*Quick correction (thanks mensch1066 for pointing it out)* #1 At 03:13 I of course mean 46% not 64%. Sadly my Germanness (we say the numbers the other way around) has gotten in the way again. I will cook an pot of extra sauer Sauerkraut this evening as penance. #2 Göring took poison, didn't hang himself.
Before someone writes in to note that Chris said 64% when he meant 46% around 3:13, saying many numbers in English is very hard when you are a native German speaker, since they say "Sechsundvierzig" (six and forty) rather than forty-six as we do. MHV makes this same sort of error from time to time.
This problem exists in Dutch as well and sometimes I catch myself writing numbers down in the wrong order. If my brain is in that state it can only be untangled by saying the single digits out loud, like "four six seven seven two". Needless to say, it can be a serious pain in the exhaust pipe.
Like many popular stories about WWII, the effectiveness of the bomber campaign against Germany is HIGHLY exaggerated. Remember, German military production INCREASED through the end of 1944.
Incorrect. German industrial throughput increased very slightly in a small number of categories between 1943 and 1944. However, there was a very broad and rapidly accelerating downward trend in oil, steel, propellant, aircraft, artillery, munitions, small arms, and explosives production, with production of most AFV's trending downwards as well. Please stop spread History Channel-esque nonsense that has been clearly and obviously debunked _many_ times over.
Delayed what? The fighter and the fighter/bomber were virtually the same same airplanes with the exception that one was fitted with the bomb racks. It did created problems by forbidden them to attack the bombers but not the production.
@@paoloviti6156 You completely misunderstood me. It was not the requirement to carry bombs that delayed the 262, it was the Allied bombing of German industry.
@@jamesharding3459 thanks for clarifying with me as I have misunderstood! Of course you are correct as it was the continuous allied bombing that delayed everything including the production of the Me 262A...
@@norbertblackrain2379 Yes, but what happened is that at the design stage they were allowed to focus on one goal. They were adapted to new roles later.
Aviation historian Walter J. Boyne devoted an entire chapter to the Blitz Bomber controversy in his book, 'Messerschmitt Me 262: Arrow to the Future'. Boyne looked at source material like meeting notes from Hitler's secretary, production figures, etc., and his conclusions are very well supported. I'm so grateful Chris is also setting the record straight.
@@oxcart4172 thank you I have 4 from the same litter and all are completely different. This is the pretty boy but empty headed Hugo, only one that's still long enough to photo. There's his color but inverted Suzy, black & tan D, and zebra stripped Taz.
@@oxcart4172 I hope the same for you, and thanks for the kind replies, they are getting to be a rare thing, sadly. Good luck during your endeavors and times of rest.
When you in-depth look into the past it’s very rarely “this happened because he did this” it’s little things combining to create big things. Very entertaining
"Mein Führer, take a look at this cutting edge jet fighter we just made!" - "Wünderbar! a new Schnellbomber for the Luftwaffe" "Errh, you must be mistaken mein Herr, this is a fighter plane" - " *Did I fucking stutter?* "
Very interesting video which makes a lot of sense. The politics of the bomber guys vs the fighter guys is so obvious --- now that you mention it!! Something I would not have thought of. And well done for using primary sources and displaying a time line. Works for me.
Not to mention the difficulty in getting rare alloys and difficultly in getting high quality fuels. Yes, those difficulties were linked with the allied bombing and reduction in territory controlled by the Reich.
It was crazy Hitler that delayed it. Hitler was a dilettante, thought he knew everything about everything and was constantly meddling in every aspect of the German war effort down to the smallest details. Because of Hitler, V1 and V2: delayed. Me262: delayed. Mp44 assault rifle: delayed! German ordnance, on top of all its other huge problems (material shortages, manpower shortages, allied bombing, et. al.) often had to try to maneuver the really important weapons projects to side-step Hitler's constant interference.
