P-80 Shooting Star - America's WW2 Combat Jet 

In the same way the WW1 saw both horseback cavalry charges and tanks and aircraft. War makes innovation look easy

So did Korea; the North Koreans were still using the old Polikarpov Po-2s for night nuisance raids (commonly known to US Troops as Bed Check Charlie), right up to the armistice. World War 2 also saw a few horseback charges, mainly in Poland and in China, and the first TV-guided drones and first weapons to definitively cross the 62-mile line into space. (There are arguments about whether WW1's Paris Gun did or didn't get quite that high, but the V2 sure did). And the early phases of the US war against the Taliban in 2002 saw horse-mounted US Special Forces calling in airstrikes via satellite.)

@Marco D'Magnifico Wise decision, because the reconnaissance UAVs were often followed by air strikes.

@Marco D'Magnifico They surrendered to the model planes because they knew what their appearance foreshadowed. One Iraqi armour unit commander was asked why he surrendered without a fight. His answer was "the damn B-52's". When it was stated that his unit had not been attacked by the bombers, his answer was "Yes I know that, but I saw one that had been".

Gravity bombs to ballistic missiles, ground spotters to radar technology, bolt actions to selective fire rifles. It really is the most fascinating, albeit terrible, war when it comes to military advances.

The recoil on the GAU in the A-10 is almot equal to the thrust of its engines.

@@galenhaugh3158 Yeah, we were crew chiefs on F-4 fighters that used the same gun and we knew that there would be problems but the "expert" engineers that were from the USAF thought different. The engineers usually don't listen to lowly mechanics so I learned through my career in the AF. We were told to take the gun off. One of the guys drew a cartoon of a T-33 with a Hound dog missile (from a B-52) on the centerline. We were told to not do that anymore by the commander although he was smiling.

@@galenhaugh3158 I believe they fixed this on the A10 by inserting inert cartridges every so many rounds

This sounds hilarious and really cool at the same time, do you have any pictures?

@@derekadair7522 No, we weren't allowed to take pictures on the flight line, the F-4's were secret and the U-2's were top secret. The T-33's were right next to them. I do think that that flight is embedded in that pilots memory for ever, I wish I had a picture of him when I opened the canopy.

I inherited the book just recently so I'm going to have to go back and read it now to confirm

Don’t forget Ancient Aliens!

True that. Can't remember the last time I watched the Hist Channel.

History and Discovery channels are huge disappointments.

The last time I watched the History Channel it was actually a channel and it actually ran programs about history. That shows how long it's been since I watched the History Channel.😋

What would have happened if the P80 Shooting Star had encountered the ME262? It probably would’ve crashed.. For one thing, the Americans had not yet adopted they swept mine concept that the Germans had figured out in their wind tunnel research. This was one theory proposed as to the instability of the P80 at its top speed.

May I remind you of the DC-10?

.....used as target drones...

@@letoubib21 & 737Max ;) Must say I have a huge amount of respect for the fellows who tested these primitive jets. Them and WW1 pilots.

Development pre-computer simulation era. Everything was developed this way. We just don't care about it. Price of progress, I guess...

The same was true for most early advanced propeller aircraft of the war. Some were exceptional right out of the starting gate and some had teething problems.

Nearly but not quite? Post war, Von Ohain later admitted that he was aware of Whittle's work and had studied his patent. Although he had already started on his own path by the time he saw them. I believe Eric Brown also mentions this in one of his interviews as he obviously knew Whittle.

And then we gave the engine to the Soviets and the US nicked it. British desperation and naivety in the late war and post war 😞

That happens quite intense, actually. There is even a common phrase that parallels it: great minds think alike.

The VJ day post I see says it was his grandfather. (Unless there are multiple posts)

He must have gone through some tough times. My dad was conscripted in 1944 and was sent for jungle training - he was going to be dispatched to Burma and he said he was absolutely terrified. Luckily he was re-assigned to a fuel supply team, worked on fuel supply projects for the Normandy landings and was eventually posted to Greece

Many grandfathers probably fought, mine WW1 and WW2. I would have loved now to talk to him about his experiences, but most i remember him, hands on face , elbows on knees staring at the floor. I wonder what he was thinking. This was back in 70's. I'm now 60, i think more of the past than the present.

So did my father. What he experienced affected him for the rest if his life.

Ty

I can hear the B=52 now: "Am I a joke to you?!"

@@CB-mn4lf This is not a competition. We can appreciate all the aircraft without putting any down. And for a fighter jet this IS impressive.

What about the B 52?

@Suðringa o Impressive comment, it got me thinking.

