The well-known Messerschmitt projects that followed the 109, 110 were surprisingly unsuccessful and technically problematic. The reason was probably that the actual designer of the successful models had a bad dispute with Willy Messerschmitt and left the company. Robert Lusser worked from 1933 at BFW later Messerschmitt. He constructed the Bf 108, the Bf 109 and the world record holder Me 209. The Bf 110 was also developed by Lusser. Before leaving Messerschmitt, he was still working on the basic features of the Me 262. He switched to Messerschmitt's enemy Heinkel, where he constructed the first twinjet fighter in the world, the Heinkel He 280. The Heinkel He 219, the first specialised night fighter, also comes from Lusser's development office.
The Sherman was a very good vehicle for the time and given the limitations of US logistics. The crane on liberty ships was limited to 30 tons. Every tank had to transported over at least one ocean so it never went back for factory upgrades or repairs. All upgrades and repairs had to be done in theater.
One of the things that Howard Hughes pointed out when he was at a Government Hearing on the failure of the Spruce Goose - was that there were A LOT of failed aircraft projects. .
The spruce goose may actually be not a failure but OBE. Similar to the Bearcat or tiger at. The need for the aircraft went away. But the delays by Hughes is partially to blame.
With the Bf109 progressing from the E version to the F it could be argued that the large number of changes to the airframe might have warranted a new model number. This probably would be even more the case for the Spitfire, though.
If the RLM had been a bit smarter, they should have started to phase out the Bf 109 by late 1942 and accelerated development of the Fw 190 versions powered by the Junkers Jumo 213 (which had started bench testing in 1940). The _Luftwaffe_ by late 1943 would have gotten what would have been essentially the Fw 190D-9 by then, and its excellent performance at speed and altitude would have made it vastly harder for the Allies to gain air superiority starting in February 1944.
They should have just developed mw-50 for a regular bmw-801 for 2500hp fw-190, and also lightened construction as much as possible. 190 was way over engineered for a fighter
@@tedarcher9120 Alas, even with MW50 boost, the BMW 801 engine still had altitude limitations above 22,000 feet. The Junkers Jumo 213 didn't suffer from such deficiencies, and as such had the equivalent of the Fw 190D-9 been available one year earlier, it would have had been a nightmare for P-51B/C and P-47D pilots to deal with because the Fw 190D-9 was almost as fast as the American fighters.
Meanwhile Italy made Re.2005 which, after receiving German propeller and uprated engine (still not on Bf 109 K4's output level) casually reached 720km/h, and version with DB603 was expected to go 740km/h or faster. And it did that while being way more maneuvrable (significantly lower wing loading). This just shows how crude Bf 109 design was by the late war standards.
Was expected.... Italy was (in)famous for using "flog the engine, and have low fuel, and no armament" to get the absolute top speed. Not the practical combat loaded top speed.
I like how the "well uh acktuhally, allied equipment was better in every way" 🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓 crowd, conveniently forget how designs made in the 1930s were very well adapted and upgraded to fight them on par all the way up to 1945.
@@BasedpilledandtradmaxxedThe 109 was far too long in the tooth and a poor machine in many ways. It was just that corruption, failures at making a replacement and the difficulty and consequences of changing production that kept the 109 going.
25:01 - One thing you forgot to mention about the Me-509 was that the engine is BEHIND the pilot, which made it like a P-39/P-63, except more extreme. Actually EVERYONE was thinking along these lines towards the end of the war - note the Fisher XP-75, and that design Rolls Royce was working on for their upcoming Crecy 2 stroke V12. It got as far as a fuselage mock-up, and was to use commonly available P-51D wings. Note also the marked resemblance to pretty much nearly all single engined jet fighters from the 1950s. The P-39 was ahead of its time.
The Luftwaffe should have been seriously looking for a successor to the bf109 when it became clear that the RAF had a fighter that could match it, and the shortcomings of the 109 became apparent.
Hitler's attention was always Russia and his strategy was that everything he had was superior to Russian weaponry. The German Luftwaffe had been superior in all aspects he'd encountered. Hitler knew he couldn't invade England or win it's neutrality. He decided a "hold-off" defensive effort of the Allies was sufficient for him to defeat Russian and later deal with the Allies, after the defeat of Russia. Hitler was a genius of politics. He simply bit off more than he could chew. If he'd not been murderous in antisemitism, he might have gotten away with winning WWII. His main enemy was Churchill, who worked tirelessly to drag the U.S.A into fighting the war for the British. As for the continuation of the ME-109, Britain sis the same with the Spitfire. The two economies were similar. Hence their manufacturing abilities were similar. The Joker, a wild card. was the U.S.A. Whomever the U.S.A. supported with material goods would win.
Willy Messerschmitt and the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM - Air Defense Ministry) both acknowledged early on that the successor of the successful Bf-109 should be undertaken. Messerschmitt duly undertook the requisite research and development. But the entire program failed, but not for lack of trying. The Me 209 did not offer any notable improvement over the Bf-109G in terms of speed and armament. In fact the first prototype was slower than the Bf-109G. The later prototype's tricycle gear was a technical advance, giving it a resemblance to the U.S. Army Air Force's P-39 Airacobra. But whatever Messerschmitt tried, the design wasn't proving to be a winner. Messerschmitt had better success tweaking the present Bf-109 design to its penultimate version, the 109K in very late 1944 to early 1945. The 109K could reach 440 mph at altitude. It's armament still retained the potent, two 13mm heavy machine guns in the nose cowling and one MG151 20mm cannon in each wing. But by then the Luftwaffe lacked the necessary numbers of fully trained pilots and aviation fuel was in very short supply. Messerschmitt's winner for late 1944 going into 1945 counted the technological cutting edge Me 262 turbojet fighter interceptor and fighter bomber, but yet an immature weapons system. By then Nazi Germany was living on borrowed time. The Me 262 came out too late, in too few numbers, with too few existing pilots and shortages of fuel. Total defeat lay mere months ahead.
- The biggest problem, other than range, was the landing gear. More Me 109's were lost in takeoff and landing accidents tha to any other cause. So, that is one issue that Messerschmidt should have addressed.
@@scootergeorge7089 Similar to the Spitfire. Didn’t want to upset the production line in effectively creating a new wing to fix the landing gear issue. Nobody, anywhere was designing a new single engined aircraft with the landing gear legs pivoting under the fuselage after 1936.
@@MrJohndoakes You mean the BF109TL? But yes, I do see a lot of the 262 in the 306 airframe. I guess Willy decided to give the 262 a bit of a proven design base?
Most people dont know that the early variants of the bf109 had a 15.1mm motor cannon, it was upgraded to a 20mm motor cannon in 1940. The 15.1mm shell had a very high velocity but it only held 3.2 grams of explosive, while the 20mm mine shell could hold 20 grams of explosive and 2 grams of incendiary filling, which was devastating to aircraft but it had a relatively low muzzle velocity of 1900 FPS, while the mg121 20mm cannon had a better 2,350 FPS muzzle velocity, which was exactly the same muzzle velocity as their 13mm machine guns, the American 12.7mm .50 caliber round had a muzzle velocity of 2,900 FPS and the British and American 20mm cannon had a muzzle velocity of 2,900 FPS, which was better for getting more hits, but the British 20mm cannon HE shell only held around 8 grams of explosive, while the American 20mm cannon shell held around 11 grams of explosive. The British 20mm HE shell was so weak, that on a British fighter armed with 20mm cannons, the standard ammunition load was 50% 20mm AP rounds and 50% 20mm HE shells. It was loaded so that 2 AP would fire, then 2 HE, then 2 AP, then 2 HE, and so forth until the very limited ammunition ran out.
Worth noting the Heinkel submission featured many elements that were difficult to manufacture- the eliptical gull-wing the main problem. The 109 was also developed out of racing planes, just like the spitfire. So they had a track record.
Long ago I read the reason why Bf changed to Me and it was multiple paragraphs and it made no sense to me. Your explanation, "company changed its name", was short and sweet. Maybe it's not the whole story (like I said the original was overly complicated and made no sense) but it's good enough and to the point. I like it.
