Being a bit of a history nerd, I stumbled on your You Tube video of the Curtiss Wright CW21. Thank you for the research and producing this amazing video. I look forward to the European CW21 as well.👍
this fills IN a LOT of "Between the Lines"! in knew from growing up with this generation. Most had super secret type jobs. but as they hung out, drank a little, played poker, camp fired, drank some more, "I Listened" and always asked just the "right questions?" indicating I had Listened and Understood All My Life! so Lots of these dudes told me their Life Story! and Gma was THERE! and Grampa #1 was a Sea Bee!
That's great! I grew up around WWI, WWII, and Korea vets, myself: both in the family and just in our social circle. Now I'm in a few vet groups for my own generation and see that same kind of fraternal bond being shared all over again. It's a blessing, indeed. If only more oral histories had been preserved when those former generations were around to offer us their experiences.
Thanks for an informative and entertaining presentation. Using AI instead of using photos of other planes (such as a Stuka standing in for the CW-21) is a plus in documentaries and I appreciate the extra effort. Even official documentaries take shortcuts. A wartime propaganda movie on the Pearl Harbor raid had a TBF bomber standing in for a Kate torpedo bomber and instead of Vals the movie had SBDs with Japanese "meatball" markings. Well done, Warbird Mistress!
Thank you! I only used the AI for the photos of Shilling; everything else is an actual photo or original film footage. Colourisation is by my own hand, too, since most cannot be digitally "Ted Turner-ised" without coming out terribly. I've thought of using it, but I think I do well enough doing my own colourisation, animation, and what-have-you. I am finnicky with my visual aids: I refuse to use things out of context or in place of something else. I'd rather have a still image than one that is anachronistic or plain old incorrect. I go for accurate, not artistic. That stands for all my videos, by the way. The one on Kos and Leros? I had to DIG for footage, but I found photos of the moments specific bombs hit specific targets at a specific time. That's half the fun and half the frustration!
@@TheWarbirdMistress You're welcome. Even "Victory at Sea" slaps my willing suspension of disbelief around. I had a 27-year military career spanning 35 years and I was a volunteer staffer at the Hill Aerospace Museum for a decade. I grew up around military bases. At the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis I was five, but there's no mistaking a B-36 for anything else--even though the B-36 quit flying in 1959, my brother and I saw one over Spangdahlem AFB in West Germany. The RB-36J had a service ceiling of 65,000 feet and the horizon at that altitude is a bit more than 300 miles--an RB-36 could stay in NATO air space and keep an eye on a lot of territory. Research isn't perfect, of course--and the official stories say I'm wrong about that B-36. Your research is impeccable.
@@alancranford3398 Thank you! My career was much, much, much shorter, so thank you for sticking around so many years! I do my best. It takes time, and I know I lost followers and Patreon supporters in the months it took to put it together, but I'm very glad with how it came out. There are some shortcomings, but nothing too severe, I believe. The key to good research is finding the primary documents. Once your evidence is in hand and you have context, then you can be creative! I just wish Red China wasn't such a black hole of WWII documentation. I doubt much has even survived to be archived knowing how good the Reds are at throwing things into the Memory Hole of history. Gratefully, there's more to be found for the final section on the Dutch experience with the CW-21. (My Dutch is also 1,000% better than my Chinese, so there's that lol)
@@TheWarbirdMistress Yes, I anticipate enjoying your third chapter as much as each of the first two. Good work! Speaking of primary sources, do translations of Douhet's "Command of the Air" count? Reprints of Billy Mitchell's "Winged Defense?" I read about Walt Disney making a 1943 film based on Seversky's "Victory Through Air Power" of 1942 in the 1950 "Air Power: Key to Survival" around 1972 but didn't see the movie until Disney released it on DVD in 2004--that was a long wait! Are my complete set of vintage Seversky (one of them autographed by the author to a previous owner) and my 2004 Disney release primary documents? I even managed to get the eight-volume bound set of IMPACT! reprints--primary source or not? Either way, I'm glad that I have these in my private library because they are voices from the past. I have some vintage Blue Jacket's Manuals, the Officer's Guide from WW2 and other books that tell me what the authors were saying back in the day. The war between the fighter mafia and the bomber mafia was complicated by the missile mafia--but the air defense missiles stayed Army and the strategic missiles became Air Force. In the Thirties the Bomber Mafia gained ascendancy and even though Seversky was a bomber pundit, he was famous for his P-35 and for the series of fighters that led to the P-47: long range, high altitude pursuit ships. The CW-21 was a one-trick pony with almost zero growth potential--compared to the P-36 and P-40 from Curtiss' stable, the CW-21 promised to fill a niche that the F8F Bearcat was designed to do years later--point defense interceptor. In 1940 the US Navy needed general purpose bombing aircraft and only put 18 fighters but 48 bombers on their carriers. There weren't enough fighters in 1942--the SBD was tasked with torpedo plane defensive CAP and the carrier air group commander could mount an effective fighter defense over his carrier task force or provide fighter escort for torpedo and dive bombers. Dive bombers were dual purpose--scout planes and bombers. In 1945 there were more fighter-bombers on USN carriers than there were all the other type of aircraft combined. The Bearcat was designed as a pure interceptor. Range and payload suffered, but the Bearcat was nimble and fast--and could reach altitude faster than the early jet fighters. When it came to aviation, World War One was inventing the wheel and World War Two invented the automobile. The CW-21 would have taken up space aboard an aircraft carrier that could have been used for aircraft with offensive capabilities--the CW-21 had short legs and a pair of rifle-caliber machine guns was inadequate for bomber killing but the CW-21 could get airborne, achieve altitude, and would have been deadly against Japanese bombers. CW-21 versus Zero? Not every plane was a Zero, perhaps most of the Zeroes reported were actually Ki-43 Oscars instead of A6M Zekes, but the job of an interceptor is to get the bombers and ignore the fighter escort as much as possible. Thanks again for being informative and entertaining.
@@alancranford3398 So where to begin... I'll start at the top, I guess. lol Honestly, I do appreciate the enthusiasm! Primary documents mean records and artifacts that are of the event itself. A diary, oral histories, a cornerstone's time capsule, a medical record, a photograph: these are primary documents. A book about photographs, a description of the time capsule, a case presentation, a biography: these are secondary documents. Secondary documents describe primary documents; primary documents are direct, immediate, uninterpreted artifacts. An unaltered reprint is a primary document under that same definition. Regarding the dual purpose of dive bombers, check out my first video ever, the video on the SBC Helldiver ( th-cam.com/video/U2iZPMjqQ7E/w-d-xo.html ) for the last example of a scout bomber and a dive bomber being different elements of a carrier force. By the end of the war, the Avenger had taken over a lot of scout bombing duties, as well. In many ways, the unreliability of American torpedoes through much of the war, the Avenger ended up being like the Kate: a torpedo bomber that primarily served as a bomber, albeit a glide bomber versus a horizontal one. Now, you made me think about this one: the CW-21 aboard a carrier. I could see her having a role as a reserve interceptor kept on deck during operations, especially in the US and Commonwealth. The Japanese could never have such a thing since they had limited operational versatility in terms of what a carrier could do with its inventory at the same time. American and British carriers could arm with multiple loadouts, launch, retrieve, and fuel aircraft simultaneously. Keeping a handful of dedicated interceptors that take up little space (if done right) and little weight (even if folding wings were installed) might be a great way to keep away kamikazes and traditional bombers during vulnerable times. The Battle of the Philippine Sea and the campaign against the Japanese Home Isles would certainly have found a use for such a thing. As for being a one-trick pony, interceptors are meant to be just that. I could see her doing port facility and industrial defence very effectively if nothing else. Darwin, Port Moresby, and Guadalcanal could have used a few to cover gaps. I think an autocannon - once perfected - would be a good addition, as could air-to-air rockets like the R4M if the Allies ever developed any. What she wasn't, as I mentioned, was a light fighter. That doesn't mean I couldn't see the Saffies and Rhodesians getting good use out of her through the 50s. Of course, all of this lives in the realm of those things we'll never know. (But we can wargame it!)
