late '43 could have halted the USAF daylight raids again. Pilots and fuel was less of a problem as well. It would have been at least 6 to 9 months before the Vampire, Meteor and Shooting Star could have been put into service in numbers (although something like the F-86 would have arrived several years earlier as well). That might just have delayed the Normandy landings until later in 44. The ram issue was it couldn't have been done in 43 at all and after that it was too late. The German Army's Kursk offensive in summer 43, on the back of Stalingrad defeat, destroyed the offence force in the East and left too little for a truly defensive strategy thereafter.
@@ronin47-ThorstenFrank I disagree slightly. It actually ended at Pear Harbour when the US committed 65 % of its power to Europe. However, leaving an undefeated UK at the end of 1940, was always going to be a mistake. The UK would have used the Empire and US procurement to defeat Hitler alongside the Soviets even without the US Army. Indeed if UK rearmament had started three years early it would already have been a more difficult challenge in 1939. I would argue the UK was not really war ready until 1943 (it would have been longer without US procurement).
Not a serious issue. The engines wouldn't have been ready any earlier for the 280 than for the 262. Remember that the 262 first flew on a piston engine in what would become the weapons bay, because no jets were available.
Mehr ein Vergleich der beiden Muster unter Industrie-/ Rüstungspolitischen Gesichtspunkten. Weniger eine Klärung der Frage: Welches ist besser. Das wäre freilich eine Frage, die man unter anderem aus aerodynamischer, struktureller, fliegerischer Sicht beleuchten müsste. Und diese Antwort fällt freilich zweifellos zugunsten der Me262 aus.
Interesting video but I must point out that the Me 262A not only more expensive (costs about the double compared to the He 162) but required much more skilled labour and necessitated high quality aluminium. Basically the Me 262A was built around the standard of the 1939 requiring among other things also high precision jigs much subjected to continuous bombings wasting enormous time to be transferred to the forest factories. Finally the vital components of the wings was produced in the Eastern part of Germany, I don't remember where but it is possible around Lübeck and Rostok because there was many factories producing important components for airplanes... , that was ready to be taken over by the Russians
It's interesting to hear what Willy Messerschmitt had to say about this, like you say it's not surprising he didn't think building the He-162 was worth the effort, I think he was right.
Hals und beinbruche mein bruder!! Always enjoy your videos my friend! When I was stationed in Germany back in 1983-1986 I almost got to meet Erich Hartman. Turns out one of the German families that more or less adopted me knew General Hartman's brother! Also, we were out in the field once and I got to speak with a German tanker from WWII. We were having a typical German/English talk in a rasthaus and he drew a picture of the tank her crewed. Turns out he crewed a Jagdpanther! I really enjoyed my time over there.
Both are interesting birds. Both have their place in aviation history. If I wanted to fly 1, it would be the 262 because it seems a little more refined. The 162 reminds me of the v-1 buzz bomb..Great video...
Excellent program! Very astute comparison between the He-162 and the Me-262. Very interesting to see how few man hours it took to build a He-162. I think an often overlooked problem, more than aircraft production, was the lack of critical raw materials and special metals (Nickle, steel alloys, etc) which hindered German jet engine production. An associated problem was, how easy was the He-162 to fly, compared to the Me-262, as Germany was loosing so many of it’s best and most experienced pilots, and if the 162 had been relatively easier to fly, it would have made a difference due to the increasing numbers of younger and less experienced fighter pilots. Again, thanks for another very interesting program!
The He-162 was, imo, the *better* plane if it came first. Sure it was inferior to the 262, but he advantages in production was much better; but as the 262 was first it really split production and this I think ultimately inhibited both.
What an outstanding video, as always. You have brought to light a very important part of war, which is the logistic aspect. Although not as glamorous (perhaps not the correct word) or captivating as combat, it is ultimately at least and often more important. At some point in your video, you talk about the resources required to manufacture the aircraft and the engines. People too often forget that although the Me-262 was a great fighter, and the He-162 was a good fighter, their engines had a very low time between overhauls. Depending upon the engine, the service was between thirty and fifty hours, and in some cases as low as ten hours. This was due to critical shortages of materials such as chromium, nickel,molybdenum, and others. Fuel and skilled pilots were other important resources that were in short supply, and the discussion of the cost and man hours to build was interesting and an important consideration. It is interesting to note that even the U.S.A.A.F. considered the cost and man hours of aircraft, as well as fuel burn. This can be seen in the decision to go with the P-51 over the P-47. Once could build three P-51s for the price of two P-47s, so they decided to stick with the Mustang, even though the P-47 was in many, many ways the better aircraft.
I feel that a major point has been missed in that the performance of the 262 was superior to the 162 such that the latter would have had minimal effect on the allied bombers whereas the 262 would could devastated whole bomber fleets.
Chris one thing that always interests me is why are there no youtube videos (or at least I've yet to come across one) digging into the post war Uk and US tests captured german jets. There must have been detailed technical studies and comparative testing done alongside test pilot views. Eric "Winkle" Brown made very positive comments on the He 162 (and he must have also flown the Me 262).
@@Ulani101 yeah, it’s a little bit different with jet engines. There’s good reasons why we don’t use wooden jets today. Mosquito was a special case and used special wood laminate design that lent itself well to a propeller driven airplane. So yeah, given a choice, I’ll take the Me 262.
If it had ever so slightly more powerful engines I'd prefer the 162, the snap roll for me anyway is much more easy to exploit in the dogfight, and it's generally got what I think is a better EMchart
The better roll was because it was lighter than the 2 engines competitors. If all had unpowered wing surfaces, a lighter jet is easier to control, unless your are some body builder lol. Giving the fact everyone was starving in europe in 1945, i dont think that was possible. Old design junkers g38 had a biplane tail because it was lighter to control in such a big plane. Germany aparently forgot about that and des8gned the me 323 gigant and put smallest female pilot to handle the thing, anna reitsch, for the crew luck she managed to land safely. The gigant need 2 strong pilots to handle the controls lol. So the he162 may be better, but the engines were crap, germany need to build a simpler engine like the post war rollsroyce centrifugal type, not the axial type they had that lasted minutes without expensive alloys.
What do *you* think about the difference between the He 162 and Me 262?
*If you enjoyed it, considering supporting the channel for more:*
- Patreon www.patreon.com/join/Bismarck
-Channel Membership th-cam.com/channels/mpahmxWXajV0-tuMMzSzAg.htmljoin
I think its all about remaining duration of war they could expect in late 44.
Shorter war supports W. Messerschmitt's opinion but longer war could justify investment into He-162. With those huge differences in cost etc., its numbers would overtake 262 soon if Germany could still mass-produce anything when 162 was ready for production.
It seems obvious to me that after 1942 German manufacturers were convinced the war was lost and were simply milking the scenario to develop and test new weapons that they thought would be good sellers after the war assuming Germany would still exist. With time fast running out the Me262 made no sense at all while the He162 was with its huge speed advantage on hit and run type of attacks either against ground targets or bombers, cheap and fast construction and single engine made total sense. Had the He162 been developed a few years earlier, and used in ground attack mode, it would have had a significant impact on the progress of the war. It would have been like having thousands of A10 Thunderbolts with no allied equivalent. Put bluntly, German manufactures hastened the end of the war as did the Nazi elite who had selfish, naive and childish emotional preferences.
You mentioned electricity shortages.
If there was a power shortage for running the machines, imagine for melting the aluminium from which the 262 was made.
About the 162, its fuselage could be made on the sawmills scattered through the forest.
By the way, the 162 blueprints survived? Seems a nice poor man's warbird choice.
Question, why He162 wasn't designed to use jumo 004 engine??
@@LuqmanHM My guess is: betting on different horses? If one type of engine ran into production problems, the other could take over. And it's also unclear how far an engine's development can 'stretch' (allow for improvement of) its design while the performance of enemy planes steadily increases: having two different designs would quadruple the chances that you have this covered.
