As it turns out, Patton (yes, the famous general) mentioned this bomber in his widely publicized book "War As I Knew It". In his writings, while in North Africa, he notes how they were disturbed at night by "four engine bombers". If you check the records, the Germans had absolutely no four-engine bombers operating in North Africa, as their only operational four engine variant at the time, the FW-200 was limited to harassing Allied convoy shipping in the Atlantic. In the movie, "Patton", the account gets skewed by showing George C. Scott confronting some harassing Heinkel He-111's in daylight.
Just so you all know, people who suffer from depression and other mental health challenges are particularly hard hit around the holidays. If you know someone who may be suffering please ring them up or pop by and make sure they know they are valued.
At the time, Italy was a relatively poor country, economically behind UK, France, USA . . . Ambitions and aspirations were something else . . . @@worldofwarbirds
As it turns out, Patton (yes, the famous general) mentioned them in his widely publicized book "War As I Knew It". In his writings, while in North Africa, he notes how they were disturbed at night by "four engine bombers". If you check the records, the Germans had absolutely no multi-engine bombers operating in North Africa, as their only operational four engine variant at the time, the FW-200 was limited to harassing Allied convoy shipping in the Atlantic.
Amazing that the Reich did not involve themselves in the R&D of this four engine bomber , the Reich was so invested in tactical level operations (attack ) they could not see the forest for the trees.
German manufacturers had a tremendous NIH complex (Not Invented Here), they didn't trust Italian aircraft designs. But you're right, had Italy and Germany worked together instead of each nation parallel pathing the other they could have accomplished a great deal more.
It would be great to find out what kind of gun laying system it had, esp to compensate for parallax error. The B-29 was a couple levels up in sophistication. Its gun laying system was a true "fly by wire" gun laying system with all electric intercommunication between gunner, central fire control computer and turrets, using Selsyn synchros. The gunner told the computer where the target was with his sighting tiller, and the computer decided where to aim the turrets.
I was wondering the EXACT same thing! I've gone down quite a few internet rabbit holes trying to wrap my mind around the B-29 system, but I wasn't able to see anything on the P.108's.
The Italian military aircraft were hampered by the fact that all they had were their relatively low powered air cooled radials. Attempts to make them more powerful resulted in unreliability. It seems that only in 1943,just prior to the armistice,when they got Mercedes Benz inverted V12 engines from Germany,did the performance of their aircraft improve. Of course, by then, it was too little,too late. Their tanks, and machine guns have similar sad stories as well.
wasnt one of the piaggio bomber engines starter motors the original engine for the vespa scooter. so a bomber part was part of what now is the most classic scooter.
Thanks, very interesting however I have a question - you say she had a 90mm cannon but in one of my Bill Gunston books he lists a 102mm, can you confirm who is correct?
It just goes to show that it doesn't just take a plane to do the job. It takes leadership, doctrine, production, supply, tactics...This bomber was missing most of these!
That's good to know and I will try to remember to say it correctly the next time to comes up. I wouldn't have said it that way due to the similarity to Wacko (like crazy!).
Good thing the axis were poor on technology sharing. Germany deploying fleets of these during the battle of Britain instead of small 2 engine bombers may have had a significant change in short term outcomes.
It was a pretty cool plane, but there just weren't enough of them and there weren't really any improvements along the way. Just think of how the B-17 went from the failing model 299, then to the XB-17 and then all the way to the penultimate B-17G!
Wannabe my Aris lad! Piaggio P.50 started in development by Italy began in 1930 leading to the ''Piaggio P.108'' in question. The yanks didn't start development of the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress till August of 1934 bring 4 years after the Piaggio P.50 laid out by Giovanni Pegna employed by the Regia Aeronautica. The yanks copied the Italian but the USA unlike the Italians had the massive industry & research base required to get it of the ground in a fraction of the time as a usable product. yanks had the laughable twin engine Martin B-10 till they copied the Italians! Personally the B17 was an outdated by ww2 as it only carried 2000Ib's of bombs 1000 miles in optimal weather at optimal speed of 225 Mph give or take 25 Mph which is narrow margin in practice. A Piaggio P.108 can carry 3.5 metric tons of bombs or 7700Ib's over near 2000miles. Italy had some very nice planes but unfortunately not the industry or raw materials to back it up. You know very little on this matter lad & your yank bias is showing or you have watched to many Hollywood flicks that it has messed with your loaf lad! Italy had the best submachine guns of the war & very overshadowed aircraft just because they lacked production. Honestly the production Italy di have was impressive if geography & population is accounted for. The USA was playing on easy mode were original copy cats before the Japanese in the economic miracle then the Chinese today. No greater conmen then yanks back in the day hence why as an Limey of old blighty I don't trust a word that comes out of our former 13 colonies till I have scrutinised it thoroughly!