I think there was a meteor that was used to test ejection seats and only was retired recently

Ikr its amazing its better then multi billion channels such as the history channel which keeps repeating them selfs to extend time

Because they are PACKED with interesting content, instead of lingering on fancy-yet-repetitive graphics, boring re-caps and endless commercials.

@@davidwilliams5749 agreed, and also I feel that it's really unique stories and new fresh untold stories from different perspectives. With the same staccato delivery from Mark.

It’s called “MARK FELTON PRODUCTION” for a reason!! @vuk stAjic!! MARK IS THE MAN!! Always wonderful content!

@Derek Davis Yes aware of this, that's exactly where my comment came from. That he alone carries that full production value into his YT vids.

His crash site is about a mile from my home in Burbank. As it turns out, this is not a "fun fact" to bring up at parties.

Sad deal

@Derek Davis Huh?

Heh!!

@Derek Davis right! How many pics of his P38 I've seen. I should have remembered.

A legendary name for a legendary man.

@Prison Planet Earth He was the highest scoring WW2 ace who flew P-38’s and became a test pilot after the war who died while flying the p-80.

Major Richard Bong if you please....

@@apenza4304 i believe he died before the war ended in his accident?

@@apenza4304 He died shortly *before* V-J Day *. . .*

Cool! :)

Chuck Yeager was a badass! Not scared by going fast either!

May he rest in peace

And Chuck Yeager said, “Bud Anderson is the best fighter pilot I’ve ever seen.”

Also said PAF has best pilots

A german FW190 Pilot: The first time I saw Chuck Yeager, I shot him down

And decorated with Red Stars against Sabres in "Jet Pilot" *. . . ;-)*

Yes, they starred against Godzilla in the early days.

@@Mondo762 got in a couple of hits in the first Godzilla. Made Godzilla call it a night..👺✈️😂

@@madisntit6547 Yippee Ki Yay...👍😂

@@letoubib21 You probably already know, but Howard Hughes spent so much time editing and re-editing the flying scenes (7 years), the planes were obsolete by the time he was finished and the movie was released.

we have one here in front of b.g.s.u. airport here in bowling green ohio,been there for decades

Lots of T-33's are still airworthy but, sadly, no P/F-80's.

Mark Felton is much, much more than a narrator, but yes, he is a wonderful narrator. He is also a very highly respected author. I love his writing style.

Had one of these on a concrete pedestal at the decommissioned CFB Cornwallis, but was removed a few years ago. Not sure where it went.

And given each other a thumbs up.

Not likely. That song is from "The Music Man", which did not appear on stage until 1957.

I found all kinds of sources for this and it's most likely based on a rhyme from Dickens 'a tale of two cities' Thanks for sharing, mate. 👍🏻

Seems pretty obvious to me. A boozer rewording of the children's song 'All I Want For Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth.' Cant imagine Dickens or some stage musical years after the war ended had anything to do with it?

@@edwardd9702 yeah, you're absolutely right. Cheers mate!

@@edwardd9702 The song was originally recorded by spike jones in 1947.

There's a big chance there's only one person doing it. A lot of this information can be found from the internet if you really look for it, and assuming he makes his living from this he would have the time for research. Getting the ideas for relevant/interesting video topics is the hardest part

Fast as a 262!

Wartime is an efficient driver of innovation.

@@alejandrayalanbowman367 oh I know. Still amazing to see. Just like how USA went to the moon from scratch in 10 years

Imo it's especially amazing how fast aviation evolved during WW1. Plane designs often were obsolete after only a few weeks.

@@legiox3719 that's what they want you to think. The Nazis where on the moon first we stole their technology.

Went from Sopwith Camel to Saturn V in 51 years

LOL! Now, that's embarrassing... Tom, thought you wouldn't tell anybody.

@Tom L Don't listen to Eskimo Buddha. That's not embarrassing, that kind of longevity is a testimonial to good old American workmanship (the quality if which we foolishly allowed to slack off and become "planned obsolescence" in the decades that followed) and your Canadian ground crew's ability to keep it in good repair.

I hope that the caretaker of the still operational CT-133 passes it on to a group that can keep it in the air for the next millennium.

@@pauld6967 Except that we used British engines and built the airframes ourselves. That said it was a US design and probably a lot of critical subcomponents would have come from the US. Unfortunately the Canadian air force mechanics have had excessive experience keeping veteran aircraft serviceable. In this case, if you build 600 of something you can scavenge parts for a long time before you get down to the last couple of dozen.