@@TheWarbirdMistress in 40 years I don't think anyone ever put out anything so absorbable and enjoyable. I went from the standard "Americans volunteered in China before Pearl harbor they were called flying tigers" line you get in school to having an understanding of the factors that led up to why the characters were there, and how it was put together in broad enough strokes to have become interested in learning more. YOUR WORK IS AMAZING
Thank you so much, Warbird Mistress!!! This is an incredibly informative, deeply researched, documentary. Not only about the Curtiss-Wright CW-21, but the overall China-Burma-India theater of vintage 1930s, air combat, that I especially like so much. This as well as the incredibly backward, US, air doctrine of combat, at the time! I thoroughly enjoyed watching this very valuable, heavily researched, two part documentary. As Always , but even more so here; You've set the gold standard of warbird research history! (I happen to live not far from Caldwell New Jersey, where Curtis Wright was located). Thanks again for all your great work, Warbird Mistress! Welcome back!
Thank you!!! I'm down in the Shore / Pine Belt area, and I wish there was a good aviation museum in our state. We really should have one considering we built the Avenger in Edison, flew anti-sub patrols out of A.C., Wildwood, and elsewhere, had a military airfield in the old Newark airport, had active CAP groups out looking for subs... It's a shame. I'm not even sure Teterboro still has the vintage collection that they once did. I know there's a small collection down Wildwood way in a preserved hangar, but we really do deserve more. NewJerWaBirMisCon 2024! lol
@@TheWarbirdMistress You hit it right on the head, about NJ lacking a good warbird museum. Yes; Down Cape May way, a few years ago, I remember seeing a couple of vintage aircraft, at a small aviation museum, or station. I just don't remember for sure where. Interesting about the Avenger plant. (I remember reading about the untold CAP coastal Patrols, when I was in it, growing up in the Bronx).
Thank you for this series. I have wanted more information about the "Demon" for decades. I also appreciate your mini biographies of Paulie and other people, and your insightful commentary about the Communists and other blights on humanity.
The implementation of the CW-21B in Dutch service is one of the areas where research did slow me up some. I can't find the training logs or operational diaries for the units involved. Honestly, I think they may have been destroyed in advance of Japanese forces or simply lost during the war since I can't seem to find them even listed in Dutch government archives.
@@TheWarbirdMistress That would be very interesting, The technology was moving along quickly but the CW-21 still would have been useful if in any kind of numbers
Pappy Boyington wrote in his book about 3 CW-21 Interceptors crashing into a mountain. He was detailed to fly them back out. Later in life he gave an interview and referred to them as CW-21 Demons. So there is a Demon name in connection with the CW-21.
I wonder if made the comment after the misconception had already set into people's minds. I've found in works from the 60s that it was already being called such. However, my point was more that the name was never used in contemporaneous documents or accounts; it was something that cropped up later.
@@vger9084 Could have been either. After the war, I could imagine either of them seeing it mentioned under that name somewhere and adopting it as did so many others. No contemporary records from any party use the name, so it had to be a post-facto matter.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Thank you for bringing this plane into the light. I was in the 6th grade when I first learned of the "Curtis Interceptor". Never could find any photos. I finally assumed that it was just a P-40 with the armor, self-sealing fuel tanks and 4 .30 caliber machine guns removed.
@@vger9084 Honestly, I only thought it was a prototype with a few handful made at most up until I bought William Green's series and it was included in the volume of American fighters. (On a side note, it's a pity his War Planes of the Second World War series did not include American bombers. I really felt it would have benefitted from another volume just to fill that gap.)
Great Channel, so informative,,always a pleasure to see new vids, all the best and lookin forward for more planes and storys ,,greetz from Germany,,herzliche Grüße
Nice. Always thought this was a lovely plane. It showed up in a number of 1940-ish books and magazines and then largely vanished aside from "things went wrong."
She disappeared for a lot of reasons, and that there is no book about her is truly a sad gap in the literature since her story is really the story of air warfare and strategy leading up to the war and the mistakes that were made.
I'm still storyboarding that one, but it feels good to be back in the saddle! I'll do my best to keep up some momentum. I apologise for the first two episodes, but I've done what I thought was my best and I'll be sure to do better on the third! Glad you appreciated my try!
Great video, really like how you go into the weeds on the story, giving relevant background info - thanks for doing these! On a minor note at 23:06 when discussing the Hawk 75, there's an image of the very similar, Chinese built Chu XP-O, not to be confused with the American Hawk 75
Claire Chennault reminds me of John Boyd. Both were expert fighter pilots and visionaries of aerial tactics and the ability to communicate those ideas to people who would listen.
Chennault was able to communicate to the public; he was largely a pain the butt to the AAF/AAC and his ability to communicate was impaired both by being blacklisted and by his womanising. It was only really after the Flying Tigers got press that he was welcomed back into the fold, and even then he kept a distance and was kept at a distance.
This is an excellent history of my favourite looking aircraft. Thanks for providing the in-depth context for the war in China and the opaque and inept bomber centered policy of the Army Air Force and the roles of Pawley and Chennault. I’m looking forward to the third installment of the CW-21 in the service of the Dutch in Indonesia.
I'm looking forward to it, as well! I can't wait to get started on the third part. I've got nearly everything I need to finish storyboarding, and from there it's a cinch!
Very nice!!! Love it And can’t wait for the Dutch!!! I’ve always wondered what would happen if the AVG got a hold of the the 3 aircraft and put their shark mouth design on it….. I guess that’s why we build models…
Thank you!! I'm glad to have completed it and I can't wait to finish the CW-21 series once I get the last of things together for the NEI portion. Hang tight!
There is a flying CW/21 in Florida.... I'm sure you knew. Thank you so very much for the "vlekelos" research done here... I'm waithing for the DVD.... Alle Beste, Ron
Thanks! I was wondering why I couldn't find the term in the literature, and there it is. I saw another few websites mention it, but it didn't seem to enter the popular imagination. Now it has.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Forgive me if you’ve seen this before. It’s Kermit Weeks flying his CW19. What a great looking plane. th-cam.com/video/8GAmw_lvjbM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=TjtEJyRGqf84toeA
Thank you War bird mistress. I bet this was a squirrelly little bird. Looks like they put the biggest engine in the smallest airframe possible. I would really like to build a replica.
