The German WW2 Fighter That Saved Israel - The Avia S.199 | Aircraft History #3 

It’s like something out of Ace Combat

It's the easiest way to verify it has been the Zionists maggots who have been behind all wars and civil conflicts for the past 300 years by the fact when they pulled off the biggest real estate scam in history and established modern day Israel they just happen to have weapons and ordnance used by all sides from the conflict known as World War Two.

The Finnish Air Force could match this. During WWII They flew German, Italian, British, American French, Dutch & Soviet aircraft

Same way it's odd to see ex Syrian panzer IVs in there museum.

they had to fight for survival almost immediatly. they took anything they could get

both sides used the DC 3 , the Egyptians adapted ( some of) theirs to bombers !!

don't worry it's just team balancing where you put them in the opposite team

Not to forger Spitfires! Both sides had them.

On the ground, Israeli Shermans fought Syrian Panzer IV-H tanks. Ironic.

@@spaghetti_rookie The Israelis 'souped' the Shermans up, putting bigger guns om and stuffl

With all due respect, you can't compare the 199s to the Corsairs, it had a much more problematic attitude and was more unstable. This is well documented. And as you say, Lenard would have handled it correctly (or at least better) with his experience, had he expected such a low performance. Actually, his experience was probably what saved his life in that first flight, but his impressions (and swearing) after the flight gave no room to doubts about this aircraft's problems.

@@WillyWeiss-HH Apparently there were people and/or techniques who/which managed to handle the 199, since not every take off or landing with it resulted in a crash. I guess.

The 109s with Daimler Benz engines already showed that behavior. In fact, it was a take off procedure to lock the tail wheel strait to help control it during take off acceleration. But it was the way things were done at the time. Equipment and life were cheap... It wasn't until the 60's that two-place fighters for training became a universal thing, because they were much more expensive than WW2 era aircraft.

@@magoid To lock the tailwheel „straight“ for takeoff and landing is a common feature on most taildraggers, especially the higher powered ones. I have a 450hp Stearman and it’s procedure there. I once owned a Zlin 526F. Though I wouldn’t call that one particularly „high-powered“ (180hp), it had quite a strong „automatic“ self centering spring mechanism to lock the tailwheel for take off and landing. So, in order to move it around on ground you had to push the fuselage sideways quite strongly to unlock the tailwheel.

@@MothaLuva Sure, but then there is likelihood of such an event on general level. Now add adverse weather condition i.e. crosswind in direction that increases torque effect. Now add need to get out of the critical condition because you need to do go-around or there is a scramble situation. And stress increases chances to suddenly apply full throttle. Plus there is question of the time you have for training to-be-pilots. Mig-15 had some sort of similarly dangerous behaviour like pulling the stick too soon after disconnecting with ground or applying full throttle at low speed just about ground

George Beurling of the R.C.A.F. was a legend of his time. May his memory be blessed.

He was flying cargo. He crashed while taking off from Rome. There are no records stating he was to join the Israeli Air force. Which he might not have done, as he was against oppressors.

Beurling was buried in Rome originally, but in 1950 his body was exhumed and re-buried (with the permission of his family) in the Kibbutz Yagar cemetery near Haifa in Israel. The Israeli Air Force provided an honor guard for the funeral. His family would not have allowed this unless he wished this.

@@cirrus1964 The Israelis were hardly considered "oppressors" at this time.

Patrick Watson had a series "The Canadians" and one chapter was on Beurling. It is right here on You Tube. It was produced in the early 90's so some of the people who knew him were still alive. He was offered a lot of money to fly for the Arabs, and asked his father, who told him he thought that if he did he would be fighting for the wrong side. Don't take my word for it. The video is right here if you search it up. It is well worth watching in my opinion.

Dave, I agree with you about the quality of this video but... you got it wrong about "No odd photos thrown in of aircraft not actually S.199s". NOT. Checkout the image at 7:35. A handsome young F4U pilot standing in front of his steed. (Why do they do that?) Also... do terms like " U-control or .049 Thimble drome or Dooling .29 mean anything to you?