They never really tackled the flaws of the undercarriage being too narrow for ease of landing, or the very cramped cockpit, and the very limited visibility for the pilot. Thankfully.
Thanks a lot, I love your soothing voice, most of the time I watch your videos in the late evening, find them relaxing, keep them coming! Greetings from Poland!
So did Milch make the correct decision early in the war? Concentrate production on a few flexible models where the basic airframe could be modified and be just good enough but keep the production lines going at full speed. The failure was not the production of aircraft but the lack of new pilot recruit training to replace losses which came to a head in the second half of 1944. Or would overall fighter losses have been less if some of the volume production of standard fighter aircraft been given over to newer higher performance fighter aircraft designs earlier in the war. Were the FW190 & Bf109 good enough for most of the war?
The inverted Benz motors look like they allow even better streamlining than the Rolls Royce types,that plane is possibly the most attractive plane out of WW2,in my eyes.
109’s isn’t not one type. The A/B/C/D’s had very little in common with the E, the E had very little in common with the F, G is closer to the F(depending on G number) Yakovlev fighters are named more appropriately, Yak-7, Yak-1, Yak-9 and Yak-3 all look very similar, like the Bf 109, but are very different aircraft with different capabilities, again like the 109. And the Me/Bf thing seems wrong. In the pilots manual, of the Bf 109, both designations are used interchangeably, same with production documents. There was a switch in designation system, but the Germans didn’t seem to strongly adhere to it. The designation change was from the major factory that drew the plans for the original aircraft, to the lead designer of the team, within that factory, that drew the design. So Bayerisch Flugzeugwerke(Bf) got changed to Messerschmitt(Me), Focke Wulf(Fw) -> Kurt Tank(Ta) with the Ta-152 and 154
Core problem with upgrading the Bf109 was what made it successful in the first place - basic airframe design. The 109 was a strong, central box with an engine bolted to the front, lightweight rear fuselage, lightweight wings on the side and undercarriage on the bottom. So if you couldn't put something extra in that central box, it was a problem. Another problem was common to just about all new WW2 German projects - the lack of really good, new engines.
You missed two of the core failures of the whole Luftwaffe at the time. The obsession with "WunderWaffen", that meant that any crazy idea could get built as long as you could make it sound like a great idea. Secondly, the whole Divebomber obsession. EVERYTHING had to be able to divebomb, even things that should never do so, like strategic bombers...
@@gchampi2 Those are both true, but I was trying to stick to the topic of replacing the 109. Saying that, while the whole 'Wunderwaffen' concept was terrible for warfighting, it was great for the scientists and engineers who really, really didn't want to get sent to the Eastern Front. As I understand it, the divebombing obsession came about because so much of Germany's transport was horse-drawn and not mechanised. So, if you wanted something resembling accurate artillery support for your (mechanised, mobile) front line, a divebomber was your go-to.
I would say there is a big difference between the Bf-109B/C/D and even E to the redesigned 109F, in fact they should have called her the Bf-209 at that point considering the total new design. I think they kept the name 109 because it was a good way to hide the F introduction until it met the Spitfires and hunted them back to their AAA cover! Not to mention what Hans Joachim Marseille was able to do with it in Africa against Spitfire, P-39, P-40 and Hurricane. The F in combination with the FW-190A-2/3 were certainly responsible for Britain to rethink their Fighter Sweep's for more than a year!
With the exception of the BV 155, everything else here had three-bladed propeller engines. The reason? Fuselage-mounted armament. A cannon firing through the spinner, wing-mounted guns, OK, but try synchronising those guns sitting on top of the engine with FOUR blades! The Spitfire began life with two blades and ended with five, moving from three to four with the jump from the Mk V to the Mk IX. The P-47, P-51 and F4U evolved from three to four blades. Germany stubbornly refused to move on...
Good observation. I would like to add the following: It is noticable that while the Germans kept the three blade design, they increased the surface area of the blades substantially. Making them almost (but not equally) as effective as 4 or 5 blade props. The issue is that propeller hubs need to be reinforced and increased in size, and more space is needed for the extra blade angle linkages if more blades are added. Bigger hubs mean engine cannons can no longer fire through the hub. And German designers loved engine cannons!
Thank you ! good vid The Germans had no shortage of innovative designs! But what i have contended all along is the bf/ Me -109 is one of the greatest fighter planes of all time when you factor in all considerations , smallness of size,cost of production,amount manufactured,sevicability and a massively succesfull battle record 30000-00 + kills ! Most of the great experten flew the 109 and many by preference,it could still do certain things better than the much vaunted fw - 190 (also a fantastic plane) the 109 was lighter and generally more nimble! The factories were tooled up for production of this proven platform that took under 5000 manhours to build compared to the marvelous and beautifull Spitfires almost 20000 man hours , the 109 was the pragmatic choice and did a lot of things well enough and one thing exceptionally well which was energy fighting (taking the fight into the vertical,it's high power to weight ratio afforded it an exceptional acceleration and climb rate),the Soviet Yak - 3 was the other plane that shone in the fast climbing department as well,also posessing a similarly high power/weight ratio!
Usual TH-cam comment. Late production of the 109 took a claimed 5000 hours…which of course didn’t include forced and slave labour. The figure you quote for the spitfire is for the early variants and includes man hours taken in design, tooling and production. Try comparing like with like.
@@annoyingbstard9407 i can't believe man hours could be counted that way,the design and tooling time is counted into every fighter built, doesn't make sense to me 🤣🤪 the British reached out to their big bully brother across the pond to assist with fighter production asking for the P- 40 to begin with, i suspect the Spitfires long production time had something to do with that ? (Might be wrong ,suspect)
I reckon the Me 109 frame (Ha 1112) would be an elegant and simple quick ship around the pylons if it were to receive the modern Yak-11 mods with an R-2000 (possibly an R-2800 could be shoe horned in), maybe call it "Hun-O-nein" or something. I know that one example had a P&W twin wasp fitted before the war, nothing much on it though ( Bf 109 V21).
The Sherman tank didn't have top ratings in firepower, armor or maneuverability. But it was #1 in the entire war for reliability and crew survivability: everyone had their own hatch, I think. And I think only like 69 Sherman-crew soldiers died in the war. Leastways, it was a number so small it just don't make sense.
The 309s nosewheel had a lot of problems with collapsing right? This shows what would be the main problem with tricycle undercarriages on conventional ww2 fighters - too much stress on the nosewheel due to being under a heavy piston engine.
It had a whole raft of problems, but from the reports of their test flights, getting it to retract then drop again was a big issue. And if it couldn't retract, then it severely affected airflow to the radiator. You'd think getting the undercarriage to work would be relatively simple, but apparently not.
The Me309 gear system was grafted on to the Me262. Literally - the gear was removed from the prototype 309 to fit to the 262. That was because the Me262 had trouble takeoff and was setting fire to both grass and tarmac runways.
BF109's had a 20 to 30 minute flight time over London depending on fuel settings the pilots selected it could be much less. All piston engines had this same issue that pilots needed to have drilled into their brains on the ground. Also in many guns they used Glycol from the engines to keep guns cooled at low altitudes and from freezing at higher altitudes. Pilots had to manage those settings in combat or they could find their guns inoperable.