That was fascinating. There were a lot of aircraft that were lost in transition in the early days of WWII as the Allied Forces collapsed under the weight of the Japanese onslaught. Another example of that would be the attempt to get the 13th Pursuit Squadron's pilots, mechanics and planes to the Philippines. As the Philippines was over run - the _USS Langley_ and the Civilian _Sea Witch_ were diverted to Java but again they Japanese were too quick. _Langley_ was sunk with 32 P-40's on board. _Sea Witch_ was able to unload it's 27 P-40's in crates - and leave - but - these then had to be destroyed to keep the Japanese from Capturing them. The men of the 13th were also mostly lost as ships carrying them or rescuing them were sunk. Operating in the Back Yard of the Japanese - land, sea and air units of the Allies struggled desperately against their fates but often succumbed. The last weeks of 1941 and the first six months of 1942 were hard on the Allies. .
Great comment! I thought at first that you'd meant types of aircraft, but indeed numbers as well. In terms of types of aircraft, one thing that the Japanese and Germans both did in the first weeks of the war was destroy tons of Allied aircraft, but also clean out the most outdated of the lot. In many ways, it's a bit like the attack on Pearl Harbour and how the ships put asunder those who would have had little to contribute to the war as it ended up happening, and it fostered the fervour to build the next generation of materiel that would win the war.
I must give credit that is due. As a life long WWII aviation fanatic, and Embry Riddle grad, I didn't believe you that a two stage supercharger was on the CW-21. The manual you posted proves it was on the 9 GC. This is one of the earliest front line uses of a 2 stage. I wonder if it was used on other Wright 1820s. The 9 GC was rated at 1,000HP at take off, however only 850HP at 6'. Most WWII fighter engines were over boosted, so take off was less HP than at 5' due to throttle losses. Do you know if it had charge air cooling? The octane rating could also account for this. Well done.
Thank you. I'll be honest: it's a little beyond me with knowing about specifics on cooling. I'm not sure if I'm not seeing it because I'm exhausted after a long day at work or if it's not in here, but enjoy a copy of the overhaul manual for the engine: 1drv.ms/b/s!Al2AlH9g-vYLiaA71gdGw_ud13tgHw?e=0mBaRs
Do you have specifics on the 2 stage supercharging on this? "Demon" please take on Ed Nash! FRD gave China a secret 200M loan, did they spend that money on CW planes? FL20 is at the edge of a pilot's tolerance without external pressure? 18:40 what a/c is that model of? Looks like a water cooled engine.
1. Here are the pages from the manual on the superchargers available for the powerplant. 1drv.ms/b/s!Al2AlH9g-vYLiaAm0GeW3v2gfR73WA?e=FAmXCc 2. I don't know how I would research if any of it was used, frankly. China can be a black hole when it comes to finding things. 3. I don't know. I got that line after googling what it is like to try a near vertical climb and watching pilot videos over the years. G force, changes in pressure, the mental strain of keeping things so you don't end up a lawn dart: it's a lot. I wrote the script months ago, and I feel that may have been a throwaway line of sorts, but it was based on something; I just forget what that something was. 4. It's a model of the P-40. The intake is larger than in reality, although the P-40's intake in some models is larger than it may seem at first glance.
I can see how that would work if I'm correct in supposing you mean in the sense that it is the standard nickname given to the aircraft. I would only say the difference here is that the pilots and aircraft at the time it was used never called it by that name; it only became known as such long after the war was over and never by Curtiss, the ROCAF, or the ML-KNIL. The American designation in the popular media was always just "Curtiss-Wright Interceptor."
@@TheWarbirdMistress the "Demon" name was used during WW2, and as you pointed out, it appears to have come from crates and paperwork being marked "Demon.", short for Demonstration. And the mistake stuck. This is not unlike how a number of aircraft got their names. The A-36 Apache for example. No one knows where that name came from, but I have seen interviews and transcripts of WW2 pilots that shows they were aware of the Apache name, even if it wasn't official. And given it's looks and performance, pilots likely liked the name. Like it or not, the CW-21 is the Demon as a result. It has been the Demon for nearly a century now, and it's not going to change.
@@SoloRenegade I suppose it's been called as much, even if the internal documents were not public knowledge and it was only ever marketed as Interceptor. As I said, I concede that it's become a nickname for her, even if Curtiss nor anyone else used it at the time. The crates and paperwork, mind, were not marked with Demon at all: that was a copy of Curtiss records of aircraft types that I showed and it only referred to the demonstrator models of specific types; it was a common abbreviation found throughout their records for all models and types. The name given to the aircraft at every single instance was "Interceptor." The first mention I can find of it ever being called Demon is in the 1960s.
@@SoloRenegade By the way, if can share where you're finding evidence of it being called the Demon during the war, I would be very interested in seeing it since I looked everywhere. I enjoy being proven wrong since it shows me where gaps in my research are!
@@TheWarbirdMistress the internal documents never called it the Demon, people did. what about that don't you understand? you're not the first/only person to research this aircraft. you need to try harder. just because you can't find things, doesn't make you the final authority. Others have found it, so clearly you're not casting your net wide enough.
Grumman XF5F Skyrocket tech was available in 1935. And the Navy rejected it. A technology that had not been fully developed was charge air cooling and 2 stage air charging.
I stand well corrected! I apologise for my error. I failed to recall the XF5F was being designed that early. I always thought it was a 1938 design and it took two years to work out into something flyable and reliable. I'm a mess lol I appreciate your comments greatly. Reminds me I've got a long way to go! I'll have to edit out that line when I make the complete video with all three parts.
@@appaho9tel I just got home from work and it was on my list of things to research. Thanks for saving the work. I agree that the technology was available, but I don't see it being developed and applied. Tech is more than just a motor and an idea: it's the development of the metallurgy, the physics of aerodynamics, the welding and riveting: everything. I'm not disagreeing with you; I accept that I'm wrong. What I am adding in is that just because the tech was available to the aircraft industry to put to use does not mean the same tech is available to the Air Corps. It's also good to note that the Air Corps didn't push the aeronautics industry to pursue that line of development. As I mentioned, every fighter designed for a high climb rate ended up having fixable flaws (with a few exceptions), yet nobody wanted to fix them. It goes to show how the War Department was so vastly different from the Navy Department's BuAer.
Oh, he's got to be amongst their favourite people lol Hearing his name always makes me want to give Charlie Daniels' Uneasy Rider a listen. RIP Charlie! "I'm a faithful follower of Brother John Birch And I belong to the Antioch Baptist Church And I ain't even got a garage! You can call home and ask my wife!"
@@TheWarbirdMistress thank God somebody knows the story of missionary parents and young farm boy growing to be a man. I believe it was the bluebook of the Birch society by Robert Welch
I can only speculate what Finland would have done with a few hundred CW-21 interceptors during their Winter War starting in 1939. Look what Finland did with Gloster Gladiators and Brewster Buffalo.
