I did say "anne-als" by the way, instead of "anals" but I can hear what some of you mean, it's easy to hear it either way, imo. Next time I'll be sure to be more anal in my quality control.
Sounds like the narration has been accelerated by about 20%. Makes for a cartoonish presentation, or perhaps you’d like to jam in more words per minute than Mr Dark Skies? At least you only used the “b” (behemoth) word once. I think.
I am German, a mechanical engineer and aviation enthusiast and I work as a teacher at a technical vocational school. I love this video in so many ways. Masses of information I never heard of before, in-depth content and a clear, sober yet also entertaining presentation. Bravo!!
Love the information-filled presentation and the non mainstream information! Great video! Good luck finding TH-cam content offering in depth and obscure information like this! Good job!
Huge shout out to Flight Dojo for this documentary! I've always been curious about the Jumo-222. The British developed the radical high-power 24 cylinder Napier Sabre, the Americans developed their big Wright R-3350 and Pratt and Whitney R-2800 radials and all of them saw service, albeit with reliability and maintenance issues. Interestingly development of the Sabre and big American radials began in 1937, as did the Jumo-222 but it never saw wartime service yet the Allied engines did. Why did no large, high powered German piston aircraft engine ever see service? I saw the Jumo-222 at the Deutsches Museum, Munich decades ago. It had always been rather a mystery to me. Certainly earlier in the war, there was a need for heavy bombers but a cascading series of management errors prevented it. There was the decision to kill the Ju-89 and D-19 after Generalleutnant Wever's death, thanks both to the OKW's tunnel vision of the Luftwaffe as merely tactical air support for ground forces with no interest (or perhaps even understanding) of the value of strategic bombing, plus concerns over limited supplies of aluminium and other resources. Then there was the ridiculous dive bombing requirement Generalluftzeugmeister Udet imposed on the He-177A (followed by what Heinkel described in his book as Reichsmarschall Goering's refusal to allow him to end the systemic coupled engine fires with a 4 separate nacelle He-177B which might well have become a German version of the rebirth of the failed Avro Manchester as the successful Lancaster). All of this ended up virtually denying the Luftwaffe the heavy bombers it could have had and which might have made a big difference in the battle of the Atlantic and on the Eastern Front. By mid war, the whole bomber (and maybe the large, high power engine) issue had become moot as Germany had lost the initiative to take the offensive and instead needed fighters to defend itself from increasingly large Allied bombing raids. I had always believed the Jumo-222 to have been an overly ambitious technical failure that ended up killing the bomber-B program and the FW-191. I expected that Junkers Motorenwerke had limited numbers of staff engineers and they were already over-extended in development and meeting hefty production targets for the Jumo-211 and later the Jumo-213 as well as the cutting edge Jumo 109-004 gas turbine program, plus there was development of other jets and even turboprops which ultimately only benefited the Soviets . I assumed there simply weren't enough remaining to adequately develop the Jumo-222. This video appears to suggest otherwise. As I understand your argument Flight Dojo, the Jumo-222 was a promising engine that overcame major engineering challenges and showed genuine prospects of success but whose development was compromised (once again) by the RLM, and changing political imperatives. Without looking at dimensions, I wonder if some version of the Jumo-222 could have been incorporated into existing fighter airframes? My gut feeling is that it would have been so big and heavy that like the Hawker Typhoon, Republic P-47, or Chance-Vought F4U a larger airframe would need to have been designed around it and by mid war there was no time or resources for that. Besides that might have further compromised the jet fighter programs. Anybody know for sure? An interesting Jumo-222 feature was the 2 speed supercharger which appears to have been aligned along the engine axis, like the BMW-801 radial, not at right angles to it like the other Jumo and Daimler-Benz inline engines. I guess this must have been due to the hexagonal radial layout of this engine. Also I notice that the Jumo-222 E/F included a 2 speed, stage supercharger with a second stage driven by a fluid coupling like the DB-601, 605, 603 engines., the subject of much prewar research at DB yet something not seen in other production German aircraft engines. Stanley Hooker's 2 stage supercharger had hugely advanced high altitude performance of the later RR Merlin engines. I wonder if Werner von der Null's work was the basis of this? A typical Jumo design feature at the time was the 2 inlet, 1 exhaust valve arrangement. The 4 valve heads in the DB and RR engines seem to have been better and eventually the later Jumo-213 head was redesigned to take 2 exhaust valves. Anyone know why Jumo hung on to 3 valve cylinder heads for so long? Cost? Simplification? Although she possessed so much engineering expertise, Germany was hamstrung by limitations on metals needed for high temperature and high tensile alloys plus issues with high octane equivalent fuels, yet remarkably managed to produce very competitive piston engines. The Jumo-222 might have played a considerable role in the war had it been available early enough. Great video, thanks Flight Dojo.
The Ju-89 and Do-19 were dead ends that Wever soon recognized, hence he pushed for the Bomber A requirement which lead to the He 177. Most of the failure points of said bomber, with the exception of the dive bombing requirement, were the fault of Heinkel, as he was the instigator of the disastrous DB606 engine, surface evaporation cooling and other engineering marvels he sold Wever and Udet. Goring did not know about the engine configuration until 1942, as he expected to see a normal 4 engine bomber. Classic RLM miscommunication and mismanagement at work. The Jumo 222 was considered for the FW 190 as its size, dimensions and weight were not grater than the BMW 801, 802, DB603 and Jumo 213.
@@alexsv1938 The Ju-89 and Do-19 were both under powered, a legacy of the intention of the Treaty of Versaiiles to hobble German military aviation. This was not unusual with large heavy bomber development at the time. The Ju-89 led to the Ju-90, Ju-290 and Ju-390 which were transports but otherwise might have been developed as heavy bombers (a proposed variant of the Ju-390 was claimed capable of bombing the US, but who knows). I don't think you can fairly call the Junkers aircraft at least a dead end. The Bomber A program was another strategic bomber specification with even more demanding performance. They all died with Walther Wever. In his book Heinkel argues that he and chief engineer Hertel had designed a competitive 4 engine bomber only to be shocked to have Udet require it to dive bomb. Heinkel claimed Udet had held up and reduced the performance of the promising Ju-88 with his dive bombing demands and that Udet saw the He-177 as "a Ju-88 with 4 engines". As a result the He-177 airframe had to be reinforced for significant pull out forces from the (relatively shallow) dives demanded of it, increasing its weight and reducing speed, payload and range. In an effort to win back lost performance they resorted to radical solutions like the DB-606 coupled engines and surface evaporation cooling. There was reason to do this as the coupled engines had worked well for the He-119, although surface evaporation cooling was pretty quickly dropped. Unfortunately for the He-177A, there was a design defect in the DB-606 that caused the oil to froth at altitude and drip down onto white hot inside exhaust stacks of the coupled DB-601 engines, starting uncontrollable fires. DB were overloaded with DB-601 production and lacked the engineering staff to investigate this issue quickly. This problem was compounded by what Heinkel described as a major design error by Hertel to not include engine firewalls, which allowed the engine fires to spread to structural members and control cables and ultimately cause catastrophic wing failure. Had a service-ready Jumo-222 been available, these problems would have disappeared. After DB seemed unable to quickly trace and fix the fire problem (it became much less of an issue with the DB-610 engines) Heinkel claims that he approached Goering to let him redesign the He-177 wings with a conventional 4 separate engine configuration, but the Reichsmarschall refused. Heinkel claimed that when he told Goering that Udet required the He-177 to dive bomb, Goering exclaimed that as madness and that he had not been informed. IMHO It's hard to credit this. This guy was responsible for the entire air force and he did not know that it's only four engine bomber was required to dive bomb - something expected of no other heavy bomber? If that is true then this is just more evidence of Goering's shocking incompetence. Alternately, Goering was known to frequently blame subordinates who followed his orders when things turned out badly. It's hard to know exactly what he thought. Out of sight of the Reichsmarschall and the RLM Heinkel privately built the He-277/He-177B in Vienna-Schwecat (sp?) and the He-274 at the Farman plant in occupied France, both with four separate engine nacelles, fitted with DB-603 engines as I recall. Both proved to be fine aircraft with good performance and flight characteristics. However by this time the war was turning and the need for fighters for home defence was more pressing than for more bombers. The He-274 was used by France after the war in ramjet experiments up to 1953, I believe. That's my $0.02 on this.
@@tsegulin I would like to give a longer answer but typing on my phone is too bothersome. The Do 19 and Ju 89 were overall bad designs, even with more powerful engines their speed would be marginally better, their range mediocre and payload laughable. The Ju 86, He 111 and Do 17 were overall better aircrafts, hence the Bomber A requirement to get something better. If you were to look more into the Ju 89-390 development you will see that they are, basically wholly new aircrafts, with little remaining from the Ju 89. I will take what Heinkel says with a grain of salt as he, together with Messerschmitt, Tank and pretty much everyone in the Nazi apparatus tends to lie and make themselves look better in post war publications. Goring: “I was told at the time that the two would be coupled in tandem, and now suddenly we find this monstrosity with the two engines welded together side by side, so that you just can’t get at them.” In August 1942, he went on to comment about the He-177: “It really is the saddest chapter. I do not have one single long-ranged bomber … I look at these four-engined aircraft of the British and Americans with really enormous envy. They are far ahead of us here.” Three weeks later, he had even more biting comments about that aircraft! In a speech made to aircraft industrialists, he outright mocked them about the He-177, “The things they told me! I asked them, ‘Why not go over to a pure four-engine type?’ And they told me, ‘No, four engined typed are passé now; it is far better to have only two airscrews.’ So I said, ‘Well, well! The enemy is proving quite a nuisance to me with his four-engined types, they are a deadly nuisance.’ Not so, is the reply: ‘We are doing things differently. We are putting two together, or two in tandem.” There's so much contradiction with the He 177 as the Richelin Test Center says one thing, the RLM another thing, Heinkel another thing and so on. Also, just so you know, Goring had a very hands-off approach to the Luftwaffe (he was lazy) and had the tendency of leaving everything up to his subordinates and visiting the RLM rarely. (1 time at most per week)
@@alexsv1938 Interesting. Thanks for your comments. If Goering had been open to a four separate engine version of the He-177, I wonder why Heinkel built the He-177B and He-274 in secret at his own expense? In principle, one can imagine that autobiographies tend to paint their subjects in the best possible light. I'm reading Frank Vann's biography on Messerschmitt now and while it seems he was a braggart and very defensive when challenged he had a way of telling truth to power which is preserved in letters, papers and industry presentations he gave. He also had a much better view of the future of the air war than the RLM, especially the coming USAAF role. I'm not convinced that Ernst Heinkel, Willi Messerschmitt and Kurt Tank can be generally written off as liars compared to those in power within the Nazi government. What I've read about Goering was that he was primarily a careerist, would do anything to enhance his position (including the Final Solution, which he passed to Heydrich to implement) and was totally focused on taking over from Hitler some day. He was carrying four (I think it was) ministerial portfolios, something no one man could possibly manage well and that he would routinely sacrifice subordinates to protect himself. Hard to know where the truth lies on the He-177A and this sorry Luftwaffe chapter probably deserves another review. The one point relevant to the Jumo-222 IMHO is that had it been available early in the war, the DB-606 and DB-610 - which were always ugly improvisations - could have been dropped in favour of it for the He-177. In Heinkel's book he makes the point that the Treaty of Versailles set out to permanently destroy a German military aviation industry but failed when it came to airframe design and engineering. Where it had succeeded, he argues, is with high performance aircraft engine development, which took much longer than airframes to develop. He mentioned this in the context of being unable to find a suitable German power plant for the He-70 mail plane in 1933, having to resort to the RR Kestrel to realize its full potential but being forced to live with the BMW VI. It was here that his interest in jet development began. I wonder to what extent the delay on the Jumo-222 and the coupled engine fiasco that wrecked the He-177 might have been the result of this deliberate effort to stymie the German aircraft engine industry?