@@demiurgiac Yes, those terms are very familiar. My interests ran more to scale plastic models though. I had a huge collection, mostly WWII. Don’t know what happened to all of them, but I do have a few on my bookcase I have built recently of A/C I have actually flown. DC3, C46, and F27. Have DC6 and B727 kits I will get around to someday.

@@demiurgiac The guy standing in front of the F4U was one of the first volunteers to fly the S199 for Israel, so the photo is really not that out of place

@@davidkallewaard750 Touché

Messer translates to knife...

when you try be smart but turns out you wrong

@@alinalexandru2466 It does, but it is a false friend.

many actually called it the 'rusted knife'. an apt description, both of the performance and how it was needed in a pinch....

Meser in Yiddish (Messer in German) means a knife

Can you summarize some of those stories?

Like stealing Palestinian land and killing babies?

@@ahmedlamouri1352 Like literally trying to wipe out an entire people? Sorry, no sympathy from me when endless attempts at destroying a country is more important to you than your own existence.

@@ahmedlamouri1352 Go back to watching American porn, Mr Troll

Why they dont use the Corsairs from the USA? Maybe the Israels know the German Plan is the Best, they make everythink perfekt. Its fore experience, you know what y meane?

Já myslím že i s S199 byly úspěšní když existuje stát jménem Izrael.

But then I'm not sure Israelis would have gotten them. One of the reason for Czechs selling the 199 to the Israeli air force was that their pilots refused to fly the "mules", having received the months prior to the Israeli war of independence better and more reliable airplanes from the USSR.

@@WillyWeiss-HH Největší důvod prodeje nejen těchto letadel ale i přebytečných zbraní a nábojů bylo získání peněz pro nastupující komunistickou vládu. Dokonce nedávno Češi natočili film Toman kdy český komunista židovského původu jménem Toman v padesátých letech organizoval migrační vlny židů z Polska a Sovětského svazu přes Československo na jih Evropy. Za každou osobu komunisté inkasovali peníze od Americké židovské organizace . Tajně.

That fire was actually a sabotage. And iirc it still is not exactly clear if it was sabotaged by german colaborants or communists guard...

@@WillyWeiss-HH Better and more reliable is more than questionable when it comes to Soviet garbage. Czechoslovakia had bunch of Spitfires (later sold to Israel as well - at least some part) that were solid and solidly built fighters. But from Soviets, they got some Lavochkins, but those ones literally rotted in some 2 years. Those wooden fuselages were deteriorating too quickly, thus albeit more powerful than S.199 they would be forces out of the service sooner.

Glad you liked it! :)

Thanks for those numbers! Buď zdráv, Vlasovče!

When a huge war meets its end, what always remains behind are the millions of firearms, and there are always buyers, it's just a matter of price and quantity.

@@WillyWeiss-HH end user certificate , what's that ?!!!

True..CZ heros. Tatra was way ahead of German designs and Jawa made awesome bikes. I am Golem from Prague 🗿 שלום

There has always been a bit of conflict over whether Jewish interests using their own funds and resources were able to purchase all the various equipment that it did from Czechoslovakia and other sources. Supposedly the CIA secretly provided the cash and connections for these deals to go through. The British were heavily invested with the Arabs at this time and did not want to anger them by providing support to the Jews. Both Britain, France and the US had made it clear before the war that they did not want millions of Jewish immigrants entering their countries. Sadly they could have possibly saved a few million Jews if they had accepted the offer made by the Germans to admit most of the three million German Jews back around 1935 and 1936, but there was a strong anti Jewish lobby at that time and so those Jews were left to be their fates. After the war a pro Israel lobby popped up and soon the Czechs were doing business with the Jews. The Czechs were quite anti Jewish but American dollars were enough to convince them to do the deals that provided tanks, artillery small arms ammo and of course the former 109s. Just as bizarre was the fact that some of the first tanks in the Israeli army were former panzer mark IVs and various others vehicles. That story would be worth watching.