I'm sure the Ilmavoimat could have made a toothpick into a deadly weapon if they had to do so! lol Your comment did make me curious, though: I wonder how she would have fared in winter conditions.
I love how everyone is so agast and amazed how development of aircraft was so little and the USA was so behind in modern designs...... 1930-1940 was the time of the Great Depression and there was NO money available for the military..... I suggest watching some episodes of "The Waltons" or watch the first 30 minutes of Peter Jackson"s "King Kong" to get some idea....... love your work......
Indeed, money was hard to come by in those years. Where the Army failed to capitalise was the desire of the private sector to find their own motivations for improving both the science and practice of aeronautics. The Navy knew how to do it: small orders that were each meant to push a little further. The Navy was also much more honest with Congress and whilst they were not always able to get the funding they wanted, they used what they could get to good effect and worked hand in hand with Grumman, Vought, and others to make excellent aircraft. The Army was bullheaded and failed to take advantage of the free market's genius for development and ingenuity. That the Navy's ideas mostly succeeded throughout the war and not a single strategic or tactical plan of the 1938 Air Corps was proven correct by the 1942-1945 Air Forces goes to show how lopsided it is when the conclusions are put before the evidence instead of using the evidence to come to conclusions.
Effective fighter aviation was an existential threat to the Bomber Mafia, and every practical measure to squash American fighter production was taken. The independent naval aviation of the United States Navy caused no end of anguish for the Bomber Mafia because efficient shipboard fighter aviation demolished the myth of bomber supremacy. "The Bomber will always get through" if there's no early warning system, no command and control, no effective interceptors capable of shooting down bombers, and if anti-aircraft artillery is rendered ineffective. The Curtiss CW-21 had to be killed or the Army Air Corps (USAAF didn't exist until 20 June 1941) would be deprived of its precious Boeing B-17 Heavy Bomber.
Indeed! I spent the first episode covering that for the very reason that without understanding the Army's politics, the CW-21 makes no sense. Curtiss-Wright was very smart to develop it completely independently and for export. So long as government money had nothing to do with it, so long as it was not in the American inventory, and so long as it was thought of as superfluous to American needs, then it could be exported. It would have been nice if the USAAC/USAAF had bought it, but it would have been better for the export market it they hadn't. What gets me is how the French didn't end up buying it when it met all of their requirements and the powerplant was within the capacity of the French motor industry to build. (See my video on the interwar French aviation industry about that whole mess!) It would have been interesting to see this in the place of the light fighters the French developed.
@@TheWarbirdMistress France rejected Vought's F4U Corsair and other American-built aircraft, often "correcting" performance data so that the French designs always won the fly-off. Too bad that the French pencil didn't work against German invasion. France and the USA suffered from NIH (not invented here) and in 1940 that cost France half of the nation to include Paris.
@@TheWarbirdMistress It was good that you did cover that in depth during the first episode. Weapons development and procurement is 90% political, 9% logistics, and 1% battlefield performance. The majority of statistics are made up--and my 90/9/1 follows that rule. Decision factors may exceed 100% because there are many factors and a synergy to those factors. In this chapter you mention export laws changing because of the Neutrality Acts. I purchased several books on Chinese small arms manufacturing from the period of 1911 to 1949 encompassing both the Chinese Revolution/Civil War and World War Two and the international ban on selling guns to the Chinese. Even pistol sales were impacted--your tale of the CW-21 is another data point in my book against "arms control" contributing to world peace. What happens when an aggressive nation is armed but neighboring nations are prevented from being armed? I thought that the historic outcome was clear. bothsidesofthetable.com/73-6-of-all-statistics-are-made-up-3c30e8ff272
@@alancranford3398 Indeed, although the Corsair they ended up using after the war when the "oops" of 1940 was still settling in. What always amazes me is how well the French fared in their Moranes, Hawks, and Dewoitines against F4Fs and Hurricanes during Torch. Vichy had some great pilots stuck in terrible situations. For their own skill at shooting themselves in the foot, I recommend checking out my review of the French interwar industry: th-cam.com/video/cb93PsefPEg/w-d-xo.html
@@TheWarbirdMistress I joke that the French and American militaries suffer from the same fatal flaw--we have to answer to French politicians. Or is it a joke? The French soldier and airman and sailor all performed well under impossible conditions.
The mile a minute interceptor? That would make it a shocking 60 miles an hour. As clickbait goes 'a mile a minute' baited me into commenting and running - the near monotone and sometimes blank screen aren't quite rivetting enough.
I'm very sorry. I don't care for my voice, either. I'm not sure why the screen is blank, though. There might be times there's a still image, but there shouldn't be anything blank. Again, my apologies. I hate to think I wasted your time. I'll definitely consider this when planning ahead.
![โกดำ - วสันต์17 x ไม้เมือง [Official Music]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OUg2L4Sx1TY/mqdefault.jpg)
![A Domestic Failure That Became An International Success | Curtiss P-36 Hawk [Aircraft Overview #33]](/img/n.gif)
Being a bit of a history nerd, I stumbled on your You Tube video of the Curtiss Wright CW21. Thank you for the research and producing this amazing video. I look forward to the European CW21 as well.👍
The Dutch East Indies is in the works! I'm storyboarding it and doing some final research, but in a few weeks it should be out.
This sequel was a satisfying conclusion to Part 1's story lines. The Cw-21 just keeps getting more interesting. 'Really looking forward to Part 3!
It's about to get even better!
this fills IN a LOT of "Between the Lines"! in knew from growing up with this generation. Most had super secret type jobs. but as they hung out, drank a little, played poker, camp fired, drank some more, "I Listened" and always asked just the "right questions?" indicating I had Listened and Understood All My Life! so Lots of these dudes told me their Life Story! and Gma was THERE! and Grampa #1 was a Sea Bee!
That's great! I grew up around WWI, WWII, and Korea vets, myself: both in the family and just in our social circle. Now I'm in a few vet groups for my own generation and see that same kind of fraternal bond being shared all over again. It's a blessing, indeed. If only more oral histories had been preserved when those former generations were around to offer us their experiences.
Thanks for an informative and entertaining presentation. Using AI instead of using photos of other planes (such as a Stuka standing in for the CW-21) is a plus in documentaries and I appreciate the extra effort. Even official documentaries take shortcuts. A wartime propaganda movie on the Pearl Harbor raid had a TBF bomber standing in for a Kate torpedo bomber and instead of Vals the movie had SBDs with Japanese "meatball" markings.
Well done, Warbird Mistress!
Thank you! I only used the AI for the photos of Shilling; everything else is an actual photo or original film footage. Colourisation is by my own hand, too, since most cannot be digitally "Ted Turner-ised" without coming out terribly. I've thought of using it, but I think I do well enough doing my own colourisation, animation, and what-have-you. I am finnicky with my visual aids: I refuse to use things out of context or in place of something else. I'd rather have a still image than one that is anachronistic or plain old incorrect. I go for accurate, not artistic.