thb The Me 309, though ultimately cancelled, held significant potential as a superior fighter design during World War II. Compared to the iconic P51 Mustang, the Me 309 had notable advantages in speed and performance. While the P-51D Mustang achieved around 437 mph (703 km/h) at high altitudes, the Me 309 was designed to reach top speeds closer to 460 mph (740 km/h), giving it a crucial advantage in speed across all altitudes. especially at low alt with some documents saying it can fly with 3 guns likely (1 20mm and 2 13mm or 15mm ) can achieve 626km or some 400mph which is one of the fastest top 5 planes in ww2 record Regarding manoeuvrability, the Me 309 drew on the design principles of its predecessor, the Bf 109, while introducing improvements to aerodynamics and engine performance. Although heavier than earlier Bf 109 variants, the Me 309 was expected to maintain competitive turn performance, making it comparable to the late-war Bf 109G series. which is impressive because the p51 couldn't match that This balance of speed and maneuverability meant the Me 309 could have outpaced many of its contemporaries, including the P-51, while still holding its own in a turn fight. Speed was a critical factor in the evolving aerial combat of 1942-1943. As many aces emphasized, "speed is life"-it provided the energy advantage needed to control engagements. The Me 309 was designed with this in mind, making it a prime candidate to counter the P-51 Mustang’s speed while also offering better maneuverability than other late-war German fighters. With its advanced features and higher speed, the Me 309 could have excelled in hit-and-run tactics, allowing pilots to dictate the terms of combat and disengage at will. Had it been mass-produced, the Me 309 could have played a pivotal role in maintaining air superiority for the Luftwaffe, especially as Allied aircraft became faster and more powerful (p51-30 with 1700hp p47-28 with it massive 2888hp p38 with twin 1700hp). Unfortunately, due to production delays and technical setbacks, the program was abandoned in Favor of other projects, but the Me 309 remains a testament to the innovative engineering of late-war German aircraft
The 509 looks a bit like the RN seahawk with a propeller. The 309s tail has definate hints of 262 Interesting that it all effectively came down to production effort and all using pretty much the same engines. But at least the engines worked well unlike so many British projects that were blighted by underperforming new engine designs. I think several american models had the same problem with engines that didnt perform to promose.
The Germans were always a year or two behind in mindset. The didn't really enter total mobilization mode until late 43 when they should have done so two years earlier. The 209 like the 210/410, 177 and so many other aircraft were not only chasing requirements from yesteryears, they were doing so with industrial assumptions from two years ago. The solution to the piston engine fighter problem until the conversion to a pure jet luftwaffe should have been to simply RE-WING the 109 and adding versions of the DB605 with multi-stage supercharging. This will take care of most of the problems. And, it is not like they have not re-winged the 109 before; they did exactly that with the Ferret model. Thinner, higher aspect ratio wings with inward swinging gears and wing root MG151s and integral outboard tanks that can be flown dry in short range interception will give hem most of what they wanted. The fuselage can be identical to the F-models or lengthened slightly like they did with the Dora 190s if a little extra room is needed for multi-stage, multi-speed, supercharging.
The 109 had some issues that never can be really shown in a spec sheet, importantly being hard to handle (only experienced pilots were assigned to 109s and oghers would be given 190s), the cockpit was VERY cramped and not well laid out, and it was very fragile, especially in the wings. It was also very hard to upgrade due to the diminutive airframe and wright being added made it lose a lot more agility. Imo the true successor to the 109 would've been the He100.
Willi Messerschmidt himself and the german pilots back in the day all called the plane Me 109, not Bf 109. And in Germany we don't say M-e 109, we say Meh 109. So we also should call it Me 109.
The video is wrong. The Me 309 was intended to be the successor from 1940 onwards. The Fw 190 was introduced as an interim fighter to supplement the Bf 109 but the intention was there from the start to replace the 109 with the new larger, faster, better armed, more stable Me 309. Messerschmitt Me 309 Development & Politics by Dan Sharp and Callum Douglas detail this.
The BF 109 was a singular use weapon it did not lend itself to much in the way of modification except a change in engine. And the engine it had, at least from the 601 and up, was probably the best engine of the war and that includes the Rolls-Royce that went into the Mustangs in the later spitfires. We know this because when the Germans got a hold of a Spitfire and put a 601 engine in it. It was not only faster than any other Spitfire on the planet it also flew with a 5,000 ft higher ceiling than any other Spitfire on the planet. Can you imagine what would have happened had we stolen the plans for the 600 series engines and started putting them into the mustangs? The larger 309 would have lent itself to being much more adaptive than the 109 ever was and they 109 would never get rid of it's tendency to have the landing gear collapse if you didn't land it exactly properly. The biggest advantage of the BF 109 actually had is it was quite small, making it harder to see.
Generally it’s best not to believe everything claimed by the Germans that appears to confirm their engineering superiority. Especially unsupported claims on the internet.
In the automotive sense, the Sherman was the best tank in the war. In the field, a tank that always runs, has crew room/ergonomics, a functioning heater & ventilation, seldom breaks, and is easy to fix is a hell of a thing. A broken better tank is not a better tank when you are trying to win a war and not a tank show.
... The Sherman was very reliable, which eased the logistic strain of keeping it operating an ocean apart from its factories, came with a well balanced provision of share oarts and had a great ergonomics. It was designed as a part of a whole, giving consideration to needs beyond direct tank on tank confrontations. Some late war German tanks had more "bling", but their logistic footprint was sometimes horrendous (Tiger, oh, Tiger) and power-train failures killed more Tigers and Panthers than the enemy did.
History has shown that a faster fighter is a successful fighter, just look at how the ultimate in manouvrebility, the Zero, was outclassed by the Hellcat and Corsair, which were 100 MPH faster.
Aviation Deep Dive did a pretty good video on it. AllthingsWW2 has a shorter one also, but I like the other better. It's a cool design, just ended up being a resource sink though that Germany really couldn't afford to follow through with into full production.
Correct, The Germans obtained the British powerplant (due to a lack of available German engines at the time), in exchange for for a Single He 70 (which first flew on 1 December 1932) for use as an engine test bed. Around the same time the Supermarine was designing the Supermarine Type 224 (first flight 19 February 1934), which proved to be a very big disappointment, Leading to Mitchell coming up with a brand new design which later became the "Spitfire"
The video missed the Me.109Z, which joined two Bf.109 fighters into one plane. A prototype was built, but destroyed by bombing and the project did not carry on. So the Me 309Z was not a new thing to Messerschmitt.
Interesting. I knew all sorts of crazy German designs and prototypes, and I hadn't even seen this fairly "normal" fighter designs. I thought they just wanted to make the BF 109 with a different landing gear.
Obviously Milch didn't recognize the BoB as the strategic defeat that it was. Nor did he recognize the need for an aircraft that could fight at distance. An improvement that could've helped them win.
All of the combatants were guilty of continued production of obsolete designs , The British with the Hurricane , Japanese and the Zero , America and the P-40 , Russia the Lagg 3. With the Hurricane and P-40 they could continue to perform at the front line , because there was little opposition . Not so good for the Russians and Japanese , whose pilots were shot down in droves.
I doubt that an improved model like the 309 would have made much difference in the end. In the West the Luftwaffe was overwhelmed by sheer numbers, firstly by P47s and then later by P51s. Even though an individual BF 109G could out-turn and out-climb a single P47, it made no difference because the next P47 and the ones following would pick it off as it tried to climb and turn away. The basic problem was that Germany was being out produced by America.
The bigger problems which led to that situation in the first place was: Lack of pilot training Lack of high octane fuel (caused by a lack or CRUDE oil) Lack of high output engines due to lack of high octane fuel Lack of production output of aircraft (output not ramped up until it was too late) Lack of resources to fight everyone at once (Africa, the Eastern front, the Western front) Lack of correct intelligence, leading to military blunders and equipment losses Plus actual strategic losses. Otherwise the bomber mafia would have ensured that the Germans would have been able to repel the bombing campaign (until someone with brains came along). And in line with that, It wasn't until Jimmy Doolittle came along and changed the tactics, that the Allies started to win the air war over Europe. Which made it impossible for Germany to be able to fight back effectively.
Re the conclusion that a huge quantity of good fighter was better for the Germans than a smaller quantity of better fighters. The reality was that while Germany was not lacking for airplanes in the final year of the war, it was definitely lacking experienced pilots, as so many had been killed. Perhaps disrupting production lines to produce better fighters would have been the better strategy after all.
Maybe they should have set up a system where their experienced pilots after spending a certain amount of time on the frontline get roated out and given a trainer role in the pilot schools so they can pass down their practical knowledge to the next wave of beginners so that the graduates will come with knowledge of what is actually useful in the conditions a pilot would experienced. This is what the Americans and eventually the British did. Meanwhile the Axis powers kept their best pilots on near nonstop combat service while this did lead to the Axis aces having higher kill counts it did lead to significantly higher rate of attritions so that by the late stage of the war the axis had lost most of their great pilots and tried to replace them by shorting the training time of their new pilots which had a severe drop in quality of their pilots
I never understood why they considered the 309 a failure. It carries almost literally 1 Ton of extra armament compared to the regular 109, while delivering the same performance or slighty faster depending where you read about it.