@@robertmaybeth3434 *_"It was crazy Hitler that delayed it."_* You must have not watched this video or not understood it. It was clear that a few bomb racks, which everyone knew about in early 1943 would have made no difference to the production run. Chris actually said this. It was also pointed out that everyone knew about the 262's potential mission as a fighter-bomber long before Hitler saw it in November 1943. Remember that date Chris asked to to store away? November, 1943. In other words, it had nothing to do with Hitler. Bomb racks would have been a field conversion: very simple and can be done by the ground crew. Then there was the matter of how many were actually completed, often due to shortages of engines and other critical parts. That's why only about 250-300 actually made it to squadron service. Again, nothing to do with Hitler. It's all in the video.
@@thethirdman225 It's you who aren't getting all the details. Because Hitler actually issued an order, that later caused many of the secret weapons to be delayed at the time when they were needed most. Around 1940, when the Germans were seemingly unbeatable, Hitler ordered another "Fuhrer directive" that any new weapons projects, that could not be completed in a year, were to be stopped. The ME 262 was one of these. Any engineer will tell you, restarting a project from a dead stop, is a thousand times harder than cranking up a small project to a larger one.
This has always seemed a silly debate because the fighter and fighter bomber roles are not mutually exclusive. Almost every fighter in WWII could carry bombs. Nobody argues that the FW-190 should have been only a fighter, and it was used extensively as a fighter bomber as well. It makes perfect sense to hang a couple of bombs on a fast fighter that is difficult to intercept. The 262 could easily drop bombs without degrading its abilities as a fighter.
yes, in the book Me-262 vs P-51 published by Osprey, they comment it. "That Hitler asked if the Me 262 was able to carry bombs may have been a misguided question from a man who had little knowledge of air strategy and aircraft design, but, at the same time, it was perfectly understandable, since every other frontline Luftwaffe combat aircraft had already proved itself adequately capable of carrying bombs or performing in the fighter‐bomber role. What was different about the Me 262? Yet, six months later, in May 1944, on the Obersalzberg, Hitler had discovered from Milch that contrary to his orders that the Me 262 be produced as exclusively as a fighter‐bomber, the aircraft was, in fact, being built purely as a fighter. Hitler was exasperated and flew into a rage. Milch tried to reason, “Führer, even the smallest child can see that this is a fighter and not a bomber.”
Yes...and no. Most Luftwaffe fighters required modification kits (Rüstsätze for field kits and Umrüst-Bausatz for factory-installed ones) to carry bombs. Not sure how many kits were available? Allied (mainly US) fighters had hard points built in that were designed for use with both bombs or fuel tanks. Hanging 550kg or more of bombs on a fighter that was never designed for the load (such as the BF-109 or Spitfire) is not a trivial exercise.
@@jarink1 We're not talking about hanging heavy bombs on a lightweight Spitfire or 109, we're talking about building hardpoints into the larger Me-262 at the factory. Hardly a difficult proposition, so it's not a case of yes or no, it was easily a yes in this case. And even the lightweight Spitfire and Bf-109 did carry bombs, as did most fighters from WWII on. Some could carry heavier loads than others, but the list of WWII fighters that never carried a bomb would be a very short list.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 What is it with you guys who are focused on abstract principles while overlooking the point. Of course weight matters, no duh, who said it doesn't? But the incontrovertible FACT is that most fighters also conducted fighter bomber missions in addition to the pure fighter role. Of course a fighter performs better without pylons and racks under the wings, so remove them if you don't need to carry external stores. Just having a hardpoint in the wing where a pylon could be attached would not make any difference in the air to air capability of the Me-262, while adding an additional important capability. In war the last gram of theoretical performance such as the last pound of payload or the last knot of speed is never as important as overall usefulness of a weapon. Why do you think most fighters were equipped to carry drop tanks by that point in the war. You can't believe that leaving out hard points to possibly make the 262 a few pounds lighter matters when it was already more than 100 knots faster than its main opposition.
The Bf 109 carried bombs in 1940... The Bf 110 carried bombs in 1940... The Fw 190 carried bombs in 1942... ...the actual question would be... WHY wouldnt the Me 262 carry bombs? Do we need to talk about the P47, F6F and F4U? Was there, by late war, a fighter plane unable to carry bombs or lacking a dedicated fighter-bomber version?