@@HweolRidda Ah, built under license then? I admit, I had not considered that. 🙂

I saw this movie as a kid in the 60s but couldn't remember the title. Thanks. Now I can look it up for a rewatch.

You're from an illustrious line. Make sure your kids and grand kids learn all about him.

I read a book, a few years ago, about his invention and development of the jet engine, and I must say that it certainly didn't seem like he was given very much help to start with, whereas the Germans saw its potential and invested in research quite early on.

@@jerribee1 FUN FACT: Ohain, the inventor of the German jet engine, read Whittle's patents and copied them. Whilst Whittle was begging for funding, Ohain received generous state funding before the war. Then the funding was reduced because Hitler believed the war would be over and won before the jet engine would enter service. The Whittle design was superior to the German imitation.

In modern jet flight, we owe everything to the genius of Frank Whittle. It cannot be overstated.

@@DestryAlecto Agreed.

To cool we where there at the same time. Good old 95 AMU. Loaded ECM pods and run and taxi for engine shop. To bad he didn't show one short stacked. Go Bone Heads.

@A D I love them too but I wouldn't like to be in a crash in a old car.

@@Jack-kq3ty Or in a jet, for that matter.

How many times did it crash?

Same. Rear facing seat of a 70s olds station wagon. Shooting Stars were penciled all over notebooks when bored in school.

I had a B-58 Hustler.

As a child I played with a light blue plastic Shooting star. At the age of < 5 I didnt know about jet engines so I supposed the nose cone belonged to a propeller so I flew it with the noise brrrr... brrr.... brrrrr...

As a boy I built a plastic model and hung it from my bedroom ceiling with some others. Later, I flew military for thirty years all in Army helicopters.

Really was. They had a wingless fuselage on display at Sun and Fun in Florida you could sit in, and it was amazing how narrow the frontal profile was

S.L.U.F.???

It was an exciting time for jets.

Sr71? Yf12a?

I'm not seeing 1930s Art Deco in the P-80. Whatchoo bin smokin'?

@@edgarcook9607 The general shape, if you will. Like one of those streamlined trains.

Lockheed (and others of interest) will be owned by China soon or at the very least infiltrated to get "eyes" on any developments. China has been conquering by acquisition rather than war. It is more cost effective and less detectable. General Electric second largest arm the GE Appliances is now Chinese owned. The next home appliance you buy is not only made in China but the brand itself is Chinese owned. Because you paid for it you are also funding Chinese interest.

Probably not easy to budget when you are creating the most innovative aircraft for 50 years straight

@@crxdelsolsir let me check who asked about China... nobody??? Shocker

Bear Grylls The P-80 the most innovative aircraft?

​@@crxdelsolsir ~ One world communism/fascist government through corporations, including incorporated government. All countries are in debt to global banking system. The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 Communist China is financed by the bankers and owned by the bankers. Corporations have owners, businesses and government serve their corporate owners.

1M+

@Phil McCrevice. I’ve always thought a pilots life was more precious than their aircraft. Big difference if you’re the pilot.

@@apenza4304 - He means you also forget the poor people on ground that a falling Jet will kill too. It's not uncommon you know.

I assume test pilots have more experience bailing out if necessary. Still, they prob can't get a normal life insur policy.

@@halibut1249 The very first question I was asked when I applied for life insurance was “Do you have a pilots license”.

One of the most dangerous jobs was for the German ground crews. They had to fuel the jets with highly corrosive jet fuel. A drop could go through the glove, the boot and into the ground.

Now that was an awesome game!

...something they never did.

@@rainbowseeker5930 Or at least that they officially never did.

The very fact that these missions are still classified leads me to suspect that they very well may (Unofficially) have...we'll probably never know

Can you believe we went from those quick-made jets and other prototypes to the F-86 Sabre in less than eight years? The late 40s were probably one of the fastest innovation eras for aircraft in history.

Bull. It didn't _have_ a fuselage. It had a _POD._ A pod and tailbooms.

@@craigwall9536, the bit the wings attach to is commonly referred to as the fuselage, it doesn’t matter if it’s a long slim thing or a short stubby “pod” it’s still the fuselage.

Great pity that the Yanks demanded the second Halford ( Goblin ) engine after crashing the the first prototype . This held up the development of the great De Havilland Vampire which was ready in early 1944 until late in 1945 . The Vampire with the Goblin engine was a better aircraft than the Meteor( and the P 80 !! having a top speed of over 500mph . Typical Yank demands and threats that they want all the available technology and screw and delay our own developments.

@Gary Tarr The US would have let the UK starve to death. There is a reason why the US can cut a better deal.