Enormous range, literally 1 extra ton worth of armament due to the extra 20mm and 13mm, 50km/h faster, landing gear not actively trying to kill the pilot and a bunch of QOL features. If this isn't a big improvement i don't know what it is.
It has been stated that 309 was costlier and would take longer to build. This and the fact that production models would not be a major upgrade to the latest versions of the 109
That's basically the way technology works, when a sort of machine is first developed, there is a huge diversity of designs and philosophies. Over time it becomes clear what are the "right" and "wrong" ways to make that sort of machine and various designs and operators become increasingly similar. Compare the Wild West of early Cold War jets to the onslaught of fifth-generation F-22 clones we have today.
Interesting that such a capable aircraft company, that could bring out dozen of new aircraft in wartime conditions but couldn’t crack this one, shame as the 309 was a spiffy looking plane 😉........off topic but modern parallel to me feels a bit like the F16, with incredibly long production, a million developments & upgrades but, as far as I’m aware, still no replacement on the horizon. ( the F35 certainly isn’t it)🤔
The 309 was designed to rectify some rather obvious problems with The 109 (notably short range and cramped cockpit) but the front and rear wheels look too close together to my layman's eye.
0:47 I always hear people say that Germany had plans to conquer the whole planet. I would like to know where people got this idea, Man in the High Castle or something?
Anyone ever wandered how a good old ww2 bomber formation would do today Like obviously it wouldnt go well, but just the confusion of hundereds of radar pings at once slowly aproching is fun to think about Also most ofthe modern aa defences are made to 100% kill like 1-4 targets with a missile or smol and fast burst... How would it do aginst numbers
@ralphe5842 No offense, but you're wrong. The production Bf 109 D did not use the DB 600, certainly not! It is unbelievable that even in the 21st century, some "popular science" literature is still spreading this WWII German propaganda. In addition to other prototypes, there were only two promotional so-called "Bf 109 D", equipped with a DB 600 engine! However, with hundreds of photos with changing markings purely for Goebbels propaganda! As the Jumo 210 G was neither very reliable nor produced in sufficient numbers, it was decided to replace it before all 58 production Bf 109 C were completed, with the older reliable but weaker Jumo 210 D model, (same engine as the Bf 109 B). The result was the most produced variant with a Jumo 210 engine, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 D, 647 units were produced. (The outdated literature and "encyclopedias" drawing from it mistakenly consider these planes to be Bf 109 C! And prototypes with DB 600 are considered "more powerful" Dora)* The Jumo 210 D had maximum values for up to 5 min: 680 PS = 500 kW at 0 m and 640 PS = 471 kW at 2700 m. At some point during the production of the Bf 109 D, the engine was replaced by a slightly improved Jumo 210 Da with an output of up to 700 PS = 515 kW at low altitude. The Bf 109 D with a take-off weight of 2100 kg had a maximum speed of only 450 km/h at an altitude of 4000 m. The lighter Bf 109 B with a take-off weight of 2000 kg reached a maximum speed of 460 km/h at an altitude of 4000 m. It is an official RLM data from 1 December 1938. Only from the end of 1939 were some Bf 109 D equipped with new flattened exhausts providing an additional 10 km/h. Source: Robert Michulec, Messerschmitt Bf 109 part 1., AJ-PRESS - 1998 & Messerschmitt Bf 109 part 4., AJ-PRESS - 2005 Miroslav Šnajdr, Messerschmitt Bf 109C and Bf 109D, JAKAB - 2019 These are highly specialized monographs that I can warmly recommend for study! I wish you a beautiful day. *(If some book, even if it was published in 2024, or a magazine claims that the Bf 109 D had a DB600 engine, or that it reached a speed of 520 km/h, beware! This is very outdated information, originally combining the German war propaganda with closed archives of the Cold War era. And I recommend taking with a grain of salt any other claims made in such "popular science" literature.)
The 309 definitely has it in the looks department. I bet if they had the research and development atmosphere of America at the time, they could have developed it into something fearsome. Good thing for our boys, they didn't.
Kind of depends on the version. The one where the cockpit was flush to the fuselage and the pilot was supposed to use a periscope doesn't do it for me!
![A Domestic Failure That Became An International Success | Curtiss P-36 Hawk [Aircraft Overview #33]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lTgY8za-2Xw/mqdefault.jpg)
You can see the DNA of the 262 in the 309 - the rudder, the empennage, the canopy and the line from the windscreen to the nose.
The Me262 tricycle undercarriage was literally removed from the Me309 prototype.
It also looks like it took some inspiration from the Mustang
Your really cute when you geek out
@@BjornTheLiar ... excuse me??
@@eh86055He wasn’t talking about you
The well-known Messerschmitt projects that followed the 109, 110 were surprisingly unsuccessful and technically problematic. The reason was probably that the actual designer of the successful models had a bad dispute with Willy Messerschmitt and left the company. Robert Lusser worked from 1933 at BFW later Messerschmitt. He constructed the Bf 108, the Bf 109 and the world record holder Me 209. The Bf 110 was also developed by Lusser. Before leaving Messerschmitt, he was still working on the basic features of the Me 262. He switched to Messerschmitt's enemy Heinkel, where he constructed the first twinjet fighter in the world, the Heinkel He 280. The Heinkel He 219, the first specialised night fighter, also comes from Lusser's development office.
Interesting.
Old Willi was a dodgy guy.
Let’s not forget the 210 fiasco.
@@alanpennie I mean yeah the whole nazi thing is a bit of a tip off
(Also what you said is really close a line spoken in red dwarf)
Sounds like Lusser got a wet Willy
The 410 was a fine aircraft
The 309 looks like if a Airacobra and mustang got it on
And if a KI-61 joined in
Ha! That's awesome
The Sherman was a very good vehicle for the time and given the limitations of US logistics. The crane on liberty ships was limited to 30 tons. Every tank had to transported over at least one ocean so it never went back for factory upgrades or repairs. All upgrades and repairs had to be done in theater.
One of the things that Howard Hughes pointed out when he was at a Government Hearing on the failure of the Spruce Goose - was that there were A LOT of failed aircraft projects.
.
The spruce goose may actually be not a failure but OBE. Similar to the Bearcat or tiger at. The need for the aircraft went away. But the delays by Hughes is partially to blame.
With the Bf109 progressing from the E version to the F it could be argued that the large number of changes to the airframe might have warranted a new model number. This probably would be even more the case for the Spitfire, though.
If the RLM had been a bit smarter, they should have started to phase out the Bf 109 by late 1942 and accelerated development of the Fw 190 versions powered by the Junkers Jumo 213 (which had started bench testing in 1940). The _Luftwaffe_ by late 1943 would have gotten what would have been essentially the Fw 190D-9 by then, and its excellent performance at speed and altitude would have made it vastly harder for the Allies to gain air superiority starting in February 1944.
They should have just developed mw-50 for a regular bmw-801 for 2500hp fw-190, and also lightened construction as much as possible. 190 was way over engineered for a fighter
@@tedarcher9120overengineered in a good way however....
@@tedarcher9120 Alas, even with MW50 boost, the BMW 801 engine still had altitude limitations above 22,000 feet. The Junkers Jumo 213 didn't suffer from such deficiencies, and as such had the equivalent of the Fw 190D-9 been available one year earlier, it would have had been a nightmare for P-51B/C and P-47D pilots to deal with because the Fw 190D-9 was almost as fast as the American fighters.
If they were really smart they would have accelerated the evolution and introduction of the ME 262, Arado and Junkers Jet bomber.
Don't siege Leningrad, just take it -ass comment
I have been waiting for years for Greg and Rex and other's and then you come in out of the shadows, thank you my friend
Rex is saving is for his 1000,000,000th episode no doubt
Its astouding a plane as small as the 109 was improved dramatically over its lifespan. And the FW190 eas a brilliant counterpoint to it.