Another great video that really dives into the archival data to reveal the inner workings of Germany at the time and the issues they were facing. As an obvious admirer of Galland I too believed that this program was delayed by the illogical choice of focusing on slinging bombs rather than tackling aerial armadas bombing Germany back to the stone age prior to watching this. Thanks!
Excellent video - it really helped me understand this whole issue. I read the quote at 22:05 as having additional implications. It strikes me that Hitler wanted not only a fighter bomber, but an operational bomber capable of some offensive use. The Ar-234 was really the appropriate platform for this use. The quote, it seems to me, says that since the Me-262 can also carry bombs, priority should stay on the Me262 project and need not be diverted to the Ar-234. Ultimately, though, what I'm hearing, both from this video and also from information on the development of the Ar-234, is that it was really the engines that were limiting to the schedule for jet fighters or bombers.
Excellent analysis! This helps us to understand much more clearly the realities of the war and the relationships of organizational behavior at this crucial time.
Great explanation. Thanks... I had always been taught that Hitler was responsible for the bomb requirement which led to the delay in the 262 coming into service.
got to see a Me-262 in a museum room that was also is home to a Lockheed SR71 (alas the Me-262 has since been taken elsewhere - not sure where its permanent home is). It was awesome to get to see an actual Me-262, though. Two legendary military aircraft under the same roof - such a treat!
I know I'm late here, but something that should be mentioned is it's common to put some bomb capacity on fighters, F4F Widcat, F6f Hellcat, P51 Mustang, P47 Thunderbolt, F4U Corsair, Supermarine Spitfire, Mig 3, Hawker Hurricane; all carried ordnance. It was the norm
When you think about it the Germans had watched the mosquito flying about the place and bombing seemingly at will with very low losses and outrunning everything
Thanks Chris. Very well worth my monthly subscription. First Mirage IIIC then Me262. My favourite book of all time is ‘Plane Speaking’ by ‘Bill Gunston’. In many of the chapters he does the sort of in-depth analysis you do here to show us that things are not as we thought they were. Looking forward to your next.
A very interesting explanation for this delay. Personally, I have always had doubts about the "official" version of those events (no basic logic in the facts given). My subconscious was telling me the reason had to be different, but that was just my subconscious. Many thanks for such an interesting disclosure of the real mechanisms of this delay.
Back when I was a teenager in the late 70's I use to be an avid reader of "Bantam war books" series and I read "The first and the last" by Adolf Galland. Also "The Luftwaffe war diarys". So I'm not quite sure were I remember this from, but I think it was Galland's book. He said that when he flew the Me 262, that it was like flying on the wing's of an Angel, because of the smooth delivery of power, versus a piston engine aircraft. He also said that Hitler danced a jig and said " Ahh, my blitz bomber". And then he turned to Willy Messershmit and asked him if it could carry bombs and Willy answered, reluctantly "Any plane can carry bombs, if it has to". According to Galland, because of Hitler's insistence that it had to be capable of carrying bombs, that Messershmit had to go back and beef the airframe up, to make it capable of carrying a substantial bomb load. This, of course, made the plane heavier and detracted from the performance, making it substantially slower and less agile, than the prototype Galland flew. Galland claimed that was what some of the delay in getting it into full scale production. He also said that when the first production planes became available, they went to bomber units, instead of fighter units, because of Hitler's insistence that it was a bomber. In fact it was forbidden, by Hitler, to be called a fighter! So it was given to Stuka pilots instead of Bf 109 and Focke Wulf 190 pilot's. Also the original version Galland flew, would do 640 mph, while the production version was considerably slower, and less maneuverable. I can't remember, for sure, but I think the production version would only do about 570mph. That's what I remember about it!