@Gary Tarr Sorry for trying to help you guys with your war. Next time we'll let Europe finish itself off.

My girlfriend too u listen more to mark Felton than me! We have argued about this many times! So yeah we're ALL together at most of time BTW my gf is like this 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😵😡😠😤😤 but me I'm like this 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😁😁😁😁😁😄😃😀😇😇😇👍 To mark Felton 👍👍👍👍👍👍

@@rjs1jd I didn't think I'd be the only one 😂😂😂

@@markwood599 hahaahha same

What are you suggesting lol

You make my day... i'm still laughing..!!!😂😂

Quadrenaro: That is so sad, it should be donated to a museum and restored.

NOBODY ACTUALLY FLEW Jets in WWII, They were basically shake-down flights. In my opinion you gotsta have an actual Squadron of Jets to convince anybody you were actually using them. And actually fight with them.

Now, let's be serious...We can't really talk about American jets becoming involved in combat in WW2, as there were no more than 4 of them or so deployed...! As the Brit Gloster Meteor, all the "action" they saw was chasing the slow V-1 bombs as they approached England... Besides, the Meteor was no match for the 262.

'I myself have always thought the allies didn't develop them until after the war, from seized German jet technology' How to say you're American without saying you're American

@@desijrichert Hundreds of German jets flew dozens of combat missions destroying so many American bombers that the USAAF considered stopping day bombing, but keep spouting those hot opinions

@@paimonpress6760 sorry my friend but a Canadian friend of mine was also under the impression that there were no Allied World War 2 Jets.

Just flying at 20,000 mph through the void

Flew the T-33 as well. Canada was still flying them until just after I retired. (1992) My avatar is a selfie taken in a T-Bird.

I've flown in the backseat of a T-33, as a ROTC cadet; I can attest to their maneuverability.

The P-80 was faster in a straight line than the 262, particularly at lower altitudes though this advantage decreased the higher up you went. The 262 could dive faster than the P-80 but that was about the only area it had a real advantage over the American jet. I think on paper the P-80 would have its way with the Messerschmidt but in practice it would have depended and I'm sure the 262 pilots, given time, would developed tactics to compensate for their disadvantages.

I'd have to do a lot of research to say for sure but my guess would be that any initial engagements would probably end up in a draw. The Me-262 pilots were very experienced pilots, like their American and British counterparts, and would have most likely tried to break contact if possible. I'm having difficulty finding the max dive speed of a P-80 but it looks like the max dive speed of a Me-262 was Mach 0.86. Where the P-80 may have had an advantage was attacking the Me-262 on landing approach. The Me-262 was vulnerable to piston engine fighters in this phase of flight. Knowing this, the Luftwaffe had piston powered fighters (usually Fw-190s) performing combat air patrols around the airfields with plenty of flak coverage at the airfield. This made going after a Me-262 reasonably dangerous for a P-51. However, a P-80 could easily out perform the CAP and would have been a difficult target even for the densest of flak gun concentrations.

The P-80 has a better rate of climb,speed, and turning rate. I think it would go to the P-80 hands down. While the 262 was great, it had two old and unreliable engines with unconventional materials dangling off of the wings (less aero).

@@chrisgoshey7388 Remember P-80 continue to be improved AFTER the war with better and more powerfull engine. Which variant top speed did you use?

And many still serving in minor and third world air forces.

I was in the Air Force in 1971 and we were still using the T-33 and i thought it was really old then......can't believe we still used it into the 90`s

75 years after the end of WWII we have advanced to variants of the DC3.

@Trainwreck727 Hence the continued political success of the Trudeau dynasty... *sigh*

I've read that the T-33s (and they may have been F-94 Starfires, despite what Wikipedia says about that aircraft's retirement date)) were used as "squadron hacks." Officers, mostly higher ranking ones, used them to commute to other bases for meetings, etc. This kept up their flight time/proficiancy. (Speculation: this may also have kept their hours up enough to maintain their flight pay.)

It's very disconcerting to push the throttle forward and wait for a lifetime before the power comes up. Remember the problems with surge? I would think the early carrier jocks all had a death wish!

Engines spool up on this jet. Makes me wonder if you ever flew one.

@@RSPYC Methinks this was simply a typo.

Stormtroopers? Wehrmacht Pt. 2 bodyguards summoned from the most obscure WW2 records ever collected is what you mean.

Looks badass

@Gazza Boo what is thy bidding dark lord...

The stormtroopers? Do you mean the Keystone Cops of Sci Fi?