Don't worry you Czechs otherwise are pretty great at engineering , so we'll let this one slide .

The Chech Republic has great aerospace industries plus they make the Prusa 3D printers that I'm so fond of. I have two.

Israel owes a great part of its success in its independence war to the Czech. They were the only ones willing to sell arms to Israel, while all the nations that voted for the partition plan refused to do a damn thing to support it, or actively acted against it - yes, I am looking at you USA, Britain and France. Israel got from the Czech also many small arms and other equipment. Sure S-199 was a piece of crap, but a very much needed piece! It did the job and the rest is history.

@@rararnanan7244 Yep, they also smuggled some B-17's through "us" (without the Norden sights). I don't even know if this was before or after the commie coup, and whose idea it was to go forward with it...I should read on it, shouldn't I?

@@vaclav_fejt It was after the coup. Stalin hoped he would get the Israel under the red flag... he could not be more wrong. Vladimír Clementis, at that time the Secretary of the Foreign Affairs was instrumental in the operation. Later executed by his own comrades.

Israel would have preferred the 109's of course considering.

I mean, they basically are, just with different engines.

Not only weapons but also SS officers to drill the new army

@@steffenrosmus9177 .....not to mention Otto Skorzeny and the fledgling Mossad!

@@steffenrosmus9177 Any luck Very interesting the way history twists and turns, but what is taught is so very lineal.....You tube links or other links for more?

@@steffenrosmus9177 do you have a source for that

And even more ironic, from the Profile Publications issue of the Me-109, one in the Israeli Air Force sporting the SS Death's Head

The French also used German eighty eights, MG 42 etc. in French Indochina.

Not the Tiger only the Pzkw IV Ausf H and some StuG III.

I believe it was actually the Ki43 Hayabusa that France used in Indochina. I have seen photos of French Oscar's, but never saw a photo of a French A6M. Not saying it didn't happen, just know that the Ki43 has photographic proof.

You forgot Thailand.

@@carlnapp4412 The French used a complete German SS division in Indochina.

Efectivamente, en España lo tuvimos en servicio hasta los 60s.. Para el ataque al suelo, estaba armado con cañones Oerlikon.. Su magnifico motor Merlín, junto a la helice de cuatro palas le daban una impresionante velocidad de trepada, aunque tenía fama de avión dificil de pilotar.. Saludos!

In Prague, I saw in Jehovov a plaque thanking Israel for its support. Hardly anyone wanted to sell weapons to Israel. A lot of things had to be smuggled, since the state as a customer did not exist yet. The Arab states, however, bought a lot of material which was surplus after the war.

For the price: It was shameful, but it was a business. Israel needed the planes and Czechoslovakia had them. The state of Israel was in its infancy at that time and the risk that it will fail was significant and so was the political risk of selling military equipment to such country. The Americans and Soviets were neutral at its best, Arabs where strong enemies, Brits and French both had their own interests in middle East and were anti-Israel. Czechoslovakia was one of the few countries willing to help and we were also under pressure from north East and West. Soviets banned the latest shipments of arms after they figured out that despite all the kibuces Isreal is not going to go the communist way. Money mean very little in a war where you fighting for your own existence. Badly equipped and overpriced air force is way better than no air force at all.

We are also kind of Newly founded or better say we were freed

There is little wonder in that, as the chassis married bomber engine and proppeler that were meant to be counteracted by being mounted off center on He-111 and by the torc of it's second engine. On s.199 it just added to whatever negatives there were on Me-109. Also the engine was not as powerful or responsive.

Bf-109 was a great plane, but has a terrible human rights record considering who used it.

@@taylorc2542 It was powerful, but also had some nasty characteristics according to the pilots. It was not designed to be easier of the pilots and the ground crews like the Fw-190 was.

@@taylorc2542 The Bf109 is a plane, a machine. It has no human rights record.

So so. When 109 was used on grass airfields idealy with wet grass it was better than operated them on asphalt airfield. Some German group used them around Q4/1944 in Austria on asphalt and there had higher losses from a asphalt than from a enemy.