*_"Also the original version Galland flew, would do 640 mph, while the production version was considerably slower, and less maneuverable. I can't remember, for sure, but I think the production version would only do about 570mph."_* That was a special version with a very low drag canopy called the V12 and was intended for aerodynamic testing. The highest speed it ever achieved was 624 mph at Leipheim on June 6, 1944. It was probably the only good news that day! This was not the "original version" and the only reason I can think of as to why it might have been more manoeuvrable was that it carried no weapons.
MAN, THANKS FOR THE TRANSLATION PART 6:30... I WAS SAYING THIS FOR AGES, YET EVERYONE KEEPS GOING LIKE HALDER SAID THAT AND THAT... Greetings from Czech rep and keep up the great work!
21:05 I interpreted that phrase about the shift between bomber and fighter as shifting production between Me262 and Ar234. And making a fighter-bomber version of the 262 would be less time consuming than shifting production to an entirely different design. 35:55 The jets actually relieved the fuel situation, since the jet engines can run on the Ersatz-diesel made from coal dust, they don't need petrol (gasoline for you Americans). I would say that this factor was far more important than the performance gains in the decision to develop and produce jet aircraft.
I made a model of the 262 as a 5 year old kid because even then I knew it was uber cool. Now I want to make it again but with a torpedo slung under the fuselage! Thanks Chris - great review.
I also found it interesting that for the fighter version when it was becoming operational in the field with the test unit and early in the life of JG 7, there was debate between different factions weather it should be primarily used to engage fighters and recon planes, or bombers. The aurgument was that the 262 would engage and keep the fighters preoccupied, while heavily armed prop planes would engage the bombers, since that had proven effective before long range allied escorts were availible. Which goes against the usually percieved idea that the 262 wad designed primarily to kill bombers.
Agreed. From an engineering standpoint it is remarkable that such an innovative piece of equipment made it to front-line service during the war at all, despite all its shortcomings.
Great video as always. On the subject of engine life, already by May 1944 the in-production Rolls-Royce Welland had a service interval of (variously) 80, 150 or 180 hours -- Wiki. The service interval of the Jumo 004 is commonly stated as 10 to 20 hours. The British engines used Nimonic for their turbines (the hot end), an alloy invented for the purpose in 1941 by Leonard Pfeil. It is composed of nickel, chromium, cobalt, titanium (2-3%) and aluminium. Maybe the "scarce alloys" story needs investigating too?
On a very high level it makes sense that a new air plane is not only a one trick pony. So early planing for several versions makes sense. However there is also a thing called prioritization. There lies in many cases the problem. And of cause priorities change with times. As always the real flow of events and decisions is always far more complex as the simple "X was it". Thank you for detailing this all.
Thanks; it's always a relief to hear a balanced & referenced argumentation. One question: How good was it at actually hitting something/causing damage with those bombs ?
Thank you for this time sink project, I've collected bits of this subject over the years, but you filled in the gaps I was ignorant of. This is why I love great documented secondary sources, primary source research is a very tedious task under ideal circumstances, it's an inside-out spaghetti sandwich when researching primary sources in a nonnative language that are on the other side of an ocean. If you need anything dealing with USA military rotorcraft or Army prop fixed wings, I should be able to help you.
It's fantastic to have wonderful sources for military equipment history: Bismark for aviation, The Chieftain & The Tank Museum for armor, Drachinifel for naval, C&Rsenal and Gun Jesus for firearms.
One of my favorite books as a child was 'The Ultimate Book Of Cross-Sections' - it had cut-aways of a bunch of vehicles, the Me-262 included. It mentioned the bomb-carrying capability of the 262: "Hitler's mistake" "When the German dictator Adolf Hitler saw the first Me 262, he insisted the designers adapt it to make a fast bomber version. This was a lucky mistake for Europe - the airplane performed far better as a fighter, and his decision meant that too few fighters were produced to give him any advantage in the airborne battle for Europe". DK Publishing, Inc., c1996
Not that it would’ve had any realistic effect on the allied bombing campaign even if there were a thousand of them. It wouldn’t take too much time for the allied bombers and fighter escort to adapt to them.
