The German Autobahn really is very versatile, wanna go fast ?use the autobahn, wanna Land a cargo plane? Use the autobahn.

@Ass_of_Amalek

11 ай бұрын

it's just a highway system like many others, and other countries also have plans for using highway sections as emergency military airports (I know of the US and sweden). I suppose if you want to do it properly, thenthosehighway sections should be built and maintained particularly well to guarantee good condition, since large jets tend to both be less tolerant of uneven tarmac than cars, and put a lot more strain on it.

@pfefferle74

11 ай бұрын

@@Ass_of_Amalek Eh, as a German I must object with some national pride. The German Autobahn is really built to higher standard than most other countries' highways. We use about twice as much concrete during its construction than the US does with its interstates. This thing has to support cars going up to 150 mph without ever hitting a crack or pothole. It's also lined with sturdy high grade steel crash barriers all the way. The Germans haven't actually invented the highway (the Italians did), but due to the "no speed limit" idea of the Autobahn we improved it to perfection. So yeah, you can probably land any fighter jet in the world on any highway in the world, but I would only trust the Autobahn to withstand the landing of an Antonow carrying two battle tanks as cargo.

@brandonstarkel-tg7tj

11 ай бұрын

​@@pfefferle74 8

@Hungary_0987

11 ай бұрын

Hungary is the same!

@barbaraclements8068

11 ай бұрын

@@pfefferle74 @Rondaru your Autobahn is a little over 13,000 kilometers in length.... In the US there are more than 260,000 Kilometers in its national highway system much of which is capable of landing midsized cargo and passenger planes without issue. And plenty of areas where something as large as a 747 could be landed in emergency. (Road repair likely following) Your autobahn is engineered and built very well. But not really impressive when it comes to size. The highways here move much more goods and people much further distances every day. And trust me... the highway here is tested to 250+ km/h... there are people blowing past me every day at these speeds.. with some police chases reaching over 320 km/h !

"It was the weight of his massive balls" That's a great way to describe those test pilots.

@dg-gaming942

11 ай бұрын

Took me long enough but i found this comment😂

This wasn't a "bad idea", it just proved to be unnecessary and overly costly. For the record, the Herc with the built in rocket assist was going to land in and then take off from a soccer stadium in Iran as part of the hostage rescue mission back in 1980.

@jamessquires7015

11 ай бұрын

Its named Credible Sport if anyone is interested, it worked suprisingly well, its just when it failed it was catastrophic.

@NotWhatYouThink

11 ай бұрын

A couple of years ago, we made a short video that talks about this: kzread.infoKcFuaTpKpoY?feature=share

@billyponsonby

11 ай бұрын

You’re conflating RATO and ZELL

@sargera1

11 ай бұрын

@@jamessquires7015 they shoulda make the Spartan with it, albeit less weapon payload to keep it less stress to airframe

@sargera1

11 ай бұрын

@@billyponsonby rato is part of it. only diff is rato still can use airstrips, like the early german jets

"It's not hesitation. It's the weight. Of his massive balls." 😂😂😂

damn the F-104 really living up to its name of "The missile with a man in it" during these trials

@Ass_of_Amalek

11 ай бұрын

if it didn't kill any pilots during the tests, then it didn't live up to the 99 remaining percent of nicknames.

@pfefferle74

11 ай бұрын

Also to its other frequent nick name "Widow Maker"

Furthermore, the Starfighter was infamous for its many accidents, gaining the nickname of "Witwenmacher" (widowmaker) and "Sargfighter" (coffin fighter), in reference to 44 crashed aircraft in a timespan of about 18 months. At the time, that led to a huge scandal in Germany, which may also have contributed to the cancellation of the program.

@Hunter12396

11 ай бұрын

That was mostly due to the fact the Germans attempted to use a high-speed interceptor with tiny wings as a fighter-bomber.

@Donuts_random_stuff

11 ай бұрын

Also ground nail or something like that I’ve heard

@vincentguttmann2231

11 ай бұрын

@@Hunter12396 As far as I can tell, most of the crashes weren't due to it being used as a bomber, and more things like improper manufacturing - for example hydraulic lines were made differing from Lockheed's instructions. But, many of the accident reports that would list the cause of the crash remain sealed to this day. Even during the introductory air show, the four Starfighters crashed, as a grim preview of what was to come. The selection of the Starfighter itself also drew a lot of criticism (experts recommend the Mirage III, but the defense minister at that time selected the Starfighter despite experts advising against that), and Lockheed may have bribed public officials.