The Horten IX has major aerodynamic issues, it can not be flown safely in hard aerobatics. This means, it can not be used as a fighter without major reconstruction of the overall layout. There is quite a large number of flying wing enthusiasts in rc modelling. Some of them are aerodynamics engineers with decades of experience in developing flying wings, including high quality calculation and simulation software and the whole theoretic background. The physics are the same, no matter how big the airplane is. The only difference is, that you an not scale the air. The molecules have their size and they allways act the same. When a flying model gets smaller, Reynolds numbers get lower. That's why a bigger plane flys better than a very small plane. What works well in small scale, does work at least as good when you scale it up. This means, what flys well as a modell, usually flys at least as well in full size. The Horten IX is the only Horten, that has huge stability issues, no matter what they do to improve the design and no matter in which scale the model is built. No matter how the airfoil or the twist in the wing is changed, the problem is never solved well enough for hard aerobatic oder combat style flying. This wing plan view simply does not work very well as a pure flying wing. Every other Horten (except for the Horten X project, that is completely unflyable in its 1945 layout) makes a really great and safe flying model, but not the IX. You have to ad a vertical fin under the tail of the center section to ged rid of the stability issues and make it into a safe flying model. The only way to get stability without a vertical fin is to greatly modify the wing plan view. With the original wing plan view, aerobatics are extremely dangerous because it stalls and spins without warning, when it is pushed over its limits. Of course this does not mean, the design is complete rubbish. As long as you are careful with the angle of attack, with stalling in general and with side slipping and never push the limits, it actually is a nice flying airplane and it is quite a fast airplane. It can not be used as a fighter, but most probably it is usable as a fast high altitude recce plane with higher speed, greater range and, due to its lower wing loading, higher service ceiling than the Ar 234.

i hope you feel better .

@@smokeybear1597 Thank you!

Get well soon.

@@salr362 Thank you!

Get well soon.

The CT-133 Silver Star was a Canadian-made version with a Rolls Royce engine.

there is just something about that 40's aesthetic. Its the reason I love the B-36.

ME-262 vs.P-80=1 toasted P-80. The ME-262 with TWO Jumo engines had a much superior climb rate, superior agility, superior dive rate, and top-end speed, and more experienced pilots with actual JET combat experience.

Yes, but having a better plane helps

That's what I think too...see my comment..⬆️⬆️

@@R.U.1.2. Nope, the US has way too many veteran pilots while the Germans don’t.

@@R.U.1.2. P-80 Performance Maximum speed: 594 mph (956 km/h, 516 kn) at sea level Range: 825 mi (1,328 km, 717 nmi) Service ceiling: 46,800 ft (14,300 m) Rate of climb: 6,870 ft/min (34.9 m/s) Thrust/weight: 0.364 ME-262 Performance Maximum speed: 900 km/h (560 mph, 490 kn) Range: 1,050 km (650 mi, 570 nmi) Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,570 ft) Rate of climb: 20 m/s (3,900 ft/min) at max weight of 7,130 kg (15,720 lb) Thrust/weight: 0.28 P-80>ME-262

What was it like?

yeah, like the Meteor it was considered too secret to let it fly over enemy held territory to prevent a wreck fall into German (of Japanese potentially) hands, so they were not used over the front lines or as bomber escort.

@@jwenting Yes, that is true but at the same time Britain was being bombarded by V1s. With only one squadron equipped with the meat box it made more sense to use it against that threat.

Good point about production numbers - the Germans were way ahead, but by that point were struggling as their industries were being bombed and materials running out. The Americans still had their war production going full speed, and fairly soon would have had these things coming out by the hundreds, as they did with P-51s and other aircraft. Had the war gone on a few more months the Americans could have eclipsed the Germans in jet numbers. Also helps that the P-80 required a single fairly simple to manufacture centrifugal-flow jet engine, while each Me 262 required two more complicated axial-flow engines. I would still suspect the Me 262 was probably the more advanced, superior aircraft, but as you say production numbers can overcome that. This was probably true of most US versus German designs, the German designs were probably usually superior, but good design couldn't make up for production capacity.

If all else fails, ram them...

@@dilet1114 Yep, production numbers definitely win out there. Every ramming incident takes down one of each. Who runs out first?

@@johnburns4017 You mean the Jumos? I don't know how they compared with the centrifugal flow engines, but I do get the sense they're more tempramental. All early jets of either type were, the video describing how many P-80s were lost to accidents shows how troublesome they were, and in turn how dangerous aircraft powered by them were.

@@johnburns4017 Also a matter of building what they could, given their lack of alloying metals, which denied them the option of building better/more advanced...