Meanwhile Italy made Re.2005 which, after receiving German propeller and uprated engine (still not on Bf 109 K4's output level) casually reached 720km/h, and version with DB603 was expected to go 740km/h or faster.
And it did that while being way more maneuvrable (significantly lower wing loading).
This just shows how crude Bf 109 design was by the late war standards.
My friend calm down
Damn right. Bf 109 was forced to Luftwaffe by corruption and this cost germany a lot of their pilots lives. Bf 109 was a failure in most of aspects.
Italy very power!
Was expected.... Italy was (in)famous for using "flog the engine, and have low fuel, and no armament" to get the absolute top speed. Not the practical combat loaded top speed.
@@kirgan1000 It was Germans who tested that plane, so GL with your theory
Amazing longevity considering when it was originally designed.
I like how the "well uh acktuhally, allied equipment was better in every way" 🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓 crowd, conveniently forget how designs made in the 1930s were very well adapted and upgraded to fight them on par all the way up to 1945.
@@BasedpilledandtradmaxxedThe 109 was far too long in the tooth and a poor machine in many ways. It was just that corruption, failures at making a replacement and the difficulty and consequences of changing production that kept the 109 going.
@@kentl7228still kept up with the rest tho
@@Basedpilledandtradmaxxed *the Hurricane looks around mildly confused*
the Allies weren't strangers whatsoever to that.
@@Basedpilledandtradmaxxedalthough handling did drop off a bit as heavier, more powerful, engines were fitted.
25:01 - One thing you forgot to mention about the Me-509 was that the engine is BEHIND the pilot, which made it like a P-39/P-63, except more extreme. Actually EVERYONE was thinking along these lines towards the end of the war - note the Fisher XP-75, and that design Rolls Royce was working on for their upcoming Crecy 2 stroke V12. It got as far as a fuselage mock-up, and was to use commonly available P-51D wings. Note also the marked resemblance to pretty much nearly all single engined jet fighters from the 1950s. The P-39 was ahead of its time.
P-51 haben wir zu Hause
Wo ist dein Homa?
Undervalued comment. I spit out my beer eating this.
Great Scott, its Willie Messersmitt, inventor of the flux capacitor!
The Luftwaffe should have been seriously looking for a successor to the bf109 when it became clear that the RAF had a fighter that could match it, and the shortcomings of the 109 became apparent.
Hitler's attention was always Russia and his strategy was that everything he had was superior to Russian weaponry. The German Luftwaffe had been superior in all aspects he'd encountered. Hitler knew he couldn't invade England or win it's neutrality. He decided a "hold-off" defensive effort of the Allies was sufficient for him to defeat Russian and later deal with the Allies, after the defeat of Russia. Hitler was a genius of politics. He simply bit off more than he could chew. If he'd not been murderous in antisemitism, he might have gotten away with winning WWII. His main enemy was Churchill, who worked tirelessly to drag the U.S.A into fighting the war for the British. As for the continuation of the ME-109, Britain sis the same with the Spitfire. The two economies were similar. Hence their manufacturing abilities were similar. The Joker, a wild card. was the U.S.A. Whomever the U.S.A. supported with material goods would win.
Willy Messerschmitt and the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM - Air Defense Ministry) both acknowledged early on that the successor of the successful Bf-109 should be undertaken. Messerschmitt duly undertook the requisite research and development. But the entire program failed, but not for lack of trying. The Me 209 did not offer any notable improvement over the Bf-109G in terms of speed and armament. In fact the first prototype was slower than the Bf-109G. The later prototype's tricycle gear was a technical advance, giving it a resemblance to the U.S. Army Air Force's P-39 Airacobra. But whatever Messerschmitt tried, the design wasn't proving to be a winner.
Messerschmitt had better success tweaking the present Bf-109 design to its penultimate version, the 109K in very late 1944 to early 1945. The 109K could reach 440 mph at altitude. It's armament still retained the potent, two 13mm heavy machine guns in the nose cowling and one MG151 20mm cannon in each wing. But by then the Luftwaffe lacked the necessary numbers of fully trained pilots and aviation fuel was in very short supply.
Messerschmitt's winner for late 1944 going into 1945 counted the technological cutting edge Me 262 turbojet fighter interceptor and fighter bomber, but yet an immature weapons system. By then Nazi Germany was living on borrowed time. The Me 262 came out too late, in too few numbers, with too few existing pilots and shortages of fuel. Total defeat lay mere months ahead.
RLM is just State Ministry of Aviation.
- The biggest problem, other than range, was the landing gear. More Me 109's were lost in takeoff and landing accidents tha to any other cause. So, that is one issue that Messerschmidt should have addressed.
@@scootergeorge7089
Similar to the Spitfire. Didn’t want to upset the production line in effectively creating a new wing to fix the landing gear issue. Nobody, anywhere was designing a new single engined aircraft with the landing gear legs pivoting under the fuselage after 1936.
Having a high wing does not impose a drag penalty. The extra drag of the parasol monoplane came from all the struts to support and brace the wing.
Kurt Tank gets the last laugh.
This early Germany aircrafts are one of my nich interests. I think the competition for the stuka could be a nice video idear too
There seem to have been a lot of the Me262's lines in the Me309.
They were thinking of reusing the Bf.109G rear fuselage and cockpit in a Me.262 variant, but it never left paper.
The "Luft '46" website had three-views of it.
@@MrJohndoakes You mean the BF109TL?
But yes, I do see a lot of the 262 in the 306 airframe. I guess Willy decided to give the 262 a bit of a proven design base?
Most people dont know that the early variants of the bf109 had a 15.1mm motor cannon, it was upgraded to a 20mm motor cannon in 1940. The 15.1mm shell had a very high velocity but it only held 3.2 grams of explosive, while the 20mm mine shell could hold 20 grams of explosive and 2 grams of incendiary filling, which was devastating to aircraft but it had a relatively low muzzle velocity of 1900 FPS, while the mg121 20mm cannon had a better 2,350 FPS muzzle velocity, which was exactly the same muzzle velocity as their 13mm machine guns, the American 12.7mm .50 caliber round had a muzzle velocity of 2,900 FPS and the British and American 20mm cannon had a muzzle velocity of 2,900 FPS, which was better for getting more hits, but the British 20mm cannon HE shell only held around 8 grams of explosive, while the American 20mm cannon shell held around 11 grams of explosive. The British 20mm HE shell was so weak, that on a British fighter armed with 20mm cannons, the standard ammunition load was 50% 20mm AP rounds and 50% 20mm HE shells. It was loaded so that 2 AP would fire, then 2 HE, then 2 AP, then 2 HE, and so forth until the very limited ammunition ran out.
Worth noting the Heinkel submission featured many elements that were difficult to manufacture- the eliptical gull-wing the main problem. The 109 was also developed out of racing planes, just like the spitfire. So they had a track record.
It pains me greatly to hear someone with such reverence for history repeatedly pronounce “Luftwaffe” so incorrectly.
I was thinking the same thing
It’s the tone he ends each line with for me dawg
Annoying
I wonder if he has ever heard it pronounced. At least he voiced the 'e' at the end.
And Cezzna
LoofWaffle air war..😂
Certainly one of the Mark Felton thumbnails of all time
Great video and presentation
Messerschmitt P-51 doesn’t exist. It can’t hurt you
Messerschmitt P-51:
The 309 really does look like a 262 crashed into the back of a 109
Long ago I read the reason why Bf changed to Me and it was multiple paragraphs and it made no sense to me. Your explanation, "company changed its name", was short and sweet. Maybe it's not the whole story (like I said the original was overly complicated and made no sense) but it's good enough and to the point. I like it.
The 159 is intriguing for having the slender cowl in place of the bulge for a flat-4.
There is video on here that show that both Bf and Me was used for the 109 in German Luftwaffe documents so both are good. At lest for newer models.
Mention of 20 years in the intro threw me when it was in production for only 10 years.
@@MarkBush-en5cz I think he is including the Spanish built copies.Even then,it’s a bit of a stretch
They never really tackled the flaws of the undercarriage being too narrow for ease of landing, or the very cramped cockpit, and the very limited visibility for the pilot. Thankfully.
