Russia's Forgotten WW2 Heavy Bomber, and Why It Failed | Petlyakov Pe-8 

I suggest the Polikarpov I-180. It's history is even 'richer' than that of the PE-8. The evolution of the I-16 that could have been the best fighter the soviets would have had at the start of the war, the tragedies, the political sabotage... Maybe the greatest 'what if' fighter of WW2 together with the Heinkel HE-100 and Arsenal VG-33.

Rex, Douglas DC5/R4D ;-)

Such a perfect sponsor, love it

Can you do a video about the me-264

It's sad that the deaths of millions of men and women; many of those innocent bystanders; should be turned into a "Game" !!!

or bt5-cap-rush-kill-teammates-after CAS

Ah, I see a man of culture

Literally just raged off the game because of a pe 8 revenge bombing loser 😂

Or team killing

@@superworm1233 you gotta break a few eggs to make a multi-kill omelette.

The name appearing on screen prompts the immediate response to remove it with extreme prejudice

5 tons of CAS coming your way, baby!

I've never played it but from what I've seen it's one of the most effective team killers in the game.

Yeah, because it was intended as a long range strategic bomber, but WT has it as a precision close air support plane, something it would be impossible to do in reality. It's use in WT is ridiculous, but much of WT is unrealistic, and ridiculous

Yeah, War Thunder is fun but it is a very unbalanced and janky game. Some historically well performing vehicles are junk while other experimental or flawed designs have epic levels of performance. It's not too surprising the Russian made game takes craft like the Pe-8 and makes them far better than they really are.

I have it aced 😏

The pe 8 bomb jumpscare is the worst nightmare to many tank players, especially when they play ground realistic battles.

The Pe-8 can take a lot of punishment, but the 5 tons of fireworks is very impressive.

Do people still play il-2? Lol Last time I played was in 2004/2005 back in middle school

😂😂😂😂😂

@@loveofmangos001 there have been updates released and it looks pretty good now. the channel growling sidewinder alternates between that and DCS.

Wheeeeee killin' is fun

At the end of the war they were flown straight from the production line to a site t be scrapped

Consoladated was busy building the B 32 Dominator. They could never get the pressurization system to work but still managed to get them into action flying bombing missions just as the war ended.

You rule.

@@simoncullum5019 Do you have a source for that?

I like to imagine everyone went to lunch and went “Wait, SHIT!”

The price for faillure was not the same in the west...

Yeah, human safety was not one of those priority in soviet union

Weren't there any purges in the USA? In some strange way, 7 million Americans disappeared from statistics from 1933 to 1941, do you know for what reason? But Americans know everything about the Gulag and the purges in the USSR. Take an interest in your history with the mass murders of its citizens by the authorities, you will be surprised that the USSR was more democratic than the West. By the way, take an interest in how the “Hunger March” of unemployed and unarmed veterans of the First World War with their families to Washington was organized in 1932. Regular troops and tanks were thrown against them. The dispersal of veterans was led by General D. MacArthur, Colonel D. Eisenhower and Major D. Patton. All three are the most famous personalities in history.

Just tag me next time

TB-7 was the future Pe-8. Before the War they were preparing a ginormous factory in Kazan but when germany invaded they switeched production mostly to the Pe/Il2/Yak/Lagg/La/Mig. They produced a very limited amount of the TB7/Pe8 and was mostly used by the ADD(Long Range Aviation) but mostly the ADD used american aircraft and some modenised DB-3(f) and later in the war a limited amount of the TU-2

No single aircraft could match the might of the TB series. Its effortless takeoff capacity, the ability to carry 2x light fighters under its wings! As well as a bomb payload! At the time also, machine guns weren't capable of any major damage to it, it was a literal flying tank

Stalin: "Why is new plane delay? ... Oh yes, the purges. ... Makes no difference. Work faster."

there really never was a heavy bomber arm with USSR and Germany for that matter the doctrine was the Airforce was to supplement the army

Exactly my thoughts after watching this!

@Rache Johnson Nah, they absolutely are.

