Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Pt. 1, design philosophy and features. 

This is the type of gentle and obviously historically informed American accent that British people like me love.

I absolutely love the analogy of a racing horse and a cavalry horse. Having spent some quality time living on a tank in combat I gained a great appreciation for machines that are simple to maintain/repair, have redundant capabilities, and are generally overbuilt. It's one thing to say something has great capabilities; it is an entirely different thing when it has to work all day, everyday. I'll take the latter every time.

The FW 190's silhouette has the most beautiful form follows function feel to it than any other fighter of the war. Even standing still, the thing screams "attack!"

Again thanks for the shout-out and giving proper credit. If you have trouble with downloading footage, let me know. I could just send you some raw footage if needed.

This is the best airplane analysis I have yet to hear. There is much 'feeling' to what the airplane represents, it's design philosophy and the minute description of really vitals for an aircraft, a very balanced approach between detail, focus and general characteristics. Hopefully part two will be of a similar quality.

As a licensed A&P mechanic in my mid-sixties, I really appreciate this video. My father, a B-17F ball turret gunner in 43-44, shot one down. Thanks!!

Kurt Tank's philosophy is the reason why the FW-190 is my favorite ride in WW2 flight sims. The Spitfire and BF-109 may have been an engineer's pride, but the FW-190 was designed from the ground up to be a pilot's joy.

This aircraft, and my grandfathers description of it flying past his ball turret (B-17G), are one of many things that inspired me to become a pilot. This is one of the finest, if not the finest material on the 190 I’ve come across. Great work.

I was flabbergasted by the speed at which the 38 minutes passed.

Prandtl is famous in fluid dynamics and aerodynamics and his contributions are well known in academia and the aircraft industry. His other contribution is the introduction of the concept of boundary layer theory which is used to estimate drag.

Shared this with my girlfriend(biology and high school maths teacher.) She was fascinated and impressed with delivery and content.

The FW190 has always been my favorite German WW2 Fighter! Many thanks for posting this video and I am looking forward for part 2. Greetings from Guatemala!

That he111 masquerading as an airliner. For one row of long thin people. Who exit via the belly. Classic airliner design...

Kurt Tank was a common sense designer. He used what materials that were afforded to him such as the BMW engine, and sub contracting the airplanes components to be built by different manufacturers. He came up with one of the wars best fighters, and was a vary good multi roll aircraft also. It didn't get the nickname Butcher bird by being a slouch. Once again thanks for the great video, I think it's great how you go into such great detail about the subject at hand. I can't wait for part 2.

The awkward german word noted translates to duty horse. The word Dienst (pronounced deenst) is duty and in german you make from two nouns one if they relate to each other. In english your duty wagon is a staff car and in german it’s a Dienstwagen. Felddienstanzug is 3 nouns tied together. Feld Dienst Anzug or field duty uniform/ dress. The american BDU or battle dress uniform would be Kampfanzug oder Gefechtsanzug in german.

It is true that Prandtl developed the theory of the elliptical wing, based on minimum induced drag considerations. But he actually was disappointed that this theory did not solve the problem he really wanted to address: how birds and insects fly, and how to build aircraft in a similar fashion. His minimum induced drag research was published in 1922, but he would also develop the "normal distribution (bell-shaped)" lift theory based on minimum structural considerations, which helped greatly with the design of tailless flying wings. This would be published in 1931, I believe. It is important to note that the elliptical wing is only "ideal" if minimum induced drag is the consideration. The normal distribution actually is better for minimum total drag, IIRC. Great video, great channel, wish this existed when I was an aero student.

Very good to hear about the mindset and intentions of the designer, one of the more interesting and oft neglected aspects of design.

Only just started watching Greg's work, and this is *really* good stuff. Top notch content produced here.

I’m just finishing up A&P Schwerin and working as a mechanic. I love these videos because of all the similarities I see in general aviation aircraft. Thank you Greg

Man this guy should have a podcast just like his channel, this stuff is so in depth, keep up the good work dude.