For example, the Fw-190 allegedly owes part of its existence to the fact that Germany foresaw a shortage of the inline engines used in the Bf-109 and He-111. The use of inline engines itself was a solution to designers believing the rotary engine design was pretty much obsolete because of its drag.
If the Germans had access to ample supplies of Gorilla glue, the fate of the He 162 as a combat aircraft might have been entirely different.
Or some decent nuts, bolts and washers!
Don't forget the all weather duck tape (yes, I mean ducK)!
Imagine germany 1945 with FLEX TAPE
Hi Phil Swift here with the amazing power of Flex Seal! I sawed this He 162 in half...
You mean they would have been entirely stuck solid to the runway.
Because everything would be well and truly stuck.
Now if they had a reasonable supply instead of a massive surplus... Maybe they would have held their planes together.
Someone say He-162 :D
yes Iron, he did. I bet you are happy lol
I was sure you'd be here
He-162 :D
@@kuartz. how
@@TheMadVulpen what?
As a retired industrial engineer I'm amazed that they could build one of these engines with only 700 hours of labor. Especially since WW2 Germany didn't have CNC machines, automation, or decent cutting tools.
Having used a German gear mill from 1943 in my training, I have to say that tools were ok.
In my view, the greatest problem was the disturbance of production and sourcing of materials due to the war unfolding overhead. Resorting to forced labour did not improve the situation.
@@daszieher I agree that the machine tools were well built and accurate but they would have had to use high speed steel for their cutters instead of modern carbide and ceramics. This would have resulted in a much longer cycle time.
Given that I don't think you could duplicate this engine with modern technology with less than 700 man hours of labor.
@@jimfarmer7811 right! Got the point you were making!
@@daszieher you mean slave labour
@@michellearmstrong7903 yes. Forced labour includes, but is not restricted to slave labour.
who is this chris guy he reminds me of a dude online named bismark
I think Chris is his cover name
You mean Bismarck, a friend o BoTime Gaming?
He's Bismarcks evil twin. ;)
4:29 look at the bottom left he is bismark
@@motorsphere356 I know
When Messerschmitt wrote about this being "beyond company politics", my brain immediately conjured up a black-and-white scene of a German officer reading that statement, turning around and shouting, "Gunther! Bring the grain of salt!". And then an aide would run off and open a large bulkhead door through which two frazzled scientists would usher a cart with the grain of salt.
That was it basically, but I still found that image mildly amusing.
😅🤣😂😅🤣😂
Pity us Germans don't take things with grains of salt.
@@Rasgonras
G'day,
Ah, really, eh - what ? (!).
Clearly, that'll be your problem then, a nation of manically obedient Anal Retentives...; as neurotic as Buggary, by Jove and by Jingo !
Just(ifiably ?) you all get a good big Tablespoonful of Epsom's Salts into ye, and purge y'selves of all that there Goosey-Steppin's, and suchlike Drama-Queenish pretentiousness....
If ye had been a Nation of Anal Expletives, like the Imperial Brutish ; why then, ye might very well have clung onto your Empire, instead of forfieting the lot in the Great War of One...(?) !
Jokularis jokulii, y'know actually (lol), olde Bean !
Happy Solstice Festival...
Have a good one.
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@@WarblesOnALot -.O
@@Rasgonras
A broad and flexible sense of self-deprecating sardonic humour helps, considerably, when attempting to underconstumble Australians when we're trying to be funny ,(!).
Take it easy...
;-p
Ciao !
“I’m not a fan of these ‘what if’ scenarios...” Well said Chris. Since about the 1970s we have been so focused on speculation about what might have happened had the war gone on longer. Even games like Il2 Sturmovik 1946 have contributed to this and a lot of people obsess over “late war German tech”. I know I’m not going to win many friends with this remark but all this has led to a loss of proportion by a lot of people. It doesn’t take a lot of research to realise that German industrial capacity wasn’t just limited by bombing facilities but also by bombing the supply network. The entire German rail system at the end was shambolic. Even the oft-quoted lack of fuel - frequently cited as “the reason why Germany lost the war” - was affected by this. It wasn’t just that there was only limited production, the means by which it would be transported was also under attack. Even Speer says so in his memoir.
The reason? The Allies intended it to be this way. People seem blind to this fact. If only they had more pilots. If only they had more fuel. Even the comment about time is likely to be misrepresented at some point. The strategy was to limit and eliminate German industrial capacity. That’s it. That means everything from bombing factories to rail yards to ports and oil refineries.
There is close link between these “what if” scenarios and the notion of “the weapon that could have changed the course of the war”. It was never that simple. Once you recognise that, “what if” becomes a sideline. It’s fun but it should never be a substitute for understanding that the defeat of Germany was a much more complex matter.
I think it's actually quite simple: as you said, the Allies were blowing the German logistical network (never one of Germany's strong suits anyway) to smithereens. Battles are won with tactics, campaigns are won with strategy, but wars are won with logistics. Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly. The only real complicating factor is the ingenuity of Germany's methods of mitigating the logistical collapse.
@@benjaminmiddaugh2729 *_"Battles are won with tactics, campaigns are won with strategy, but wars are won with logistics. Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly."_*
Hardly simple. We'd have to go into all the different bits they won and lost. I don't know who said wars were won with logistics. Yes, they are the things that keep commanders awake at night but they are far from the only things. The point is that logistics are not the only things that win wars.
*_"Eisenhower understood this and strategized accordingly."_*
Yes but don't get the idea that it was simple matter. If it had been simple, the Allies wouldn't have needed Eisenhower to run it. Just getting people to work together in a common goal was one thing: Montgomery and Patton; Harris and Spatz, are just a few examples (personally, I think Harris should have been replaced). Then there are the supply lines, which were never going to be an easy matter. There is a difference between goals and objectives. A goal can be simple enough: to win the war against Germany. The objectives are the roadmap to the end goal and they measure the success or otherwise of the overall campaign.
The point that I'm making is that if you simplify to a matter of, "Germany lost the war because X", then there are those who will look for something that might have solved X. Chances are, a single entity to solve that problem doesn't exist. There are people who think that if Germany had build more Maus tanks then the war would have turned out differently. There are those who say the same about German jets. Some point to oil as the biggest problem, others to wrecked infrastructure. There was no, one, single, identifiable factor.
@@thethirdman225 You're right that it's never just one thing. I just wanted to respond to this: "I don't know who said wars were won with logistics." I think it was Gen. Pershing, and the verion of the quote that I'm used to hearing is this: "infantry win battles, logistics win wars."
@@jeffbenton6183 Pershing wasn't the first, though I'm sure you're right that he said it.
Sun Tzu takes it even further than that. While logistics and supply chains keep generals awake at night, grand strategy is usually a major player. It starts with decisions made by governments about who they are likely to fight, where it's likely to happen and how well industry and the population can support it. So for example, while Germany had a very competent army and good morale, their grand strategy failed for any number of reasons. Perhaps the one that's overlooked the most is their underlying belief in their own infallibility. Not only did they believe that the lands they were conquering were theirs and the people to be subjugated according to German will but they also believed they were superior to anyone else. It wasn't just Hitler, as everyone says. Ultimately, in the Sun Tzu interpretation, Germany simply didn't have the manpower or industry to support such a war indefinitely.
JMHO.
It all depends on what one means by ‘better.‘ Capt. Eric Brown concluded the HE 162 would run rings around the Meteor, had they ever met in combat.
Brown never shot down an airplane, right?
@@drinksnapple8997 Left, I mean *wrong* . Winkle shot down at least 2 aircraft but even better, he flew 487 different aircraft types so was in a unique position to be able to compare the performance of each of these aircraft against the others that he had test flown.
@@drinksnapple8997 Um... you do realise he is more valid in his statements comparing german and allied aircraft than LITERALLY ANYONE ELSE at the time...?