@Icetea-2000

8 ай бұрын

@@Hunter12396And what does that have to do with the aircraft failing exactly?

While in the Navy in VC-6 at Dam Neck, Virginia Beach, Virginia, I launched the MQM-74 from a stationery launch pad, firing two solid propellant bottles to get the Target Drone airborne.

"It's not hesitation, it's the weight of his massive balls!" You guys owe me a new shirt, this one is covered with coffee as I laughed uncontrollably.

em-launch rail is a nice one

I can still see the benefit of the Soviet idea. You need to get a fighter in the air fast to protect a particular target. You launch the plane nearby and once it's mission is complete it can fly to a normal airfield to land. Since the plane didn't have to travel from the airfield to the defense target it should be faster and could potentially boost it's effective range do to having used less fuel to get into position.

@StrikeNoir105E

11 ай бұрын

The problem was that you still needed to land the plane, which would necessitate putting the plane down in a runway somewhere, which might be very far from where the plane launched. This would mean having to deliver the plane overland to the launch platform perhaps hundreds of miles from away. And besides, if you need a defensive measure to immediately protect an area from air attack, that's what modern surface-to-air missile platforms are for.

Love your videos man. You always teach some random information!! greetings from Brazil

Great video but its short! I like your longer videos man! Videos on this channel are easy to watch for 15 minutes

Always making the best videos

always a joy when i see a new video

I am faster than the topic of the video

@jeffreylaw2407

11 ай бұрын

SPEED

@ahriise9570

11 ай бұрын

Badass 😂

uh oh... a rocket-launched lawn dart 😬

Your content are awesome.

The weight of his massive balls. XD Noice.

Awesome work as always keep it up thank you for keeping us informed on different things God bless you♥🙏

Normal rocket boosters were already used in ww2 to help planes like the Gigant into the air.

@ColonelSandersLite

11 ай бұрын

The british where also using them just like this to fling hawker hurricanes off of merchant ships.

In this episode of the old Steve Canyon t.v. series, they used some of that same footage. Operation Zero Launch Episode aired Sep 27, 1958 John R. Ellis, Dean Fredericks, and Johann Des Roches in Steve Canyon (1958) Steve is assigned to aid his friend Bradshaw, a test pilot, in a hazardous project to launch F-100 Super Sabres from the backs of trucks with rocket boosters. When Bradshaw's booster fails to detach in flight it places him and the whole program in danger...but Col. Canyon has a plan.

2:20 I chuckled. I was not expecting that.

So essentially me when designing an airplane in KSP

@orbitalvelocity357

11 ай бұрын

Funny coincidence that I'm literally playing KSP RSS when I read this comment

"That's why the pilot is getting into the cockpit somewhat slowly... It's not hesitation... It's the weight of his massive balls..." 🤣😂🤣😂

there is an f104 zell in the luftwasse museum near berlin. a cool thing indeed

Definitely an interesting topic. I like the way you gave a brief but in-depth overview. Just one thing: I'm pretty sure the V1 flying bomb of Nazi Germany's Luftwaffe was the first operational cruise missile, not the MGM-1 Matador. (Though I will agree that it was more of a rudimentary cruise missile, given it could be easily diverted by RAF pilots by tipping a wing to push them off course.)

@DeHerg

10 ай бұрын

Same with aicrafts launched from a ramp which would either be the WW2 "Natter"(for rocket launches) or pre-ww2 ship catapult launches(for reconnaissance planes).

There was a HESS truck toy that had this idea. Loved it so much

I think it would be cool to experience a RATO take off in Fat Albert from the cargo bay with the rear door open.

@haydentravis3348

11 ай бұрын

Hope you're tied down.

“ it’s not what you think” quotes by not what you think

my father was USMC Capt, at San Diego/Miramar, and as a child in the 50s got to watch them practice hovering/landings etc with the "Pogo" plane. it looked stupid to me and my daddy just smiled when i told him. the colonel was not amused. a project DOA,

TLDR: Harriers and helos were better at the pure VTOL capability, STOL was not as necessary in places where good highways exist, and ballistic missiles are better than aircraft at being a rocket

JATO is very hard on air frames.