@@tsegulin It is probably because the others in the RLM were not. Udet and to a lesser extent Jeschonnek and Milch were looking at the twin-engine configuration as the future of bombers, perhaps that way it would have been cheaper and faster to build the wing, but certainly it would have allowed the bomber to dive bomb. You will notice (barring a few exceptions) that the 4 engine bomber configuration started to make a reappearance in 1942-43, perhaps as a result of the He 177 disaster. Ju 488, FW 191C, He 274, 277 and dozen other paper projects. The RLM was plagued by shortsightness, petty disputes, miscommunication and mismanagement of many things, though it is debatable how worse was it compared to the British Air Ministry. The guy in charge of engine development (forgot his name) was certainly bad at his job to some extent, with the Jumo 222 being perhaps set aside in favor of the 213 as the Germans were really excited about its potential. Perhaps the cancelation came as a mistaken belief that the 213, achieving 2000 HP would enter production soon so there was no need of the more complex 222. Or, as by late 1942-early 1943 the industry was ordered to decrease the nickel quantity to 8% in piston engine, which lead to the DB605 25h lifespan, (with the miscommunication between the manufacturing industry, RLM and engine firms dragging the issue until they realized the engine firms did not know about the nickel decrease) the RLM was perhaps not receptive to the possibility of a DB605 situation with the 222? Or the bearing stresses were too much? Dunno, even if the engine was cancelled from petty reasons, Milch would have been forced to use sound arguments. (This is just my speculation)
I visited the Deutsches Museum on the last day of a trip to Munich. But, I did not know it was divided into Air, Sea and Land...! We just wandered into the closest building which turned out to be Sea. Still amazing. But, wished we'd gone to Air.... ;)
Of the engines that never went into production much less flight testing I have long been fascinated by the Wright R-2160. It must have sounded glorious. 21 firing impulses per rotation of the crankshafts. Yes crankshafts. Three crankshafts tied together by lay shafts between each cylinder bank. Plus OHCs
Curious about the firing order of each row. The great majority of radials have odd numbers of cylinders per row for a reason - these engines are four strokes, which means each cylinder fires every 720 degrees (2 revolutions). For a smooth firing order, you would skip a cylinder each time - the firing order of a 7 cylinder single bank engine would therefore be 1-3-5-7-2-4-6, this way, every cylinder in the row fires once every 720 degrees, with evenly distributed power strokes (remember that all of the pistons in the row are tied together because you have one crank throw per row and one master rod). How would you achieve this if you had an even number of cylinders per row? The only way I can think of doing this with six cylinders is to fire two cylinders one after another, then skip two cylinders, so you would have a firing order of 1-2-5-6-3-4. Not perfectly smooth, but usable, especially since there are four rows and the crank throws can be set so that overall you'd have a more even firing sequence. I wonder if this is how they did it.
It's not a radial, but a 6-bank inline. 4-stroke radials *have* to have an odd number of cylinders per row. And the rows are usually staggered so as to even out power transfer to the main shaft.
@@onenote6619 It's a radial in the sense that all the conrods in a plane (a row) are connected together to a common big end. Like other radials there's one master rod and the rest are attached to the master with a pin. (I've heard it said that Harley Davidson engines are two cylinder "radials" by this definition.) Since the pistons in each row are attached together like this, the same firing sequence constraints apply.
The firing order is actually 2 at a time on opossing banks, it follows a dual helical firing order. It's incredibly well though, you get perfect balance and timing. From source "Torque-Meter" Vol.6 N°3: Jumo 222E Cylinder Numbering and Firing Order (example: 2nd Bank, cyl 4) count cylinders 1-4 from front to rear in each bank and banks 1-6 in counter-clockwise direction. Ignition happens in Clockwise direction tho... (Two Cylinders Fired Simultaneously) so we have 12 pairs of ignition before repeating the cycle. 1) 2B1 & 5B2 2) 1B1 & 4B2 3) 6B4 & 3B3 4) 2B3 & 5B4 5) 1B2 & 4B1 6) 6B2 & 3B1 7) 2B4 & 5B3 8) 1B4 & 4B3 9) 6B1 & 3B2 10) 2B2 & 5B1 11) 1B3 & 4B4 12) 6B3 & 3B4
@@marcox43 Ah... So all the cylinders in the first row (all connected to the same master rod, and the same crankpin) would be 2B1, 1B1, 6B1, etc. right? So if I concentrate on that one row of cylinders on the front of the engine, the firing order would be 2B1, 1B1, rest, rest, 4B1, 3B1, rest, rest, 6B1, 5B1, rest, rest. "Rest" meaning a piston reaching top dead center at the end of an exhaust stroke and the beginning of an intake stroke, and no firing taking place. This is over 720 degrees, with two cylinders firing in a row, 60 degrees apart, then 120 degrees with no cylinder firing, then two more firing, etc. Which is what I guessed in the beginning. Interesting indeed. Note how this differs from a "normal" radial - in any given row, every other cylinder would fire in turn, so you'd complete one row's firing sequence in 720 degrees, there always being an odd number of cylinders per row. If you have two rows of cylinders, you'd arrange the cylinders so they'd be staggered behind the first row, so if you set the cylinder in the back row 180 degrees away from the first cylinder in the front row to fire at the same time, you'd achieve a similar balance. Staggering the cylinders in the second row also helps with the cooling.
@@iskandartaib also by being a 4-cylinder bank, risk of warping is kinda low, unlike a 6 or 8 cylinder head. It has a flatplane crankshaft as you may guess, so it works like a bunch of boxers smashed together by a shared crankpin. I recommend you buying the pdf magazine ($8), it has quite some detail about it's internals.
Very well done I might say, I've seen this JUMO 222 Film before, as our family has some of Hugo's 8mm Movies made in the 1920's and early 30's, keep up the good work.... BD in Alaska..... 😎
Well I know many engines have sodium cooled exhaust valves, and apparently that tech is still used today. But I've never heard of this technology used for intake valves! Something about the pressure of war, technology is pushed and many variations of already known principles are applied in different areas to try and get that "step ahead" improvement.
@@shawns0762 I disagree. There is usually no need for sodium on intake valves; but when you have a high power engine under sustained heavy load - the heat builds up. Just like oil squirters on pistons - unnecessary for short high power sprints, but a gamechanger for endurance engines that need to put out full rated power for hours and hours and hours.
Okay. Who watched this video 13,000 times and didn't hit the subscribe button? It was you! All along! I'm really a fan of other technical creators, but this is a pretty decent video, and I did need to know more about this powerplant. Coz I'm a guy. Nat. I really appreciate this video, sir. Thank you for keeping this history and this data alive, and it is well presented. What I could do (in my imagination) with a motor churning out 2.5 Kw @ 3,200 rpm and 6.75 compression...gaaaaaaahhhhhh. Okay. I'll hit that subscribe button and check you out.
I've always been under the impression radials had to have odd numbers of cylindars per bank for some reason. How did the 222 get away with having 6? Or is the odd number rule just a myth?
As far as I know, the only difference a radial has is its cylinders are layed out "Radially" in a circle for more efficient air cooling, as opposed to an "In-line" engine with them all just in a row or two blocking eachothers airflow and making liquid cooling a requirement. I could be wrong though. As far as the 222 goes it doesn't seem to be a Radial engine as we'd think of one, but 6 in-line engines in a Radial pattern turning a single shaft. So if the odd number of cylinders rule is a thing, with its cylinders in 6 in-line banks instead of being evenly spread around the engine, the 222 wouldn't necessarily be beholden to the same rules anyway.
The old rotary engines, where the crank was fixed and the engine spun, was an early example of an attempt to achieve better cooling. Later the radial engines, where the engine was fixed and the crank spun, were an improvement because of better fuels and rotary engines were limited by centrifugal forces acting on them. But both used the 1,3,5,7,9,2,4,6,8 ( in a nine-cylinder engine ) firing order to maintain a certain amount of balance in the running of the engine. I think you have to consider this engine more like a bunch of inline four engines similar to what is present in a lot of cars and motorcycles and such. They use a 1,3,4,2 firing order to achieve balance in their service. As such ( although, I have no way of knowing what they actually did ), I would assume that what they did was a firing order where all of the number 1 cylinders fired and then all of the number 3 cylinders fired, then all of the number 4 cylinders fired and then all of the number 2 cylinders fired. As such, the firing order would be 1,1,1,1,1,1,3,3,3,3,3,3,4,4,4,4,4,4,2,2,2,2,2,2. It's the only way I can see this thing working with a single crankshaft. I noticed that there was a mention of balance and harmonics problems, probably related to this weird and wonderful engine. Also, my 1980 Honda Hawk 400 twin had a three-valve head, I really thought this was advanced back then, but now I see it was old stuff.