@@drinksnapple8997 yes, he did, I don’t know why you ask this question: he was at one point flying Navy carrier operations. He was a superlative pilot. He was the only survivor when his carrier was sunk, he did the seemingly impossible, working out how to take off and land a Mosquito on a carrier. You need to read more. I suggest Wings on my Sleeve by Capt Eric Brown.
@@drinksnapple8997 Wrong, Brown did have s combat career flying off carriers, and had a number of victories flying Martlets and worked out a successful for fighting the heavily armed Fw Condor. As you may not know, Brown flew and evaluated the flying characteristics of all UK and German advanced types at the RAE. And your bone fides are?
" ...had there been time."
That sums up the problem.
That and space
They was pretty much out of it by 1945 with no where else to go other than to die on the ground they was standing on.
The bigger problem was trained pilots
With Germany of the period, that was to be said about many of their hi-tech ideas.
Not so sure just a question of time. Heinkel mentioned how folks at Hirth seem to have consistently underestimate the difficulties of mastering the engineering of jet engines. Jumo 004 was a problematic piece of hardware, and the HeS 0011 was coming along only very slowly. And time was pretty much up for the Germans by August 1944 ...
TIme was just many of the resource issues the Germans faced. Time, skilled labor, raw materials, particularly the strategic metals, the fact that their factories were being bombed repeatedly, etc. etc. And let's not forget how much of that "time" was wasted in the intrigues that characterized the Luftwaffe fighter development program.
You make outstanding documentaries, thank you. You articulate technical details so well. Keep up the great work 😁
Thank you
I'm speed .. just like the Volksjäger
Hey I use speed to
I'm on speed
me 2
The 262 was faster though.
This indeed was excellent. Thanks for making the point at 19:45, stressing that indeed war is terrible. Although history can be so interesting.
Thanks, TigerTimon!
Agreed 👍
If war is terrible, than why were the Einsatzgruppen so heckin' cute and valid?
- Adûnâi
I knew a guy about 15 years ago who said he was 262 ground crew and that the machining capabilities by the end of the war was so degraded, the fuel fittings leaked like a sieve so they drew straws to see who had to be the one to go refuel them.
He never struck me as a guy that lied about anything and I believe his account.
By the last 2 month of the year this was true about pretty much everything
But this was really in the spring of 1945, in the early 1945 (januari and feburary) the industrial capacity was still resonable.
Many People belive germany was just brokem.after invasion of normandy. This was far from true. Really the quality was on the way down alreddy since early 1943, but it was still not catasteoficallt bad in february of 1945.
What really happened after invasion of normandy was that germany had to split its land power 2 (or really 3) ways, showing the lack of capacity.
In the same but opposite way, germany start conserving there fighters in late 1943 early 1944, same as UK did in 1940, making it seam like germany had much worse airpower tha n they really did. This was a rud awakaning i augusti of 1944.
There are a buch of reports that ground comandets of the allies thought they would lose the war i the winter of 1944. But germany was using material much faster than it could be replaces making the downfall of 1935 prett är fast
Likely the trouble was the use of "ersatz" rubber for the O-rings on those fuel line fittings. Problems with "Buna" and other "ersatz", or substitute materials (which Germany had also needed to resort to in WWI, and they did some amazing things thanks to having some of the world's greatest chemists) also plagued their AFVs, especially in the freezing weather of the Eastern Front.
@@selfdo Are you quite sure that the buna-n was the replacement stuff in ww2 as well as in ww1?
@@Devantejah Yes, I'm quite "sure". Buna was actually a BRAND, so obviously there'd been improvements in the makings of gaskets, bushings, o-rings, seals, and other parts utilizing rubber. Most of that came from coal TAR, which Germany did have plenty of. Still, most of the synthetics of the time were inferior to natural rubber products under extreme temperatures. It was actually the United States, facing similar problems when the Japanese took the Dutch East Indies, that made enormous strides in development of synthetic rubber products. Most had already been developed, but didn't have a market due to the higher cost until the imported raw material was cut off. Natural rubber was still a very prized commodity by both sides, as is the basis for the 1965 film "Morituri", involving a German armed freighter, flying the Swedish flag, blockade running from Singapore back to Europe, in 1943.
@@selfdo Yeah, just curious if you had accidentally mixed up nitrile rubber with something else.
Here is the impression of the He 162 flown by Captain Eric Brown from "Wings of the Luftwaffe"
..."the aircraft had excellent directional snaking characteristics making it a good gun platform. From this aspect it was the best jet fighter of it's time, and I was certainly in a position to judge, having flown every jet aircraft then in existence. A check on the rate of roll at 400 mph revealed the highest that I had ever experienced outside of the realm of hydraulically-powered ailerons, and the stick force demanded to produce these exhilarating gyrations was delightfully light. Leveling off at 12,000 feet I settled down to another spell of the pleasures of the phenomenal roll rate of this delightful little aeroplane ... I had never met better flying controls ... Even if somewhat underpowered it had a good performance - it could certainly have run rings around the contemporary Meteor. I was to fly the little aeroplane quite frequently"...
Thank you this is exactly what I was looking for
Thanks, you've also explained to me why some articles claimed the He 162 had hydraulic controls. It didn't, Eric Brown merely said the He 162 was almost as good. The Germans did use hydraulic boosted controls on the Dornier Do 335 and expected to need to do so with some of the swept wing aircraft they were developing. The BMW 003A would likely have been replaced by the more powerful BMW 003B (900kg thrust) and 003D (1100 kg thrust) both of which featured improved compressors while the 003d received a new turbine and combustion chamber as well)
Had to stop and laugh at 2:35. You can't build a cheap ANYTHING with a BMW engine and nothing is more expensive than a cheap BMW.
Sincerely, BMW Car Club member for 15 years and owner of several current and older Bimmers...
You can't make pilots though. War was over for them, if they were to do anything it should be hand held AA to protect from strafing.
You are absolutely right. Read Norbert Hannig, Luftwaffe Fighter Ace: Chapter 4 Fighter Instructor in the Homeland. Hannig tried to teach new pilots to fly fighters when there is a chance they would be shot down while trying to land. Good book.
@@hlynnkeith9334 Hannig was, at the time as a flight instructor, in Prussia (West, East?) so USAAF incursions were rare (though he did experience about 3 of them, I think); that being said, Jet Airfields were VERY heavily defended by flak. Making a strafing on a German airfield was NOT conducive to a Long Career==but that of course meant the 8th AAF made those airfields prime targets for heavy bomber raids.
Or fuel.......
@@Mugdorna Yes==they also attracted the Attention of The 8th AAF...
Can't make airplane fuel either
Definitely the me 262, the only thing the he-162 was an improvement in was being able to have the engine overheat faster than the Stuka in war thunder
Also cost, agility, visibility, better gun platform, etc..
The 262 was no better, engine life was only 8-10 hours before they self destructed.
Good thing a war thunder match is 5-20 minutes.
@@GeraldMMonroe Not really, they ran out of fuel in 10-12 minutes of flying time, one powered dive and the 262 turned into a glider.
@@georgebarnes8163 And your qualified source is the bar tender in your pub ? Unfortunately those facts have never been told to the 262. :-))
Adolph Galland flew the Gloster Meteor (Argentina post War) & the Me 262. Which was best? He said Me 262 using Rolls Royce engines....
The issue was that it would be the choice of the Meteor in the air or the Messerschmitt in the workshop.
@@PassportToPimlico - Not if the Me 262 used Rolls Royce engines as Galland suggested. The 262 was let down by the engines, which were hampered by the lack of “Strategic Materials”.
@@PassportToPimlico I thought the 262 handled better than the Meteor? Also: 4x 30mm (not that there's anything wrong with Hispanos, but still)
@@TraditionalAnglican Indeed. The allies were fully aware of the strategic materials issues and ensured that they were exacerbated to the upmost. The Germans had the engines that they had and so that was that.
@@zJoriz I think that the issue would be that the RAF could keep more of their jets in the air. Even if the war had continued, that and the fact that the piston engined fighters were staking out the airfields would have neutralised the effectiveness of German jets.