That stands for all my videos, by the way. The one on Kos and Leros? I had to DIG for footage, but I found photos of the moments specific bombs hit specific targets at a specific time. That's half the fun and half the frustration!
@@TheWarbirdMistress You're welcome. Even "Victory at Sea" slaps my willing suspension of disbelief around. I had a 27-year military career spanning 35 years and I was a volunteer staffer at the Hill Aerospace Museum for a decade. I grew up around military bases. At the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis I was five, but there's no mistaking a B-36 for anything else--even though the B-36 quit flying in 1959, my brother and I saw one over Spangdahlem AFB in West Germany. The RB-36J had a service ceiling of 65,000 feet and the horizon at that altitude is a bit more than 300 miles--an RB-36 could stay in NATO air space and keep an eye on a lot of territory. Research isn't perfect, of course--and the official stories say I'm wrong about that B-36. Your research is impeccable.
@@alancranford3398 Thank you! My career was much, much, much shorter, so thank you for sticking around so many years! I do my best. It takes time, and I know I lost followers and Patreon supporters in the months it took to put it together, but I'm very glad with how it came out. There are some shortcomings, but nothing too severe, I believe. The key to good research is finding the primary documents. Once your evidence is in hand and you have context, then you can be creative! I just wish Red China wasn't such a black hole of WWII documentation. I doubt much has even survived to be archived knowing how good the Reds are at throwing things into the Memory Hole of history. Gratefully, there's more to be found for the final section on the Dutch experience with the CW-21. (My Dutch is also 1,000% better than my Chinese, so there's that lol)
@@TheWarbirdMistress Yes, I anticipate enjoying your third chapter as much as each of the first two. Good work!
Speaking of primary sources, do translations of Douhet's "Command of the Air" count? Reprints of Billy Mitchell's "Winged Defense?" I read about Walt Disney making a 1943 film based on Seversky's "Victory Through Air Power" of 1942 in the 1950 "Air Power: Key to Survival" around 1972 but didn't see the movie until Disney released it on DVD in 2004--that was a long wait! Are my complete set of vintage Seversky (one of them autographed by the author to a previous owner) and my 2004 Disney release primary documents? I even managed to get the eight-volume bound set of IMPACT! reprints--primary source or not?
Either way, I'm glad that I have these in my private library because they are voices from the past. I have some vintage Blue Jacket's Manuals, the Officer's Guide from WW2 and other books that tell me what the authors were saying back in the day.
The war between the fighter mafia and the bomber mafia was complicated by the missile mafia--but the air defense missiles stayed Army and the strategic missiles became Air Force. In the Thirties the Bomber Mafia gained ascendancy and even though Seversky was a bomber pundit, he was famous for his P-35 and for the series of fighters that led to the P-47: long range, high altitude pursuit ships. The CW-21 was a one-trick pony with almost zero growth potential--compared to the P-36 and P-40 from Curtiss' stable, the CW-21 promised to fill a niche that the F8F Bearcat was designed to do years later--point defense interceptor. In 1940 the US Navy needed general purpose bombing aircraft and only put 18 fighters but 48 bombers on their carriers. There weren't enough fighters in 1942--the SBD was tasked with torpedo plane defensive CAP and the carrier air group commander could mount an effective fighter defense over his carrier task force or provide fighter escort for torpedo and dive bombers. Dive bombers were dual purpose--scout planes and bombers. In 1945 there were more fighter-bombers on USN carriers than there were all the other type of aircraft combined. The Bearcat was designed as a pure interceptor. Range and payload suffered, but the Bearcat was nimble and fast--and could reach altitude faster than the early jet fighters. When it came to aviation, World War One was inventing the wheel and World War Two invented the automobile. The CW-21 would have taken up space aboard an aircraft carrier that could have been used for aircraft with offensive capabilities--the CW-21 had short legs and a pair of rifle-caliber machine guns was inadequate for bomber killing but the CW-21 could get airborne, achieve altitude, and would have been deadly against Japanese bombers. CW-21 versus Zero? Not every plane was a Zero, perhaps most of the Zeroes reported were actually Ki-43 Oscars instead of A6M Zekes, but the job of an interceptor is to get the bombers and ignore the fighter escort as much as possible.
Thanks again for being informative and entertaining.
@@alancranford3398 So where to begin... I'll start at the top, I guess. lol Honestly, I do appreciate the enthusiasm!
Primary documents mean records and artifacts that are of the event itself. A diary, oral histories, a cornerstone's time capsule, a medical record, a photograph: these are primary documents. A book about photographs, a description of the time capsule, a case presentation, a biography: these are secondary documents. Secondary documents describe primary documents; primary documents are direct, immediate, uninterpreted artifacts. An unaltered reprint is a primary document under that same definition.
Regarding the dual purpose of dive bombers, check out my first video ever, the video on the SBC Helldiver ( th-cam.com/video/U2iZPMjqQ7E/w-d-xo.html ) for the last example of a scout bomber and a dive bomber being different elements of a carrier force. By the end of the war, the Avenger had taken over a lot of scout bombing duties, as well. In many ways, the unreliability of American torpedoes through much of the war, the Avenger ended up being like the Kate: a torpedo bomber that primarily served as a bomber, albeit a glide bomber versus a horizontal one.
Now, you made me think about this one: the CW-21 aboard a carrier. I could see her having a role as a reserve interceptor kept on deck during operations, especially in the US and Commonwealth. The Japanese could never have such a thing since they had limited operational versatility in terms of what a carrier could do with its inventory at the same time. American and British carriers could arm with multiple loadouts, launch, retrieve, and fuel aircraft simultaneously. Keeping a handful of dedicated interceptors that take up little space (if done right) and little weight (even if folding wings were installed) might be a great way to keep away kamikazes and traditional bombers during vulnerable times. The Battle of the Philippine Sea and the campaign against the Japanese Home Isles would certainly have found a use for such a thing.
As for being a one-trick pony, interceptors are meant to be just that. I could see her doing port facility and industrial defence very effectively if nothing else. Darwin, Port Moresby, and Guadalcanal could have used a few to cover gaps. I think an autocannon - once perfected - would be a good addition, as could air-to-air rockets like the R4M if the Allies ever developed any. What she wasn't, as I mentioned, was a light fighter. That doesn't mean I couldn't see the Saffies and Rhodesians getting good use out of her through the 50s. Of course, all of this lives in the realm of those things we'll never know. (But we can wargame it!)
O I am a minute in. I subscribed and I'm going to listen to part 1 first. Thank you for whatever this story turns out to be for me.
Thank you and be sure to let us know!
@@TheWarbirdMistress in 40 years I don't think anyone ever put out anything so absorbable and enjoyable. I went from the standard "Americans volunteered in China before Pearl harbor they were called flying tigers" line you get in school to having an understanding of the factors that led up to why the characters were there, and how it was put together in broad enough strokes to have become interested in learning more.
YOUR WORK IS AMAZING
@@Xsiondu I'm very flattered! Thank you!!