I always wondered why Tank designed the 190 with so many electrically actuated features. As a “converted” electrical engineer, this makes perfect sense and demonstrates his forward thinking.

Your videos are fantastic. As a aircraft enthusiast born in 85 I watched endless aircraft documentaries on TV, built models and read books. Your in depth analyses give so much more insight and I appreciate them very much. Keep up the good work!

20:31 in model airplanes we call this feature "Exponential" done by computer mixing. Amazing that the Germans had that in the FW-190

The word was "Dienstpferd", which translates directly to duty-horse or service-horse. Your reliable good friend that gets the job done and needs only little care. Love your content by the way.

I've been waiting for this video. It was worth the wait. IMO this is your best episode. The FW 190 was my favorite fighter of WW2. Didn't get the publicity of the 109. As an electrical engineer I agree with Mr Tank's philosophy of using electrical vs hydraulic systems. Your P 51 schematic of the hydraulic system demonstrates the complexity of hydraulics ... the system looks horrifying for performing maintenance. Plumbing, seals, pumps .. potentially flammable liquid. Give me electric systems anyday. The radial engine with the unique cooling .... the visibility .. the very looks of this fighter makes it one of the best. Thank you for this video. Bravo to your demonstration and teaching skills.

While I just sell car parts, IMHO, Electrical systems has a slight advantage over hydraulics. Hydraulic systems are an enormous pain when they go wrong, at least compared to electric. They spill hydraulic fluid all over the place, special high pressure hoses and pipes and fittings need replacing. That, and spilled hydraulic fluid costs money, but "spilled" electricity is costs almost nothing and is easily manufactured on the spot. While electrical components are just as specialized as hydraulic ones, they are smaller, cheaper, easier to make and replace, and far more common. Electricity has standards that are more universal, amperage and voltage; two components may require different specs, but understanding what goes where and how is far easier than the hassle of hydraulic fluid compatibilities and different measurements of pressure and viscosity. The upside to hydraulics is that it is FAR more intuitive than electricity. Pump builds pressure and velocity, more of these makes more power, end devices use this pressure and velocity and return slower and lower pressure fluid back to the pump. Resistance is caused by too small of a pipe or a blockage, and leaks are announced by drips and sprays and emptying reservoirs. Repair, while more expensive and time consuming once found, is far easier to find and understand and can be easily discovered before function is effected. Electricity on the other hand, its faults are usually only discovered when something suddenly stops working or catches fires or sparks and shocks are found.

All else aside, Greg, the Fw-190 is one of the most beautiful and intimidating-looking fighters of any time, and they painted it so well. And the Panther tank was designed by Hans Flugzeug. I once saw a ceremonial smooth-bore artillery piece at Edinburgh Castle that had a plate on it that said "Camera" :D

This guy is so homely and humble.Stumbled onto this by accident and now I'm hooked!

I absolutely appreciate all the time and effort that goes into these thoroughly researched videos. I’ve always been fascinated by WWII aircraft and the technical detail you give these magnificent warbirds is just fantastic. Great work as always. Cheers

Imo the Fw-190, Yak-3, & Corsair, are my two favorite looking planes of the type. I think perhaps because most books I had growing up were full of mustangs, spitfires, and lightnings and wanted more. So when I saw the sleek Yak, the angular Corsair, and the Brutish fw 190, I fell in love. Also love the Condor, I really wish it had been an airliner and allowed to develop.

awesome video greg, learned a lot man thanks for your work on it.

well, it doesn't matter for me the accent, but I love the amazing content of this site after 40 years of aviation history, I never saw somebody like Greg, explaining the engineering side of the planes that I love so much. By the way, I'm in America,but I was born in Argentina and also I'm Italian and lived in Europe for 3 years, so I'm used to all accents.

can’t wait to learn more a bout that engine, i’ve always found that the control system (what little info is out there about it) is very interesting

Thankyou for covering one of my favourite planes, love the horse anlage, it reminded me of one about the typhoon. It has the temperament of a stallion and the handling of a cart horse.