@@scarecrow8004Not just the cooling. Rotary engines also fixed problems with fuel and lubrication. Both were delivered to engine centre via a hollow shaft. Centripetal acceleration flung them both outward without need for complicated pumps. Burned fuel went out the exhaust pipes and used lubricant (generally castor oil) vented out the engine after a single pass through. And yes, the crew & airframe got very greasy.
Radials have odd # cylinders because they evenly skip a cylinder as they revolve thru 720d. With even # cylinders at least 2 cylinders fire in immediate sequence. (There are even # cylinder 2 stroke radials (eg Nordberg Diesel)) Because the master rod causes uneven articulation of the slave rods, radials have secondary vibration headaches. Jumo had its work cut out, but the engine was set up to self-cancel these vibes. (Its wonder P&W sorted out the R4360.). So Jumo’s trade was uneven firing for cancelled vibes. Cheers
Enjoy your videos, being an aviator (job), P/T engineer, engine builder and warbird enthusiast, I can be a real PITA on correctness! 🙂 IMHO your channel, along with Gregs airplanes and Dr Mark Felton's Productions, is one of few worthy of viewing. Well researched, produced and presented. On point and fact based. If only the likes of the once upon time watchable "History" TV channel paid half as much attention... So many channels are kid made, poorly produced, aimed very low, and loaded with hyperbole and inaccuracies. Not yours! Thanks for your efforts. SUBSCRIBED!
The Ju 288 did fly with the Jumo 222 (as well as the BMW 801 and DB610). The engine was ambitious in that the Junkers was trying to achieve 2500hp with only 87 octane B4 fuel whereas allied engines like the Sabre and R-3350 used 100 or 100/130. The engine was scheduled for production in 1944 and eventually succeeded in its type test at 2800hp with B4 + MW50 but it was decided to wait for it to achieve 3000hp. I suspect the engine could have been introduced in de rated form of 2200hp but airframe weight growth easily outstrips engine development. It takes 6 years to get a piston engine in service. The Germans never gave it enough tube.
Great examination of the engines creation and development. Would love to know more about the 'Harmonic resonance' problems encountered (around 10.42 min ).
Good luck; most of the documentation on such things was lost to the ravages of war. But I agree, would be interesting to know all about it. Personally, I'm curious how the engineers would have measured or evaluated harmonics in the 1940s. Not as if they had high frequency accelerometers back then.
The most likely problem they encountered would have been crankshaft resonance. As you extract more power, the torque applied by the combustion processes increase in almost direct proportion. However, that 'mode of failure' would have been torsional. Even if accelerometers were available, they would be of little use. Certainly, most automotive engines use a 'tuned absorber' on the front of the crankshaft, tuned to nominally to the same frequency as the crankshaft as a means of reducing the twist at resonance.@@GroovesAndLands
The difference in octane ratings is mostly mythical. The Germans were about six months behind the Americans on fuel octane levels. With methanol water injection the difference evaporated. Britain was behind the Germans for the first two years of WW2 because they had no Tetraethyl lead production (unlike the Germans) capacity and imported all the high octane fuel from the United States. The total lack of ANY fuel was a bigger problem for the Germans than the octane levels of the fuel they had.
@@massmike11 Ten minutes is longer than the ammunition will last in combat - and that’s how much was in the tank. The full authority engine management system in the German fighters took care of most of that anyway. Unlike the Americans, the Germans ran full rich mixtures (for highest octane yields) at all times too. They weren’t worried about range when flying over Germany.
At 19:20 there is a drawing of a Fock Wulf fighter with a single mid engine Jumo 222. Can anyone shed any light on this aircraft proposal? Obviously it did not proceed to production.
It looks to be a drawing by Justo Miranda ... for really authentic sources and serious research I would recommend the latest booklet of Dan Sharp which covers some fighter projects with the Jumo 222.
Se le menti migliori avessero avuto occasione di dare il loro contributo anche fuori dal contesto delle guerre sicuramente la civiltà ne avrebbe giovato, questo motore , per gli addetti ai lavori , è un opera d'arte in anticipo coi tempi, onore postumo al merito.
Fascinating engine. The logic of the design is so common sense, how some of the other WW2 engjnes ran at all is baffling. It would be interesting to know what the harmonics were from as it is( kind of ) a triple plane opposed flat 8, and fuel injected to boot! Love the photos of the various aircraft, btw, especially the Uhu.
There were some great engine innovations that were never exploited in aircraft simply because everyone got an erection for jet engines. Think about a Wankel in an airplane I believe probably the best possible application for that engine because oil consumption and emissions were not an issue. There were some great diesel engine designs at wars end that were never developed because of jets. I believe that those diesels could've been used today in long range transports and personal aircraft. Anyhow thank you Flight Dojo I very much enjoy your videos.
Style of text which describes the engine in the beginning is very... special, so to say. Like something from marketing materials mimics technical whitepaper. All these "fine lines", "illustrating" and such :-)
All sucessfull radiale have odd numbers of cylinder banks, usually multiples of 7 or 9. I have allways assumed that 6 was avoided due to balance issues.
Who is interested enough in this niche of piston aero engine content to watch these videos but doesn't immediately hit the subscribe button? Help the man out here guys!
Lol. I'm a nurse , have no experience or history with planes and no interest in ever flying an airplane. Yet here I am (for years) watching content on ancient airplane technology. Greg's airplane and auto , WW2 bombers , 2 other great channels vastly different than dojo s but great stuff!
Your recommendation of Calum's book has really opened up my interest in the subject. In the context of the 222, it still had a 3-valve combustion chamber. Added to this engineering faux pas was the scarcity of strategic metals that inhibited the quality of their otherwise advanced engines. Great video, and thanks for the recommendation of the book.
@@piperpa4272Probably means 'The Secret Horsepower Race' by Callum Douglas. Highly recommended for insight into WW2 aero engines from Britain, Germany, Italy and USA.
The Wright R-2120 was not a hexagonal layout. Seven cylinders in each row. Six cylinders in each bank. The Soviets did bring a very similar engine to production status but did not use it in series production. As usual see Old Machine Press.
Seems like the pinicle of piston engine design across the board was the radial engine... I believe for aircraft the radial was way superior in almost every way to the inline engine... Look at the R-4300 by P&W...The Sabre Mark VII was a pretty kool engine also...
@Turnipstalk Gotta push back that a Porsche or VW boxer-firing horizontally opposed engine is "effectively a radial". It's not. A key distinction of a radial is each "row" of cylinders are on the same plane, and make use of the same crankpin. The whole point of the horizontal engine is the inertia of each piston/rod assembly is acting equal/opposite to the one opposed to it - which mandates the cylinders be offset from one-another by a crankpin - so that both opposed cylinders reach TDC (or BDC) simultaneously. That's very different than a radial. However, typical Harley Davidsons V-twins could be considered a 2-cylinder radial...and they run like crap.
Nitrous oxide gave the common BMW 801 and Jumo 605 engines about 500 more HP. The late 222's could make almost 3,000 HP without it. For an engine with its displacement there would have been a 700+ HP gain
In German aero engines NOX injection was used to restore power at high altitude and MW50 used to increase power at low altitude. The Ta 152H was unusual in using both simultaneously
Sounds like a slickly-produced commercial promotion for Junkers. I suggest dropping most of the adjectives for a more direct style, and changing your reading rate to emphasize important sentences. Silence can be an excellent narrative tool.
Sir FlightDojo, Can you please do the new video of BMW802 and BMW803, That two new large air-cooled radial aircraft engine is more powerful to give Luftwaffe and RLM deploy strategic bomber, But BMW802 and BMW803 is unsuccessful to fail test run performance at air-cooled and lack of quality high-temperature alloys meant the project was never able to enter production. Please introduce BMW802 and BMW803 new video, I have been waiting for you.
@@flightdojo idk I'm going to have to look into it, i know sodium is circulated as a coolant in nuclear reactors (and LFTR etc) Probably it's only liquid when it's at operating temp, but I don't understand how it's implemented here.
When the valve is manufactured, the valve stem is drilled out and partially filled with metallic sodium. A cap is welded on to the stem to seal the sodium in. When in operation, the heat from the valve face melts the sodium, which then draws the heat away from the valve face and allows the valve to run at higher compression ratios without burning the valve edges. Sodium filled valves are very common in today's cars and have been used in high performance engines for many years.
Considering the collective intelligence within Germany, why did nobody foresee the incredible risks of attacking Western Europe? Germany could have simply ignored Chamberlain’s war declaration. What could he have done?
I've often mused about this, myself. In fact I was chatting about it with a friend just last night. I think it comes down to Hitler's paranoia. Maybe he was right to be paranoid about it. If Hitler had ignored France/Britain, and instead focused on an Eastern front - he could have launched Barbarossa a full year earlier - during a drier spring which would have allowed the attack to commence earlier in the spring. Considering how close he got to Moscow even with the late attack - perhaps his campaign against Russia would have been more successful. It also would have given Stalin a full year LESS time to prepare. However, with Hitlers focus on the East - his entire Western side would have been exposed to attack from France/Britain. Would France/Britain, having already declared war against Germany, just sit there and watch Germany's success in the East and do NOTHING? Maybe.... But I think not. I think they would have watched Hitler's success in the East and been terrified of him consolidating his successes in the East and then turning his attention West to finish off all of Europe. Interesting to think about.
I believe the prevailing attitude of appeasement would have kept Western Europe at bay despite the war declaration. France and the Low Countries would have extended the Magino Line making Blitz Kreig less effective. There would have been no need to prop up Stalin and Hitler would probably (through who knows) kept his U-Boats at bay. On the other hand Hitler’s generals were bad at following orders. They all knew Goering was full of it so would have kept air transport as optional. BUT (against orders) they split their forces to take Moscow which had no strategic significance. Even Stalin was amazed at that mistake. The Nazi doctrine of genocide would have made it hard to maintain the long border down to the Caucasus oilfields. It was idiotic because Russian peasants hated Stalin and would have “happily” fought against him.
Hitler absolutely wanted the war with France. He wanted revenge for WWI. He didn’t wanted war with UK because he saw the British as Arian race. Finally when he declared war to Russia and USA Germany got a second time in a war against 90% of the world population. Somehow not a so good idea. For that reason all this discussion of angloamerican experts „what would have happened if general X had done this … and used weapon Y“ is senseless for us Germans - the war and the ideology was based on a death cult of sacrificing humans. This is the real tragic - you see all the fine engineering and advanced tactics of the German war machinery - but the total irrational mindset of the Nazis were causing an outburst of brutality and sadism that was selfdestructive from the beginning on.