They were only a little bit narrow at landing gear than a Spitfire was...

Fw190 fan myself

@@chadrowe8452 ….Give the 109 it’s due. When introduced it was the best in the world. It was upgraded thought out it’s production. The FW190 was a better aircraft. However in the middle of a war 109 production wasn’t going to stop. So the 109 has laurels for being the most produced fighter aircraft in history

@@Idahoguy10157 very true sir

Think Spanish 109,s used home made hisso,s more like Merlin not inverted and were used in battle of Britain movie , exhaust not inverted.

Die Schweizer Flugwaffe hat auch deutsche Flugzeuge abgeschossen mit Bf 109, die auf dem Weg nach Frankreich über Schweizer Gebiet geflogen sind. Hermann Goehring war sehr sauer, es wurde dann untersagt, um die Nazis nicht zu provozieren. The Swiss Air Force also shot down German planes with Bf 109 flying over Swiss territory en route to France. Hermann Goehring was very angry, it was then forbidden in order not to provoke the Nazis.

@@jochensch8821 Das hatten Sie auch mit einer Fw 190 Dora versucht, der Pilot hatte amerikanische Begleitjägern bekämpft und war über die Schweiz geraten. Von da an hatte die Schweiz 2 Bf109 weniger. Die Schweiz hatte auch viele amerikanische Flugzeuge zur Landung gezwungen.

@@carlnapp4412 Nun wenn neutral dann richtig. Es gibt da einen Witz den ich einmal gelesen habe. Amerikaner überfliegen die Schweiz, die Luftüberwachung funkt an. Sie überfliegen die neutrale Schweiz. Amerikaner: das wissen wir. Verlassen sie den Luftraum, sonst müssen wir schiessen. Amerikaner: das wissen wir. Es wird geschossen. Amerikaner: Sie schiessen zu niedrig Schweizer: das wissen wir. Ich habe im TV auch einen Bericht gesehen, über US-Bomberbesatzungen die technischen Probleme hatten und in der Schweiz landeten. Sie durften nicht mehr starten und man musste sie auch internieren.

@@jochensch8821 Selbstbewußtsein war noch nie Mangelware unter den Eidgenossen.

The Messerschmitt was named after the designer Wilhelm Messerschmitt. He designed passenger planes later making the iconic fighters we all know and love.

Fun fact Haim Weizmann invented acetone.

The centrally hinged front gear makes for a narrow gear profile and unstable stance on the ground.

The centrally hinged front gear makes for a narrow gear profile and unstable stance on the ground.

exactly correct on all points. Every experienced pilot who lands on both unimproved and paved landing areas knows that the airframe takes much less stress on the (reasonably) unimproved field, landing as close as possible to wind heading. Land uphill, take off downhill if given the choice

Thanks! I am working on a video series called "Tales of the (insert air force name here)" which will somewhat cover the chronological histories of various air forces. Its a lot of work and research so you may not see these for a little while let :)

@@RexsHangar awesome

There were all kinds of German munitions exported from Post war, recreated Czechoslovakia. Anything and Everything that had the benefit of not having to cut corners during the production and not being carpet and firebombed by the Western Allies. The piston engine German aircraft were still of a very high technological level that would only be improved with American High test gasoline and and the adoption of superchargers. Small arms like K98k Mausers were and still are in the USA today in very good condition with winter trigger guards from the Bruenn rifle plant (or Brno in Czech.) Surprisingly, the German assault rifles, the MP44s that were manufactured in very high numbers, around 1 million of them, don't seem to have been sold to Israel in any big numbers. Perhaps they weren't available in the post war Czech areas.

Sure the 109's accepted the more sort of engine types and countries were they where crafted and still flews...

By the time the former 109s got to Israel they were a bit of a Frankenstein but inside there was the remains of the world's most accomplished fighter plane. From Spain over Europe, Africa and Russia finally to the middle east it racked up more kills than any other fighter between 15 and 20 thousand. No other fighter comes close. It was like a beat up, half blind old boxer given one last shot at a title and I think it came out well on top. Once an icon of oppression it ended it's days as a freedom fighter hero to a new nation, not a bad ending.