Thanks a lot, I love your soothing voice, most of the time I watch your videos in the late evening, find them relaxing, keep them coming! Greetings from Poland!
Another great video. very informative. Thank you.
Lots of Arado mentions in the aircraft department of late. Across multiple channels. I dig.
AMAZINGNES!!! Can you do a video on the panavia tornado?
So did Milch make the correct decision early in the war? Concentrate production on a few flexible models where the basic airframe could be modified and be just good enough but keep the production lines going at full speed. The failure was not the production of aircraft but the lack of new pilot recruit training to replace losses which came to a head in the second half of 1944. Or would overall fighter losses have been less if some of the volume production of standard fighter aircraft been given over to newer higher performance fighter aircraft designs earlier in the war. Were the FW190 & Bf109 good enough for most of the war?
Mr. IHYLS, the "U" in "Luftwaffe" is a high "U", not a flat English one.
Mr johndoakes from what I understand we won the war and are not speaking German.
@@paulkitait’s literally a German word.
But his luft waffle is great 😃
@@PvtPartzz so is the word Wanderlust. Yet we don't say VAHN-der-loost. We say WAN-der-lust. Need any more examples?
@@paulkita “wander” and “lust” are both words used in English Luftwaffe is not.
The HE 112 looks ahead of its time. Very sleek.
It had a radiator system that would have been very suseptible to battle damage and was routed all through the wing.
The inverted Benz motors look like they allow even better streamlining than the Rolls Royce types,that plane is possibly the most attractive plane out of WW2,in my eyes.
109’s isn’t not one type. The A/B/C/D’s had very little in common with the E, the E had very little in common with the F, G is closer to the F(depending on G number)
Yakovlev fighters are named more appropriately, Yak-7, Yak-1, Yak-9 and Yak-3 all look very similar, like the Bf 109, but are very different aircraft with different capabilities, again like the 109.
And the Me/Bf thing seems wrong. In the pilots manual, of the Bf 109, both designations are used interchangeably, same with production documents. There was a switch in designation system, but the Germans didn’t seem to strongly adhere to it. The designation change was from the major factory that drew the plans for the original aircraft, to the lead designer of the team, within that factory, that drew the design. So Bayerisch Flugzeugwerke(Bf) got changed to Messerschmitt(Me), Focke Wulf(Fw) -> Kurt Tank(Ta) with the Ta-152 and 154
There is something of the P-39 in the silhouette of the Me 309.
Core problem with upgrading the Bf109 was what made it successful in the first place - basic airframe design. The 109 was a strong, central box with an engine bolted to the front, lightweight rear fuselage, lightweight wings on the side and undercarriage on the bottom. So if you couldn't put something extra in that central box, it was a problem. Another problem was common to just about all new WW2 German projects - the lack of really good, new engines.
You missed two of the core failures of the whole Luftwaffe at the time. The obsession with "WunderWaffen", that meant that any crazy idea could get built as long as you could make it sound like a great idea. Secondly, the whole Divebomber obsession. EVERYTHING had to be able to divebomb, even things that should never do so, like strategic bombers...
@@gchampi2 Those are both true, but I was trying to stick to the topic of replacing the 109. Saying that, while the whole 'Wunderwaffen' concept was terrible for warfighting, it was great for the scientists and engineers who really, really didn't want to get sent to the Eastern Front. As I understand it, the divebombing obsession came about because so much of Germany's transport was horse-drawn and not mechanised. So, if you wanted something resembling accurate artillery support for your (mechanised, mobile) front line, a divebomber was your go-to.
The first 209-1 looks like an engine with a plane attached!I didn't realize that it had gone up to 609.
the me 509 reminds me of the piaggio p.119 too other than the r2y, p. 119 first flight and tests started in late 1942 and was first drawn around 1939
45km/h speed advantage at sea level is a lot. And as Fw 190 has shown, you don't need good turn rate for a fighter to be succesful.
I would say there is a big difference between the Bf-109B/C/D and even E to the redesigned 109F, in fact they should have called her the Bf-209 at that point considering the total new design. I think they kept the name 109 because it was a good way to hide the F introduction until it met the Spitfires and hunted them back to their AAA cover! Not to mention what Hans Joachim Marseille was able to do with it in Africa against Spitfire, P-39, P-40 and Hurricane. The F in combination with the FW-190A-2/3 were certainly responsible for Britain to rethink their Fighter Sweep's for more than a year!
How thin were the 309's wings? They look like they are only a few inches.
With the exception of the BV 155, everything else here had three-bladed propeller engines. The reason? Fuselage-mounted armament. A cannon firing through the spinner, wing-mounted guns, OK, but try synchronising those guns sitting on top of the engine with FOUR blades! The Spitfire began life with two blades and ended with five, moving from three to four with the jump from the Mk V to the Mk IX. The P-47, P-51 and F4U evolved from three to four blades. Germany stubbornly refused to move on...
Good observation. I would like to add the following: It is noticable that while the Germans kept the three blade design, they increased the surface area of the blades substantially. Making them almost (but not equally) as effective as 4 or 5 blade props. The issue is that propeller hubs need to be reinforced and increased in size, and more space is needed for the extra blade angle linkages if more blades are added. Bigger hubs mean engine cannons can no longer fire through the hub. And German designers loved engine cannons!
Thank you ! good vid The Germans had no shortage of innovative designs! But what i have contended all along is the bf/ Me -109 is one of the greatest fighter planes of all time when you factor in all considerations , smallness of size,cost of production,amount manufactured,sevicability and a massively succesfull battle record 30000-00 + kills ! Most of the great experten flew the 109 and many by preference,it could still do certain things better than the much vaunted fw - 190 (also a fantastic plane) the 109 was lighter and generally more nimble! The factories were tooled up for production of this proven platform that took under 5000 manhours to build compared to the marvelous and beautifull Spitfires almost 20000 man hours , the 109 was the pragmatic choice and did a lot of things well enough and one thing exceptionally well which was energy fighting (taking the fight into the vertical,it's high power to weight ratio afforded it an exceptional acceleration and climb rate),the Soviet Yak - 3 was the other plane that shone in the fast climbing department as well,also posessing a similarly high power/weight ratio!
Usual TH-cam comment. Late production of the 109 took a claimed 5000 hours…which of course didn’t include forced and slave labour. The figure you quote for the spitfire is for the early variants and includes man hours taken in design, tooling and production.
Try comparing like with like.
@@annoyingbstard9407 i can't believe man hours could be counted that way,the design and tooling time is counted into every fighter built, doesn't make sense to me 🤣🤪 the British reached out to their big bully brother across the pond to assist with fighter production asking for the P- 40 to begin with, i suspect the Spitfires long production time had something to do with that ? (Might be wrong ,suspect)
At 0:49 in you pronounce Luftwaffe wrong…Luft rhymes with “put”… not “puff”
I reckon the Me 109 frame (Ha 1112) would be an elegant and simple quick ship around the pylons if it were to receive the modern Yak-11 mods with an R-2000 (possibly an R-2800 could be shoe horned in), maybe call it "Hun-O-nein" or something. I know that one example had a P&W twin wasp fitted before the war, nothing much on it though ( Bf 109 V21).
Could you do a video about the treaty of Versailles and how it actually worked and probably won the war.
The Sherman tank didn't have top ratings in firepower, armor or maneuverability. But it was #1 in the entire war for reliability and crew survivability: everyone had their own hatch, I think. And I think only like 69 Sherman-crew soldiers died in the war. Leastways, it was a number so small it just don't make sense.
A 13mm MG is the same as a 12.7mm Browning M2 HMG?
The 309s nosewheel had a lot of problems with collapsing right? This shows what would be the main problem with tricycle undercarriages on conventional ww2 fighters - too much stress on the nosewheel due to being under a heavy piston engine.
It had a whole raft of problems, but from the reports of their test flights, getting it to retract then drop again was a big issue. And if it couldn't retract, then it severely affected airflow to the radiator. You'd think getting the undercarriage to work would be relatively simple, but apparently not.