Yet another superlative video debunking a common myth. As always the truth is more complex, hidden behind a language barrier and a overreliance on memoirs. Great work Bis.
The problem was probably that many of the 262s went to bomber units that might have otherwise really made a difference in countering the American bombers.
I guess it's way easier to put blame on AH in hindsight, and make so many excuses about delays for "wild" reasons instead of just being as a simple "we don't have enough engines" reason. Is just people's attempts to shift blame on specific people/things that sound important rather than the mundane?
It does make for a more emotional trigger and that makes it more memorable, thus it's easy to share - but I think a lot of this usually simply comes out of the fact that sometimes people weren't exposed to/or had access to a wider pool of information. Simple answers are placeholders, once more information is available I think people are very capable in making the connections and also take onboard the mundane. And as we see in this case, AH certainly didn't help the development of the Me 262, so there is a core to it, but the problem was way bigger.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory When I was a teenager I only have a small public library as my source of information with TV shows and movies helping to fan the flame of interest. Hence, my knowledge was limited to those sources including to the Me262 delay. Now, the internet is the opposite of my teenage days with a near-bottomless ocean of knowledge and ideas at my finger tips. However, considering my numerous topic of interests versus my limited time to indulge in them... perhaps, the internet is just way way too big.
The Stuka's inability to provide close air support means fighters with bombs must replace it. Fighters can survive where the pure ground attack Stuka cannot. Even the German's pure bombers are less survivable in a fighter heavy battlefield. They require a fighter escort, a fighter bomber could evade better and handle missions with less pure fighter support.
The Stuka is probably the best example of the difference between close air support and tactical bombing. As long as the Luftwaffe had air superiority (or better, air supremacy) there was nothing anyone could do about it and it was still a great aircraft. The problem was that by mid-1943, the Germans no longer had air superiority so the Stuka could no longer be used. But in fact, this had been known since the Battle of Britain. That meant the reliance on aircraft like the Fw-190A8 or similar (also used in hit-and-run raids over Britain). It also removes a lot of the accuracy that could have been almost guaranteed by the Stuka but is still relatively affective. You're dealing with a larger area and a larger margin of error. Close air support requires mastery of the air and the best choice was probably the Stuka. They even tried to get some old Hs-123s back into service. Tactical bombing is what you do when you can't clear the air sufficiently for Stukas to be used unopposed and so you need an aircraft like the Fw-190. By late 1943, they day of the Stuka was over.
What you say is true, and the Luftwaffe modified the FW-190 for ground attack. They even made one with almost a ton of added armor plate, around the cockpit and vital points, which made it almost as ungainly as the Stuka.
I was under the impression that Hitler envisioned the 262 bomber as important to repel the allied second front amphibious invasion. The timeframe of Nov.1943 to June-July 1944 fits with this nicely. The Jumo 004 was developed using high temperature alloys, but it had to be adapted to more available materials as the Jumo 004a. Probably, this requirement alone caused meaningful delay. Thanks for your analysis. ✌️
Also the UK had the mosquito and the US half its land-based fighters were fighter bombers and some of them were fast too. So maybe he wanted to get in on that action? Also when your low on resources having both in 1 is better than having none of one.
A few months earlier Göring had asked Ernst Heinkel the same question about the He280 and gotten the reply that it would take so much redesign it would make the 280 a completely different aircraft. The He280 was not developed into production and would not be accepted by Luftwaffe.
Excellent. It’s both assesment of facts, but added human angle that explains the facts..these things get micro analyses and debated..so more power to you for doing this one
Great video as usual Chris, and on a subject where a lot of have believed the common misinformation. Sometimes I think of how much the post-war memoirs influenced Western histories, and how some reassessments definitely have to be made. I believe in academia the popular myths were debunked long ago, but they're still having a hard time reaching the popular history level, and I think videos like this and your efforts will play a major role in turning the tide!
Thank you, I do hope that these videos do their small part. As you say, the 'state of the literature' is always ahead of the general knowledge pool in these cases, its in the nature of things. I am pretty sure I learned things in science classes back in high school that are also completely out of date by now.