Junk? It did the job didn’t it.

@@r.g.o3879 well said.

@@r.g.o3879 Brilliant. Numbers don't lie.

mainly from dulles in the state department who hated Israel and Jews in general.

Kbely air museum

Indeed it is! And apparently the ex-allied pilots (the Americans at least) had another nickname for the S.199... the Messershit. :)

@@janiilola5810 I saw that.. pretty funny. They didn’t like it because it had a Heinkel bomber engine in it

He-111 parts ;)

With those big props, it would have been a deadly fighter at high altitudes. But it seems like most of the battles were fought at low altitudes and ground attack where it was not well suited for at all.

wasn't that the FW 190 ?

It wasn't the enemy's best fighter.

@@AviViljoen Germany used the Bf-109 since the start of the war until it ended, you can say it was their best fighter

@@yoamal1187 You can say it, but you'd be wrong. Just because it was in service for six years doesn't make it the best. Which would you say was the best US fighter of the war? Was it the Brewster Buffalo, or the Bell Airacobra? (both were used from the start of the war until it ended, which - by your logic - make them jointly the best US fighters).

No joke. The supposed movie script had the intrepid airman parting from his girlfriend, then taking off and flying away on his mission. The plane took off and was supposed to land at another field so they could continue filming scenes, but it wasn’t noticed that the plane was not headed to the field, but another direction. By the time the deception was discovered, the plane and “film crew” were long gone. The English authorities were very angry.

The Israeli pilots heard a rumor that the Arabs had hired some ex German Luftwaffe pilots and thought of the irony of Israeli Messerschmitts against Germans flying Spitfires.

Yes the Heinkel was better, but Heinkel was not in the NSDAP. Messerschmitt was in Hitlers Party.

You have to consider the pilots. On the Israeli side there were American and British veterans of WW2 with combat experience, against inexperienced and poorly trained Arab pilots.

Yes, Milton Rubenfeld, flew for the RAF as well as being one of the first Israeli fighter pilots.

Thanks! I plan to cover everything from the dawn of flight up to Desert Storm. So it should be fun!

Seen the drawings of the cannon going through the original 109 engine and out of the middle of the cone of the prop? Crazy! 😁

Let me introduce you to the Standard Vanguard Vignale..

I've got some hairs if you need to split any more..... Given that all they did was stick a different engine in it, I wouldn't consider that as so much development that the title is incorrect....