Both your research and delivery are wonderful. Thank you for this intriguing history of the CW-21 in China!
Thank YOU! Glad you checked back in for Part II. Next up: the NEI!
Thank you so much, Warbird Mistress!!!
This is an incredibly informative, deeply researched, documentary.
Not only about the Curtiss-Wright CW-21, but the overall China-Burma-India theater of vintage 1930s, air combat, that I especially like so much.
This as well as the incredibly backward, US, air doctrine of combat, at the time!
I thoroughly enjoyed watching this very valuable, heavily researched, two part documentary.
As Always , but even more so here; You've set the gold standard of warbird research history!
(I happen to live not far from Caldwell New Jersey, where Curtis Wright was located).
Thanks again for all your great work, Warbird Mistress!
Welcome back!
Thank you!!! I'm down in the Shore / Pine Belt area, and I wish there was a good aviation museum in our state. We really should have one considering we built the Avenger in Edison, flew anti-sub patrols out of A.C., Wildwood, and elsewhere, had a military airfield in the old Newark airport, had active CAP groups out looking for subs... It's a shame. I'm not even sure Teterboro still has the vintage collection that they once did. I know there's a small collection down Wildwood way in a preserved hangar, but we really do deserve more.
NewJerWaBirMisCon 2024! lol
@@TheWarbirdMistress You hit it right on the head, about NJ lacking a good warbird museum.
Yes; Down Cape May way, a few years ago, I remember seeing a couple of vintage aircraft, at a small aviation museum, or station.
I just don't remember for sure where.
Interesting about the Avenger plant.
(I remember reading about the untold CAP coastal Patrols, when I was in it, growing up in the Bronx).
Thank you for this series. I have wanted more information about the "Demon" for decades. I also appreciate your mini biographies of Paulie and other people, and your insightful commentary about the Communists and other blights on humanity.
Thank you so much! Glad you're enjoying the series!
Really well done Claire, can't wait to see part 3, what might have been if this little bugger could have been properly utilized
The implementation of the CW-21B in Dutch service is one of the areas where research did slow me up some. I can't find the training logs or operational diaries for the units involved. Honestly, I think they may have been destroyed in advance of Japanese forces or simply lost during the war since I can't seem to find them even listed in Dutch government archives.
@@TheWarbirdMistress That would be very interesting, The technology was moving along quickly but the CW-21 still would have been useful if in any kind of numbers
@@billestew7535 Certainly!
Pappy Boyington wrote in his book about 3 CW-21 Interceptors crashing into a mountain. He was detailed to fly them back out. Later in life he gave an interview and referred to them as CW-21 Demons. So there is a Demon name in connection with the CW-21.
I wonder if made the comment after the misconception had already set into people's minds. I've found in works from the 60s that it was already being called such. However, my point was more that the name was never used in contemporaneous documents or accounts; it was something that cropped up later.
@@TheWarbirdMistress It makes me wonder then, did Boyington call it a Demon or did the interviewer write it up as Demon after researching the plane?
@@vger9084 Could have been either. After the war, I could imagine either of them seeing it mentioned under that name somewhere and adopting it as did so many others. No contemporary records from any party use the name, so it had to be a post-facto matter.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Thank you for bringing this plane into the light. I was in the 6th grade when I first learned of the "Curtis Interceptor". Never could find any photos. I finally assumed that it was just a P-40 with the armor, self-sealing fuel tanks and 4 .30 caliber machine guns removed.
@@vger9084 Honestly, I only thought it was a prototype with a few handful made at most up until I bought William Green's series and it was included in the volume of American fighters. (On a side note, it's a pity his War Planes of the Second World War series did not include American bombers. I really felt it would have benefitted from another volume just to fill that gap.)
So much detail! Thrilled to find this well done, perfectly delivered production. 🙂
Thank you kindly! I know it's got a long way to go, but I appreciate it!
Great Channel, so informative,,always a pleasure to see new vids, all the best and lookin forward for more planes and storys ,,greetz from Germany,,herzliche Grüße
Vielen Dank!!!
You did a marvelous job of documenting the CW-21. Thanks so much!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Nice. Always thought this was a lovely plane. It showed up in a number of 1940-ish books and magazines and then largely vanished aside from "things went wrong."
She disappeared for a lot of reasons, and that there is no book about her is truly a sad gap in the literature since her story is really the story of air warfare and strategy leading up to the war and the mistakes that were made.
Amazing research and wonderful presentation. THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!
My pleasure! One more episode still on the way!
Research and history I have never seen before. Thanks and thanks for the live voice instead of robot voice
I may not like my voice, but I agree that ANYTHING is better than that noise! Thanks so much!
A brilliant documentary series about a little known aircraft. I'm really looking forward to the CW-21 exploits in Java episode.
I'm still storyboarding that one, but it feels good to be back in the saddle! I'll do my best to keep up some momentum. I apologise for the first two episodes, but I've done what I thought was my best and I'll be sure to do better on the third! Glad you appreciated my try!
Pretty Work Mistress.... This series is greatly appreciated!
Glad it's being enjoyed! Just one more to go! Feels good to be back in the saddle.
Great video, really like how you go into the weeds on the story, giving relevant background info - thanks for doing these!
On a minor note at 23:06 when discussing the Hawk 75, there's an image of the very similar, Chinese built Chu XP-O, not to be confused with the American Hawk 75
Claire Chennault reminds me of John Boyd. Both were expert fighter pilots and visionaries of aerial tactics and the ability to communicate those ideas to people who would listen.
Chennault was able to communicate to the public; he was largely a pain the butt to the AAF/AAC and his ability to communicate was impaired both by being blacklisted and by his womanising. It was only really after the Flying Tigers got press that he was welcomed back into the fold, and even then he kept a distance and was kept at a distance.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Sounds just like John Boyd and the Fighter Mafia.
This is an excellent history of my favourite looking aircraft. Thanks for providing the in-depth context for the war in China and the opaque and inept bomber centered policy of the Army Air Force and the roles of Pawley and Chennault. I’m looking forward to the third installment of the CW-21 in the service of the Dutch in Indonesia.
I'm looking forward to it, as well! I can't wait to get started on the third part. I've got nearly everything I need to finish storyboarding, and from there it's a cinch!
Scholarship blossoming
Thanks bigtime from a geezer, halfblind
Thank you! I love research. Did it for a living long enough, it's nice to do it for a hobby about my passion! Glad you enjoyed!
Very nice!!!
Love it
And can’t wait for the Dutch!!!
I’ve always wondered what would happen if the AVG got a hold of the the 3 aircraft and put their shark mouth design on it…..
I guess that’s why we build models…
If you make one, be sure to share it!
@@TheWarbirdMistress Will do I have to build my standard dutch version first but I think that would be an interesting kit to do
Great job! This project is a big step for your page!
Thank you!! I'm glad to have completed it and I can't wait to finish the CW-21 series once I get the last of things together for the NEI portion. Hang tight!
Dank u well, Claire!
Graag gedaan, zoals altijd!