While stationed on a German airfield in 1945 with her unit in the British Army, my mother took a great picture of an ME-262 sitting in a partially collapsed hangar. We still have it in our family photo album. Must be one of the 497 ME-262s that were never repaired.
I'd like to see this
@@CarlosPF94 Sadly, I don't think I can attach images to this feed. If you know of a way to get the images to you, I can try t find the picture and scan it.
Although I’m not well read on the subject, this makes me wonder how different an attitude and process the Japanese had working out their jet projects (like the Kikka) using the limited technical documentation, resources, and construction knowledge supplied from Germany.
Would there have been any similarities in figuring out where to focus production energies, or did the increasingly desperate war situation prohibit thoughts from even getting that far?
Kinda had the cartoonish vision of the IJAAF/IJNAF building a 262 from the box art, with a few pages of the instruction manual missing.
I would say that the war would prohibit efforts in trying to deploy the Kikka.
IMO if they had the time and resource to produce the Kikka, they should have instead put those resources on to the already existing piston aircraft. Namely the N1K, Ki-84, and Ki-100 which were comparable if not superior in certain respects to late-war allied fighters. Maybe throw the A7M in the list if they got that ready but since at that point they have no viable carrier fleet anyways, I would focus on the existing 3 piston aircraft. Although yes the A7M can still be used from land, but why complicate production if you don't need to?
The Kikka is a completely different type of aircraft as it's a jet fighter so existing production is incompatible. Jets are fuel guzzlers, in which Japan is already lacking in. As mentions existing aircraft can already do the job. Even if Kikka is technically superior performance wise, it's not worth the resource compared to the high performance piston aircraft Japan could instead focus on.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 Jet engines run on really crap fuel - piston engines just can’t. Jet engines will run just fine on pine turpentine for example.
Japan was supplied a full set of drawings for the Me262 and a sample Jumo engine. The submarine they were sent on was however sunk just outside Singapore - in a spectacular own goal by the Japanese...
For some reason the Japanese just dropped the ball on putting in place an integrated air defense, despite seeing what was happening to the Germans in early 1944. Note: Saipan fell in July of 1944 - so they had time to prepare.
AS for the Kikka, the Japanese got pretty far with limited resources/limited knowledge. If there was a bigger effort earlier on in knowledge transfer and prioritization of resources, they could maybe have made more progress, and say gradually build up capability out of reach of bombers/fighter aircraft (say in Korea, or on the western side of the Home Islands).
Would have liked to see a functional comparison of their actual combat capabilities.
The HE162 was one of my favorite German WWII aircraft. One of the things I had noticed was that the main landing gear (MLG) doors are nearly identical to the American F-16 MLG doors, after working on the F-16. It is nothing big, but thought it was amusing to see that door design on an aircraft being built 30 years later.
With that said, I felt that the HE-162 was the better aircraft compared to the ME-262. For one, Hans Von Ohain who was working for Heinkel, took out a patient on using the Turbo Exhaust to power an aircraft. Ohain presented this idea to Ernst Heinkel who helped to develop into a working engine. Von Ohain successfully demonstrated his first engine, the HeS 1 in 1937.
Heinkel then made the first jet aircraft the HE-178. All this development and testing was made in such great secrecy that the German Luftwaffe didn't know about it until Heinkel demonstrated it for them in November 1939. The big problem with that was the HE-178 was slower than the propeller aircraft of the day and it could only fly for about 10 minutes. With the Luftwaffe Generals that didn't have much forward thinking or imagination, they didn't like the aircraft or the jet engine and thought it was a waist of time. Second, the ME-262 with 2 under wing engines was slower than the HE-162 and the HE-162 or any of the other Jet Aircraft that Heinkel was developing on their own, would have been far better, faster and would have had longer flight time than anything Messerschmidt would have developed. But Messerschmidt had the political savvy and the friendship of many on the Nazi party. He was able to get the funding and any of the contracts for development and was able to put a cap on Heinkel.
With all that being said, the HE-162 was a problem aircraft. It's biggest problem was that it was made out of wood and mostly glued together. The one thing the Germans lacked during that time was a good dependable glue and there are several films showing this in high speed ground tests of the aircraft coming apart. There are also many reports of the HE-163 coming apart without warning in flight.
The second problem was that the HE-162 Volksjäger or Peoples Fighter was supposed to be was easy to fly and glider students in pilot training supposedly were to be able to transfer straight to the HE-162 from Glider training. But the HE-162 was unstable and needed a real good pilot to fly it. Being an unstable aircraft is not a bad thing. All fighter aircraft need to be somewhat unstable to be a good Fighter Aircraft and maneuverable but that requires good pilots to fly them. Also the HE-162 was one of the very first aircraft with an ejection seat and it was required if the pilot needed to bail out with that jet engine just behind the cockpit on top of the fuselage.
The link below is of another TH-cam video of a very young German pilot, back then, that flew the HE-162. It's Harald Bauer's presentation about how he, an American by birth, was recruited into the Luftwaffe during the waning days of WWII. He was shot down in 1944 but survived and his story is a good one for those interested in aircraft or WWII history. He later winds up in the US Air Force during the Korean War.
th-cam.com/video/xmJqjx9VVKM/w-d-xo.html
This was excellent. Yours is my premier channel for aviation history. As someone in the USA, I have always had a keen interest in European aviation history. The closest alternative channel here for me is "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles", also very good. I have visited the US National Archives to research the early jet testing at Edwards AFB. It is quite an experience touching actual documents, reports, etc., from that time. They allow you to photograph them in a supervised environment. Perhaps it is similar for you? Anyway, thank you so much. I always look forward to your presentations.
Hey, thanks for feedback and support! I'd love to go to NARA in the future, they have so many great documents there, I can't wait. And yes, agreed, I enjoy Greg's channel as well.
Excellent
@@MilitaryAviationHistory Great. As you may know, there are many National Archives facilities in the USA. I counted roughly 30 of them on their website. An online search should tell you which location holds specific documents you may be interested in. I went to their Riverside facility, east of Los Angeles. There I found many original test documents, paper, not film, like early F-100 trials dealing with the roll coupling issue and the original small vertical tail. There seems to be a lot of stuff from Edwards AFB, perhaps because it is only 100 miles or so from there, though I don't know if proximity plays a role in which facility gets what. Hope you can make the trip.
Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles is a fantastic channel and one of the few american channels I can watch about WW2 without rolling my eyes. That guy does take his topics seriously and puts the research into it instead of just repeating history channel BS.
greg has amazing knowledge and chris really does his homework to.both great aviator channels
Very interesting as always! why I Love your channel: you Go beyond the sources and with this comparison provide new insights. And besides all tech-talk you see aspects of warfare always from the strategical viewpoint.
TY!
Enjoyed the video. Imagine having to ration electricity! Could you do something similar with the British Gloster Meteor and the De Havilland Vampire sometime?
I prefer the Vampire, great design.
That was britain in the 70s when the unions got upset
California still has “brown outs” these days
14:57 "Had there been time" is the underlying problem for all the Wunderwaffe, from the Me-262 to the Ar-234 and Natter and Volksjager and everything else. Have you yet dealt with why the He-280 never went into production? This has always seemed to me to be the greatest missed opportunity.
Same engine supply problems as the 262, but a poorer match for the engines that were available (remember Heinkel designed it for their own engines, which were behind the Jumo 004 in development). Performance of the flying example was lower than that of the 262.
Eh...the 262 development was started before WW2 and was not far behind the He280. The 262 required that much time due to engine development. The He280 would have run into exactly the same issues, with a less advanced airframe.
One aspect that I never seen discussed is the advantage of the position of the engine on top of the He 162. I believe this gave a tremendous advantage over the Me 262 which was limited to operating from concrete runways. He 162s were much safer to operate from grass airstrips...
Safety was NEVER a consideration in the development of the He 162.