@@notsureyou “Given that all they did was stick a different engine in it” >>Not true. The Junkers Jumo 211F (and propeller) did not allow for the use of the “Motorkanone” (central cannon mount), so that was deleted. So that was the main armament, gone. Also, to make up for the loss of the cannon, they installed cowl-mounted MG-131 machine guns under the wings. So, contrary to your argument that “all they did was stick a different engine in it”, they also had to a) use a different propeller, b) delete the central cannon mount, and c) install cowl-mounted machine guns. “I wouldn't consider that as so much development” >> It was not a development. It made the planes much worse. (More on this, later). “so much development that the title is incorrect....” >>The title is incorrect. The Avia S.199 is not a German WW2 fighter. It is a Czech post-war development of a German WW2 fighter. Not the same. “I've got some hairs if you need to split any more” >>One the one hand I want to be as dismissive as you, and simply ask “where am I splitting hairs?” But the astonishing ignorance inherent in your comment prevents me from treating you in the same way as you are treating me. They replaced a fighter engine (Daimler-Benz DB 605) with a bomber engine (Junkers Jumo 211) and propeller. Judging by your flippant comment, you seem to think that this is insignificant. The resulting aircraft was (by Israeli accounts) unreliable, difficult to maintain, unresponsive (especially at take-off and landing altitudes), over-torqued (due to the heavy, wooden bomber-propeller), suffered from too much drag due to the cowl-mounted machine guns, heavy, and with insufficient firepower. The Bf-109 was not an easy aircraft to control, and was known to be a handful, even to experienced pilots. This was - in a large part -due to its heavy wing-loading. The addition of the cowl-mounted machine guns (due to them “sticking in another engine”) compounded this. A senior Luftwaffe pilot described the handling characteristics of the later Bf-109 as “malevolent”. So any degradation in handling would be disastrous. The extra torque/weight/drag/ was obviously enough to make the S-199 a real 'Mule'. The Bf-109 was a very difficult plane to land, due to its high wing-loading, small rudder and narrow undercarriage. “All they did was stick a different engine in it”. This increased the landing speed to 200km/h, making the plane even more difficult to land. It was difficult enough with the Daimler engine, so the torque-heavy Jumo must have made it well-nigh impossible. This, according to you, is “splitting hairs”. The S.199 was structurally heavier than the Bf-109, because they used inferior construction materials. This is not good for an underpowered fighter aircraft. The Jumo engine, and especially the wooden propeller, was aerodynamically inferior to the Bf-109. Not good for an underpowered fighter aircraft. Due to the fact that the Jumo engine had so much more torque, they had to add a bulge to the fin, to try and counter the torque problem. The synchronisation of the underwing machine gun sometimes failed, causing the machine guns to fire into the oversized wooden propeller. But, according to you, “all they did was stick a different engine in it”. All they did was not to just stick a different engine in it. They fundamentally changed the aircraft and its characteristics. The Avia S.199 is not a German fighter and it did not save Israel. You defend a clearly factually incorrect title and you denigrate a factually correct comment. Is this also the case in other areas of your life? What you tried to achieve with your vacuous comment is well and truly beyond my comprehension. I encourage you to make your riposte more substantive, logical, and robust.

@@AviViljoen They didn't install cowling mounted machine guns to make up for the loss of the main armament. The 13mm cowling mounted machine guns were standard in the Bf109 from the G6 onwards (Early 1943). The gondola (under wing) mounted canons were a standard optional fitment on all wartime Bf109's from the F series onwards, and was known as the Rüstsatz VI kit. The synchronizer issue that you mention as is also mentioned in the video had to do with the cowling mounted machine guns, not the underwing gondola canons (as these did not fire through the propeller) The Bf109 was not known to be a handful in the air, yes take off and landing was interesting for new pilots (and many new pilots had accidents because of the fear they had of the aircrafts take off and landing qualities). Yes it had a higher wing loading than a Spitfire, but it also had a lower wing loading than a P51 I don't doubt that the changes that were made, caused the aircraft to become an absolute pig. But given what I would call minimal changes compared to the original design, In that it was a German ww2 fighter design, that was later adapted to take a different German engine (with other minor changes, like using a He111 propeller, and deleting the centrally mounted canon) So an inferior derivative yes, but the changes are not enough to claim that the title is incorrect. As essentially the the airframe is near identical, just a different engine and propeller. In one of the first attacks they stopped the advance of the Egyptian army, when they were about 40 km's south of Tel Aviv. This was due to the effect that the attack had on the Egyptian army morale, rather than the aircraft showing any form excellent ground attack qualities. So the claim that the Aircraft type saved Israel is correct given this, and especially considering that upon the types arrival, that the balance of airpower shifted in favour of Israel.