@miraphycs7377

10 ай бұрын

so is taking off and landing on an aircraft carrier or operating aircraft in the ocean in general

I think it is a good idea to launch an aircraft from a truck given it is launched from an unexpected area to attack swiftly a target and get back to base. Lower the enemy response time is a good idea.

I did this in a game once, it was a very oversized rocket sled.

Have to disagree; if you don't have or can't safely use runways -this would be a godsend. Eg. Ukraine -they could keep their fighters mobile on trucks, launch them and then the trucks scoot. The fighters then land on a roadway, are loaded back onto the trucks and then go off to some other location to rearm/refuel -both the launching and recovery sites; would always be different. Plus transfering the trucks/fighters to say Poland for maintenance/repair would be much easier. It's a crazy lvl of mobility.

This is very sexy looking way to launch a fighter, especially if you could imagine underground hangar impervious to nuclear bombs with a couple launch sites covered by a hatch.

Man NWYT, I love your channel! I've already watched every single video 2 & 3 times. I get anxious waiting for the next 1 to drop. I'm not rushing you or anything. You content is just that good. You've turned me into a NWYThead. With withdrawals & all!🤣

@NotWhatYouThink

11 ай бұрын

Hehe thanks very much! Do you watch both our short and long format vids?

@jamiebray8532

11 ай бұрын

@@NotWhatYouThink yep surely do

Soo many forgotten tech from the past.

I thought the reason is that you may be launching a lemon into the air. An aircraft going through pre-flight can alert the pilot that his plane has a problem before taking off. so yeah the lack of a Safe Abort and If they launch you with a broken machine you will only be able to glide or .. CRASH.

In Antarctica at McMurdo Station they use old C-130 with rocket assisted takeoff. Antarctica is as flat as a pancake so you might not realize it's all two miles above sea levels and a fully loaded prop play will struggle to take off at that altitude.

It wasn’t canceled. It was transferred to the civilian sector where people launch each other from a recliner with airbags.

"Its the exact way of the balls"

the funny thing is that, the rocket launched f-104 are having less chance to crash, since most of the incidents happen on f-104 occur during take off, with the rocket booster, it actually helped the f-104 avoiding the take-off stage, plus the pilots are usually more careful when in the rocket take off f-104, so the rocket f-104 are having way less crash rate than normal f-104

8:06 - Some sections of the Autobahn were meant to be used as emergency airbases to start with.

Does anyone know where I might find drawings of the ZELL launcher for the F-84 (or better still, the F-100) so I could build a model? Hawk Model had a kit called the "Guerrilla Combat Team" consisting of their F-84E aircraft combined with their M-52 Tractor - Trailer / Launcher adapted from their Matador Missile kit, in 1/48th scale. These were available in 1961, and as I was only two years old at the time, I missed any opportunity to build them. Unless Round 2 or Atlantis has the tooling, we're not likely to see these vintage kits released, again. So far, all my attempts to find information online has not yielded any results. I appreciate any help anyone may provide. Thanks for sharing this with us!

aircraft carrier catapult on the ground look better than using the zell method

That f-84 @2:30 just isn't the first aircraft to take off like that. Maybe the first *JET* to do it? The british were doing this during ww2 with hawker hurricanes, firing them off of merchant ships. I don't know that it's publicly known how many test and training flights there were, but there were 10 known combat missions flown this way. The thing to look up for more information is CAM ships.

3:19 Im not trying to be a know-it-all, but the first operational cruise missile goes to the V1 "buzz bomb"

It's not a bad idea for launching drones. An interceptor drone could be part of an AA system. Airplanes can kite and defend against SAMs by running away, and performing last second maneuvers. But a drone with air to air missiles could chase down said airplane and shoot it down with a higher kill probability. Give it a rocket booster to bring it up to speed, and then a scramjet engine could take over, letting it accelerate to hypersonic speeds. I'm fairly certain air to air missiles can't hit a hypersonic target, or at least it would be extremely difficult. It would also be an effective counter against stealth. Stealth aircraft usually can be detected at some distance, but radar systems are incapable of achieving a target lock for an effective homing solution. The drone could just be launched in the direction of the stealth aircraft, and close the distance to the stealth fighter quickly and relay targeting data to a network to provide an effective homing solution to all friendly SAM systems. It may or may not be reusable. It could possibly use a parachute to recover the drone at a later time.