Wiki gives a different view - the 222 was never used operationally due to its many operational failings and concentrating on this one flawed design left the Luftwaffe using lesser pre-war designed engines through to the end of the war.
It's a fairly common story throughout WW2 German military projects. The HeS 011 made ambitious promises with many aircraft planned around it, but never delivered. Tanks were much the same. I do wonder for tanks, though, what would have happened if Germany had modified Daimler-Benz aircraft engines in the same way that the Merlin was modified into the outstanding Meteor.
You can subscribe and not have notifications. Then the videos just show up in your feed. You just click the notification bell and it cycles through the different options
"Sodium filled intake valves" ???? Don't you mean exhaust valves? The intakes are naturally cooled by the charge air vs the exhaust valves being exposed to the flame of combustion...
Also, imagine if they could have put modern turbos on it! The altitude they reached, over 40,000 feet is quite respectable. Im curious about lonvevity/tbo , fuel consumption figures, too. Any info on that?
Nice. The guy was right in pointing out a monopoly, I mean pretty soon everything except the 109 had jumo in it. Not sure what the differences were between those businesses but in retrospect jumo was just leagues ahead of the others. If anything they should have been given full control of that and put those other plants with setting up production. Not like it would have mattered. lol A bit preachy toward the beginning there m8. 35 seconds to remind the 60% why they never subbed to you in the first place. Actually probably closer to the 15% that watch your videos that just don't like you or the way you do things, hard to tell, but you have been confrontational a few times, not sure if that is it, or how you handled those situations. I would say a lot of the non subs are way beyond your control however, auto play ruins subs, ad block, weird browsers, mobile users, tablet users, random countries. Probably is a video about that out there too, but yeah a simple reminder to like, subscribe and comment are all sufficient, and we all know why. Albeit we can even block that as it is a call to action, or in video ads, sponsorblock is amazing. It is just someone has to watch you and set the filter then the rest then on won't have to see it. Your content speaks for itself, and is really nice quality. Upload regularly, and you should keep growing. Albeit this is a bit niche, maybe make your tags more vague like engine, combustion, gasoline, ya know, so it gets fed into engine fans no matter interest in warplanes or whatever. Good luck.
If technological talent (and many other endeavors) were the determining factors as to who should be the leading rulers on this planet,Germany would take up the 1st spot in the row of candidates!
It has a lot of similarities to the Sabre - increasing total volume by reducing individual cylinder size but increasing the number. Both liquid-cooled inlines. Sabre is 4 banks of 6 and the Jumo 6 banks of 4. Both achieved this by using complicated, precise engineering and both had serious difficulties with quality control as a result. Napier got assistance from other companies with experience in this kind of quality control and made it work - mostly. Jumo ... did not. I would hazard a guess that being bombed 3 days a week and operating a factory with a significant percentage of unwilling foreign workers played a part in that.
Hi there! I enjoyed your video about airplanes of the past. Your exploration of historical aircraft was fascinating. I believe there might be a small error in the script at the very beginning of the video, its first words. The word ‘anals’ should actually be ‘annals,’ pronounced as ‘ann-uhls’, the narrator said, 'ayn-uhls'. In addition to referring to historical records or chronicles, ‘annals’ can also be confused with ‘anals,’ which pertains to the butthole. It’s essential to use the correct term in context. Perhaps only a butthole would skip the final narration check before publication! 😄 Let’s hope this inspires more thorough proofreading next time.
An interesting design, but it was not going to happen under the Nazi's chaotic leadership. The Brits really lucked out with the RR merlin and had the prewar dispersed manufacturing planning to go with it. The Germans had neither. Nor did wartime Germany have enough resources to produce whole new fleets of aircraft worth of engines. Or the fuel to run them it turned out. Most nation's best war engines were in some advanced stage of development before the war even started. Germans even had the first jets and screwed that up. Guess a bunch of drunks, drug addicts and alcoholics are not who you want to run the air force.
@Turnipstalk the thing is running on diesel was possible with the jumo jet engines. Diesel was the closest Germany could manufacture from coal. C3 on the other hand, still much worse then 150 Octane stuff the allies had was horrible short on supply.
The biggest problem of 222 was the concentration of the enormous power on the 5 crankshaft bearings of one crankshaft. The sliding bearing technology without some very rare alloy materials the Germans not had was not advanced enough to solve the problem. The Brits made their 3000 HP engine with 2 crankshafts successfully and could adapt it on the Hawker Tempest
@@justacomment1657 Jet fuel is what, closer to kerosene than high octane gas, I get it. Less processing & costs/time. Good point. Would have been a rude surprise for bomber command in mid/late 42 if hundreds of He 280s were buzzsawing through German skies.
They didn't cut back on the project because someone was trying to stifle innovation. The design created so much drag that it would be a massive fuel hog the Germany could not afford at the time.
Unfortunately you post new videos very rarely. I had to search for you newer content even though i try to follow your newer content especially. Your content is appealing but you almost went extinct yourself.
A typical WW2 Nazi project. Huge effort, money and resources expended and magnificent engineering outcome with zero effect on the war. I am amazed (even with the Nazis) that the programme was continued AFTER the emergency fighter programme was instigated and Junkers was heavily engaged in developing a practical jet engine. Brilliant engine. Totally pointless. Thank Christ.
Typical German design, overly complex difficult to manufacture and unreliable. The GM Allison V-3420 was a far better engine that worked. In 1937 Rollers ran their Griffon V-12 on the test bench with a very respectable pony count of 1,730, the 60 Series with two speed two stage blower added another 4-500 ponies, not bad for a big V-12,like Clarence Kelly Johnson said in 1954 whilst working on his 'Dragon Lady 'Keep it simple stupid'.
Really enjoying these engine videos! @flightdojo - Just gonna make an offer, for your future videos, if you want you can send me all the German words you intend to use and I can record the correct pronunciation for you. (I wouldn't ask for anything in return, I just like the channel and this would be a way to help out in a small way.) Let me know if you're interested. :)
First the Nazis lost the war for it was much to large for Germany. Then the wonderful weapons came to late, long time in the war there was the opinion „the war nearly is won, for the rest the weapons we have are sufficient
I did say "anne-als" by the way, instead of "anals" but I can hear what some of you mean, it's easy to hear it either way, imo. Next time I'll be sure to be more anal in my quality control.
Sounds like the narration has been accelerated by about 20%.
Makes for a cartoonish presentation, or perhaps you’d like to jam in more words per minute than Mr Dark Skies?
At least you only used the “b” (behemoth) word once. I think.
I cant unhear Fuck-wolf now, lol
I am German, a mechanical engineer and aviation enthusiast and I work as a teacher at a technical vocational school. I love this video in so many ways. Masses of information I never heard of before, in-depth content and a clear, sober yet also entertaining presentation.
Bravo!!
You tell it incredibly detailed without being boring. That's a rare quality.
Love the information-filled presentation and the non mainstream information! Great video! Good luck finding TH-cam content offering in depth and obscure information like this! Good job!
Don't throw shade on this very innovative engine. I have never seen anything like it. Great video topic.
Look up the Lycoming XR-7755. 127 liter, 36 cylinders (9 banks of 4 cylinders), water cooled. Was to be used on the B-36.
Love your content! Please keep up the great work!
Just found your channel and I am already binging...
Thank you! Means a lot
Pace yourself 😂. Upload schedule isn't what you call frequent. Great stuff but I burned through all the content then nothing for months lol
Huge shout out to Flight Dojo for this documentary! I've always been curious about the Jumo-222.
The British developed the radical high-power 24 cylinder Napier Sabre, the Americans developed their big Wright R-3350 and Pratt and Whitney R-2800 radials and all of them saw service, albeit with reliability and maintenance issues. Interestingly development of the Sabre and big American radials began in 1937, as did the Jumo-222 but it never saw wartime service yet the Allied engines did. Why did no large, high powered German piston aircraft engine ever see service? I saw the Jumo-222 at the Deutsches Museum, Munich decades ago. It had always been rather a mystery to me.
Certainly earlier in the war, there was a need for heavy bombers but a cascading series of management errors prevented it.
There was the decision to kill the Ju-89 and D-19 after Generalleutnant Wever's death, thanks both to the OKW's tunnel vision of the Luftwaffe as merely tactical air support for ground forces with no interest (or perhaps even understanding) of the value of strategic bombing, plus concerns over limited supplies of aluminium and other resources. Then there was the ridiculous dive bombing requirement Generalluftzeugmeister Udet imposed on the He-177A (followed by what Heinkel described in his book as Reichsmarschall Goering's refusal to allow him to end the systemic coupled engine fires with a 4 separate nacelle He-177B which might well have become a German version of the rebirth of the failed Avro Manchester as the successful Lancaster). All of this ended up virtually denying the Luftwaffe the heavy bombers it could have had and which might have made a big difference in the battle of the Atlantic and on the Eastern Front. By mid war, the whole bomber (and maybe the large, high power engine) issue had become moot as Germany had lost the initiative to take the offensive and instead needed fighters to defend itself from increasingly large Allied bombing raids.
I had always believed the Jumo-222 to have been an overly ambitious technical failure that ended up killing the bomber-B program and the FW-191. I expected that Junkers Motorenwerke had limited numbers of staff engineers and they were already over-extended in development and meeting hefty production targets for the Jumo-211 and later the Jumo-213 as well as the cutting edge Jumo 109-004 gas turbine program, plus there was development of other jets and even turboprops which ultimately only benefited the Soviets . I assumed there simply weren't enough remaining to adequately develop the Jumo-222.
This video appears to suggest otherwise.
As I understand your argument Flight Dojo, the Jumo-222 was a promising engine that overcame major engineering challenges and showed genuine prospects of success but whose development was compromised (once again) by the RLM, and changing political imperatives. Without looking at dimensions, I wonder if some version of the Jumo-222 could have been incorporated into existing fighter airframes? My gut feeling is that it would have been so big and heavy that like the Hawker Typhoon, Republic P-47, or Chance-Vought F4U a larger airframe would need to have been designed around it and by mid war there was no time or resources for that. Besides that might have further compromised the jet fighter programs. Anybody know for sure?