@@notsureyou Thank you for a rational, considered response. “They didn't install cowling mounted machine guns to make up for the loss of the main armament.” >> I know. I mentioned it to counter your argument that “all they did was stick a different engine in it”. “The 13mm cowling mounted machine guns were standard in the Bf109 from the G6 onwards (Early 1943). The gondola (under wing) mounted canons were a standard optional fitment on all wartime Bf109's from the F series onwards, and was known as the Rüstsatz VI kit.” >>So was it standard or was it optional? It was optional, and it was common, but it wasn’t standard. “The synchronizer issue that you mention as is also mentioned in the video had to do with the cowling mounted machine guns, not the underwing gondola canons (as these did not fire through the propeller)” >>Not for the Bf-109, but it became a problem for the S.199 after they fitted the larger He-III propellers. “The Bf109 was not known to be a handful in the air, yes take off and landing was interesting for new pilots” >>I agree with you on this. I didn’t make my point clear enough. What I should have said was that take-off and landing became more difficult with the S.199’s reduced power, reduced responsiveness, increased torque, increased drag, and increased weight. It follows logically that these qualities also caused the S.199 to be inferior to the Bf-109 in the air (supporting my argument that the difference between the Bf-109 and the S.199 didn’t come down to a matter of “all they did was stick a different engine in it”. “(and many new pilots had accidents because of the fear they had of the aircrafts take off and landing qualities).” >>Of course I don’t have figures, but I would suspect that pilots had accidents more because the plane was difficult to take off and land rather than just because of fear. “Yes it had a higher wing loading than a Spitfire, but it also had a lower wing loading than a P51” >>That’s not the point. The point is that while the Bf-109 already had a high wing loading, the changes they made to the S.199 increased that wing loading, reducing its ease of handling. “I don't doubt that the changes that were made, caused the aircraft to become an absolute pig. But given what I would call minimal changes compared to the original design,” >>Changes which adversely affect almost all of the characteristics of the plane to such an extent that it becomes non-viable in combat are hardly minimal. “In that it was a German ww2 fighter design, that was later adapted to take a different German engine” >>It wasn’t merely a different engine. The original engine was designed and built for fighter aircraft. The Jumo was built specifically for bombers. There is a difference, and judging from your other comments on this forum I suspect that you know why this is relevant. Also, just because it’s German doesn’t make it equal. “(with other minor changes, like using a He111 propeller, and deleting the centrally mounted canon)” >>The changes might have been minor, but their impact was drastic by all accounts. “So an inferior derivative yes, but the changes are not enough to claim that the title is incorrect.” >>The title is incorrect. If you were to call a Kfir a Mirage 5 because one is based on the other, you would be wrong there as well. Is a VW Golf and a Skoda and a SEAT the same thing with interchangeable names? No. One is built in Germany, the other, inferior derivative or not, is built in the Czech Republic. Not the same. (Alternately: get yourself a German car - say, a BMW 5-series. Now remove the engine, and stick in a completely different German engine - say a VW TDi. Now tell me your car is the same). You might as well argue that the Spitfire Mk XIII is the same as the Spitfire XII - they just stuck a different engine in it. “As essentially the the airframe is near identical” >>But it is not, and I suspect you know this. Different materials, different reinforcements, and again, I suspect you know this. “just a different engine and propeller.” >>Even if this was true - and it is not - it is a fundamentally different aircraft, with fundamentally different characteristics. “In one of the first attacks they stopped the advance of the Egyptian army, when they were about 40 km's south of Tel Aviv. This was due to the effect that the attack had on the Egyptian army morale, rather than the aircraft showing any form excellent ground attack qualities. So the claim that the Aircraft type saved Israel is correct given this, and especially considering that upon the types arrival, that the balance of airpower shifted in favour of Israel.” >>Although the S.199 undoubtedly played a significant role, and was a much-needed tool, I have no doubt that it was the Israelis who saved Israel. Thank you again for a cognitive, mature reply to my post.

​@@AviViljoen The underwing gondolas were fitted as needed (attacking bombers etc), and at other times it was up to the pilot pilots preference (just doing a fighter sweep for example). In this context the word standard means that it wasn't a kit that was made up by one unit, so in todays language it would be an optional OEM kit (or equipment like a tow bar). In your first paragraph you "c" point mentioned the installation of cowl mounted machine guns, which is why brought it up. Correct the synchronizer issue was ironed out in the BF109 (it was an issue when they first transitioned from the 7.96mm guns to the 13mm guns according to Galland in his book), But reappeared when they changed the propeller when making the Mule. I 100% agree that the minor changes had a big affect (and not in any good way) on the handling of the aircraft. But they were again minor changes, And as an aside a pilot that has flown both a "normal" BF109 and one of the "Spanish 109's" has commented that even those aircraft had had at least one difference in flying characteristics that was not good. So perhaps a better title for the video should be: "The Czechoslovakian derivative of a German ww2 fighter that was used to save Israel" Yes the sheer will of the Israelis is what gave them the strength to fight as hard as they did, but sheer will without a weapons won't win.