That’s cool

Okay now I have to go see if I can find anything on that. I didn't think the PE-8 was large enough for that but the Soviets would have done "Modifications" to make it work.

@@WayneMoyer Exactly. I know that there was consideration for trying to make it capable of carrying one or two I-16's but I cant find anything thay says it was ever actually done or tested on the PE-8. I think it was just an experimental doctrine that fell through and was only used on the TB-3. Though the idea of using long range heavy bombers as motherships is certainly fascinating I think it was entirely scrapped woth the advent of escort aircraft like the PE-2 or simply giving bombers better guns.

When I first played WT right as it came out in 2013 it really surprised me to hear even the radio calls were the same from IL-2 Birds of Prey and the models too.

@@legoeasycompany Well, Il2 Birds of Pray is from Gaijin Entertainment, none less. However, don't know if Maddox Games gave the code of IL2 to Gaijin.

I also initially thought WT was from the makers of IL-2

@@dse763 I mean the BT hangars and such seemed to be riped straight from Birds of Prey. I'm sure they did since they did a bunch of console stuff but then they got that bright idea

Well have u tried the updated IL-2 1946? I think now it has cockpit for the Pe-8.

A potentially strategic bomber, actually used for tactical purposes.

Not a heavy bomber but a long-range bomber to replace the TB-3/Il-4 if memory serves me right.

@@martijn9568 Not TB-3, but DB-3 (Dalniy Bombardirovshchik), the first designation of Yer-2 was DB-240.

@Антон Г Shit, meant DB-3 indeed. Not sure how I managed to write TB-3 instead, as I'm familiar with both aircraft.😅

Essentially that thing was very unreliable and they kept on putting it into production and then cancelling it because engines powerful enough for it were never fully "worked out" to be put into mass production. This is a fairly common theme with soviet plane engines through ww2.

3rd would be the 12,000 lbs "super-cookie" surely? Or 3x 4,000 lbs "cookies" stuck together.

@@high-velocitymammal5030 I didn't mentioned them precisely because the supers were "frankenbomb", 2-3 strapped together.

Stalin was many things, but "psycopathic mass-murderer" wasn't one of them. Its also not paranoia if the danger was real, as evidenced by the Nazi plan to plant pro-Nazi paraphernalia in design bureau offices, with the expectation that those bureau chiefs would be reprised.

Chill, Dave, Stalin was an above-average decision maker

@@Zond3r In solidifying power in Russia for himself yes, in war and research no. In fact when he realized he should let the generals general and believe the intelligence reports sent to him, things got a lot better for the Soviet military. (Hitler went the exact opposite direction)

@@generalhorse493 chill The shietviet Union was beaten by Pepsi and McDonalds

Chill, he’s literally a minor and neurodivergent

I suppose it is because the Lancaster carried the largest loads.

Yes, I love the underappreciated planes, and the Stirling just has great character. And I think a far worse reputation than it really deserves.

It failed. They never developed a reliable engine for this aircraft, which explains the low production numbers. Unlike the Germans, the USSR was interested in long range strategic bombing, and a four engined bomber would have allowed them to bomb German railheads and supply depots in Poland and Western USSR. But the Soviet aviation industry was still underdeveloped in comparison to western countries, and this was especially evident in engine development and design.

@@petergray7576 The thing wasnt the best but still worked i dont think anything would make the production rates bigger since most of the resources were sent to strike and fighter aircraft. Allies could let themselves to produce a lot of bombers since they didnt rlly have ground battles. Soviets couldnt. especcially in the early years.

@@petergray7576 Soviet military doctrine simply didn't need the Pe-8 in the numbers of its Western counterparts, as explained in the video. Thus, I wouldn't call it a failure. It just didn't fit the type of conflict that was the Great Patriotic War. Soviet industry had to focus primarily on fighters and tactical bombers. So not really a failure, just not produced in numbers enough to make a difference.

@@petergray7576 Not the aviation industry when it comes to amount of planes produced but when it comes to engines the soviet industry was mostly relying on improved engines "Borrowed"(semi-stolen) American and French desighns which were acquire for pennies during the height of the depression.