Dienstpferd = “Horse which serves”-> Horse soldier ...

And an odd aside on the Frise balanced ailerons. They were used on the Piper Warrior I, which was intended as a training airplane. They were too effective in countering adverse yaw, and the Warrior II reverted to conventional ones so the student could learn to use the rudder!

Well done, Greg, as usual. Excellent background information, and - since my Dad was an F6F combat pilot - I couldn't help noticing the similarities between the design philosophies of Kurt Tank and Leroy Grumman: make the plane pilot-friendly, rugged, easy to maintain, straightforward to operate, and so on. While a few Hellcats did fly a handful of missions over southern France after D-Day, to my knowledge, the FW190 and the F6F never met in combat. My amateur's hunch is that any dogfights between the two would have been very interesting, and more than "interesting" for the pilots involved.

Having just finished building a 1/32 scale model of the FW190 I found this video fascinating. So thank you sir.

Excellent Greg. I vastly appreciate the time and effort you put into these vids. The content is superb. I have learned so much and my admiration for all things in aviation..has increased. Good day and I look forward to the next vid in the series.

Today, 24 February (1898) Kurt Waldemar Tank was born (died on 5 June 1983)...

Best channel on youtube. Love the in depth analysis explained so clearly, must take a lot of time to present this content... it's appreciated.

I live in Columbia, SC right next to our local airport Owens Field. The other week I saw an FW190 in the back corner of one of the hangers. I couldn't believe it. I've been waiting on the door to be open again so I can ask the owner if he'll give me a tour. I'm watching this video so I can have an idea about how it works and impress the owner with my "vast" knowledge of his aircraft haha!

I've always found the Fw 190 an interesting type, especially given it's performance whilst having a radial engine and the aerodynamic profile associated with that. Thanks for another thoroughly researched and informative video.

Awesome video with technical details. I love it! Thank you very much. Loving fw190-D

Judd Peterson, son of Major Richard 'Pete' Peterson of the 357th FG flying various P-51 versions. In your video of the comparison between P-51 and Me109 performance, I commented on a dogfight my father had with an Me109 in which they got tangled in a counterclockwise, Lufberry chase circle, and he successfully utilized the lowering of his flaps to create greater lift in his P-51 and cut the radius of the circle smaller. That allowed him to gain on the Me109 and ultimately catch him in the circle and down the enemy plane. During later debriefings to learn and share how to get out of a Lufberry chase successfully, there was further discussion about how to deal with an enemy fighter pilot who might be employing the same flap strategy. During this discussion, one conclusion was that, if the enemy plane were a FW190, then you wouldn't have to worry about their similar use of the flaps for better lift in a Lufberry chase circle. Because the FW190 has "split flaps" which do not modify the aerodynamic shape of the upper face of the wing, they cannot generate increased lift and, therefore, cannot be used in a tight Lufberry chase circle to shorten the turning radius by increasing lift. Something my father was advised of during those debriefings.

Who would dislike this video? To me, this is some of Greg’s best work. Looking forward to part 2.

Thank you Greg for making this video! It is one of my favourite planes and I appreciate the effort you put it to give us information that we do not usually hear/ is harder to find. More of this would be wonderful!

Man!This narration is as beautiful as the subject matter!Its like a genial, genteel professor has taken me aside to explain the finer points of a rugged, practical yet refined WW2 war horse of an airplane. Thank you!

I never thought I'd hear the 190's performance described as "generally mediocre;" so I'm charged up to hear about that in part 2. Thanks Greg for another remarkable video.