There is a flying CW/21 in Florida.... I'm sure you knew. Thank you so very much for the "vlekelos" research done here... I'm waithing for the DVD.... Alle Beste, Ron
The CW-19R that Kermit has? Not quite the 21, but born from the same barn.
Oh, I thought it was a 21....Sorry.@@TheWarbirdMistress
outstanding, thank you!
You're very welcome! Glad you enjoyed it. Just one more episode to go!
Outstanding!
😁
thank you for posting ,well done...
Thank you for enjoying! Cheers!
Nice bit of research catching the erroneous “Demon” nomenclature.
Thanks! I was wondering why I couldn't find the term in the literature, and there it is. I saw another few websites mention it, but it didn't seem to enter the popular imagination. Now it has.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Forgive me if you’ve seen this before. It’s Kermit Weeks flying his CW19. What a great looking plane. th-cam.com/video/8GAmw_lvjbM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=TjtEJyRGqf84toeA
Good info
nice vid enjoyed thanks
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you War bird mistress. I bet this was a squirrelly little bird. Looks like they put the biggest engine in the smallest airframe possible. I would really like to build a replica.
You're not the only one!
That was fascinating.
There were a lot of aircraft that were lost in transition in the early days of WWII as the Allied Forces collapsed under the weight of the Japanese onslaught.
Another example of that would be the attempt to get the 13th Pursuit Squadron's pilots, mechanics and planes to the Philippines.
As the Philippines was over run - the _USS Langley_ and the Civilian _Sea Witch_ were diverted to Java but again they Japanese were too quick. _Langley_ was sunk with 32 P-40's on board. _Sea Witch_ was able to unload it's 27 P-40's in crates - and leave - but - these then had to be destroyed to keep the Japanese from Capturing them. The men of the 13th were also mostly lost as ships carrying them or rescuing them were sunk.
Operating in the Back Yard of the Japanese - land, sea and air units of the Allies struggled desperately against their fates but often succumbed. The last weeks of 1941 and the first six months of 1942 were hard on the Allies.
.
Great comment! I thought at first that you'd meant types of aircraft, but indeed numbers as well. In terms of types of aircraft, one thing that the Japanese and Germans both did in the first weeks of the war was destroy tons of Allied aircraft, but also clean out the most outdated of the lot. In many ways, it's a bit like the attack on Pearl Harbour and how the ships put asunder those who would have had little to contribute to the war as it ended up happening, and it fostered the fervour to build the next generation of materiel that would win the war.
Can’t wait for the Dutch East Indies..
👍🐢
Neither could the Japanese? lol
It's in the works!
I must give credit that is due. As a life long WWII aviation fanatic, and Embry Riddle grad, I didn't believe you that a two stage supercharger was on the CW-21. The manual you posted proves it was on the 9 GC. This is one of the earliest front line uses of a 2 stage. I wonder if it was used on other Wright 1820s. The 9 GC was rated at 1,000HP at take off, however only 850HP at 6'. Most WWII fighter engines were over boosted, so take off was less HP than at 5' due to throttle losses. Do you know if it had charge air cooling? The octane rating could also account for this.
Well done.
Thank you. I'll be honest: it's a little beyond me with knowing about specifics on cooling. I'm not sure if I'm not seeing it because I'm exhausted after a long day at work or if it's not in here, but enjoy a copy of the overhaul manual for the engine:
1drv.ms/b/s!Al2AlH9g-vYLiaA71gdGw_ud13tgHw?e=0mBaRs
Do you have specifics on the 2 stage supercharging on this?
"Demon" please take on Ed Nash!
FRD gave China a secret 200M loan, did they spend that money on CW planes?
FL20 is at the edge of a pilot's tolerance without external pressure?
18:40 what a/c is that model of? Looks like a water cooled engine.
1. Here are the pages from the manual on the superchargers available for the powerplant. 1drv.ms/b/s!Al2AlH9g-vYLiaAm0GeW3v2gfR73WA?e=FAmXCc
2. I don't know how I would research if any of it was used, frankly. China can be a black hole when it comes to finding things.
3. I don't know. I got that line after googling what it is like to try a near vertical climb and watching pilot videos over the years. G force, changes in pressure, the mental strain of keeping things so you don't end up a lawn dart: it's a lot. I wrote the script months ago, and I feel that may have been a throwaway line of sorts, but it was based on something; I just forget what that something was.
4. It's a model of the P-40. The intake is larger than in reality, although the P-40's intake in some models is larger than it may seem at first glance.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Thanks!
Yes yes yes!!!
Yes? Yes!
CW-21 is officially the "Demon".
Just as the F-16 is Viper, A-10 is Warthog, P-47 is Jug, etc.
I can see how that would work if I'm correct in supposing you mean in the sense that it is the standard nickname given to the aircraft. I would only say the difference here is that the pilots and aircraft at the time it was used never called it by that name; it only became known as such long after the war was over and never by Curtiss, the ROCAF, or the ML-KNIL. The American designation in the popular media was always just "Curtiss-Wright Interceptor."
@@TheWarbirdMistress the "Demon" name was used during WW2, and as you pointed out, it appears to have come from crates and paperwork being marked "Demon.", short for Demonstration. And the mistake stuck. This is not unlike how a number of aircraft got their names. The A-36 Apache for example. No one knows where that name came from, but I have seen interviews and transcripts of WW2 pilots that shows they were aware of the Apache name, even if it wasn't official. And given it's looks and performance, pilots likely liked the name.
Like it or not, the CW-21 is the Demon as a result. It has been the Demon for nearly a century now, and it's not going to change.
@@SoloRenegade I suppose it's been called as much, even if the internal documents were not public knowledge and it was only ever marketed as Interceptor. As I said, I concede that it's become a nickname for her, even if Curtiss nor anyone else used it at the time. The crates and paperwork, mind, were not marked with Demon at all: that was a copy of Curtiss records of aircraft types that I showed and it only referred to the demonstrator models of specific types; it was a common abbreviation found throughout their records for all models and types. The name given to the aircraft at every single instance was "Interceptor." The first mention I can find of it ever being called Demon is in the 1960s.
@@SoloRenegade By the way, if can share where you're finding evidence of it being called the Demon during the war, I would be very interested in seeing it since I looked everywhere. I enjoy being proven wrong since it shows me where gaps in my research are!
@@TheWarbirdMistress the internal documents never called it the Demon, people did. what about that don't you understand?
you're not the first/only person to research this aircraft.
you need to try harder. just because you can't find things, doesn't make you the final authority. Others have found it, so clearly you're not casting your net wide enough.
@TheWarbirdMistress >>> Great video...👍
Glad you enjoyed it!
Grumman XF5F Skyrocket tech was available in 1935. And the Navy rejected it.
A technology that had not been fully developed was charge air cooling and 2 stage air charging.
I stand well corrected! I apologise for my error. I failed to recall the XF5F was being designed that early. I always thought it was a 1938 design and it took two years to work out into something flyable and reliable.
I'm a mess lol
I appreciate your comments greatly. Reminds me I've got a long way to go! I'll have to edit out that line when I make the complete video with all three parts.