@@petergray7576 AM-35 used in Pe-8 was developed into AM-38 of which there would be FORTY THOUSAND built. *F* *O* *R* *T* *Y* *T* *H* *O* *U* *S* *A* *N* *D* Germans were very interested in long range bombers, to bomb the ural industry and even united states while soviets pumped out thousands of tactical bombers and ground attack planes (powered by these "unreliable" engines) instead.

Players hate it because it's Soviet and Gaijin rarely nerf Soviet. High attitude + early spawn + big bomb. Too hard to counter. Players always leave the match after 1 bomb because it's useless to play against unfair match.

@@suthiraksb just intercept the bomb.

It want even the first time they tried what , and no, it is not an original idea. Shit, the first jet engines were motorjets with the compressor driven by a V12 aero engine instead of a turbine, it is definitely not a new idea.

What happened to Argentina's air force? After the Falklands War (Malvinas) it hasn't been the same.

Weren't there any purges in the USA? In some strange way, 7 million Americans disappeared from statistics from 1933 to 1941, do you know for what reason? But Americans know everything about the Gulag and the purges in the USSR. Take an interest in your history with the mass murders of its citizens by the authorities, you will be surprised that the USSR was more democratic than the West. By the way, take an interest in how the “Hunger March” of unemployed and unarmed veterans of the First World War with their families to Washington was organized in 1932. Regular troops and tanks were thrown against them. The dispersal of veterans was led by General D. MacArthur, Colonel D. Eisenhower and Major D. Patton. All three are the most famous personalities in history.

It appears both Stalin and Hitler had a similar, if not the same mindset for their aviation industry. Competing nose-to-nose instead of getting into the broader picture of long-range strategic bombing. An example is Hitler's interference with the He-177 to force Heinkel into using two propellers only for four engines, hampering their development and making them problematic for reliability and maintenance, and hampering production.

@@tomt373 First, there was no such thing as "nose-to-nose" mindset of Stalin in terms of aviation. Russia pioneered large and/or long range planes (bombers) since WWI "Ilya Muromets" by Sikorsky, and this didn't change much with communists. Rex's channel already told the stories of the largest Soviet planes of 1920-30s. Furthermore, in 1937 an ANT-25 conducted a direct (i.e. without any intermediary landings) flight from Moscow to the mainland United States. So Stalin was never intentionally harming or forbidding works on large aviation and/or bombers; a lot of non-technical issues came not only from "paranoid machinations" (which is a wrong way to describe internal struggle within the communist party), but from the severe competition in the field too - for example Tupolev was not once accused of "sabotaging" by his peers and pilots for various bold (and sometimes dubious) decisions. And when the war started, in the situation when the enemy was moving with a fast pace, and the country was literally fighting for its survival, spending too much resources on those non-critical projects would be an impossible luxury. Besides, "strategic bombing" in WWII was not as efficient as some might think after listening to all the praises. It's known that Western bomber crews were often dropping bombs "somewhere in the vicinity" while not being able to identify their target. And when they were hitting the mark, more often than not the damage was not severe or crippling- usually Germans were resuming production/repairing the damage within a couple of days, if not hours. This is true until at least 1943 - when the fate of the war was already decided in the East. In fact, the most well-known "achievements" of Anglo-American strategic bombing aviation are the terror acts against civilians (napalm bombing of Dresden, Konigsberg, Tokyo etc., atomic bombing of Japan), that did not require precision.

@@tomt373 why bomb targets(factories, cities) behind enemy lines if you can capture them? And knowing that Soviets had over 20,000 tanks and over 21,000 warplanes and 5,000,000 soldiers when Germany preemptively attacked...

@@Tallorian I'll add that curious readers might wish to look at "Kelly's History"'s documentation of British strategic bombing in Germany.