Thanks! Yeah it was a pretty horrible aircraft overall, I bet the pilots were very happy to get out of them as soon as possible.

Nah... most nations have to actually do something to qualify for a medal. 😉

@@AviViljoen In the US some branches of the military give a medal for completion of boot camp.

@@edwinsalau150 Yes, that was the kind of thing I was referring to 🤣

@@AviViljoen well Israel did more than enough to get hundreds of medals. Israelis are brave people and fight like hell when their home is threatened.

@@IdoDekel-do7hh I know, and I absolutely agree with you. I have the highest respect for the Israelis. I was referring to some other nations who hand out medals for merely attending courses. I am ex South African Army, and in my day, if you saw one medal on a soldier, you knew it was well-earned. I will not speak badly of the Israeli Defence Force.

I have some books that cover the 262 extensively, though I have not read them all yet. Perhaps I will find an answer to this!

Czechnology

Jumo 004As had a service life of about 200 hours before major overalls. To put this into perspective the first Meteors' engines had about a 150 hour life span.

@@southernbear736 Production and maintenance of the 004 was done at the Junkers works at Magdeburg, under the supervision of Otto Hartkopf. Completed engines earned a reputation for unreliability; the time between major overhauls (not technically a time between overhaul) was thirty to fifty hours, and may have been as low as ten,

@@lambastepirate Those are not the engines I'm referring too. The Jumo 004A is the pre production engine, used for in the prototype Me 262s built without material restrictions, of which had a engine rebuilt period of about 200 hours. The *production* Jumo 004B however is a very different story. Built without the nickel and other rare metals required for the high temperatures, Junkers came up with an Aluminium ablative coating to coat the fan blades and combustion chamber, which would wear down over time just like the heat shield on a space craft. The Bs had an average time between engine rebuilds of about 25-26 hours for the average pilot. As you have stated a good pilot could make them last for up to 50-60 hours with proper throttle control.

The Israeli air force is successful today because it has some of the bravest pilots in the world and some of the most advanced jets in the world. But it started with only brave pilots, really REALLY brave pilots who had to fly into combat in death traps.

Agree! IF the Jumo engine - they should've used 190 D's ;-)

Not only planes. You sold to Israel also guns (what we in Israel called them Czech guns that were Mausers 98s), machine guns MG34, and ammo. Those actually opened the road to Jerusalem that was besieged by the Arabs , and helped to kick out the Egyptian army that invaded deep into the newly established Jewish state. These sales were authorized by the Soviet Union which thought that the new Jewish state would become their sattelite. This, of course, didn't happen.

AVIA vyrobila i 500 dopravních letadel IL 14 ve špičkové kvalitě

The British had to convert ex-Luftwaffe 'Ju52s' into crude airliners for internal services ca. 1947 while hundreds of more-modern U.S. 'C-47s' were taken back by the U.S.. Some "ally".

The French used a version built in France, the Amiot AAC 1 Toucan . This version was built from 1943 to 1948 and used French designed and manufactured engines in place of the standard BMW engines

@@None-zc5vg Most military equipment supplied by the Americans to Britain was done under Lend Lease. One of the conditions of this arrangement was that at the end of hostilities, all American supplied equipment had to be returned to the USA or destroyed on the spot wherever it happened to be. The use of the JU52 by BEA was an interim measure only, there were delays in the introduction of the new feeder airliner, the Vickers Viking so in the short term BEA resorted to using JU52s The JU 52 was only in BEA service for about 18 months at most.

@@None-zc5vg hahahaha. Pay your Lend / Lease bills you cheapskates!

FW airframe was redesigned to accommodate the new engine, here you have a frankensine monster made from parts.

because it wasn't the same engine. The D9 used a Jumo 213 not a Jumo 211

@@randomnickify The FW also didn't use a Jumo 211.