@@chuckschillingvideos that's a broad generalisation. Yes, they rushed the design and took calculated risks. Yet, there was no point for them to have an unreliable combat aircraft. They were not kamikaze aircraft. Quite the opposite, they wanted to install an ejection seat. Yet, compromises had to be made.
great video as always - odd point from this I finally worked out what the line of dashes under the nose of the ME 262 are for - HIER AUFBOCKEN = JACK UP HERE. I've always liked them because from the front view it looks like the aircraft is smiling
Only one possible answer: start producing the He 280 in 1940.....
it wouldn't be ready in 1940 it didnt receive its actual engines until 1943 the first flights in 1940 were airframe tests, while it may have been possible to accelerate the programme a little mass production before 1943 is simply out of the question and I'm saying this as a person who thinks the 280 had several advantages over the 262 that may have operationally countered it's technical deficiencies and considering the HE280 was designed for the BMW003 Engine not the Jumo so with engine production issues it could be argued that the He 280 would not have beaten the 262 into service
@@jonsouth1545 I personally think that He 280 could beat 262 into service, if Messerschmitt wasnt favorized and there wouldnt be anyone rooting for his jet even when his program was 1+ year behind
@@jankrajewski1076 It is possible for it to have done but the He280 was plagued with engine problems and none of the engines proposed beat the Jumo 004 into production, and with the Jumo 004 being significantly bigger than the proposed engines fitting them to the 280 would have needed a complete redesign of the 280 thus putting it back even further. The only way for the 280 to enter service first would be to somehow solve the issues with the proposed engines the 280 program went through 4 seperate engines before it finally got cancelled all of them failed. The 280 was plagued with engine issues the HeS8 was the original engine and was cancelled in 1942 due to its Myriad of issues then they tired the HeS11 and HeS30 Neither of them ever went into production before finally they went for the BMW003 which as stated in the video came into production significantly after the Jumo engines.
the he 280 also had its problem (particulary the Hes 8 engine and it was verry hard to put the jumo on it)
@@thebunkerparodie6368 i mean it had its problems but so did everything else.
if they worked on it germnay could have had jet squads around the same time as tiger 1s...
It must be remembered that the Jumo 004 wasn't used only in the 262, but also in the Arado 234 jet recon/bomber, also requiring two engines per plane and subsequent spares for the inevitable engine failure(s).
I can't remember the exact service life of the Jumos, but I think we can all agree it was not a lot. Three engines per airframe would make sense if the planes got shot down before the engines needed to be replaced anyways, otherwise it would be insufficient...
@@zJoriz 25 hours for the production model. It needs to be said, though, that the prototype Jumos had a much higher engine life. It was mostly the lack of alloys that reduced the engine life to 25 hours....which btw is not that bad by WW2 standarts. Added, due to their complexity piston engines of that time were much harder to service. The engine nacelles of the 262 also made reaching and servicing the Jumos particulary easy.
*You're right Dr. Trax*
There was actually a four-engine version of the Arada 234, the "C" version, I believe. That one had itself two variants, one with dual=engine pods on each wing, the other with four separate engine pods.
What's often forgotten is that the Me262 had other innovations aside from the jet engines, the most notable being the 35 degree swept wing, itself a radical step in aviation. The Arado, being a straight-wing configuration, was about 80 mph slower at its top speed than the Me262 "Schwalbe" (Swallow), but it cruised at 430 mph, and given that it had a ceiling greater than 30,000 feet, was all but uncatchable. AFAIK, the RAF didn't even attempt to intercept their recon flights over the UK in 1945 with either the Mosquito or the Gloucester Meteor, which in theory had a chance to get the Arado.
The so called short life of the 262 Jumo 004 is exaggerated. It was a third the cost of a V12 piston engine and took only thirty minutes to change. Compared to two days plus for a V12 piston engine. By comparison the American General Electric fitted to their jets in 1949 had only a similar life.
Well thankfully the he-162 was a little too late to be any use however just looking at her lines she was a beautiful little aircraft
Something pretty cool - we have the Me 262 engine exhibited in our school - I have no idea how it got there, but it is there.
that s really awesome!
I like to imagine that it just smashed through the ceiling one day
Thanks for this chapter, I like both planes but those were needed 1 year earlier to do something in the war. For me the question is. Why they produce the He 162 when the Henschel Hs 132 was in the final stage of its development.
Desperation
I would also guess they'd prefer their pilots sitting upright. I know I would.
Different planes for different purposes..It was because the war was going badly for Germany that the He162 came into being. It wouldn't have needed to be developed if the war was going Germany's way. It was a desperation weapon and should be viewed as such. I still think it is a pretty cool plane ..bit more development it could have been a rather sweet plane - but they had no time to do that.
Different planes for different purposes. True
I read that an RAF test pilot rated the Heinkel He-162 very highly. As to the what ifs if the war had carried on, the RAF had moved Gloster Meteors over to the continent to take on the German jets just before the surrender.
If the war had continued then Hamburg would have replaced Hiroshima.
Eric Brown (RN) was the test pilot. Wings on My Sleeve is a great read (his autobiography). Both the 262 and 162 were tested by the RAF and Royal Navy after the war against the Meteor and Vampire and found that the Vamp could handle both in a fight easily with the Meteor being unable to compete in a turning fight with either and marginily slower than both in speed, early Meteor F1 and F2s had snaking problems and vibration at higher speeds.
Imo, the Me 262 was an interceptor, not a dogfighter.
IMHO too much is made of any distinction between a fighter and an interceptor. Both these aircraft were intended to outperform prop fighters so they could get at the bombers, but they were still called fighters.
The P-38 was was called an interceptor on paper only because Army policy at the time was to spend no money on development of twin engine fighters. So the officers pushing the P-38 got around that by calling it an interceptor and the label was born. The F-102 and 106 were intended to intercept bombers, only because there was no need to intercept fighters, which did not have the range to fly from the Soviet Union to the United States. But given a gun they could dogfight. The F-104 was designed as an air superiority fighter but many think it was intended as a bomber interceptor. I think interceptor is more of a role than an airframe, and the early radar and missiles that allowed for all weather targeting supported that role. USAF used to call is Air Defense Command squadrons fighter/interceptor squadrons.
I don't think that the He-162 had an dogfight capability either. With its ''wings''
@@gort8203 I would say the 262 was more of an interceptor. Large cannons like the 30mm found on the 262 are really meant for larger targets, I'd say the 20mms would make more sense for fighter on fighter engagements (the 30mm had much lower velocity, too)
@@gort8203 No, interception is a very distinct mission on its own. The MiG-31, for example, is a dedicated interceptor. It isn’t designed to do anything else. Whether the argument could be made that the 262 was an interceptor or air superiority fighter is another matter.
@@oblivionguard2286 Yes, the heavy armament was installed to kill robust aircraft like bombers, but my point is that this is still a fighter mission. You don't need to label the airplane an interceptor as though it is restricted to that role. Spitfires and especially Hurricane intercepted bombers, but the RAF called these planes fighters. My point is that interception is type of mission, not not a dedicated type of aircraft.
Love your mastery of the English language, well done..!
Das is good ya
The He-162 was a good idea on paper, but in the final analysis, the He-162 was inferior to the Me-262 and it was to little too late, and if I had a Time Machine that could travel back in time, I would not use it to help Hitler, this is theoretical thinking.
Heinkel, having been given the same development time frame as Messerschmitt, would have produced a vastly superior jet fighter: Heinkel P.1078, powered by it's own jet engine, the HeS 011.
Had to google that... looks sweet. I don't think such a short plane would make a stable gun platform though?
They needed cheaper, not better.
@@zJoriz I can imagine poor lateral control, especially if it used the 30mm cannons
Outstanding video! Outstanding analyses!
1. The requirements for the Me262 differed from those for the He162. Thus, the two aircraft are not comparable. At least in total.
2. Richard Franks assertion (16:50) about Nazi aircraft manufacturing capacity highlights the difference between scientists and engineers. Scientists assume that shifts are frictionless. Engineers know they are not.