An interesting Jumo-222 feature was the 2 speed supercharger which appears to have been aligned along the engine axis, like the BMW-801 radial, not at right angles to it like the other Jumo and Daimler-Benz inline engines. I guess this must have been due to the hexagonal radial layout of this engine. Also I notice that the Jumo-222 E/F included a 2 speed, stage supercharger with a second stage driven by a fluid coupling like the DB-601, 605, 603 engines., the subject of much prewar research at DB yet something not seen in other production German aircraft engines. Stanley Hooker's 2 stage supercharger had hugely advanced high altitude performance of the later RR Merlin engines. I wonder if Werner von der Null's work was the basis of this?
A typical Jumo design feature at the time was the 2 inlet, 1 exhaust valve arrangement.
The 4 valve heads in the DB and RR engines seem to have been better and eventually the later Jumo-213 head was redesigned to take 2 exhaust valves. Anyone know why Jumo hung on to 3 valve cylinder heads for so long? Cost? Simplification?
Although she possessed so much engineering expertise, Germany was hamstrung by limitations on metals needed for high temperature and high tensile alloys plus issues with high octane equivalent fuels, yet remarkably managed to produce very competitive piston engines. The Jumo-222 might have played a considerable role in the war had it been available early enough.
Great video, thanks Flight Dojo.
The Ju-89 and Do-19 were dead ends that Wever soon recognized, hence he pushed for the Bomber A requirement which lead to the He 177. Most of the failure points of said bomber, with the exception of the dive bombing requirement, were the fault of Heinkel, as he was the instigator of the disastrous DB606 engine, surface evaporation cooling and other engineering marvels he sold Wever and Udet. Goring did not know about the engine configuration until 1942, as he expected to see a normal 4 engine bomber. Classic RLM miscommunication and mismanagement at work.
The Jumo 222 was considered for the FW 190 as its size, dimensions and weight were not grater than the BMW 801, 802, DB603 and Jumo 213.
@@alexsv1938
The Ju-89 and Do-19 were both under powered, a legacy of the intention of the Treaty of Versaiiles to hobble German military aviation. This was not unusual with large heavy bomber development at the time. The Ju-89 led to the Ju-90, Ju-290 and Ju-390 which were transports but otherwise might have been developed as heavy bombers (a proposed variant of the Ju-390 was claimed capable of bombing the US, but who knows). I don't think you can fairly call the Junkers aircraft at least a dead end. The Bomber A program was another strategic bomber specification with even more demanding performance. They all died with Walther Wever.
In his book Heinkel argues that he and chief engineer Hertel had designed a competitive 4 engine bomber only to be shocked to have Udet require it to dive bomb.
Heinkel claimed Udet had held up and reduced the performance of the promising Ju-88 with his dive bombing demands and that Udet saw the He-177 as "a Ju-88 with 4 engines".
As a result the He-177 airframe had to be reinforced for significant pull out forces from the (relatively shallow) dives demanded of it, increasing its weight and reducing speed, payload and range. In an effort to win back lost performance they resorted to radical solutions like the DB-606 coupled engines and surface evaporation cooling. There was reason to do this as the coupled engines had worked well for the He-119, although surface evaporation cooling was pretty quickly dropped. Unfortunately for the He-177A, there was a design defect in the DB-606 that caused the oil to froth at altitude and drip down onto white hot inside exhaust stacks of the coupled DB-601 engines, starting uncontrollable fires. DB were overloaded with DB-601 production and lacked the engineering staff to investigate this issue quickly. This problem was compounded by what Heinkel described as a major design error by Hertel to not include engine firewalls, which allowed the engine fires to spread to structural members and control cables and ultimately cause catastrophic wing failure. Had a service-ready Jumo-222 been available, these problems would have disappeared.
After DB seemed unable to quickly trace and fix the fire problem (it became much less of an issue with the DB-610 engines) Heinkel claims that he approached Goering to let him redesign the He-177 wings with a conventional 4 separate engine configuration, but the Reichsmarschall refused. Heinkel claimed that when he told Goering that Udet required the He-177 to dive bomb, Goering exclaimed that as madness and that he had not been informed. IMHO It's hard to credit this. This guy was responsible for the entire air force and he did not know that it's only four engine bomber was required to dive bomb - something expected of no other heavy bomber? If that is true then this is just more evidence of Goering's shocking incompetence. Alternately, Goering was known to frequently blame subordinates who followed his orders when things turned out badly. It's hard to know exactly what he thought.
Out of sight of the Reichsmarschall and the RLM Heinkel privately built the He-277/He-177B in Vienna-Schwecat (sp?) and the He-274 at the Farman plant in occupied France, both with four separate engine nacelles, fitted with DB-603 engines as I recall. Both proved to be fine aircraft with good performance and flight characteristics. However by this time the war was turning and the need for fighters for home defence was more pressing than for more bombers.
The He-274 was used by France after the war in ramjet experiments up to 1953, I believe.
That's my $0.02 on this.
@@tsegulin I would like to give a longer answer but typing on my phone is too bothersome.
The Do 19 and Ju 89 were overall bad designs, even with more powerful engines their speed would be marginally better, their range mediocre and payload laughable. The Ju 86, He 111 and Do 17 were overall better aircrafts, hence the Bomber A requirement to get something better.
If you were to look more into the Ju 89-390 development you will see that they are, basically wholly new aircrafts, with little remaining from the Ju 89.
I will take what Heinkel says with a grain of salt as he, together with Messerschmitt, Tank and pretty much everyone in the Nazi apparatus tends to lie and make themselves look better in post war publications.
Goring: “I was told at the time that the two would be coupled in tandem, and now suddenly we find this monstrosity with the two engines welded together side by side, so that you just can’t get at them.”
In August 1942, he went on to comment about the He-177: “It really is the saddest chapter. I do not have one single long-ranged bomber … I look at these four-engined aircraft of the British and Americans with really enormous envy. They are far ahead of us here.”
Three weeks later, he had even more biting comments about that aircraft! In a speech made to aircraft industrialists, he outright mocked them about the He-177, “The things they told me! I asked them, ‘Why not go over to a pure four-engine type?’ And they told me, ‘No, four engined typed are passé now; it is far better to have only two airscrews.’ So I said, ‘Well, well! The enemy is proving quite a nuisance to me with his four-engined types, they are a deadly nuisance.’ Not so, is the reply: ‘We are doing things differently. We are putting two together, or two in tandem.”
There's so much contradiction with the He 177 as the Richelin Test Center says one thing, the RLM another thing, Heinkel another thing and so on.
Also, just so you know, Goring had a very hands-off approach to the Luftwaffe (he was lazy) and had the tendency of leaving everything up to his subordinates and visiting the RLM rarely. (1 time at most per week)
@@alexsv1938
Interesting. Thanks for your comments.
If Goering had been open to a four separate engine version of the He-177, I wonder why Heinkel built the He-177B and He-274 in secret at his own expense?
In principle, one can imagine that autobiographies tend to paint their subjects in the best possible light. I'm reading Frank Vann's biography on Messerschmitt now and while it seems he was a braggart and very defensive when challenged he had a way of telling truth to power which is preserved in letters, papers and industry presentations he gave. He also had a much better view of the future of the air war than the RLM, especially the coming USAAF role. I'm not convinced that Ernst Heinkel, Willi Messerschmitt and Kurt Tank can be generally written off as liars compared to those in power within the Nazi government.
What I've read about Goering was that he was primarily a careerist, would do anything to enhance his position (including the Final Solution, which he passed to Heydrich to implement) and was totally focused on taking over from Hitler some day. He was carrying four (I think it was) ministerial portfolios, something no one man could possibly manage well and that he would routinely sacrifice subordinates to protect himself. Hard to know where the truth lies on the He-177A and this sorry Luftwaffe chapter probably deserves another review.
The one point relevant to the Jumo-222 IMHO is that had it been available early in the war, the DB-606 and DB-610 - which were always ugly improvisations - could have been dropped in favour of it for the He-177.
In Heinkel's book he makes the point that the Treaty of Versailles set out to permanently destroy a German military aviation industry but failed when it came to airframe design and engineering. Where it had succeeded, he argues, is with high performance aircraft engine development, which took much longer than airframes to develop. He mentioned this in the context of being unable to find a suitable German power plant for the He-70 mail plane in 1933, having to resort to the RR Kestrel to realize its full potential but being forced to live with the BMW VI. It was here that his interest in jet development began.
I wonder to what extent the delay on the Jumo-222 and the coupled engine fiasco that wrecked the He-177 might have been the result of this deliberate effort to stymie the German aircraft engine industry?
@@tsegulin It is probably because the others in the RLM were not. Udet and to a lesser extent Jeschonnek and Milch were looking at the twin-engine configuration as the future of bombers, perhaps that way it would have been cheaper and faster to build the wing, but certainly it would have allowed the bomber to dive bomb.
You will notice (barring a few exceptions) that the 4 engine bomber configuration started to make a reappearance in 1942-43, perhaps as a result of the He 177 disaster. Ju 488, FW 191C, He 274, 277 and dozen other paper projects.
The RLM was plagued by shortsightness, petty disputes, miscommunication and mismanagement of many things, though it is debatable how worse was it compared to the British Air Ministry. The guy in charge of engine development (forgot his name) was certainly bad at his job to some extent, with the Jumo 222 being perhaps set aside in favor of the 213 as the Germans were really excited about its potential. Perhaps the cancelation came as a mistaken belief that the 213, achieving 2000 HP would enter production soon so there was no need of the more complex 222.
Or, as by late 1942-early 1943 the industry was ordered to decrease the nickel quantity to 8% in piston engine, which lead to the DB605 25h lifespan, (with the miscommunication between the manufacturing industry, RLM and engine firms dragging the issue until they realized the engine firms did not know about the nickel decrease) the RLM was perhaps not receptive to the possibility of a DB605 situation with the 222? Or the bearing stresses were too much? Dunno, even if the engine was cancelled from petty reasons, Milch would have been forced to use sound arguments. (This is just my speculation)
I visited the Deutsches Museum on the last day of a trip to Munich. But, I did not know it was divided into Air, Sea and Land...! We just wandered into the closest building which turned out to be Sea. Still amazing. But, wished we'd gone to Air.... ;)
Air has an own Hangar outside of Munich in Oberschleißheim. So you didn't miss much, only a small part of the Air Collection is in the Museum.
actually you need 16 days to see every single piece they have on display there. also they house germanys first submarine.
On the last Day of our visit....
I made the same mistake, one needs a 2 weeks trip to this museum to see everything 😊
Munich is München.