After watching your video, the situation could actually be summarized as: "Despite Hitler only describing the Me 262 as a schnelbomber, it was first tested and mostly used as a fighter."
Exactly right! The most effective part of the "Third Reich", arguably, was its propaganda machine. Add to that the influence of the whitewashing memoirs that you mentioned, and voilà, you have all those misconceptions that still shape a lot of the perception today, even in non-right wing circles.
Galland might have had a point when he said that training bomber pilots into flying the 262, wich they never really used, instead of using fighter pilots, might have delayed the usage of this weapon in a fighter role.
Fortysix, it would be easier by far if the English said sixandforty like the Germans do. Excellent video by the way. It demonstrates the politics inherent in the decision making process of national, military, and industrial leaders. It also points out the strains of any new arms system on a nation's materiel and personnel, particularly in time of war.
I thought the reasons were: 1. Hitler knew there would be a second front, and there would be allied air supremacy over the landing zone so he wanted aircraft that could fly in, drop bombs, get out and keep doing it. He thought the Me 262 could be that aircraft. 2. Fighter bombers were not unusual. Hitler was not asking for anything new by asking about a fighter bomber variant. 3. The Me 262 wasn't ready for D-Day anyway. 4. There wasn't the alloys available or fuel or enough trained pilots and aircraft were being built by slave labour so it meant it never made a difference anyway. 5. If it had been available in larger numbers it might have delayed things a little but then the US might have dropped their first nuke on Berlin so Germany was lucky the war ended when it did.
In his book ‘A higher calling’ pilot Franz Sigler, who flew them, was the turbine blades had problem due to material shortages. And they crashed often.
Phat Bostarrrd, phonetically the German alphabet , especially the end IS a bit of a trap. The letters are familiar but they sound different. U, V, W are OO, foaw, Veh. So Beh,emm,veh!
Would love to see a video about the Heinkel He-280 and why it wasn't adopted, even though its first jet-powered flight was a full year before that of the Me-262.
OK, this is really random, but... Picture this: Me 262 Launched from a V-1 launch gantry Large gantry underneath Carrying a Fritz-X 1800kg glide bomb. The ultimate naval strike fighter / bridge bomber?
Sehr interessantes Video. Vielen Dank für die Recherchearbeit. Ich bin mir sicher, dass es nicht einfach ist alle Unterlagen zu solchen Themen zu finden. Welche Bücher kannst du zum Thema "Frühe Düsenflugzeuge" empfehlen?
Vielen Dank für diese interessante Recherche! Die Art der Quellenanalyse und deren Präsentation erinnert mich an Ralf Raths. Ihr macht beide sehr professionelle Beiträge!
General Adolf Galland in a 1970's interview was asked the question did the the bombs delay entry into service the ME=262. His answer was no but it was the engines
This is the second time I have reviewed this video and I agree with your conclusions. Those engines were not ready and were restrained by the shortage of critical materials.
Most enlightening Bismarck video get. The reality of the Bombers high status and the public misconception. How Hitler terrible as he was, made a perfect scapegoat of all matters!
I would love to see you and TIK to work together on something (esp about "madman Hitler"). It's amazing how many things become the immediate order of a defeated leader (even more so if he's dead :-) )
I think your underestimating the work involved in adapting a plane to carry bombs. Passive provision, designing the airframe to be strong enough to accommodate the weight of bomb load is one thing you can do early on and isnt too demanding, your just accepting a weight penalty from thicker beams or possibly additional bracing struts will need to be added, running a wire from the release mechanism to the cockpit is also quite easy. Its a lot more work to actually carry through and work out the flight characteristics with and without, how the aircraft will react when the bomb is released, how the bomb will fall in the aircrafts airflow, will it start to spin? Do you need to reposition the bomb or install an airflow deflector? Do you need to adjust the aircrafts weight by placing counterweights? How will the aircrafts takeoff and landing characteristics be affected with and without the bomb load etc.... Essentially there is a big difference between having passive provision in your airframe for bombs to be carried and actually carrying through to produce a manufacturable bomb carrying design.