3. After a quick search, I found American aircraft production for 1945 (Jan - Aug): 45,852 of all types; 21,082 fighters. In 1945, the Nazis measured aircraft production in the 100s; Americans, in the 10,000s. (You can't win. You can't break even. You can't even quit the game.)
4. I love videos about airpower logistics and aircraft production almost as much as I love in-the-cockpit videos of WW1 airplanes.
Very good comment. Even if you add sum those German "100's" over the different air frame types, their cooked. Quantity has its own unique quality.
I'd love to know where you got the US production #'s. I can only piece bits together where you seem to have found "all types'. THANKS
@@jeffmoore9487 Thank you for the compliment.
#s: I searched 'american aircraft production 1945' on duckduckgo.com. A Wikipedia entry came up first (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_aircraft_production_during_World_War_II) and posted the numbers in a convenient table. I confirmed Wikipedia's numbers with 3 other websites from the search page.
I watched both He 162 videos but I'm missing the part where you explain how the users and victims of these aircraft judge the planes! - How do they compare in flight, and in use?
Handley Page attempted to make AVRO manufacture the Halifax when the Manchester failed and came within an ace of doing so, these situations were far from isolated
I'm interested in knowing how the life span of the two engines compared.
I would guess probably the same for all intents and purposes, about 10 hours for a good one. Even in the 50's jet engine life was poor. We had some engines from that era at the A&P School I attended and times between overhauls was 50 hours or less for the most part.
The BMW 003 engine for the He 162 was a lot more efficient than the Junker Jumo 004
@@samsmotzzz2171 As I understand it the Junker Jumo 004 expected life was around 10 hours, 20 hours if treated kindly...are there numbers for the BMW 003?
I have a couple of model gas turbine engines for RC model aircraft. Turboshaft versions are used in model helicopters and the bigger types are used in those Iron Man flying suit things. They run on normal jet fuel with oil mixed in to lubricate the bearings. They have a manufacturers service interval of 20 to 30 hours but mine usually become unreliable after 15 to 20 hours needing an expensive rebuild and new ceramic bearings. They are fun though :)
Numbers are unknown for the 003, but I do know that they were also used on the MiG-9 when the Soviets took half of Germany. The MiG-9 had a better lifespan, better thrust acceleration, and overall quality. The Yak-15 had a captured Jumo engine, and not even the Russians admired its efficiency and lifespan.
That was extremely informative and seeing those numbers is really interesting.
The summary is that the bombing of Germany by the Western Allies decided the war in 1942/43 when the development of new airplanes was impeded in multiple ways. At this point almost all of the German industrial output had to spend on fighting the Western Allies. The "hardening" of factories, dispersion etc. retarded everything, from research to design to production. It is inconceivable that under the circumstances any retooling and development even took place.
Technically the HE162 was an excellent design (I trust Eric Browns judgment of the matter), the best fighter jet to come out of WWII.
You don't need to speculate "what if", it happened. And it was not the idiotic paper only screwed up designed brandished in so many publications. All you have to do is to look at French, American and Russian developments. The Russians got the Junkers team, the French the BMW team (the result was the fabulous Mirage with the ATAR/BMW engine) and the Americans a mixture of all (including the Heinkel radial compressor jets you did not mention).
The Nazis almost had to bet the war would last longer, they were doomed, thanks God, either way.
Wow🤯. Great video! I was expecting the same old kind of thing....which this most certainly is NOT! Really informative and interesting, thank you so much for doing this in English; a terrific examination of primary sources. Sadly, I know very little German, despite my unquenchable interest in every aspect of Germany from 1930-1945.
After Stalingrad the War was lost, no matter what they had.
The Volksjäger was build under the Project "Jägernotprogramm"
and then the SS follow with his own Projekts like the Natter.
That all are improvised Things, not to win,only to keep going on.
Yes, they had Blueprints of Bombers and Jets that the allied
use up to decades later.But they didnt won the war with Jets
or any Wunderwaffe,if the Allied were allready in the Reich in
1944.
seing that photo of the underground He-162 factory and hearing how many thousand engines were actually built, really makes me understand the idea behind the 162.
The biggest problem with these designs? About two years too late.
Germany realised they had to embrace mass production, but only after they had started to run deficits of equipment, machines and skilled workers.
If they had embraced it as early as the start of conflict in russia they might have seen a serious solution. They didn't, and so they found no solution.
Meanwhile Russia, France, Britain, the US, even Italy and Japan did see a need to ramp up for wartime production early. But italy and Japan had no resources and France fell too quickly for expansion to take hold.
Germany had coal, it had mines, it had steel, it had wood. So assured they were of supremacy they went after projects like the tiger, the panther and mucking about with subs. Meanwhile the Condor was a more significant threat to shipping. Although it did use aviation fuel instead not bunker oil, so maybe it is an unfair comparison...
Germany had many of the raw materials. They never had enough rare resources, nor oil to meet every desirable need.
Frankly I am surprised they didn't swarm with panzer 4 and Panther backup, supported by stugs towing anti-tank and artillery.
Maximum bang, minimum resources. All can do their jobs and use only what they need.
Stugs supporting infantry and guarding artillery.
Panzer 4s shooting up infantry with panthers in reserve against heavier armour.
But German officers didn't have a bigger picture, and hindsight is better that foresight.
Frankly if I were in Germany pre world war, I would encourage investment in British realms. Because we know of the oil in the middle-east. So much oil. So europe would be independent of America.
But american trade sanctions? So what. The british are our friends, I wonder how the grand fleet would enjoy chewing on the standard class?
And if France gets grumpy and you are bosum friends with England? Guess who gets an easy invasion?
Poland? Trading partners. Pay them to buy Russian oil, to sell it to you.
Although I might have to shank some of the Nazis for racial bias, sorry folks, gotta be done for world peace, but if I could persuade the Keizer to work beside Britain instead of getting into a pointless war, by simply garrisoning troops around towns as a policing force instead of full invasions leading to global conflict that'd be nice.
Chris, why do you pronounce the "j" in Junkers and Jumo like the English "j" instead of the English "y"?
Hes discussed this before, its quite interesting. Junkers is pronounced Yonkers by some Germans and Yunkers by others, also as Juhnkers by most English speakers so to avoid confusion with another company with a similar nane but spelt with a Y (Yenker maybe?) he just pronounces the J as a British Juh.
Not all languages have pronunciations f letters as English speakers do. Germans pronounce J as Y Mexican speakers pronounce J as H. There are all sorts of these differences between languages.
For me it is Yunkas.
Panzer is also said like "pants her"
Huey or Kiowa: which is the better helicopter?
They had very different missions, for one thing, so any direct comparison is suspect.
Would you want to use a Huey as a forward spotter?
A Kiowa to rescue troops?
Compare aircraft with similar missions, handling and performance.
Just because they were both Germans jets of WWII doesn't mean they are in any way similar.
Interesting comparison, thank you. It seems neither aircraft was a good solution for the Reich’s problem at hand. That is a point Willy Messerschmidt seems to allude to. There is also the elephant in the room issue of lack of experienced pilots and lack of fuel.
Lack of fuel / kerosene/ may solved easy; Not attacked SSSR ,attacked Gibraltar and Malta; also with non-reactions after Pearl Harbour , Rommel had better chance; OKH and Kriegsmarine did amazing small things that may be good for Rommel's DAK.
Given that the Me-262 was a proven effective fighter vs the He-162 often had the annoying tendency to lose wings mid flight, I'd say the Me-262.
That said, had the He-162 had the time to resolve the engineering problems, it would have made a decent short range air defense fighter.
As always, a fascinating, well researched and thoughtful analysis! I would like to see a direct comparison of the efficiency and operational lifetimes, etc. between the Junkers 004 and BMW 003 engines. Also, more interesting, I think, is the story of the German engineers from BMW who created the famous Snecma Atar series of engines, engines still in use to this day.
Me too...