@@klobiforpresident2254 Thank you for recommending that channel! I've never heard of it before, but after looking through a couple of videos I've found not only things I'd previously known from other sources, but a lot of deep research in archive documents. A truly tremendous work done by that guy! Such a shame his channel is so small and unknown to the public. And he did videos not only about the British bombing, but also an analysis of the facts behind the narrative story about the American precision bombing. In the context of this video about Pe-8, I doubt that after watching Kelly's research anyone would still be able in good faith suggest that the Soviet focus on attack planes and dive bombers for ground support instead of large high-altitude and long range bombers was a mistake move forced by a silly, shortsighted and incompetent dictator.

The slightly later B-29 was significantly faster at 357 mph (but cruised at 220mph).

Funny thing is the Pe-8 in warthunder is wrong. Its labeled as an 85 engine, with specs slightly above that. With the 85 engine, it shouldn't have rear gunners. It also shouldn't be able to pull an immelman at 120mph without stalling, nor should it be able to pull 12g to do a reverse, or turn. Should be much more sluggish, and even more so with the rear gunners.

It also killed any chances of the Soviets of having a proper blue water Navy.

Supposedly it was such an exact copy of that frame that they even copied an unneeded hole that an assembler mistakenly drilled in a piece of the framing. I can't remember where I heard this, but it stuck with me.

@@jameshall1300 It was said in a forum I forgot that even the rudder pedals of the Tu-4 has the Boeing logo...

"No no no Mr. John, this definitely isn't an exact copy of your bomber. This one clearly has cannons instead of your 50 cals"

@@rizalardiansyah4486 as far as I read that was kind of tupolev giving Stalin the finger. Tupolev had some ideas how to improve the b-29 when copying here. So he went to Stalin for approval of these changes but Stalin insisted on a exact copy. So tupulev went and made a exact copy.... including all boeing logos

​@@tobiasfreitag2182 lel.

For some reason, other nations don't get their own giant bombs yet in War Thunder. Where's Britain's 4,000, 8,000, and 12,000 lb Blockbusters, along with 12,000 lb Tallboy and 22,000 lb Grand Slam? Where's America's 4,000 lb AN-M56, 10,000 lb pumpkin bomb (a conventional version of Fat Man), and 12,000 lb Tarzon (radio-guided Tallboy)?

@@RedXlV oh, if those enter into War Thunder. Oh it's going to be a bloodbath.

"Once Mr. FAB-5000 is dropped, it is no one's friend."

@@merafirewing6591 USSR wouldn't need to be left in the dust by in that arms race of mega-bombs either, since the Tu-16 and Tu-22 could be added with the FAB-9000 bomb. I say bring on all of the giant bombs and leg the carnage ensue.

@@RedXlV yeah, and see how many vehicles die to the megabombs wrath.

Maybe. But then you realize that these raids were taking up a majority of the Luftwaffe's resources. To have another air force start launching air raids against German military and industrial targets would have probably pushed the Luftwaffe to the breaking point much sooner.

@@petergray7576 True, I just mean the Russian bombers wouldn't be high altitude and their defense would probably be less formidable than the Americans and less sneaky/stealthy than the British, so they would get a good running through by the Luftwaffe just like the Luftwaffe in general got very favorable kill loss ratios versus Soviets. The Luftwaffe would still lose, though, 100%.