I tend to put your videos aside, Greg, until I can give them my FULL attention and never have I been quite as rewarded for doing so as with this video. What I most enjoyed was the time you took to establish the *context* of the 190 so thoroughly. As one commenter noted, never has 38 minutes passed quite so fast and left me keenly wanting more. Yeah, we're all geeks on this channel in a fundamental sense for being so enthralled by a subject that's becoming ever more esoteric. But that's a legitimate source of pride 😉

Greg, Outstanding Presentation! It is great to watch the segment with a high level of technical description as well as pilots' perspective. as a pilot myself I greatly appreciate the knowledge and pictorial representation of the key points that are discussed. I thought I knew quite abit about the 190 series but I realize there is still much to learn about Tanks' approach to designing a very "user friendly" high performance airplane.

Luv the way ya say Have a Great Day at the end . . I will because of watching this

14:23 "Dienstpferd" could be translated as service/duty horse. And thanks for all the great content its really enjoyable. Greeting from switzerland

Dammit Greg, I will be busy at school when this premieres. That all said, I will be eager to watch this long awaited video. From the description alone I am eager to see what you make of Kurt Tanks philosophy that resulted in a remarkable fighter that.

hello Greg, thank you for your brilliant work. on the elliptical wing look for the Brothers Siegfried & Walter Günter ; they used this design since the mid 20´s . Pilot of the Fw190 in the Video was sympathic Alsacian Marc Mathis; died in 2015 test flying a homebuild aircraft of his friend Gruß Linus

once again Greg, you have managed to answer most questions that have been nagging me concerning most systems covering my favorite fighter. An all around aircraft serving the needs (right place, right time) of the typical fighter pilot, and doing it quite well.Thank you.

The engine cowl design development is a fascinating story and is one of features of the Fw-190 that was copied in other designs like the hawker sea fury. A special video on the Fw-190 cooling spinner design and subsequent cowl design development?

Link been Facebook posted :) the man who makes these videos is a very good teacher he keeps the technical details as simple as possible but not to simple and will try to push your understanding curiosity farther

As somebody who has actually worked in aircraft design, the whole idea of "copying is shameful" in industry is just absurd fanboyism from armchair aviation enthusiasts. Yes, Supermarine absolutely copied Heinkel, there is no doubt in my mind that is exactly what happened because looking at existing solutions and applying lessons learned prior is a core part of advancing engineering and making a successful product. But Supermarine, nor any other company that made elliptical winged aircraft could never admit that because it would look bad from a PR perspective. Science, and by extension engineering, is not a competition, it is a global collaborative effort. Everybody gains from sharing info. Building on what already exists the the very soul of engineering as a whole. It's the *companies* that are in competition, not engineers, and they have a vested interest in promoting the idea that other designs are in some way "shameful" because they used things another company pioneered.

Video is about the Focke Wulf 190 10 minutes in and its talking about the wing shape of the Spitfire and the He-112 Theres still 20 minutes left And theres a second part of it God ive been looking for a channel like this for years.

Can't wait for part 2. Always love Greg's videos, so many interesting tid bits and insights.

I need more videos like this - going down into the gritty details that determine a great plane from one that is good on paper.

Once again, thank you, SIR Greg. There was a lot of stuff I had never known before, and I used to think of myself as an expert on these things. How wrong was I.

I recall reading years ago that during a visit to England in early 1943 Leroy Grumman was so impressed with a captured 190's design and performance he had the then on the drawing board F8F redesigned and made smaller, bucking the trend of ever larger and heavier fighters.

im hype for this. enjoy listening to these while playing flight sims. keep up the good content greg!