Especially with regard to reliability. Trusting the entire airframe to a single 003 sounds a little nuts.
@@michaelharris679 Well, yes, but having hitler youths who had a small amount of training, mostly in gliders, etc., is even more crazy. A good fighter is inherently unstable, easier to maneuver that way, but deadly for the amateur pilot. The 162 probably would have been a good fighter. And having that engine over your head (and slightly to the back) couldn't have been reassuring either. Parachuting out was going to be interesting.
Production values and resources are one thing.....but performance and reliability is another.
The latter is something you don't discuss here.
So which was better?
You should do a colab with Greg's airplanes
Check out Henkel He 280 in late 1940 never accepted due to politics, it had tricycle undercarriage where Messerschmitt 262 had tail wheel and had change to tricycle undercarriage, the 280 had first ever ejection seat and it was used and saved test pilot.
I view the He 162 as the Reich finally realizing that quality doesn't beat quantity, but far too late to make a difference in the grand scheme of things.
Well, the Bf-109 is the most produced fighter in history.
They definitely understood the value of quantity from day 1. But as the war went on, it became obvious that they couldn’t compete on that front, not with the Soviet Union, the US and the UK cranking out planes constantly.
So their only choice was to go for “wonder weapons“ which could make a difference even if they’re outnumbered.
Even the He-162 was such a weapon, albeit a budget one.
It probably would have been easier to build more Bf-109s than to develop a new plane from scratch, even if it was a much simpler design than the 109. But no matter how many 109s they would‘ve built, they’d be picked off easily given how outnumbered they were.
@Nephalim Power there’s a difference between not valuing raw numbers and miscalculation. For example, we know that Germany vastly underestimated the amount of tanks the SU had at their disposal.
Also, I seem to remember that they - at least slightly - underestimated the amount of planes the Royal Air Force had.
Hitler thought that he did have more tanks than the Russians and more planes than the British when in reality it was the opposite, regarding Russian tanks significantly so.
At that point, you’re correct of course, it was basically impossible for Germany to turn this around during the war, especially once the raw materials and the fuel got scarce. Which is exactly why they shifted focus during the war towards “wonder weapons“.
@Nephalim Power if they did that, how did they find the time to develop jet planes? Ballistic missiles? Rocket planes? And several of each to boot?
That surely took resources away from simply building planes and tanks…
The odd knee culturally order because gateway molecularly expect failing a necessary banjo. glib, hoc sardine
Always a treat to see that you have a new video up on the channel.
Video is mis-titled. It discusses the question of whether the HE 162 should have been produced at all. As an aircraft, the ME 262 was superior in pretty much every metric.
Absolutely. The sole virtue of the 162 was that it could be produced in greater numbers. But the 262 was actually able to achieve more. Of course, by that stage of the war neither path would have been able to achieve victory for the Nazis, which makes the whole argument irrelevant - however interesting:)
The 262 was the way better airplane. Better airframe. Two engines, and that time, turbines were very independable. More firepower. And if the pilot lost the game, he had a chance to bail out and not being sucked in.
Nobody is getting sucked in. It has a ejector seat. Numbers matter. The 262 is not getting to the field.
How dependable would you consider a 1944 ejection seat, kickin the pilot upwards at high speed, less than 3 ft ahead of the engine inlet? The Do 335 had a bang seat as well, and yet the rear prop and fin were blast away before ejection. He 162 was projected during the Jägernotprogramm with mainly wooden airframe and intended to be flown by poorly trained unexperienced pilots, so that seat was hardly more than a reason for hope. Insufficient armour and only 2 MGs, compared to normal protection, 4 cannons and more range of the Me 262. Despite 262 had also a flaw of going irreversible nose down above Mach .86 it was definitely the better plane. There are even some replicas around with General Electrics J85 engines, one's operated at Germany.
I thought you were going to talk about flight characteristics. Not how they were produced and problems like that.
Heinkel probably had the right basic idea, but it begs the question:
What is the point of streamlining the production of one component (airframes), when bottlenecks in other components (engines) or ressources (fuel) cannot be overcome?
And what was the point of fighting that war after Kursk?
Just replace everything that you need with blind faith.
@@Paciat That is an entirely different question and is beyond the scope of this video.
Imo Kursk wasn't a turning point. It was just another step torward unaviodable defeat.
When germany failed to knock britain out of the war by early 41, the writing was on the wall.
When they failed to break the organised resistance in the east before the first winter - frankly, I doubt there was ever a serious chance of that happening in the first place - germany was doomed.
@@Bird_Dog00 No, the question is not entirely different. Both questions ask why Germans tried to do things they could not achieve. And my response that Germans replaced logic with blind faith answers your question perfectly.
Nor I ever said that Kursk was a turning point. I said the opposite. After Kursk Germany couldnt achieve a turning point and start winning, no matter how much they tried.
@@Paciat The question is different as mine looks at a singe weapon developement program, while yours looks at the war as a whole.
I concede that there is some similarity as in both cases they tried to find a solution for a problem that had no "good" solution.
But then, that was true for a lot of things the germans did in both World Wars.
When you don't see Kursk as a turning point, then why did you choose to bring up this particular battle?
Thanks for these videos. Did I hear correctly that Willy Messerschmidt say that even his own 262 was a bit questionable at this point in the war - late 1944? If so that would be a stunning recognition of reality. Had both of these been even 6 months farther along we might have had a very interesting war history. Personally although the ME 262 is obviously the superior airplane, and had been flying for awhile already I’d push for the HE 162 since it could be produced more quickly.
Nice and detailed content about these two interesting jet fighters. As to the war itself, I wonder if the U.S. would've dropped a nuclear bomb on Germany first had the war continued there past May of 1945.
I would argue no. Germany was already broken at the point that the Bombs were ready, which was June 1945. Japan only reacted after two bombs and those were on the Japanese main land. Dropping bombs on Germany would have had negligible effect.
There was no question, at the time the bombs were ready of Germany fighting on. Ground forces had captured most of Germany, and their cities had already been reduced to rubble by conventional bombing.
If by some miracle the d-day landing had failed and the russkies had become stuck somewhere east of poland, certainly berlin would have been nuked
Nuking Germany wouldn't have been a good idea. They had stockpiles of radioactive bomb making material and could easily have sent dirty V1 and V2's in retaliation.
Enriched Uranium was hard to come by. The Allies could only churn out 2-3 of these low-yield nukes per year.
Late 1944 the war was lost for germans anyway. So well I do not think it did not matter much. If they had been able to produce any of the two in a much larger scale. They would not have had enough fuel nor the needed infrastructure to get them up in the air
Very, very good. Some film clips taken of these types in operation would increase interest. I am very supportive of the fact you do your research and stick to the facts - excellent. You should consider collaborating with Mark Felton tp do a few joint videos - together you would compliment each other.
How in the world is there not more footage of the he-162? Only thing that seems to exist is the first prototype taking off. But you mean to tell me nothing exists when these aircraft were seized and tested in other countries - Russia, France, England, and the U.S. and not one piece of film when the almighty pilot Brown had flown it??
ME-262 will always be one of my favorite fighters. Speaking of jets, have you considered visiting the USA and taking a look at the AR-234 in the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy center?
You have to remember - this was all happening while the war was almost lost - it means, at every level you had problems with resources, developing and production. Mind blowing that they ws able to made it at all. 🤷♂️
The myths about the Wunderwaffen have to be destroyed. There is no way Germany could have pushed back the allies at the end of 1943, even with a large fleet of jet fighters.
I would go way further - it was doomed from September 1939. It would be to long to explain this in detail on what I base my opinion on. Only this: the moment German units crossed the border to Poland Pandora´s box was open. It more or less allowed all nation which later became the Allies to cross swords with Germany and all scenarios from this point on end with the same outcome as it happened in the real world.
@@ronin47-ThorstenFrank so many things would have to go incredibly well for the Germans to even have a chance.
