Part 1 Design Specs - 5:05 Part 2 The Engine - 8:04 Part 3 The Airframe - 11:26 Part 4 The flight model and control surfaces - 13:50 Part 5 The Weapons - 15:40 Part 6 (Not named but this seems like an optimal point for a 6th part, and he said 6 parts so...) Cinematic and testing - 19:00
You know what I find nuts, the Lancaster's bomb load was considered ridiculously large for it's time yet less than 25 years later the Buccaneer would carry an even larger bomb load at transonic speeds. The rate of progress never ceased to amaze me
Many times have I pointed out to people that a single fighter jet can often carry well over the bombload of the biggest bombers of WW2. It's ridiculous to think about.
Or how about the F-111, which could carry over thirty thousand pounds of payload also just 25 years later, but at almost twice the speed of sound. Pretty crazy...
So looking at it, bo is smack dab in the middle of wolf pack territory (ignoring how it's presence would affect that) so I woukd assune bo woukd have a large number of maritime patrol/asw aircraft.... wonder what they would look like.....
I never thought of that! That would make a very fun video if I were to break out of aviation/flyout RU-vid. Either that, or I'll just build the marksman into a maritime patrol aircraft with different engines, a modified bomb-bay, and a gigantic extending radar to replace the current air-to-ground setup. (Wait that's just the shackleton)
Yeah, it’s a cool plane, but it’s targets and methods were ultimately decided by nazis, so you kind of have to disconnect the plane and the people who operated it.
It may not seem like it, but sourcing music is one of the hardest parts of making videos. My subscription to Artlist.io is the only reason why we haven't gotten the exact same music as when I started yt last year
I think the brief history piece at the beginning worked well to establish why we wanted the design specs we want. How short/long it should be is probably worth experimenting with but putting the design goals in a context from the very start works well I think.
Messier a flyout tip to make better curved pipes for exhaust is to select all of the edit points and move it to be on top of the default location then you can rotate it from the base making a ring (-thickasfrick taught me that so i can not clame this idea but i can spread the idea)
I want to see how you would redesign the F-104 Starfighter in Flyout, make it a worthy fighter instead of a coffin with wings. Maybe give it modern avionics too
It looks very similar to the B-32 Dominator, which would have been used over Japan in 1946 to prep the battlespace in support of the invasion. Great video!
videos similar to this with other types of planes from other eras would be a great series. and you dont even have to make specific aircraft for these, you can use fotage from your other videos if said plane fits
you design really looks like a lengthened combination of a b32 dominator and a a26 invader, def looks the part of a hypothetical world war two strategic bomber, wonderful work
I'm planning on designing a long-range bomber in simpleplanes, I'm sure some might think the game is a bit dated but I don't care it's fun as fuck and the second game is coming out next year
ATTENTION, LOTS OF TEXT! Hello, I just wanted to say that I loved this design. However, there are a few changes I would make to this model, the main one being no pressurization. Now, I admire your idea of making an aircraft that would be safer for the crew, so they wouldn't have to face -50°C cold, but there are three, maybe four, problems with that: the cost(the b-29 cost 3 billions of dollars for the program alone), the production line, the weight because of the pressurization and last but not least the German insistence(jets). However, not everything is super negative reviews, far from it, I know this is just a "simplified" model, there are still things I would like to improve the aircraft's capabilities. The towers would be a twin 20mm to wreck anny german fighter, regardless they size or speed. The engines could have a interesting design that it was used in the fw 190 that's the use of a fan between the propeller and engine which would allowed to hide the air intakes above the engine(there's a channel named Greg that explain it better than me) and there's some minor improve such a nose upper bubble for star navigation, like that one in the b-17, a bomb bay door similar to the b-24(because it has less drag), some windows behind the cockpit for radio operator and fly engineer to look at the engines, air filters, fuel injection if u are crazy and the fw 190 nose to make it look cool Overall this it's just my opinion, in the end i not even a aeronatic engineer so u can ignore with you want( just don't attack please😢), i just a boy that love warbirds, and some heavy ones, it's your plane so do the way u prefer. Try make a fighter that can also be used by the navy, or just for the navy😅
every single time!!!!! Every. Single. Time. Every time I see ur vids, I just go ham, boot up trailmakers, and then make an OVER POWERED build. Yea. Im just kinda like that lol
Strategic bombing IS terror bombing. One of the biggest strategic advantages of strategic bombing was intended to be the diminishing of enemy morale, so that can't be a key difference. Terror bombing was just a propaganda term invented during WW2 to galvanise support from civilians and sew negative sentiments towards the enemy.