Version 1 of the Piaggio P.50 was very unorthodox as it had 4 engines in two pairs with forward & 2 backward. push & pull nacelles engine arrangement was a bit ahead of it's time as the engineering wasn't their yet hence the P.50 II was far more practical that the USA outright plagiarised.
Nothing american is better than Italian so there is no wanna be it was better than B17 but Italy did not need to produce so many of them like America did. Why did America have to produce so many B17? To support her English speaking ally England in day bombing missions over world superpower Germany. Italy did not have that ambition so very few four engine Italian bombers were built. To mention the last important thing is America being 40 times the size of Italy and enormous amount the factories on the East and West Coast it was inevitable that American could produce more than Italy could despite Italy not having that need. That being said it did not mean that American bombers were cutting edge technology or better quality than Italian four Engine bombers. One comparison. look at a Corvette with a primitive pushrod engine and look at flat12 Ferraris lmao
@@Kawasaki750H2stroke Absolutely! They were actually burden to Germany and Germany would have done better alone. Italians are not warriors. they like fashion good food and building kick a.. Ferraris.
@@anthonynicholich9654 Somewhat true but popular to contrary belief Rommel actually had very few German forces in Africa. Rommel was the German commander but very little of the axis presence was German, Italy made the bulk of it, and Rommel’s achievements were largely accomplished due to the Italian manpower available to him. I also read that on the Russian Front the Italian soldiers fought very well under German leadership. Italian generals were terrible.
Another derisive title about an Italian vehicle or plane to get clicks. The plane was fine it just needed a little bit better engines and a little more training for the pilots that were rushed out because of the war. They came out at a time when the Axis were fighting most of the World at once and the skies didn't belong to them anymore, that was the main problem.
The Italians did build some pretty looking planes.
dont forget the superb Fiat G56 Centauro fighter!
Cute motor cars and railway trains too . . .
Great Bomber ,the Italian version of B17
As it turns out, Patton (yes, the famous general) mentioned this bomber in his widely publicized book "War As I Knew It".
In his writings, while in North Africa, he notes how they were disturbed at night by "four engine bombers".
If you check the records, the Germans had absolutely no four-engine bombers operating in North Africa, as their only operational four engine variant at the time, the FW-200 was limited to harassing Allied convoy shipping in the Atlantic.
In the movie, "Patton", the account gets skewed by showing George C. Scott confronting some harassing Heinkel He-111's in daylight.
I remember that scene! Yes, it would've had to the the P.108 in reality. Thanks for bringing that up.
@@worldofwarbirds How about a "thumbs up"?😃
@@tomt373 👍👍
Just so you all know, people who suffer from depression and other mental health challenges are particularly hard hit around the holidays. If you know someone who may be suffering please ring them up or pop by and make sure they know they are valued.
This is very, very true.
Merry Christmas everyone
Stop being the victim buddy, its Christmas!
@@PanzerChicken69You totally missed the meaning with Christmas, haven’t you?
Great reminder.
Many Italian planes were excellent but expensive and complicated to manufacture!
And there just didn’t seem to be the drive or resources to build enough of them…
At the time, Italy was a relatively poor country, economically behind UK, France, USA . . . Ambitions and aspirations were something else . . . @@worldofwarbirds
Italy had no modern mass production lines in its industries, work was still semi-artisanal
I love that you used Special Hobby kit box art for your title cards. Merry Christmas...
One of my faves in War Thunder. Especially the one within a 102mm cannon.
90mm or 102mm? Video says 90
@@JohnDoe-pl8iv102mm is correct.
Nice bit of history. Thanks for the video
Glad you enjoyed it
The C, and T versions are esthetically OK, but the bomber looks like a B-17 that had it's nose broken and badly set.
That’s a pretty good description!!
Thank You for Your time and efforts Brian. Best Wishes to You and Your Family for the Holiday Season.
Thank you so much and same to you!
Never heard of that bird. Truly impressive.
Happy holidays from Germany.
Same to you!
Thank you.@@worldofwarbirds
As it turns out, Patton (yes, the famous general) mentioned them in his widely publicized book "War As I Knew It".