@@wolfganggugelweith8760 Ja.
Excellent video, thank you for providing such high quality content
Fascinating. . . I would not want to set the valve clearance up on the engine. . 🤣
Thank you for your time enlightening us. 👍
You had me at "liquid cooled inline radial”
superb video - THANK YOU !!!!
I love seeing these videos being uploaded thank you!
I wonder what will you do once you run out of engines would you cover the guns on aircraft?
Not sure. Lots of engines and other topics
Of the engines that never went into production much less flight testing I have long been fascinated by the Wright R-2160. It must have sounded glorious. 21 firing impulses per rotation of the crankshafts. Yes crankshafts. Three crankshafts tied together by lay shafts between each cylinder bank. Plus OHCs
Curious about the firing order of each row. The great majority of radials have odd numbers of cylinders per row for a reason - these engines are four strokes, which means each cylinder fires every 720 degrees (2 revolutions). For a smooth firing order, you would skip a cylinder each time - the firing order of a 7 cylinder single bank engine would therefore be 1-3-5-7-2-4-6, this way, every cylinder in the row fires once every 720 degrees, with evenly distributed power strokes (remember that all of the pistons in the row are tied together because you have one crank throw per row and one master rod). How would you achieve this if you had an even number of cylinders per row? The only way I can think of doing this with six cylinders is to fire two cylinders one after another, then skip two cylinders, so you would have a firing order of 1-2-5-6-3-4. Not perfectly smooth, but usable, especially since there are four rows and the crank throws can be set so that overall you'd have a more even firing sequence. I wonder if this is how they did it.
It's not a radial, but a 6-bank inline. 4-stroke radials *have* to have an odd number of cylinders per row. And the rows are usually staggered so as to even out power transfer to the main shaft.
@@onenote6619 It's a radial in the sense that all the conrods in a plane (a row) are connected together to a common big end. Like other radials there's one master rod and the rest are attached to the master with a pin. (I've heard it said that Harley Davidson engines are two cylinder "radials" by this definition.) Since the pistons in each row are attached together like this, the same firing sequence constraints apply.
The firing order is actually 2 at a time on opossing banks, it follows a dual helical firing order. It's incredibly well though, you get perfect balance and timing.
From source "Torque-Meter" Vol.6 N°3:
Jumo 222E Cylinder Numbering and Firing Order
(example: 2nd Bank, cyl 4) count cylinders 1-4 from front to rear in each bank and banks 1-6 in counter-clockwise direction. Ignition happens in Clockwise direction tho...
(Two Cylinders Fired Simultaneously) so we have 12 pairs of ignition before repeating the cycle.
1) 2B1 & 5B2 2) 1B1 & 4B2
3) 6B4 & 3B3 4) 2B3 & 5B4
5) 1B2 & 4B1 6) 6B2 & 3B1
7) 2B4 & 5B3 8) 1B4 & 4B3
9) 6B1 & 3B2 10) 2B2 & 5B1
11) 1B3 & 4B4 12) 6B3 & 3B4
@@marcox43 Ah... So all the cylinders in the first row (all connected to the same master rod, and the same crankpin) would be 2B1, 1B1, 6B1, etc. right? So if I concentrate on that one row of cylinders on the front of the engine, the firing order would be 2B1, 1B1, rest, rest, 4B1, 3B1, rest, rest, 6B1, 5B1, rest, rest. "Rest" meaning a piston reaching top dead center at the end of an exhaust stroke and the beginning of an intake stroke, and no firing taking place. This is over 720 degrees, with two cylinders firing in a row, 60 degrees apart, then 120 degrees with no cylinder firing, then two more firing, etc. Which is what I guessed in the beginning. Interesting indeed. Note how this differs from a "normal" radial - in any given row, every other cylinder would fire in turn, so you'd complete one row's firing sequence in 720 degrees, there always being an odd number of cylinders per row. If you have two rows of cylinders, you'd arrange the cylinders so they'd be staggered behind the first row, so if you set the cylinder in the back row 180 degrees away from the first cylinder in the front row to fire at the same time, you'd achieve a similar balance. Staggering the cylinders in the second row also helps with the cooling.
@@iskandartaib also by being a 4-cylinder bank, risk of warping is kinda low, unlike a 6 or 8 cylinder head. It has a flatplane crankshaft as you may guess, so it works like a bunch of boxers smashed together by a shared crankpin. I recommend you buying the pdf magazine ($8), it has quite some detail about it's internals.
Very well done I might say, I've seen this JUMO 222 Film before, as our family has some of Hugo's 8mm Movies made in the 1920's and early 30's, keep up the good work....
BD in Alaska..... 😎
Well I know many engines have sodium cooled exhaust valves, and apparently that tech is still used today. But I've never heard of this technology used for intake valves! Something about the pressure of war, technology is pushed and many variations of already known principles are applied in different areas to try and get that "step ahead" improvement.
There is no reason to sodium cool an intake valve
@@shawns0762 I disagree. There is usually no need for sodium on intake valves; but when you have a high power engine under sustained heavy load - the heat builds up. Just like oil squirters on pistons - unnecessary for short high power sprints, but a gamechanger for endurance engines that need to put out full rated power for hours and hours and hours.
A new one to me. Well done on finding out about this.
TOTALLY worth waiting for another deep-dive into how to turn AVGAS into glorious noise…..
Okay. Who watched this video 13,000 times and didn't hit the subscribe button?
It was you! All along!
I'm really a fan of other technical creators, but this is a pretty decent video, and I did need to know more about this powerplant. Coz I'm a guy. Nat. I really appreciate this video, sir. Thank you for keeping this history and this data alive, and it is well presented. What I could do (in my imagination) with a motor churning out 2.5 Kw @ 3,200 rpm and 6.75 compression...gaaaaaaahhhhhh. Okay. I'll hit that subscribe button and check you out.
whoops. Is that 2,500 KW, bhp, ps, whatever, 2,500 horsies is what I means.
I’ve never heard of this one. Cool
I've always been under the impression radials had to have odd numbers of cylindars per bank for some reason. How did the 222 get away with having 6? Or is the odd number rule just a myth?
As far as I know, the only difference a radial has is its cylinders are layed out "Radially" in a circle for more efficient air cooling, as opposed to an "In-line" engine with them all just in a row or two blocking eachothers airflow and making liquid cooling a requirement. I could be wrong though.
As far as the 222 goes it doesn't seem to be a Radial engine as we'd think of one, but 6 in-line engines in a Radial pattern turning a single shaft. So if the odd number of cylinders rule is a thing, with its cylinders in 6 in-line banks instead of being evenly spread around the engine, the 222 wouldn't necessarily be beholden to the same rules anyway.
This is exactly right
The old rotary engines, where the crank was fixed and the engine spun, was an early example of an attempt to achieve better cooling. Later the radial engines, where the engine was fixed and the crank spun, were an improvement because of better fuels and rotary engines were limited by centrifugal forces acting on them. But both used the 1,3,5,7,9,2,4,6,8 ( in a nine-cylinder engine ) firing order to maintain a certain amount of balance in the running of the engine. I think you have to consider this engine more like a bunch of inline four engines similar to what is present in a lot of cars and motorcycles and such. They use a 1,3,4,2 firing order to achieve balance in their service. As such ( although, I have no way of knowing what they actually did ), I would assume that what they did was a firing order where all of the number 1 cylinders fired and then all of the number 3 cylinders fired, then all of the number 4 cylinders fired and then all of the number 2 cylinders fired. As such, the firing order would be 1,1,1,1,1,1,3,3,3,3,3,3,4,4,4,4,4,4,2,2,2,2,2,2. It's the only way I can see this thing working with a single crankshaft. I noticed that there was a mention of balance and harmonics problems, probably related to this weird and wonderful engine. Also, my 1980 Honda Hawk 400 twin had a three-valve head, I really thought this was advanced back then, but now I see it was old stuff.
@@scarecrow8004Not just the cooling. Rotary engines also fixed problems with fuel and lubrication. Both were delivered to engine centre via a hollow shaft. Centripetal acceleration flung them both outward without need for complicated pumps. Burned fuel went out the exhaust pipes and used lubricant (generally castor oil) vented out the engine after a single pass through. And yes, the crew & airframe got very greasy.
Radials have odd # cylinders because they evenly skip a cylinder as they revolve thru 720d. With even # cylinders at least 2 cylinders fire in immediate sequence. (There are even # cylinder 2 stroke radials (eg Nordberg Diesel))
Because the master rod causes uneven articulation of the slave rods, radials have secondary vibration headaches. Jumo had its work cut out, but the engine was set up to self-cancel these vibes. (Its wonder P&W sorted out the R4360.).
So Jumo’s trade was uneven firing for cancelled vibes. Cheers
I am ever again amazed how well foreigners research and know about German engines. A very interesting video, indeed. Thanks, Kind Regards
Enjoy your videos, being an aviator (job), P/T engineer, engine builder and warbird enthusiast, I can be a real PITA on correctness! 🙂 IMHO your channel, along with Gregs airplanes and Dr Mark Felton's Productions, is one of few worthy of viewing. Well researched, produced and presented. On point and fact based. If only the likes of the once upon time watchable "History" TV channel paid half as much attention... So many channels are kid made, poorly produced, aimed very low, and loaded with hyperbole and inaccuracies. Not yours! Thanks for your efforts. SUBSCRIBED!
Totally agree.
And then the jet engine decided to show up and go: "Hi, I'm going to make you completely obsolete!"
Great video as always. Small hint - almost all photos of the Ju 288 show it with the Daimler Benz DB 610 engine and not with the Jumo 222.
Thanks for the info!
There are pictures of one fitted with the 222. No sure if they are in the vid. Not that far yet.
The Ju 288 did fly with the Jumo 222 (as well as the BMW 801 and DB610). The engine was ambitious in that the Junkers was trying to achieve 2500hp with only 87 octane B4 fuel whereas allied engines like the Sabre and R-3350 used 100 or 100/130. The engine was scheduled for production in 1944 and eventually succeeded in its type test at 2800hp with B4 + MW50 but it was decided to wait for it to achieve 3000hp. I suspect the engine could have been introduced in de rated form of 2200hp but airframe weight growth easily outstrips engine development. It takes 6 years to get a piston engine in service. The Germans never gave it enough tube.