Debatable as strategic bombing ostensibly intends to only target military targets with the intent of removing the enemys ability to use or produce military assets... But the accuracy of such mass bombing campaigns effectively makes such distinctions moot if not meaningless especially with the use of incendiary weapons.
@@V3RTIGO222 Also the fact that most factories and other industrial and manefactoring area are 'likely' to located near dense civilian area (idk people might want to not travel far from their workplace or something), plus horrible accuracy of any type of high release boming equal... yeah. But they are clear intend of something between high-up directly order to bomb clearly civilians area and order bomb industrial areas anyway but are aiming at the same thing and might have some same effect but they are difference.
Actually, the allied calculus behind the logic of strategic bombing in Europe was that a mathematics model found out that Axis industrial capacity could be crippled by making people homeless by bombing them. Breaking morale was more of a side effect than the main purpose. The german bombings of Britain would be terror bombings, since they targeted morale
Yeah, it seems like the difference between 'destroy this military thing, like 90% of the victims are going to be civilians but that's an acceptable rate' and 'hey destroy this military thing, and make sure that we get like 90% civilian casualties to scare the shit out of them.' the intent is kinda different, but it's still basically the same thing
@@paullywog2477 I think the universal ban on incendiary weapons after the war is an acknowledgement that the possible harm to civillians was poorly evaluated and admittedly catastrophic.
3:05 implies that the british built radar to counter the bombing in the blitz, which ignores the fact that the chain home early warning radar came online before the war started and was the worlds first operational military radar system.
Strategic bombing is targeting industry and infrastructure targets although the reason that a lot of civilians died was because there were very few "Smart Bombs" during WWII. The B-29 was introduced in 1942. WWII bombers didn't have radar. The combatants during WWII used Turbo superchargers as well as various assists (ie 50/50 Methanol/water mixture or the German GM-1 superpower device using nitrous oxide fuel injection). Oboe was RDF rather than radar although the British did develop aircraft radar, it was used exclusively in night fighters.
I wanna see you make a video trying out SimplePlanes, as it is an older game with a different building system in almost every way, and despite that people still make crazy things that are extremely detailed with all the XML modding available and stuff.
One thing to note is that the americans at the start of the bombing aimed for military targets and factories, often near cities, so they bombed during the day for more acurate bombing. The british bombed at night using area bombing, hitting cities just as the germans did in the battle of britain. Towards the end of the war, the american bomvers did aim for civilian cities.
about forced induction and intercooling, heat from the exhaust gases have little effect on manifold pressure, as they do not come into contact with the impellor wheel of the turbo. Must heat in relation to turbocharging comes from physically compressing the air. Compressing air increases its heat as its the same thermal energy in a smaller space. "Heat soak," while certainly not completely negligible, is quite small.
Looks pretty much like the type of bomber that would've been designed mid war and saw service in 46-49, only to do basically nothing before being scrapped cause jets are a thing now. Great build tho!
The difference between terror bombing and regular strategic bombing isn't the amount of non-combatant casualties. It's the motivation/goal of the mission. Aka the way by which it's supposed to negatively affect the enemy. If the goal of a bombing is to destroy manufacturing capabilities or logistics hubs, then the targets are usually civilians, since workers in munitions factories or train stations for example are usually civilians. That's not terror bombing. What makes something terror bombing is if the goal is to negatively affect people's morale, not strategic capabilities. The bombing of Dresden was not terror bombing. It was bombed for its strategic value. It didn't have much value for terror bombing, since its bombing was only used as propaganda by the Germans, thus raising morale, not lowering it. On the other hand, Hiroshima and Nagasaki could arguably be considered as terror bombings, even though they had significant military value. This is because although the targets were chosen by their military and strategic value, the intended effect was to shock the Japanese into surrendering. It would've been much cheaper to just firebomb the cities as they had done with many others, but a single bomb glassing almost an entire city has much more of a shock value.
My great grandfather actually flew a Lancaster in the Second World War, he made it through the entire thing. Wish I could have met him, apparently he was a lovely man.
fun fact: it turned out that heavy machinery and railroads tent to be quite robust / quick easy fix. so the allies ended up bombing the same factories day after day in a kinda loonie toons way
You know sometimes I wonder and dream of an idea of what WW2 would have looked like if we gotten missiles systems early... like imagine if some madman went back in time and just went absolutely ham in designing, then building missiles; all so he could see a P-51 shoot aim-9s at helpless Bf-109s.