@@sergeipohkerova7211 The Soviets believed that long-range strategic bombing wouldn't cause the enemy sufficient damage and that too many cities would need to be targeted for it to have any effect. Given the distance (and yes, quite a few times longer than German submarine pens in France or Germany itself from Britain) and all focus going to land forces and what could be allocated to the airforce was for fighters and attack aircraft/light bombers it was an obvious choice. Here's what: *After* the war it turned out the Soviets were correct. The allies were overly optimistic that Nazi Germany could just be bombed to surrender. If anything it strengthened their resolve to fight the total war (Goebbel's words in a speech to the German people). In early 1943 the allies discovered that their strategic bombing didn't cause enough sustained damage to German industry. One of the main reasons for this is that *most bombs dropped missed their target* and those that did hit their target usually meant the production was halted for a few days or weeks. Nazi Germany had seized a lot of workers from occupied countries all over Europe and they were really good at "motivating" them to work hard and repair damaged equipment and buildings. In order to limit the effect of allied bombing raids Nazi Germany moved their production of shells and ammo to buildings which the allies obviously wouldn't target. Some production of wheel bearings and certain parts were done in neutral countries such as Sweden and Switzerland - which obviously wouldn't be bombed. In fact production of parts were out-resourced to smaller facilities and then just the *assembly* was done in factories. German production broke all records in 1944 - *when the allied bombings were the worst and most intense* . Some aircraft were assembled in factories lacking roofs from previous bombings. In other words strategic bombing certainly didn't end neither German production nor will to fight. And as for "precision bombing", during WWII this was highly theoretical and we didn't see that until the Gulf War of the 1990's. The British were aware that allied bombings did little to stop German production so they had an idea... if German factories and machines could be repaired and rebuilt, German *workers* couldn't. Hence the firebombing of cities like Dresden. With dead workers who is going to work in the factories? And they decided on this strategy precisely because they knew just bombing factories and military targets did little lasting damage. After the war it was calculated that the allied bombing raids limited German production by roughly 20%. Most of that from the last three years of the war. How much allied bombing raids limited German production in 1939-1942 I don't know but not significantly would be my modest guess. So (ironically) the Soviets were right largely ignoring long-range strategic bombing. Besides, given the fact they faced the lion's share of the Wehrmacht on a vast front ( *and* most of the axis allies and client-states as well as foreign volunteers and SS divisions) it's easy too see, like I mentioned, how long-range strategic bombing wasn't considered. Lack of oil and strategic raw materials was what doomed Nazi Germany the longer the war went on. Certainly not bombing raids. German logistics suffered throughout the war and when the fuel reserves were getting critical they couldn't conduct any large-scale offensives anymore from early 1943 onward. Vietnam was bombed to cinder during the Vietnam War by a huge number of B-52's. That bombing made the bombing of Nazi Germany look like a picnic. Yet, the Vietnamese didn't surrender. Or lose the war... So the PE-8 being used in strategic bombing is an academic question. Had the Soviets somehow decided to start it themselves they'd probably use fast two-engined bombers or develop a whole new heavy bomber design in the final years of the war.

Considering all the circumstances of USSR and artificially boosted difficulties Soviet leadership inflicted upon their own engineers and scientists,it's actually quite impressive design in it's own right.In some weird way,it reminds me of Tu-95 (which looks like somebody merged Pe-8 with Tu-4).

Yes but this was planned and designed well before the Stirling etc .. Hell .. these were flying while we still relied on Wellingtons and Whitleys .. It is like saying the B29 outclassed the Lancaster .. look at the timeframe between the two planes ..

@@kittyhawk9707 Most people lack context. Agreed. On the other hand, they are contemporary designs. First fllight in 1936 for the 8 and 1939 for the Stirling. Which may come as a shock to most. God only knows what the Soviets could have achieved had it not been for the Great Purge throwing back the development of the 8 for two years. And even though the Stirling could fly circuits around the Pe-8 at low altitude, it lacked the ability to reach high altitudes and a decent cruise speed. Both were delightful flyers, the Stirling being a bit tricky during take off and landing. That being said, you make do with what you have. And neither the RAF nor the VVS had much for some veritable long range bombing during 1941-42. They were hitting fields and the wrong cities in almost every single sortie during that period. Cheers.

@@kittyhawk9707 The point is the PE8 may have had an initial flight earlier than the Stirling but nothing came of it and it was the ONLY 4 engine heavy the VVS had and it was kept in service and underpowered for the entire war. The Stirling was a success and replaced by Halifaxs and Lancasters, the PE8 was not. You are aware that the Wellington was the most produced UK bomber and that it was used in all theatres and gave excellent service throughout the war. The Wellington outclassed the PE8 in all practical metrics, not the. fantasy tats of the PE bureaux.

@@The_Modeling_Underdog There was no accrate bombers in WW2, the Nordern Sight was useless.