@@Jakob_DK Yes. But exactly for many of the reasons already mentioned by @Watcher Zero. You will have to worry about flight characteristics on a steep dive with bomb load, how the bombs separate at 70% dive, can the control surfaces and fuselage withstand the pull out stress from the dive, do you need to fit dive brakes? And even non flight stuff like the bombsight would need to be located to point forward instead of pointing down.
this is very useful video....i grew up 'knowing' the 262 was delayed to be converted to a bomber....and thought that was a ridiculus idea. as you said the conversion is very simple with hard points and simple controls to release bombs. I think you debunked this myth thoroughly....
that is one great video! with the Jumo engines was it that they didnt know the metallic composition they needed to resist heat or avoid fractures in blades? (so they were having to trial by error) or was it lack of materials and metals from the start so they were having to try substitutes for alloys they would have used from the start if they had had them?
wow, i guess i can just agree with @Priceless Historie said, you mind gets blown away with this much information. But this is a plus my book :) were all here to lean more about ww2 aircraft and their background. The information is very well presented with the sources and charts, acompanied with original an museum footage. a great video, well worth the wait :D Have a nice day :)!
Chris, excellent video! 1 tiny thing; I thought the BT series of bomb were simple shapes to speed up production, torpedo like in shape only. Am I wrong?
That was very interesting to listen to! Thank for the immensely detailed breakdown! When I was a teenager I used to read a lot of books on the war time and often wondered what caused the delay? I knew that as far as I knew LOL! That the delay was caused by the bombing and that I assumed caused its delay! It was fascinating to hear it from another stand point! Thank you ever so much! I did hear your ahem! Mistake re 46% but I do understand the problem, as I speak French and it does give me a headache with numbers too! Plus I use a french keyboard too and that gives me a huge headache! LOL 🤣
"On November 2, 1943, Göring, accompanied by Milch, visited the bomb‐damaged Regensburg works and met Messerschmitt. It was at this meeting that a new, previously unforeseen dimension crept in - the demands of Hitler. Göring enquired of Messerschmitt as to whether the Me 262 could carry bombs externally. “Herr Reichsmarschall,” Messerschmitt replied, “It was intended from the beginning that the machine could be fitted with two bomb racks so that it could drop bombs, either one 500kg or two 250kg. But it can also carry one 1,000kg or two 500kg bombs.” Göring was elated: “That answers the Führer’s question.”" Me 262 vs P-51 by Robert Forsyth
This is indeed the question at hand: when did Hitler truly learn about the Me262 (even as a project without nothing to show), and did he influence the design process before, or not.
A very interesting history on the ME-262. When I used to fly small planes I went to Gravenhurst Airport in Ontario, Canada and discovered the chief instructor pilot was one of the first to fly the ME-262. A very interesting guy, he taught aerobatics on Pitts Specials. He related that initially the ME-262 was a tail-dragger, and when he attempted to takeoff, it would not, and as the runway was ending, he applied the brakes which caused the plane to tip forward/horizontal at which point it took off. Hence the tricycle landing gear.
Hi Chris, I really appreciated your reviews, comments and analyses. Your sense of humour adds to the overall review. Small errors in the comments are understandable, after all you keep a running comment at the top of your head. My respect and keep it going.
I think most viewers will agree, this aircraft is the most bad-ass looking machine to come out of WW2. Its shark like shape is simply beautiful. I have the Kanal summer jacket from Noble House in tribute, so far & thankfully no one has called me out as a Luftwaffe fanboy :)
As for the importance of bombers in the Luftwaffe, didn't the best pilots from flight training mostly get assigned to bomber units, while fighter units got second pick?
Thank you. Some of them were gifted to me by friends (incl. Drach), so I don't know the origin of all of them. I have recently partnered as an affiliate with Air Models however, so if you like the models you can get some via them and support the channel: airmodels.net/?aff=144