1) the biggest risk for bombers over Germany were fighters, not flack... 2) especially for night bombers, they did a study regarding defensive armament during the war... They came to the conclusion that it would be optimal if Lancaster gave up all machine guns :) thanks this would make it possible to significantly speed up these machines, and at the same time they could carry a heavier bomb load, so for a given number of bombs on targets, the British would lose fewer machines and, above all, significantly fewer crew members. In the end, they decided to keep the gunner primarily for reasons of the morale of the soldiers, and also because it would be a highly controversial decision... 3) but good work, you can see that you put a lot of effort and energy into those designs
The Chain Home radar system was active during the Battle of Britain. Also did you know that some turbocharged aviation radials also have a single stage supercharger in series with the turbo so any attempt to cool the intake air prior to the supercharger is a wasted effort with the supercharger just putting more heat into your carefully cooled intake air. Speaking of your obsessive focus on charge and exhaust cooling, some mighty big aero engines did just fine with what little cooling one intercooler could cope with. Having so many coolers between the exhaust and intake... For one thing, use heat resistant steels in the tube(s) carrying the exhaust gasses, insulate it well, and don't cool it as your taking energy away from the turbocharger. Do some studies on the big engines like the P&W Double Wasp, Wright Duplex Cyclone and the sleeve valve 18 cylinder Bristol Pegasus.. Also, you are going to need great volumetric efficiency, like either 4 valves per cylinder or sleeve valves; putting in a bunch of space and volume flow wasting radiators to get more power is going to not work as great as you think. There's a ton of very thin but very cold air up at 29K, as long as your aircooled engine(s) have a well designed internal cooling duct and cowling, and a cooling flaps that don't induce too much drag.. And then there is the real biggie: Be prepared to have all your whiz-bang recip engine tech be rapidly become irrelevant in less than 10 years time as the jet turbine and more importantly the gas turboshaft/prop start to surpass all your reinventing the wheel. it's inevitable, the first C130 flew when, 1954? With 3000 hp per engine in less weight, size, and complexity.
Me watching him talk about nautical miles and engines: Nerd! Also me in question: So the letters in the name of a B-17 say where it was made, BO meaning Boeing (Seattle, WA), DL meaning Douglas (Long Beach, CA), and VE meaning Lockheed Vega (Burbank, CA) so that would mean the B-17F75BO was made in Seattle. And the letters on the fuselage defined what bomb group, I’m too lazy to pull up my files about it.
Another added advantage of night bombing is that civilians tend to be asleep and therefore have a harder time getting to bomb shelters, leading to an "increased strategic value" per raid.
1 thing: compressed air, by virtue of compression, produces huge amounts of heat. Not so much the problem of the hot side being attached to the cold side. Example: supercharged engines ALSO need intercoolers because they get hot fast and start loosing power do to all that compressed air. Physics!
At 11:00 when setting all the parts to the None texture resolution, you could've just give into the craft files and delete all the blank textures. Would barely take a minute
Your bomber airframe design should be able to using large litre displacement in-line engines with neither supercharger or turbocharger setup as a substitute in case your minion in aerospace power plant division made some major foul-ups in production schedule for your radials😇
i am surprised you didnt include Schnellbomber, aka the best kind of bomber because unlike the other kinds these were built by competent people. because defensive gunners until radar controlled guns, were hopelessly useless against an attack from interceptors. also they look so fucking sleek.
My favorite type of Aircraft designs has to be the twin engines with turrets/gunners on them And my favorite aircraft of all time goes the the P-61 Black Widow due to its unique top quad 50 turret and it's overall design...except the round nose I kinda hated that part but it's whatever I wonder what your fictional nation would make of a twin engine heavy fighter
Daylight bombing was effective, night was not, in ETO. You cannot directly compare how bombing worked in PTO vs ETO, so many things were different between both.
Requesting a supersonic stealth VTOL fighter that uses canard rotor wing technology for VTOL flight but turns into an oblique wing for forward flight. Has thrust vectoring and adaptive cycle engines
Figured out a reason why they would have the expensive engines and such. It’s because a good portion of the raid would happen at during the day. They reached Germany. It would still be there be barely light or just had sunset so there’s a chance that they might encounter patrolling fighters in route. Something I think you need is a World War II Maritime strike aircraft. I mean your island is well in Ireland. It lives dies by the world’s oceans so American strike, and patrol aircraft would be needed.