The Me309 gear system was grafted on to the Me262. Literally - the gear was removed from the prototype 309 to fit to the 262.
That was because the Me262 had trouble takeoff and was setting fire to both grass and tarmac runways.
BF109's had a 20 to 30 minute flight time over London depending on fuel settings the pilots selected it could be much less. All piston engines had this same issue that pilots needed to have drilled into their brains on the ground. Also in many guns they used Glycol from the engines to keep guns cooled at low altitudes and from freezing at higher altitudes. Pilots had to manage those settings in combat or they could find their guns inoperable.
Very nice information.
thb
The Me 309, though ultimately cancelled, held significant potential as a superior fighter design during World War II. Compared to the iconic P51 Mustang, the Me 309 had notable advantages in speed and performance. While the P-51D Mustang achieved around 437 mph (703 km/h) at high altitudes, the Me 309 was designed to reach top speeds closer to 460 mph (740 km/h), giving it a crucial advantage in speed across all altitudes.
especially at low alt with some documents saying it can fly with 3 guns likely (1 20mm and 2 13mm or 15mm ) can achieve 626km or some 400mph which is one of the fastest top 5 planes in ww2 record
Regarding manoeuvrability, the Me 309 drew on the design principles of its predecessor, the Bf 109, while introducing improvements to aerodynamics and engine performance. Although heavier than earlier Bf 109 variants, the Me 309 was expected to maintain competitive turn performance, making it comparable to the late-war Bf 109G series. which is impressive because the p51 couldn't match that This balance of speed and maneuverability meant the Me 309 could have outpaced many of its contemporaries, including the P-51, while still holding its own in a turn fight.
Speed was a critical factor in the evolving aerial combat of 1942-1943. As many aces emphasized, "speed is life"-it provided the energy advantage needed to control engagements. The Me 309 was designed with this in mind, making it a prime candidate to counter the P-51 Mustang’s speed while also offering better maneuverability than other late-war German fighters. With its advanced features and higher speed, the Me 309 could have excelled in hit-and-run tactics, allowing pilots to dictate the terms of combat and disengage at will.
Had it been mass-produced, the Me 309 could have played a pivotal role in maintaining air superiority for the Luftwaffe, especially as Allied aircraft became faster and more powerful (p51-30 with 1700hp p47-28 with it massive 2888hp p38 with twin 1700hp). Unfortunately, due to production delays and technical setbacks, the program was abandoned in Favor of other projects, but the Me 309 remains a testament to the innovative engineering of late-war German aircraft
The 509 looks a bit like the RN seahawk with a propeller.
The 309s tail has definate hints of 262
Interesting that it all effectively came down to production effort and all using pretty much the same engines. But at least the engines worked well unlike so many British projects that were blighted by underperforming new engine designs. I think several american models had the same problem with engines that didnt perform to promose.
The Germans were always a year or two behind in mindset. The didn't really enter total mobilization mode until late 43 when they should have done so two years earlier. The 209 like the 210/410, 177 and so many other aircraft were not only chasing requirements from yesteryears, they were doing so with industrial assumptions from two years ago. The solution to the piston engine fighter problem until the conversion to a pure jet luftwaffe should have been to simply RE-WING the 109 and adding versions of the DB605 with multi-stage supercharging. This will take care of most of the problems. And, it is not like they have not re-winged the 109 before; they did exactly that with the Ferret model. Thinner, higher aspect ratio wings with inward swinging gears and wing root MG151s and integral outboard tanks that can be flown dry in short range interception will give hem most of what they wanted. The fuselage can be identical to the F-models or lengthened slightly like they did with the Dora 190s if a little extra room is needed for multi-stage, multi-speed, supercharging.
The 109 had some issues that never can be really shown in a spec sheet, importantly being hard to handle (only experienced pilots were assigned to 109s and oghers would be given 190s), the cockpit was VERY cramped and not well laid out, and it was very fragile, especially in the wings.
It was also very hard to upgrade due to the diminutive airframe and wright being added made it lose a lot more agility.
Imo the true successor to the 109 would've been the He100.
Quite refreshing to hear "Messerschmitt" not "Meshersmit."
Messer, like the big knife👍
@@mastathrash5609 it means "knife smith" or knifemaker.
@@rolanddutton it does indeed
Willi Messerschmidt himself and the german pilots back in the day all called the plane Me 109, not Bf 109. And in Germany we don't say M-e 109, we say Meh 109. So we also should call it Me 109.
The video is wrong. The Me 309 was intended to be the successor from 1940 onwards. The Fw 190 was introduced as an interim fighter to supplement the Bf 109 but the intention was there from the start to replace the 109 with the new larger, faster, better armed, more stable Me 309.
Messerschmitt Me 309 Development & Politics by Dan Sharp and Callum Douglas detail this.
The BF 109 was a singular use weapon it did not lend itself to much in the way of modification except a change in engine. And the engine it had, at least from the 601 and up, was probably the best engine of the war and that includes the Rolls-Royce that went into the Mustangs in the later spitfires. We know this because when the Germans got a hold of a Spitfire and put a 601 engine in it. It was not only faster than any other Spitfire on the planet it also flew with a 5,000 ft higher ceiling than any other Spitfire on the planet. Can you imagine what would have happened had we stolen the plans for the 600 series engines and started putting them into the mustangs?
The larger 309 would have lent itself to being much more adaptive than the 109 ever was and they 109 would never get rid of it's tendency to have the landing gear collapse if you didn't land it exactly properly.
The biggest advantage of the BF 109 actually had is it was quite small, making it harder to see.
Generally it’s best not to believe everything claimed by the Germans that appears to confirm their engineering superiority. Especially unsupported claims on the internet.
In the automotive sense, the Sherman was the best tank in the war. In the field, a tank that always runs, has crew room/ergonomics, a functioning heater & ventilation, seldom breaks, and is easy to fix is a hell of a thing. A broken better tank is not a better tank when you are trying to win a war and not a tank show.
... The Sherman was very reliable, which eased the logistic strain of keeping it operating an ocean apart from its factories, came with a well balanced provision of share oarts and had a great ergonomics. It was designed as a part of a whole, giving consideration to needs beyond direct tank on tank confrontations.
Some late war German tanks had more "bling", but their logistic footprint was sometimes horrendous (Tiger, oh, Tiger) and power-train failures killed more Tigers and Panthers than the enemy did.
History has shown that a faster fighter is a successful fighter, just look at how the ultimate in manouvrebility, the Zero, was outclassed by the Hellcat and Corsair, which were 100 MPH faster.
That MpM kit art.
I really want to see a bv 155 video, its a quite interesting aircraft
Aviation Deep Dive did a pretty good video on it. AllthingsWW2 has a shorter one also, but I like the other better. It's a cool design, just ended up being a resource sink though that Germany really couldn't afford to follow through with into full production.
@@jameshall1300 oh that's cool, all I've found when looking for a video on the BV 155 is war thunder stuff
I'm surprised Willy didn't try to put the DB603 into the KR200...
Didn't the Bf109 prototype originally have a Rolls-Royce Kestrel powerplant?
Yes.
Correct,
The Germans obtained the British powerplant (due to a lack of available German engines at the time), in exchange for for a Single He 70 (which first flew on 1 December 1932) for use as an engine test bed.
Around the same time the Supermarine was designing the Supermarine Type 224 (first flight 19 February 1934), which proved to be a very big disappointment,
Leading to Mitchell coming up with a brand new design which later became the "Spitfire"
The video missed the Me.109Z, which joined two Bf.109 fighters into one plane. A prototype was built, but destroyed by bombing and the project did not carry on. So the Me 309Z was not a new thing to Messerschmitt.
Ever think of doing a vid on the TA-183?
Great video
Interesting. I knew all sorts of crazy German designs and prototypes, and I hadn't even seen this fairly "normal" fighter designs. I thought they just wanted to make the BF 109 with a different landing gear.
Obviously Milch didn't recognize the BoB as the strategic defeat that it was. Nor did he recognize the need for an aircraft that could fight at distance. An improvement that could've helped them win.
"Looft-Waffe" Sorry it hurt my ears.