In his writings, while in North Africa, he notes how they were disturbed at night by "four engine bombers".
If you check the records, the Germans had absolutely no multi-engine bombers operating in North Africa, as their only operational four engine variant at the time, the FW-200 was limited to harassing Allied convoy shipping in the Atlantic.
Amazing that the Reich did not involve themselves in the R&D of this four engine bomber , the Reich was so invested in tactical level operations (attack ) they could not see the forest for the trees.
German manufacturers had a tremendous NIH complex (Not Invented Here), they didn't trust Italian aircraft designs. But you're right, had Italy and Germany worked together instead of each nation parallel pathing the other they could have accomplished a great deal more.
Appears to have been a very capable aircraft, comparable to some of the allied four engined bombers. The Cant Z 1014 looks very interesting🤔
That end. bit about the Vespa scooter was funny!
Great video glad it pop up in my recommendations. Merry Christmas
Thanks! All the best to you.
as the urban legend goes "Vespa" was made of plane's engine starters and landing wheels... but no, it was not
Really? Oh damn I was lied to.
What a babe! (The one at the end) ♥♥♥
Yes. A little eye candy for the end of the show!
4:05 ...and even the US found it difficult to make their remote-controlled turrets at the B-29 reliable...!
If you think about it, it’s an incredibly difficult thing to do with an analog computer.
Today Piaggio makes mopeds, vespas and three wheeled vehicles what I can see.
They still make planes. The P.180 Avanti and it is an excellent plane too.
And it financed an attemped neo-fascist coup in December 1970
It would be great to find out what kind of gun laying system it had, esp to compensate for parallax error. The B-29 was a couple levels up in sophistication. Its gun laying system was a true "fly by wire" gun laying system with all electric intercommunication between gunner, central fire control computer and turrets, using Selsyn synchros. The gunner told the computer where the target was with his sighting tiller, and the computer decided where to aim the turrets.
I was wondering the EXACT same thing! I've gone down quite a few internet rabbit holes trying to wrap my mind around the B-29 system, but I wasn't able to see anything on the P.108's.
The Italian military aircraft were hampered by the fact that all they had were their relatively low powered air cooled radials. Attempts to make them more powerful resulted in unreliability. It seems that only in 1943,just prior to the armistice,when they got Mercedes Benz inverted V12 engines from Germany,did the performance of their aircraft improve. Of course, by then, it was too little,too late. Their tanks, and machine guns have similar sad stories as well.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians leveraged each other's technical capabilities until it was too late.
the front looks like the Fiat Multipla....
Cant belive war thunder removed the one with the big ass gun smh that thing was fun
Oh that's too bad!
@@worldofwarbirds yea they removed the variant of the plane with an 100mm cannon in the nose :^/
They didnt remove it. Now it is a rank I plane, in the same
box with the Breda 88
wasnt one of the piaggio bomber engines starter motors the original engine for the vespa scooter. so a bomber part was part of what now is the most classic scooter.
Yup! It was mentioned in the video near the end
6:02 The gun was 102 mm (4 inch), not 90 mm.
Yeah, that's a bit confusing. It seems it was a 90mm gun bored out to be 102mm? Anyway, a big-ass gun either way!
I actually found an old KC☆ Newspaper reporting that Gibralter attack.
Thanks, very interesting however I have a question - you say she had a 90mm cannon but in one of my Bill Gunston books he lists a 102mm, can you confirm who is correct?
This is a find on a par with Mark Felton, thanks for sharing.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!
Really ?!
Isn't Piaggio also known for the Vespa scooter?
😂
Piaggio makes everything. Including drones, private jets, components for satellites etc....
Either convergent evolution or borrowed designs or,as in most things in life,a mixture of the two?
It ded seem to have the potential to be a useful aircraft
It just goes to show that it doesn't just take a plane to do the job. It takes leadership, doctrine, production, supply, tactics...This bomber was missing most of these!
Just to help you out a little bit - Waco is pronounced wah-co, not way-co. Aviation guys notice things like this....
That's good to know and I will try to remember to say it correctly the next time to comes up. I wouldn't have said it that way due to the similarity to Wacko (like crazy!).
Not in Texas it is not. It is definitely pronounced 'Way-coh'. You can Google that!
As one aviation guy to another. (nudge, nudge. wink, wink).
Italy. For the Eyetalians.
Ha ha!
What does It mean?
Hail Brian!
Thanks!
@@worldofwarbirds do you have a channel membership or a Patreon account so people can support you financially?