The elliptical planform came out of Prandtl’s analysis determining the minimum induced drag for a given span. This yielded an elliptical Spanwise Lift Distribution (SLD) and was basically correct; however, Prandtl himself recognized that an aircraft is a tradeoff between weight and drag. So, he used the same lifting line theory and changed the optimization from minimum induced drag for a fixed span to minimum induced drag for a fixed root bending moment. This yielded a parabolic SLD. This parabolic SLD had about 15% greater span and even lower induced drag than the elliptical SLD. The really interesting thing is that even though the Spitfire had an elliptical spanwise chord distribution, it did not actually have the “optimal” elliptical SLD. Why? Because if an elliptical wing has no twist, then every section along the span is just as likely to stall at the same angle of attack as any other, meaning that the smallest asymmetry would make roll-upon-stall behavior unpredictable. Supermarine gave the Spitfire washout to ensure a progressive stall from root to tip, maintaining both dihedral effect and roll control. This meant that the Spitfire was not only forgiving during low speed maneuvering, giving it’s pilots the confidence to go there, but also allowed for a lighter structure because the actual SLD was closer to the ideal parabolic. Interestingly, both the Bf 109 and FW 190 had unpredictable behaviors near stall, putting their pilots in a less comfortable position.

Everybody here including me is scrambling to get home to watch this haha

This is why I love BMW. The technological leaps they make in everything, have been astounding... from Bi-plane to Airliners in a matter of years

Another jewel of a video. Many thanks, Greg.

Ever since I built the FW-190 Airfix model, I have been fascinated by the apparent paradox of it simplicity, the poor performance of its rated specifications, and the many Allied and Axis reports of its superb performance. If ever there was a plane the belied its specifications, it was the 190. Thanks, Greg, for finally making everything make sense.

"Dienstpferd", literally "service horse" - or "work horse", if you will.

its indeed a beautiful design for an aircraft

I absolutely love your videos and I really appreciate how you work things out. I would really love it more if you could improve your sound quality. Not easy when you're recording in hotels between trips, but some consistency and compression will go a long way. I usually get to hear these videos in the morning and with the kettle or microwave found, you're too easily drowned out. Keep up these! They really are fantastic

Thank you very much for the in-depth video. I've never been a fan of the Fw-190 series, I've always thought they looked awkward. However, I never understood why, exactly, they excelled, particularly on the Eastern front, which this video did a good job of explaining. I look forward to following this series

45 waitng, 90 likes even before the video is viewable.... :-) Edit: and the video is great as usual and well worth watching !!

What a geat channel - easily explained concepts for non-aeronautical engineers like me. I learnt a lot about the FW-190 that I didn't know, and I now appreciate this aircraft a lot more, after viewing this concise video. Thanks!! 👍 .....now where's Part 2?

As a point,the I.Ae. 33 "Pulqui II"was a jet aircraft designed in Argentina by the Aerotechnical Institute and built at the Military Aircraft Factory. The famous German designer Kurt Tank, together with the Argentine engineer Norberto Morcchio and a team of Argentine/German collaborators, had a capital participation in the project. Only five prototypes were produced between 1950 and 1959. Then he worked on aeronautical developments in India, before returning to Germany in the late 1960s to work as a consultant for Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm (MBB). This is the last copy of the Pulqui II, exhibited in the National Aeronautical Museum of Argentine. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-j00FKDc-f60.html . Greetings from Argentina.

Imagine if a two-stage supercharger or a robust turbocharger had been incorporated into the design. The radial 190 was completely outclassed above 20,000 feet as designed

Wake up from after work nap: Greg video waiting on me. Why cant everyday be like this?

Greg, I enjoy every one of your uploads, both aircraft and automobiles. But, I've really been looking forward to this FW-190 series. It's always been one of my favorite single seat, piston driven, fighters. Thanks for all of your time and effort! Semper Fi, TreeTop

There are some comments about the Heritage Museum's FW-190D. Last I heard, it has been restored to a sort of museum flying condition. Virtually everything is restored to 'stock'. And the high performance Jumo engine is in perfect running condition. However, it is not Airworthy or flyable. This is due to very understandable reasons... Late in the war, which Germany was losing, the expected lifespan of an airframe was very short, and due to critical raw materials shortages certain parts of these 'late war' aircraft were fastened together with glue, or with iffy fit and finish, as corners were cut to meet production goals. I believe that this aircraft *could* be made Airworthy - - but it would have to be rebuilt differently(better) such that it would not require the equivalent of complying with numerous A.D.'s every 5 or 15 hours, which is crazy in the modern world. Truthfully the only realistic thing to do is spend $$$$$ and build a replica using superior construction techniques. Cheers ;)

As usual, great in depth technical analysis! Nice to see a full size replica 190 flying as well. Can't wait to see Ep, 2!