Pronouncing both S's in _sans_ tell us the narrator is no languages superstar anyway.
Needs a better narrator in his otherwise good productions.
Isn’t the me609 just a modernised the ME109Z that was built then destroyed
All of the combatants were guilty of continued production of obsolete designs , The British with the Hurricane , Japanese and the Zero , America and the P-40 , Russia the Lagg 3. With the Hurricane and P-40 they could continue to perform at the front line , because there was little opposition . Not so good for the Russians and Japanese , whose pilots were shot down in droves.
The sucessor of the me109 was the Alison powered p51a courtesy of professor shmued
The biggest thing with the h e one twelve was the vulnerability of its evaporative cooling system
Why do you keep chainging your metrics using metric for size and imperial for speed?
I doubt that an improved model like the 309 would have made much difference in the end. In the West the Luftwaffe was overwhelmed by sheer numbers, firstly by P47s and then later by P51s. Even though an individual BF 109G could out-turn and out-climb a single P47, it made no difference because the next P47 and the ones following would pick it off as it tried to climb and turn away. The basic problem was that Germany was being out produced by America.
The bigger problems which led to that situation in the first place was:
Lack of pilot training
Lack of high octane fuel (caused by a lack or CRUDE oil)
Lack of high output engines due to lack of high octane fuel
Lack of production output of aircraft (output not ramped up until it was too late)
Lack of resources to fight everyone at once (Africa, the Eastern front, the Western front)
Lack of correct intelligence, leading to military blunders and equipment losses
Plus actual strategic losses.
Otherwise the bomber mafia would have ensured that the Germans would have been able to repel the bombing campaign (until someone with brains came along).
And in line with that,
It wasn't until Jimmy Doolittle came along and changed the tactics, that the Allies started to win the air war over Europe.
Which made it impossible for Germany to be able to fight back effectively.
Re the conclusion that a huge quantity of good fighter was better for the Germans than a smaller quantity of better fighters. The reality was that while Germany was not lacking for airplanes in the final year of the war, it was definitely lacking experienced pilots, as so many had been killed. Perhaps disrupting production lines to produce better fighters would have been the better strategy after all.
Maybe they should have set up a system where their experienced pilots after spending a certain amount of time on the frontline get roated out and given a trainer role in the pilot schools so they can pass down their practical knowledge to the next wave of beginners so that the graduates will come with knowledge of what is actually useful in the conditions a pilot would experienced. This is what the Americans and eventually the British did. Meanwhile the Axis powers kept their best pilots on near nonstop combat service while this did lead to the Axis aces having higher kill counts it did lead to significantly higher rate of attritions so that by the late stage of the war the axis had lost most of their great pilots and tried to replace them by shorting the training time of their new pilots which had a severe drop in quality of their pilots
I never understood why they considered the 309 a failure. It carries almost literally 1 Ton of extra armament compared to the regular 109, while delivering the same performance or slighty faster depending where you read about it.
There, you said it: its performance just wasn't enough of an improvement over the 109.
Enormous range, literally 1 extra ton worth of armament due to the extra 20mm and 13mm, 50km/h faster, landing gear not actively trying to kill the pilot and a bunch of QOL features. If this isn't a big improvement i don't know what it is.
@@Scarface_1b Dan Sharp book about Me 309
It has been stated that 309 was costlier and would take longer to build. This and the fact that production models would not be a major upgrade to the latest versions of the 109
does everything evolve into the p-51 or something
That's basically the way technology works, when a sort of machine is first developed, there is a huge diversity of designs and philosophies. Over time it becomes clear what are the "right" and "wrong" ways to make that sort of machine and various designs and operators become increasingly similar. Compare the Wild West of early Cold War jets to the onslaught of fifth-generation F-22 clones we have today.
13:51 Milch also hated Willy Messerschmitt with a passion.
The 309 looks a lot like the MB5
Why did the Panther A come after the Panther D? 'Splain that!?
Interesting that such a capable aircraft company, that could bring out dozen of new aircraft in wartime conditions but couldn’t crack this one, shame as the 309 was a spiffy looking plane 😉........off topic but modern parallel to me feels a bit like the F16, with incredibly long production, a million developments & upgrades but, as far as I’m aware, still no replacement on the horizon. ( the F35 certainly isn’t it)🤔
The 309 was designed to rectify some rather obvious problems with The 109 (notably short range and cramped cockpit) but the front and rear wheels look too close together to my layman's eye.
The plane on the thumbnail looks like a Mustang, which is cool
0:47 I always hear people say that Germany had plans to conquer the whole planet. I would like to know where people got this idea, Man in the High Castle or something?
Mein Kampf.
Hitler’s personal train was the “Amerika”.
@@allangibson8494 well i can tell you've never read it. And he changed the name of his train in 1941.
@@Atreid3s 1942. After he declared war on the United States.
Probably because Hitler said, "Today Germany, tomorrow the world!"
And then he also said, "Ein volk, ein reich, ein fuhrer."
Oh but they did, you obviously do not read history let alone anything about world war two.
Anyone ever wandered how a good old ww2 bomber formation would do today
Like obviously it wouldnt go well, but just the confusion of hundereds of radar pings at once slowly aproching is fun to think about
Also most ofthe modern aa defences are made to 100% kill like 1-4 targets with a missile or smol and fast burst... How would it do aginst numbers
309 looks like they tried to use the 262 fuselage as a base to copy the p39 with
The D model had a MB600 engine not the jumo
@ralphe5842 No offense, but you're wrong. The production Bf 109 D did not use the DB 600, certainly not! It is unbelievable that even in the 21st century, some "popular science" literature is still spreading this WWII German propaganda. In addition to other prototypes, there were only two promotional so-called "Bf 109 D", equipped with a DB 600 engine! However, with hundreds of photos with changing markings purely for Goebbels propaganda!
As the Jumo 210 G was neither very reliable nor produced in sufficient numbers, it was decided to replace it before all 58 production Bf 109 C were completed, with the older reliable but weaker Jumo 210 D model, (same engine as the Bf 109 B). The result was the most produced variant with a Jumo 210 engine, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 D, 647 units were produced. (The outdated literature and "encyclopedias" drawing from it mistakenly consider these planes to be Bf 109 C! And prototypes with DB 600 are considered "more powerful" Dora)* The Jumo 210 D had maximum values for up to 5 min: 680 PS = 500 kW at 0 m and 640 PS = 471 kW at 2700 m. At some point during the production of the Bf 109 D, the engine was replaced by a slightly improved Jumo 210 Da with an output of up to 700 PS = 515 kW at low altitude.
The Bf 109 D with a take-off weight of 2100 kg had a maximum speed of only 450 km/h at an altitude of 4000 m. The lighter Bf 109 B with a take-off weight of 2000 kg reached a maximum speed of 460 km/h at an altitude of 4000 m. It is an official RLM data from 1 December 1938.
Only from the end of 1939 were some Bf 109 D equipped with new flattened exhausts providing an additional 10 km/h.
Source: Robert Michulec, Messerschmitt Bf 109 part 1., AJ-PRESS - 1998 & Messerschmitt Bf 109 part 4., AJ-PRESS - 2005
Miroslav Šnajdr, Messerschmitt Bf 109C and Bf 109D, JAKAB - 2019
These are highly specialized monographs that I can warmly recommend for study!
I wish you a beautiful day.
*(If some book, even if it was published in 2024, or a magazine claims that the Bf 109 D had a DB600 engine, or that it reached a speed of 520 km/h, beware! This is very outdated information, originally combining the German war propaganda with closed archives of the Cold War era. And I recommend taking with a grain of salt any other claims made in such "popular science" literature.)
The 309 definitely has it in the looks department. I bet if they had the research and development atmosphere of America at the time, they could have developed it into something fearsome. Good thing for our boys, they didn't.
Kind of depends on the version. The one where the cockpit was flush to the fuselage and the pilot was supposed to use a periscope doesn't do it for me!
"The Erhard Milch aspect".
That guy was quite an asset to the Allied war effort.
N@zis gonna N@zi, wouldn't be them if they didn't feel the need to constantly screw one another over and them selves in the process