@miraphycs7377

10 ай бұрын

look up xq-58 valkerie

@thuggeegaming659

10 ай бұрын

@@miraphycs7377 Yeah I've seen this before. It has some capability similar to what I described, but I think it using a scramjet engine is really essential to a drone interceptor because it can close the distance to a stealth fighter, and get a targeting solution which it can relay back to friendlies, also it being hypersonic means it's unlikely to be shot down with conventional air to air missiles.

2:23 was out of control

v2 rocket moment

Brought to you by that Pentagon that failed 5 audits and can't account for 60% of it's budget. That's trillions of dollars.

2:19 It's not hesitation.. 🤣

06:39 Hm, where is the Lädschfäld airbase? I only know "Lechfeld"... 😆

Not What You Think: "Launching aircraft from a fixed platform with rockets is a bad idea." The ghost of Lothar Siebert: "I could have told you that in 1945..."

id like one of those little rockets for drag racing

I guess you can say the rocket idea did not take off.

@samsonsoturian6013

11 ай бұрын

I hate you. +1

@lelandgrubson2736

11 ай бұрын

I see what you did there 😂

This looks so much like zelda TOTK

I love the narrator's humor. He makes the videos really enjoyable to watch. Shalom

Opens fridge... Zell! 😮

The f-104 had its ejection mechanism so that the pilot was ejected down. So is not to impact the tail. There was an incident where the pilot needed to eject almost immediately after launch by rocket. He tried to get the plane inverted so he would not be ejecting into the ground. If memory serves me correctly he did not make it.

00:36 Rocket Assisted Takeoffs are kinda scary 😮

Bro just said "Massive Balls"

I would assume that the engine is already started with the rocket attached to the fighter jets.

It might be a bad idea, but I still wanna do this

Hi

@2:15 LOL 🤣

*Thunderbirds are GO!*

i didn’t think that 🤔🤔🤔

Completely useless and yet, brilliant...its that Yak. Another great upload. Cheers!

Watching a C-130 pull that much AOA on takeoff is bonkers

The Wright Brothers launched their airplane from a ramp!😊

Not what I think indeed. I thought the program got cancelled because of the development of effective SAM rockets

أخي بندر ويافوز وحمد آل نهيان هكذا علينا أن نطير بطائراتنا وليس من مدارج يراقبونها باقمارهم الاصطناعية

The whole concept of a ZELL launch is a bit obsolete since we have Harriers.

A Mk.7 Thor atomic bomb "shape" was aboard that manned F-100 ZELL launch. It was edited out of all still and film footage for some odd security reason. As if any Intelligence officer worthy of the title wouldn't know what this test was all about.

Unless you want to treat the pilots as regular warheads, otherwise you won't launch them like a MLRS

6:24 if you though the f-104 was ugly... wait until you see this... that mockup is hideous

1950s aeronautical silly buggers, my favourite thing.

It's cool though

It's a shame Pepsi didn't honor their Harrier prize way back when....

Me! It was me! I thought ot this the other day!

3:22 is False the First Operational Surface to Surface Cruise missile was the German V1 (Vergeltungswaffe 1)

the weight of his massive balls caught me off guard

ZELL would work better for cheap UAVs

Somehow, Wylie Coyote never did this.

00:35 Going super saiyan

"It's the weight of his massive balls"

"its the weight of his massive ...." awesome !!

Thunderbird 2 ready for takeoff...

Kerbal Space Program players: “Pathetic.”

its speed

Did not the British Merchant Navy do this with Hurricanes against the Germans during WW2?

"it's the weight of his massive balls"

And where could an F-100 with a tank and an bomb take it exactly?

2:21 "the weight lf his massive balls" 💀

what the heck is that plane 7:07

They no longer use jato. They used them all up and no longer make them

this was so experimental idea that i wanted to do it on KSP so i took a already proven good plane of mine put it on the rocket pad with a solid booster at the angle like in this video and ......... after 1 hour of failures i got it its so unreliable method too much jet fuel and is too heavy wont launch to little and will spin it has to be perfect to work i can see why the steam catapult from the aircraft carrier is so more reliable