Another small remark: The picture at 16:20 is the Lycoming XR-7755, not the Jumo 225 😉
Great examination of the engines creation and development. Would love to know more about the 'Harmonic resonance' problems encountered (around 10.42 min ).
Good luck; most of the documentation on such things was lost to the ravages of war. But I agree, would be interesting to know all about it. Personally, I'm curious how the engineers would have measured or evaluated harmonics in the 1940s. Not as if they had high frequency accelerometers back then.
The most likely problem they encountered would have been crankshaft resonance. As you extract more power, the torque applied by the combustion processes increase in almost direct proportion. However, that 'mode of failure' would have been torsional. Even if accelerometers were available, they would be of little use. Certainly, most automotive engines use a 'tuned absorber' on the front of the crankshaft, tuned to nominally to the same frequency as the crankshaft as a means of reducing the twist at resonance.@@GroovesAndLands
Thankyou for pronouncing Junkers correctly
Fantastic report.
Imagine what the power output would have been if they had had higher octane fuel allowing for higher compression
I need to do a video just comparing compression differences someday
The difference in octane ratings is mostly mythical. The Germans were about six months behind the Americans on fuel octane levels. With methanol water injection the difference evaporated.
Britain was behind the Germans for the first two years of WW2 because they had no Tetraethyl lead production (unlike the Germans) capacity and imported all the high octane fuel from the United States.
The total lack of ANY fuel was a bigger problem for the Germans than the octane levels of the fuel they had.
Water methanol was a very short term thing, use it to long and you blow up your engine.
@@massmike11 Ten minutes is longer than the ammunition will last in combat - and that’s how much was in the tank.
The full authority engine management system in the German fighters took care of most of that anyway.
Unlike the Americans, the Germans ran full rich mixtures (for highest octane yields) at all times too. They weren’t worried about range when flying over Germany.
At 19:20 there is a drawing of a Fock Wulf fighter with a single mid engine Jumo 222. Can anyone shed any light on this aircraft proposal? Obviously it did not proceed to production.
It looks to be a drawing by Justo Miranda ... for really authentic sources and serious research I would recommend the latest booklet of Dan Sharp which covers some fighter projects with the Jumo 222.
Se le menti migliori avessero avuto occasione di dare il loro contributo anche fuori dal contesto delle guerre sicuramente la civiltà ne avrebbe giovato, questo motore , per gli addetti ai lavori , è un opera d'arte in anticipo coi tempi, onore postumo al merito.
Fascinating engine. The logic of the design is so common sense, how some of the other WW2 engjnes ran at all is baffling. It would be interesting to know what the harmonics were from as it is( kind of ) a triple plane opposed flat 8, and fuel injected to boot! Love the photos of the various aircraft, btw, especially the Uhu.
Imagine how far piston engined aircraft would have come if the turbo jet had not been invented
You could already seen it in todays modern automobile
Just like historian and people at the time saids simply put it has reach its apex all there is to do is just refinements
It would’ve reached a maximum efficiency to output sometime in the 20th century as the late war turboprop‘s we’re reaching early jet levels of power.
There were some great engine innovations that were never exploited in aircraft simply because everyone got an erection for jet engines. Think about a Wankel in an airplane I believe probably the best possible application for that engine because oil consumption and emissions were not an issue. There were some great diesel engine designs at wars end that were never developed because of jets. I believe that those diesels could've been used today in long range transports and personal aircraft. Anyhow thank you Flight Dojo I very much enjoy your videos.
@@lyman1965still disagree no manner how efficient piston engine it can't compete agains jet in multiple fronts
Offering for the algorithm. May you be blessed with many new subscribers and viewers
Fingers crossed!
Haha I like that "offering"
Junkers hung on to the three valves per cylinder arrangement well past its sell by date.
For some reason German engines always fascinates me😅 never found out why
They definitively had their own way of doing things!
Well i guess after this im gonna watch some db600 engine vids of you 50th time 😂😂 I never had enough
Probably because they invented nearly all the relevant designs (Otto, Diesel, Wankel).
True Facts💯%☝️
Style of text which describes the engine in the beginning is very... special, so to say. Like something from marketing materials mimics technical whitepaper. All these "fine lines", "illustrating" and such :-)
Strategic addition! Operational harmony! Relentless push for innovations!
SOLD!
All sucessfull radiale have odd numbers of cylinder banks, usually multiples of 7 or 9. I have allways assumed that 6 was avoided due to balance issues.
Who is interested enough in this niche of piston aero engine content to watch these videos but doesn't immediately hit the subscribe button? Help the man out here guys!
Lol. I'm a nurse , have no experience or history with planes and no interest in ever flying an airplane. Yet here I am (for years) watching content on ancient airplane technology. Greg's airplane and auto , WW2 bombers , 2 other great channels vastly different than dojo s but great stuff!
Your recommendation of Calum's book has really opened up my interest in the subject. In the context of the 222, it still had a 3-valve combustion chamber. Added to this engineering faux pas
was the scarcity of strategic metals that inhibited the quality of their otherwise advanced engines. Great video, and thanks for the recommendation of the book.
Which book is this?
The Secret Horsepower race western front fighter engine development by Calum Douglas Morton books@@piperpa4272
@@piperpa4272Probably means 'The Secret Horsepower Race' by Callum Douglas. Highly recommended for insight into WW2 aero engines from Britain, Germany, Italy and USA.
Calum Douglas's "The Secret Horsepower Race".@@piperpa4272
@@piperpa4272The secret horsepower race. Available on Amazon about £27.
Thanks I appreciate it I just didn't know , I dropped many subscriptions because of the notification every two minutes :)
You didn't showcase the installation and cooling arrangements.
Bravo Dojo! Keep it up mate 😊 Napier Deltic at some point yes?
The Napier Deltic is a "relative" of the Junkers Jumo 223 opposite-piston two-stroke Diesel engine in a rhombic configuration.
The Wright R-2120 was not a hexagonal layout. Seven cylinders in each row. Six cylinders in each bank.
The Soviets did bring a very similar engine to production status but did not use it in series production. As usual see Old Machine Press.
Praise the TH-cam algorithm...one sub gained!
Do you know anything more about those bouncing bombs? This is completely new to me.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouncing_bomb
@@onenote6619Thank you, i only knew the British version but not the German Version.
Flight Dojo, you didn’t tell us the displacement or whether it was carbureted or injected.
What's your displacement,
Are you carburated or injected?
Seems like the pinicle of piston engine design across the board was the radial engine... I believe for aircraft the radial was way superior in almost every way to the inline engine... Look at the R-4300 by P&W...The Sabre Mark VII was a pretty kool engine also...
@Turnipstalk Gotta push back that a Porsche or VW boxer-firing horizontally opposed engine is "effectively a radial". It's not. A key distinction of a radial is each "row" of cylinders are on the same plane, and make use of the same crankpin. The whole point of the horizontal engine is the inertia of each piston/rod assembly is acting equal/opposite to the one opposed to it - which mandates the cylinders be offset from one-another by a crankpin - so that both opposed cylinders reach TDC (or BDC) simultaneously. That's very different than a radial.
However, typical Harley Davidsons V-twins could be considered a 2-cylinder radial...and they run like crap.
Take a look at the Rolls Royce "Crecy" engine if you want to see the most overcomplicated piston engine design...
Harley engines don’t run like crap, though they do have an uneven firing order. They have also been very reliable since the evo.
awesome !
Very interesting, now we know🤠
Explaining p-47 supercharger
Nitrous oxide gave the common BMW 801 and Jumo 605 engines about 500 more HP. The late 222's could make almost 3,000 HP without it. For an engine with its displacement there would have been a 700+ HP gain
In German aero engines NOX injection was used to restore power at high altitude and MW50 used to increase power at low altitude. The Ta 152H was unusual in using both simultaneously
@@williamzk9083 yes, the Jumo 213 was new for the TA-152 with 2,240 HP. It was expected to have a capacity of 3,300 hp
Sounds like a slickly-produced commercial promotion for Junkers. I suggest dropping most of the adjectives for a more direct style, and changing your reading rate to emphasize important sentences. Silence can be an excellent narrative tool.
Sir FlightDojo, Can you please do the new video of BMW802 and BMW803, That two new large air-cooled radial aircraft engine is more powerful to give Luftwaffe and RLM deploy strategic bomber, But BMW802 and BMW803 is unsuccessful to fail test run performance at air-cooled and lack of quality high-temperature alloys meant the project was never able to enter production. Please introduce BMW802 and BMW803 new video, I have been waiting for you.
Imagine a Focke-Wulf ta152 with the 222E/F!
Wtf is "sodium cooled intake valves"? 13:30
Sounds like just reading a script...
The interior of the poppet valve is filled with liquid sodium
@@flightdojo idk I'm going to have to look into it, i know sodium is circulated as a coolant in nuclear reactors (and LFTR etc)
Probably it's only liquid when it's at operating temp, but I don't understand how it's implemented here.
Interesting, I guess that is a thing still.
I'd never heard of that.
When the valve is manufactured, the valve stem is drilled out and partially filled with metallic sodium. A cap is welded on to the stem to seal the sodium in. When in operation, the heat from the valve face melts the sodium, which then draws the heat away from the valve face and allows the valve to run at higher compression ratios without burning the valve edges. Sodium filled valves are very common in today's cars and have been used in high performance engines for many years.
What's funny about this is that every high school shop teacher has to keep an eye out for kids cutting old exhaust valves open for the sodium metal.
Meanwhile the R-2800 started at 2,000 hp and just went up from there.
Great point! Lots of better strategic metals and better fuel though.
Probably the best radial engine of the war. It was maintenance friendly, could take abuse, and it always delivered excellent power output.
@@josephglatz25 I don't think it is a radial. If it were, the successive banks would have to be offset. It is a multi-bank inline.
@@flightdojobetter fuel? waaaay better fuel. I highly doubt the r2800 or merlin could run on b4 without knocking itself to prices
mostly due to better fuel and materials
Please speed up, and add more hyperbol.
Considering the collective intelligence within Germany, why did nobody foresee the incredible risks of attacking Western Europe? Germany could have simply ignored Chamberlain’s war declaration. What could he have done?
I've often mused about this, myself. In fact I was chatting about it with a friend just last night. I think it comes down to Hitler's paranoia. Maybe he was right to be paranoid about it.