Greg, thanks a lot for another very interesting, well researched video. Recently you featured the Ta-152, now the Fw-190 in multiple parts - both being my favorite birds it's a joy to follow your channel. But allow me one bit of criticism. I wish your videos would be louder somehow (the former sound engineer in me advices to bring the microphone closer to your mouth which will bring your voice up and reduce ambient noise plus room reflections) and, in the case of this very video more consistent in volume (after 35:40 it becomes nicely loud again). Luckily your good narrator's voice is very, very intelligible which balances it out a bit. Again, thanks for the good videos and the channel.

This is really fascinating. I think it's awesome that the controls use rods instead of cables.

Always had a special interest in the FW-190 (and the P-47) because they just looked like they were MADE to fight. How interesting to learn how that was indeed central to Kurt Tank's design philosophy. Wonderful research.

I really enjoy your videos. They usually send me off tracking down more details, and long roads I did not know I wanted to be on. Kurt Tank was a genius, and his designs were most impressive of WW2. Can only imagine what he would have done if leadership of the time would have left him alone. Much like the Horten brothers.

Nice video! I've always been confused when I read about how Spitfires were outclassed by Fw190 when it first appeared. Goes to show the importance of reliable and stable gun platforms.

Great video, Greg. Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.

Here from Greg, who recommended you and rightly so. Subscribed immediately after I saw the 109 DB605 low passes. What a sound!

I had to strain my ears to ear you Greg, Very interesting

Hi Greg, as usual a fun and informative video. Regarding the Spit's wing, I have strong doubts that it was "copied" from the Heinkel. If I had to place a bet, I would guess that Supermarine used Prandtl's published lifting line theory to arrive at the shape independently of the Heinkel. Here's why: applying the math of the lifting line theory (usually done by way of Glauert's method, who was a British aerodynamicist, but other methods exist) leads to the conclusion that an elliptical planform is the most efficient one. Even if Supermarine's engineers didn't do the math for themselves, they were surely aware that Prandtl did and the resulting conclusion. Next, for the very low Mach numbers were these planes usually operate, especially in a dogfight, little to no leading edge sweep is preferred. In an elliptical wing, the only way to do that is with a much shallower leading edge ellipse than the trailing edge ellipse. This is why most elliptical wings are so similar with the characteristic tip "pulled forward" look. Specifically for the Spitfire, it is clear that the designers tried to go for the lowest LE sweep possible (probably to gain a little extra turn performance) with a very shallow LE ellipse resulting in an almost straight LE for much of the span. It seems to me that once the decision to use an elliptical wing was made, the specific shape they ended with was an obvious outcome. Of course it is possible that it was "copied"/directly inspired by the Heinkel, but I doubt it. On a side note, Prandtl is one of the biggest names in aerodynamics. He was responsible for many different contributions. His lifting line theory took Kutta's and Joukowski's circulation theory of lift (the only mathematically valid theory) and expanded it from 2D to 3D. He made contributions to shock wave theory (e.g. Prandtl-Meyer expansion fans), boundary layer theory and much more.

When I was a young person, fascinated with anything airplane, tank, ship, etc. the FW-190 mostly caught my attention due to the apparent ramp-up in firepower from the Bf-109. Will you address the decision to use both MG-FF and MG-151 20mm cannon?