@@TheWarbirdMistress Allow me to be clear, the technology used to build the XF5 was available in 35, as in the B 17. The XF5 was built in 38.
@@appaho9tel I just got home from work and it was on my list of things to research. Thanks for saving the work. I agree that the technology was available, but I don't see it being developed and applied. Tech is more than just a motor and an idea: it's the development of the metallurgy, the physics of aerodynamics, the welding and riveting: everything. I'm not disagreeing with you; I accept that I'm wrong. What I am adding in is that just because the tech was available to the aircraft industry to put to use does not mean the same tech is available to the Air Corps. It's also good to note that the Air Corps didn't push the aeronautics industry to pursue that line of development. As I mentioned, every fighter designed for a high climb rate ended up having fixable flaws (with a few exceptions), yet nobody wanted to fix them. It goes to show how the War Department was so vastly different from the Navy Department's BuAer.
If you think that's difficult getting information out of them, ask about John Birch's involvement with the AVG
Oh, he's got to be amongst their favourite people lol
Hearing his name always makes me want to give Charlie Daniels' Uneasy Rider a listen. RIP Charlie!
"I'm a faithful follower of Brother John Birch
And I belong to the Antioch Baptist Church
And I ain't even got a garage! You can call home and ask my wife!"
@@TheWarbirdMistress thank God somebody knows the story of missionary parents and young farm boy growing to be a man. I believe it was the bluebook of the Birch society by Robert Welch
I can only speculate what Finland would have done with a few hundred CW-21 interceptors during their Winter War starting in 1939. Look what Finland did with Gloster Gladiators and Brewster Buffalo.
I'm sure the Ilmavoimat could have made a toothpick into a deadly weapon if they had to do so! lol Your comment did make me curious, though: I wonder how she would have fared in winter conditions.
I love how everyone is so agast and amazed how development of aircraft was so little and the USA was so behind in modern designs......
1930-1940 was the time of the Great Depression and there was NO money available for the military.....
I suggest watching some episodes of "The Waltons" or watch the first 30 minutes of Peter Jackson"s "King Kong" to get some idea.......
love your work......
Indeed, money was hard to come by in those years. Where the Army failed to capitalise was the desire of the private sector to find their own motivations for improving both the science and practice of aeronautics. The Navy knew how to do it: small orders that were each meant to push a little further. The Navy was also much more honest with Congress and whilst they were not always able to get the funding they wanted, they used what they could get to good effect and worked hand in hand with Grumman, Vought, and others to make excellent aircraft. The Army was bullheaded and failed to take advantage of the free market's genius for development and ingenuity. That the Navy's ideas mostly succeeded throughout the war and not a single strategic or tactical plan of the 1938 Air Corps was proven correct by the 1942-1945 Air Forces goes to show how lopsided it is when the conclusions are put before the evidence instead of using the evidence to come to conclusions.
I’m not getting audio on my TV stream, but I am on my iPod. Weird.
Fixed
Interesting. I wonder why TH-cam was like that.
Effective fighter aviation was an existential threat to the Bomber Mafia, and every practical measure to squash American fighter production was taken. The independent naval aviation of the United States Navy caused no end of anguish for the Bomber Mafia because efficient shipboard fighter aviation demolished the myth of bomber supremacy. "The Bomber will always get through" if there's no early warning system, no command and control, no effective interceptors capable of shooting down bombers, and if anti-aircraft artillery is rendered ineffective. The Curtiss CW-21 had to be killed or the Army Air Corps (USAAF didn't exist until 20 June 1941) would be deprived of its precious Boeing B-17 Heavy Bomber.
Indeed! I spent the first episode covering that for the very reason that without understanding the Army's politics, the CW-21 makes no sense. Curtiss-Wright was very smart to develop it completely independently and for export. So long as government money had nothing to do with it, so long as it was not in the American inventory, and so long as it was thought of as superfluous to American needs, then it could be exported. It would have been nice if the USAAC/USAAF had bought it, but it would have been better for the export market it they hadn't.
What gets me is how the French didn't end up buying it when it met all of their requirements and the powerplant was within the capacity of the French motor industry to build. (See my video on the interwar French aviation industry about that whole mess!) It would have been interesting to see this in the place of the light fighters the French developed.
@@TheWarbirdMistress France rejected Vought's F4U Corsair and other American-built aircraft, often "correcting" performance data so that the French designs always won the fly-off. Too bad that the French pencil didn't work against German invasion. France and the USA suffered from NIH (not invented here) and in 1940 that cost France half of the nation to include Paris.
@@TheWarbirdMistress It was good that you did cover that in depth during the first episode. Weapons development and procurement is 90% political, 9% logistics, and 1% battlefield performance. The majority of statistics are made up--and my 90/9/1 follows that rule. Decision factors may exceed 100% because there are many factors and a synergy to those factors. In this chapter you mention export laws changing because of the Neutrality Acts. I purchased several books on Chinese small arms manufacturing from the period of 1911 to 1949 encompassing both the Chinese Revolution/Civil War and World War Two and the international ban on selling guns to the Chinese. Even pistol sales were impacted--your tale of the CW-21 is another data point in my book against "arms control" contributing to world peace. What happens when an aggressive nation is armed but neighboring nations are prevented from being armed? I thought that the historic outcome was clear.
bothsidesofthetable.com/73-6-of-all-statistics-are-made-up-3c30e8ff272
@@alancranford3398 Indeed, although the Corsair they ended up using after the war when the "oops" of 1940 was still settling in. What always amazes me is how well the French fared in their Moranes, Hawks, and Dewoitines against F4Fs and Hurricanes during Torch. Vichy had some great pilots stuck in terrible situations.
For their own skill at shooting themselves in the foot, I recommend checking out my review of the French interwar industry:
th-cam.com/video/cb93PsefPEg/w-d-xo.html
@@TheWarbirdMistress I joke that the French and American militaries suffer from the same fatal flaw--we have to answer to French politicians. Or is it a joke? The French soldier and airman and sailor all performed well under impossible conditions.
+2 Internets for the nod to Sax Romer. Fu Manchu lives again!
"The insidious scent of mimosa fills the air."
1. I'm glad someone got the reference!
2. I could use one of those!!
Antici.............pation!
Great Scott!
Not one, but two RHPS references. A late night, double feature if you like.
@@ZoeBrain Haven't been to one of those in ages!
I know, right? I even made some toast.@@ZoeBrain
To cannibalism!
mile a minute is really slow
I'm aware. It's the moniker given by the press and by Curtiss in reference to her rate of climb. I'm sorry if that's unclear from the video.
The mile a minute interceptor?
That would make it a shocking 60 miles an hour.
As clickbait goes 'a mile a minute' baited me into commenting and running - the near monotone and sometimes blank screen aren't quite rivetting enough.
Mile a minute refers to its climb rate. Extremely fast at that time.
I'm very sorry. I don't care for my voice, either. I'm not sure why the screen is blank, though. There might be times there's a still image, but there shouldn't be anything blank. Again, my apologies. I hate to think I wasted your time. I'll definitely consider this when planning ahead.