If Hitler had ignored France/Britain, and instead focused on an Eastern front - he could have launched Barbarossa a full year earlier - during a drier spring which would have allowed the attack to commence earlier in the spring. Considering how close he got to Moscow even with the late attack - perhaps his campaign against Russia would have been more successful. It also would have given Stalin a full year LESS time to prepare.
However, with Hitlers focus on the East - his entire Western side would have been exposed to attack from France/Britain. Would France/Britain, having already declared war against Germany, just sit there and watch Germany's success in the East and do NOTHING? Maybe....
But I think not. I think they would have watched Hitler's success in the East and been terrified of him consolidating his successes in the East and then turning his attention West to finish off all of Europe.
Interesting to think about.
I believe the prevailing attitude of appeasement would have kept Western Europe at bay despite the war declaration. France and the Low Countries would have extended the Magino Line making Blitz Kreig less effective. There would have been no need to prop up Stalin and Hitler would probably (through who knows) kept his U-Boats at bay.
On the other hand Hitler’s generals were bad at following orders. They all knew Goering was full of it so would have kept air transport as optional. BUT (against orders) they split their forces to take Moscow which had no strategic significance. Even Stalin was amazed at that mistake.
The Nazi doctrine of genocide would have made it hard to maintain the long border down to the Caucasus oilfields. It was idiotic because Russian peasants hated Stalin and would have “happily” fought against him.
Hitler absolutely wanted the war with France.
He wanted revenge for WWI.
He didn’t wanted war with UK because he saw the British as Arian race.
Finally when he declared war to Russia and USA Germany got a second time in a war against 90% of the world population.
Somehow not a so good idea.
For that reason all this discussion of angloamerican experts „what would have happened if general X had done this … and used weapon Y“ is senseless for us Germans - the war and the ideology was based on a death cult of sacrificing humans.
This is the real tragic - you see all the fine engineering and advanced tactics of the German war machinery - but the total irrational mindset of the Nazis were causing an outburst of brutality and sadism that was selfdestructive from the beginning on.
Wiki gives a different view - the 222 was never used operationally due to its many operational failings and concentrating on this one flawed design left the Luftwaffe using lesser pre-war designed engines through to the end of the war.
It's a fairly common story throughout WW2 German military projects. The HeS 011 made ambitious promises with many aircraft planned around it, but never delivered. Tanks were much the same. I do wonder for tanks, though, what would have happened if Germany had modified Daimler-Benz aircraft engines in the same way that the Merlin was modified into the outstanding Meteor.
Ju 288 had no problems apart from the remote control armament and lack of reliable Jumo 2500hp rated engines
Enjoyed video sir, but subscribed brings on so many notifications on phone its distracting and annoying i wish there was a way to fix that
You can subscribe and not have notifications. Then the videos just show up in your feed. You just click the notification bell and it cycles through the different options
"Sodium filled intake valves" ???? Don't you mean exhaust valves? The intakes are naturally cooled by the charge air vs the exhaust valves being exposed to the flame of combustion...
Also, imagine if they could have put modern turbos on it! The altitude they reached, over 40,000 feet is quite respectable. Im curious about lonvevity/tbo , fuel consumption figures, too. Any info on that?
Nice. The guy was right in pointing out a monopoly, I mean pretty soon everything except the 109 had jumo in it. Not sure what the differences were between those businesses but in retrospect jumo was just leagues ahead of the others. If anything they should have been given full control of that and put those other plants with setting up production. Not like it would have mattered. lol
A bit preachy toward the beginning there m8. 35 seconds to remind the 60% why they never subbed to you in the first place. Actually probably closer to the 15% that watch your videos that just don't like you or the way you do things, hard to tell, but you have been confrontational a few times, not sure if that is it, or how you handled those situations.
I would say a lot of the non subs are way beyond your control however, auto play ruins subs, ad block, weird browsers, mobile users, tablet users, random countries. Probably is a video about that out there too, but yeah a simple reminder to like, subscribe and comment are all sufficient, and we all know why. Albeit we can even block that as it is a call to action, or in video ads, sponsorblock is amazing. It is just someone has to watch you and set the filter then the rest then on won't have to see it.
Your content speaks for itself, and is really nice quality. Upload regularly, and you should keep growing. Albeit this is a bit niche, maybe make your tags more vague like engine, combustion, gasoline, ya know, so it gets fed into engine fans no matter interest in warplanes or whatever.
Good luck.
Am I the only one who looked at that and immediately saw Peanut Hamper?
I subbed.👍
If technological talent (and many other endeavors) were the determining factors as to who should be the leading rulers on this planet,Germany would take up the 1st spot in the row of candidates!
Grat information, but your script sounds like a salesman's pitch. How many times did I hear "optimized for efficiency, or "robust and reliable"?
I had to slow this down, normally it’s the other way around 😂
Great content. Please slow it down. Delivery is distracting.
07:25 Really… 😒
Gud vid
Good grief. The Reich's answer to the Napier Saber.
It has a lot of similarities to the Sabre - increasing total volume by reducing individual cylinder size but increasing the number. Both liquid-cooled inlines. Sabre is 4 banks of 6 and the Jumo 6 banks of 4. Both achieved this by using complicated, precise engineering and both had serious difficulties with quality control as a result. Napier got assistance from other companies with experience in this kind of quality control and made it work - mostly. Jumo ... did not. I would hazard a guess that being bombed 3 days a week and operating a factory with a significant percentage of unwilling foreign workers played a part in that.
@@onenote6619 Indeed. I'm fascinated with these baroque systems. I want to see them running somewhere.
please, the word 'annals' is pronounced '' ANN-als '' (yearbooks), and not '' ANE als '' (which refers to rectums. oh, please!
I was looking for this comment. The first sentence out of his mouth.
Quit being so anal retentive
I know this but somehow messed it up during recording. Whoops. One-man team over here
Nice
Hi there! I enjoyed your video about airplanes of the past. Your exploration of historical aircraft was fascinating. I believe there might be a small error in the script at the very beginning of the video, its first words. The word ‘anals’ should actually be ‘annals,’ pronounced as ‘ann-uhls’, the narrator said, 'ayn-uhls'. In addition to referring to historical records or chronicles, ‘annals’ can also be confused with ‘anals,’ which pertains to the butthole. It’s essential to use the correct term in context. Perhaps only a butthole would skip the final narration check before publication! 😄 Let’s hope this inspires more thorough proofreading next time.
~13 minutes: Sodium-cooled 'Intake' valves??
Didn't appreciate the word salad that treated this internal combustion more as an advertisement but in reality technically uninformative.
So is your mother, yet she shot you out
Please don’t use chat gpt this much.
You can clearly hear, that the script wasn’t written by a human
I don't think the script was AI written.
An interesting design, but it was not going to happen under the Nazi's chaotic leadership. The Brits really lucked out with the RR merlin and had the prewar dispersed manufacturing planning to go with it. The Germans had neither. Nor did wartime Germany have enough resources to produce whole new fleets of aircraft worth of engines. Or the fuel to run them it turned out. Most nation's best war engines were in some advanced stage of development before the war even started. Germans even had the first jets and screwed that up. Guess a bunch of drunks, drug addicts and alcoholics are not who you want to run the air force.
Depends on whose side you are on (drugs and druggies in charge).
fun fact, using jet engines would actually negate part of the fuel problems the Luftwaffe had...
@Turnipstalk the thing is running on diesel was possible with the jumo jet engines. Diesel was the closest Germany could manufacture from coal.
C3 on the other hand, still much worse then 150 Octane stuff the allies had was horrible short on supply.
The biggest problem of 222 was the concentration of the enormous power on the 5 crankshaft bearings of one crankshaft. The sliding bearing technology without some very rare alloy materials the Germans not had was not advanced enough to solve the problem. The Brits made their 3000 HP engine with 2 crankshafts successfully and could adapt it on the Hawker Tempest
@@justacomment1657 Jet fuel is what, closer to kerosene than high octane gas, I get it. Less processing & costs/time. Good point. Would have been a rude surprise for bomber command in mid/late 42 if hundreds of He 280s were buzzsawing through German skies.
Too complex.. difficult to field repair.. delicate --not robust enough... vs mb 600 series not feasible...
Wow. This is more a sales pitch than anything else. It is interesting, but please tone it down a lot in future...
Deutsches Technikmuseum
m.th-cam.com/video/NXRoGEstvE4/w-d-xo.html
They didn't cut back on the project because someone was trying to stifle innovation. The design created so much drag that it would be a massive fuel hog the Germany could not afford at the time.
P l e a se s pe a k m o r e s. L. O. W. L y
Unfortunately you post new videos very rarely. I had to search for you newer content even though i try to follow your newer content especially. Your content is appealing but you almost went extinct yourself.
Be-hemuth? LOL
WAFFLE.
A typical WW2 Nazi project. Huge effort, money and resources expended and magnificent engineering outcome with zero effect on the war. I am amazed (even with the Nazis) that the programme was continued AFTER the emergency fighter programme was instigated and Junkers was heavily engaged in developing a practical jet engine.
Brilliant engine.
Totally pointless.
Thank Christ.
PS: "Annals of history" in not pronounced "Ay-Nals" like butt holes.
My God this is boring! Endless repetition. It could been a third the length & still covered everything.
Anals of history 😁
Typical German design, overly complex difficult to manufacture and unreliable. The GM Allison V-3420 was a far better engine that worked. In 1937 Rollers ran their Griffon V-12 on the test bench with a very respectable pony count of 1,730, the 60 Series with two speed two stage blower added another 4-500 ponies, not bad for a big V-12,like Clarence Kelly Johnson said in 1954 whilst working on his 'Dragon Lady 'Keep it simple stupid'.
The “anals” of history?
I believe it’s pronounced “ANN-als”, like the word is spelled: annals.
Come on!
Read the pinned comment
It's annals of history not Anals, that's a totally different thing, and asking for subscriptions even before the video gets under way is just SAD.
I prefer anal.
Stupid Nit Picking...look at the overall value of the information contained....
Very very clever people
Really enjoying these engine videos!
@flightdojo - Just gonna make an offer, for your future videos, if you want you can send me all the German words you intend to use and I can record the correct pronunciation for you.
(I wouldn't ask for anything in return, I just like the channel and this would be a way to help out in a small way.)
Let me know if you're interested.
:)
If the Nazis had so many wonderful weapons why did they lose?
First the Nazis lost the war for it was much to large for Germany. Then the wonderful weapons came to late, long time in the war there was the opinion „the war nearly is won, for the rest the weapons we have are sufficient