I do! patreon.com/WorldofWarbirds
Please use maps of the era discussed.
Who do you think would've won if WWII had just been Italy vs France?
That'sa spicy a meataball
Especially the A version! Meatball Shooter!
italy; "can i copy your homework?"
usa; "sure. just change it a little bit."
Good thing the axis were poor on technology sharing. Germany deploying fleets of these during the battle of Britain instead of small 2 engine bombers may have had a significant change in short term outcomes.
Yeah Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia didn’t subscribe to the strategic bombing theory.
Always thought it was french bombers that hit gibraltar.?
The Italians have always been great at designing. Think of Alfa Romeo. But never good at manufacturing. They almost always break down.
It was a pretty cool plane, but there just weren't enough of them and there weren't really any improvements along the way. Just think of how the B-17 went from the failing model 299, then to the XB-17 and then all the way to the penultimate B-17G!
WACO pronounced wrong. A is like the A in want. It was an acronym.
Thanks!
Wannabe my Aris lad!
Piaggio P.50 started in development by Italy began in 1930 leading to the ''Piaggio P.108'' in question.
The yanks didn't start development of the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress till August of 1934 bring 4 years after the Piaggio P.50 laid out by Giovanni Pegna employed by the Regia Aeronautica.
The yanks copied the Italian but the USA unlike the Italians had the massive industry & research base required to get it of the ground in a fraction of the time as a usable product.
yanks had the laughable twin engine Martin B-10 till they copied the Italians!
Personally the B17 was an outdated by ww2 as it only carried 2000Ib's of bombs 1000 miles in optimal weather at optimal speed of 225 Mph give or take 25 Mph which is narrow margin in practice.
A Piaggio P.108 can carry 3.5 metric tons of bombs or 7700Ib's over near 2000miles.
Italy had some very nice planes but unfortunately not the industry or raw materials to back it up.
You know very little on this matter lad & your yank bias is showing or you have watched to many Hollywood flicks that it has messed with your loaf lad!
Italy had the best submachine guns of the war & very overshadowed aircraft just because they lacked production.
Honestly the production Italy di have was impressive if geography & population is accounted for.
The USA was playing on easy mode were original copy cats before the Japanese in the economic miracle then the Chinese today.
No greater conmen then yanks back in the day hence why as an Limey of old blighty I don't trust a word that comes out of our former 13 colonies till I have scrutinised it thoroughly!
Version 1 of the Piaggio P.50 was very unorthodox as it had 4 engines in two pairs with forward & 2 backward.
push & pull nacelles engine arrangement was a bit ahead of it's time as the engineering wasn't their yet hence the P.50 II was far more practical that the USA outright plagiarised.
Nothing american is better than Italian so there is no wanna be it was better than B17 but Italy did not need to produce so many of them like America did. Why did America have to produce so many B17? To support her English speaking ally England in day bombing missions over world superpower Germany. Italy did not have that ambition so very few four engine Italian bombers were built.
To mention the last important thing is America being 40 times the size of Italy and enormous amount the factories on the East and West Coast it was inevitable that American could produce more than Italy could despite Italy not having that need. That being said it did not mean that American bombers were cutting edge technology or better quality than Italian four Engine bombers. One comparison. look at a Corvette with a primitive pushrod engine and look at flat12 Ferraris lmao
As a whole Italians were not as loyal to fighting WWII as the German and Japanese people were.
@@Kawasaki750H2stroke
Absolutely! They were actually burden to Germany and Germany would have done better alone. Italians are not warriors. they like fashion good food and building kick a.. Ferraris.
@@anthonynicholich9654 Somewhat true but popular to contrary belief Rommel actually had very few German forces in Africa. Rommel was the German commander but very little of the axis presence was German, Italy made the bulk of it, and Rommel’s achievements were largely accomplished due to the Italian manpower available to him. I also read that on the Russian Front the Italian soldiers fought very well under German leadership. Italian generals were terrible.
Another derisive title about an Italian vehicle or plane to get clicks. The plane was fine it just needed a little bit better engines and a little more training for the pilots that were rushed out because of the war. They came out at a time when the Axis were fighting most of the World at once and the skies didn't belong to them anymore, that was the
main problem.
It needed a lot. Mainly it needed numbers and support in order to carry on a campaign.
I wish I were a B17, not "was." Use the subjunctive case for hypotheticals.
Thanks teacher! I'll write it 100 times on the blackboard! :)
It's pronounced, " W AH CO ". Not like the city.
+