@@bigbully1277 Exactly Viewed from my todays knowledge there was a lot of luck on the German side and incompetence from the other sides involded that the German forces did come as far as they did. I can say this without diminishing the real feats and on a tactical, strategic and operational level.
But if viewed from a grand strategic perspective it was insane to even think about it
I think it depends what you mean by that. I think it is possible that such a fleet in late '43 could have halted the USAF daylight raids again. Pilots and fuel was less of a problem as well. It would have been at least 6 to 9 months before the Vampire, Meteor and Shooting Star could have been put into service in numbers (although something like the F-86 would have arrived several years earlier as well). That might just have delayed the Normandy landings until later in 44.
The ram issue was it couldn't have been done in 43 at all and after that it was too late. The German Army's Kursk offensive in summer 43, on the back of Stalingrad defeat, destroyed the offence force in the East and left too little for a truly defensive strategy thereafter.
@@ronin47-ThorstenFrank I disagree slightly. It actually ended at Pear Harbour when the US committed 65 % of its power to Europe. However, leaving an undefeated UK at the end of 1940, was always going to be a mistake. The UK would have used the Empire and US procurement to defeat Hitler alongside the Soviets even without the US Army. Indeed if UK rearmament had started three years early it would already have been a more difficult challenge in 1939. I would argue the UK was not really war ready until 1943 (it would have been longer without US procurement).
Both aircraft were very brilliant designs.
If the Me 262 had come out in the summer of 1943.....it might have changed the Air War....
Jumo is pronounced You-mo. The same with Junkers. Shameful !
I’m this early just saying
hi this early, how are you?
Let’s be thankful the nazi didn’t pick the HE 280 a whole year before the Me 262
Not a serious issue. The engines wouldn't have been ready any earlier for the 280 than for the 262. Remember that the 262 first flew on a piston engine in what would become the weapons bay, because no jets were available.
Thank you for a wonderful and professional work you’ve done regarding this amazing Jets! All the best for you!!
Mehr ein Vergleich der beiden Muster unter Industrie-/ Rüstungspolitischen Gesichtspunkten. Weniger eine Klärung der Frage: Welches ist besser. Das wäre freilich eine Frage, die man unter anderem aus aerodynamischer, struktureller, fliegerischer Sicht beleuchten müsste. Und diese Antwort fällt freilich zweifellos zugunsten der Me262 aus.
Another Outstanding video and presentation.
Thank you!
Pilots and fuel, neither plane could solve those problems
I think both aircraft were similar to the USAF F 15 F16 concept but the US didn't have Germany's war time problems.
Interesting video but I must point out that the Me 262A not only more expensive (costs about the double compared to the He 162) but required much more skilled labour and necessitated high quality aluminium. Basically the Me 262A was built around the standard of the 1939 requiring among other things also high precision jigs much subjected to continuous bombings wasting enormous time to be transferred to the forest factories. Finally the vital components of the wings was produced in the Eastern part of Germany, I don't remember where but it is possible around Lübeck and Rostok because there was many factories producing important components for airplanes...
, that was ready to be taken over by the Russians
The real issue here is that it's impossible to fly A Heinkel or a Messerschmitt without fuel.
And it is hard to convert a production facility to produce a new design while it is on fire.
It's interesting to hear what Willy Messerschmitt had to say about this, like you say it's not surprising he didn't think building the He-162 was worth the effort, I think he was right.
Hals und beinbruche mein bruder!! Always enjoy your videos my friend! When I was stationed in Germany back in 1983-1986 I almost got to meet Erich Hartman. Turns out one of the German families that more or less adopted me knew General Hartman's brother! Also, we were out in the field once and I got to speak with a German tanker from WWII. We were having a typical German/English talk in a rasthaus and he drew a picture of the tank her crewed. Turns out he crewed a Jagdpanther! I really enjoyed my time over there.
the luftwaffe was still trying to develop more fighters like the h229. that appears superior to both the other jets but just late3.
how is this even a question?
of course its the he 162
Both are interesting birds. Both have their place in aviation history. If I wanted to fly 1, it would be the 262 because it seems a little more refined. The 162 reminds me of the v-1 buzz bomb..Great video...
Excellent program! Very astute comparison between the He-162 and the Me-262. Very interesting to see how few man hours it took to build a He-162. I think an often overlooked problem, more than aircraft production, was the lack of critical raw materials and special metals (Nickle, steel alloys, etc) which hindered German jet engine production. An associated problem was, how easy was the He-162 to fly, compared to the Me-262, as Germany was loosing so many of it’s best and most experienced pilots, and if the 162 had been relatively easier to fly, it would have made a difference due to the increasing numbers of younger and less experienced fighter pilots. Again, thanks for another very interesting program!
HE162 was the more modern concept
The He-162 was, imo, the *better* plane if it came first. Sure it was inferior to the 262, but he advantages in production was much better; but as the 262 was first it really split production and this I think ultimately inhibited both.
What an outstanding video, as always. You have brought to light a very important part of war, which is the logistic aspect. Although not as glamorous (perhaps not the correct word) or captivating as combat, it is ultimately at least and often more important.
At some point in your video, you talk about the resources required to manufacture the aircraft and the engines. People too often forget that although the Me-262 was a great fighter, and the He-162 was a good fighter, their engines had a very low time between overhauls. Depending upon the engine, the service was between thirty and fifty hours, and in some cases as low as ten hours. This was due to critical shortages of materials such as chromium, nickel,molybdenum, and others.
Fuel and skilled pilots were other important resources that were in short supply, and the discussion of the cost and man hours to build was interesting and an important consideration. It is interesting to note that even the U.S.A.A.F. considered the cost and man hours of aircraft, as well as fuel burn. This can be seen in the decision to go with the P-51 over the P-47. Once could build three P-51s for the price of two P-47s, so they decided to stick with the Mustang, even though the P-47 was in many, many ways the better aircraft.
Just saying before even watching this video:
*Me 262 SCHWALBE FüR EVVA*
Very well presented, eloquently explained in convincing detail. Thank you.
I feel that a major point has been missed in that the performance of the 262 was superior to the 162 such that the latter would have had minimal effect on the allied bombers whereas the 262 would could devastated whole bomber fleets.
All true. It is even such that the 262 had all features of airplanes capable for speeds close to Mach one. The 162 had not.
Chris one thing that always interests me is why are there no youtube videos (or at least I've yet to come across one) digging into the post war Uk and US tests captured german jets. There must have been detailed technical studies and comparative testing done alongside test pilot views. Eric "Winkle" Brown made very positive comments on the He 162 (and he must have also flown the Me 262).
Favorite video yet! The amount of effort in production and research you put into these videos is astounding.
Pretty sure He-162 had a lot of wooden parts so I would say I’d rather be in the ME-262.
He-162 had an ejector seat.
Wood wasn't a problem. Just ask DeHaviland, and the men who flew Mosquitos.
@@Ulani101 yeah, it’s a little bit different with jet engines. There’s good reasons why we don’t use wooden jets today. Mosquito was a special case and used special wood laminate design that lent itself well to a propeller driven airplane. So yeah, given a choice, I’ll take the Me 262.
If it had ever so slightly more powerful engines I'd prefer the 162, the snap roll for me anyway is much more easy to exploit in the dogfight, and it's generally got what I think is a better EMchart
That's if your airframe doesn't decide to let you down and break apart.
The better roll was because it was lighter than the 2 engines competitors. If all had unpowered wing surfaces, a lighter jet is easier to control, unless your are some body builder lol. Giving the fact everyone was starving in europe in 1945, i dont think that was possible.
Old design junkers g38 had a biplane tail because it was lighter to control in such a big plane. Germany aparently forgot about that and des8gned the me 323 gigant and put smallest female pilot to handle the thing, anna reitsch, for the crew luck she managed to land safely. The gigant need 2 strong pilots to handle the controls lol.
So the he162 may be better, but the engines were crap, germany need to build a simpler engine like the post war rollsroyce centrifugal type, not the axial type they had that lasted minutes without expensive alloys.