Fw 190, F4F Wildcat, F4U Corsair. gotta love the radials, the unsung heroes of wwii.

The analises to the BMW 801 will be interesting, maybe you could finally put to rest the myth that the last versions of the A-8 and A-9 had a BMW 801TS, which many books say its a "turbocharged" engine. It's not! Also, the Dora versions and, especially to me, the long range G versions deserve a better explanation. Keep up the great work!

So much research and work was put in this video. Made it interesting and fascinating. Great job, sounds like a lot of the design features are somewhat still in use. Bravo to the plane designers.

The undercarriage on that Condor doesn’t look at all confidence-inspiring.

Another outstanding design analysis. Function has its own beauty. The FW-190 is certainly that.

Hi Greg, Firstly thanks again for yet another brilliantly detailed video. I love the mix of fact and informed opinion. I’m impressed by the variety and quality of source material. And finally I very much enjoy your delivery, both in coherency and with the occasional dash of dry humour. On that last point of coherency I’ve noticed on most of your videos your voice seems to be a bit quieter (audio at a lower level) than most of the others on RU-vid. Occasionally the audio levels jump around a bit too. So I did a little bit of measuring, because I record audio for a living, and in this video your voice averages about -29LKFS which is about 5dB below the standard for the USA. This isn’t the end of the world and is easily fixed by just turning the volume up a bit. However later in the video between 23:39 and 34:41 the level drops to -39LKFS which is very quiet. Anyway the long and short of this is I’d like to help you tweak your recording/production process so the audio quality is up there with the excellent quality of the content. I’m fairly certain this shouldn’t cost you any money as there are plenty of tools available for free on most platforms. And of course, only if you’re cool with me doing this. What are you recording your voice overs with? (Inbuilt microphone on phone, tablet, laptop or is it an external microphone) What video editing software/app are you using to put together the videos? If you’d rather do this in private instead of getting a public tutorial I’m happy to do that too. Alternatively I guess I could make my own RU-vid tutorial on levelling and normalising audio… How hard can it be? ;-) Regards Grant Audio Engineer Sydney, Australia

IThis comment comes quite late in the day but I have only recently “discovered” you channel and I have just completed watching your fascinating series on the FW-190. In his book “The German Fighter” Rudiger Kosin tells an interesting story concerning the decision to build a fighter with a radial engine. He tells that in 1938 a captured Polikarpov I-16 (nicknamed “Rata” (rat) in Spain during the civil war) was tested at Resling and made available to the industry. At the time Kosin was working for Arado. He stated the I-16 possessed certain characteristics that made it vey attractive to ordinary pilots, its manoeuvrability was superior to the Bf 109 (inferior in every other aspect) and it was of very simple constructions. Kosin was at Resling when the plane was demonstrated and he commented to his companion that something like that had to be “translated” into German, this is, built to German technical standards. Arado then proceeded to draw a German version of a fighter powered by the BMW 14 cyl radial and the result was very similar to the future FW-190 (“how could it not have done?” he says). He continues to say that Blume (Arado Technical Director) showed little enthusiasm for the idea as he thought the ministry would not want it and that still less enthusiasm showed the LC-III office of the ministry that rejected them straight away when they stated a target speed figure of 600-650 Km/h. When Arado received the drawings of the FW-190 for production at their factory and they compared them with the plans they themselves had submitted they speculated that either Tank went directly to the head of the ministry bypassing the LC-III office or Udet himself had gone directly to Tank. In any case what is relevant to the genesis of the FW-190 is that Kosin seems convinced that the testing of the I-16 at Resling had something (or much perhaps) to do with the decision of the ministry to put in motion the radial engine fighter project (and reading between lines it is clear that Kosin was rather put-off by Focke Wulf being awarded the project instead of Arado). Otherwise It doesn’t change a iota of your splendid video on the design of that magnificent plane but it is an interesting story.

Damn you made my request to a reality! Thanks sir, hats off to you.