This is the type of gentle and obviously historically informed American accent that British people like me love.

@Rift45

3 жыл бұрын

Usually I have to turn to British people to find someone nice to listen too! But Greg is excellent

@SearchBucket2

3 жыл бұрын

@@Rift45 He sounds just like American Chess Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura.

@ryanholton9385

3 жыл бұрын

British people like our accents? I always thought it was just us Americans liking British accents ;)

@chrisbflory

3 жыл бұрын

Tulsa accent. T-Town, USA.

@trubblman

3 жыл бұрын

What does historically informed mean? I m a linguist so I'm curious.

I absolutely love the analogy of a racing horse and a cavalry horse. Having spent some quality time living on a tank in combat I gained a great appreciation for machines that are simple to maintain/repair, have redundant capabilities, and are generally overbuilt. It's one thing to say something has great capabilities; it is an entirely different thing when it has to work all day, everyday. I'll take the latter every time.

@davecrupel2817

3 жыл бұрын

Agreed. That's why i love Russian design phillosophy. "Build it rugged, tough, redundant and simple." An American fighter plane is almost certain to catch fire and explode if it does a gear up "belly landing." A Russian fighter plane can slide on its belly from one end of the runway to the other at 200 knots, spark like hell. But it will not catch fire. It will not explode. And it's pilot wil unstrap himself (american fighter pilots are strapped in and out by others) pop open the canopy, step out, and walk away in time for lunch. EDIT: here's a video of almost exactly that. A Russian plane goes on a takeoff roll, then retracts his gear without pulling up. Click this link and skip to 5:00. kzread.info/dash/bejne/amVozdd6k9PLnbw.html

@bushwhackerinc.4668

2 жыл бұрын

As a usmc LAV25 crewman. I totally agree with you.

The FW 190's silhouette has the most beautiful form follows function feel to it than any other fighter of the war. Even standing still, the thing screams "attack!"

This is the best airplane analysis I have yet to hear. There is much 'feeling' to what the airplane represents, it's design philosophy and the minute description of really vitals for an aircraft, a very balanced approach between detail, focus and general characteristics. Hopefully part two will be of a similar quality.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks TPath3, I hope you like Part 2, and I'm working on Part 3. I think you would also like my Turbo vs. supercharging videos, and my P-47 series.

This aircraft, and my grandfathers description of it flying past his ball turret (B-17G), are one of many things that inspired me to become a pilot. This is one of the finest, if not the finest material on the 190 I’ve come across. Great work.

As a licensed A&P mechanic in my mid-sixties, I really appreciate this video. My father, a B-17F ball turret gunner in 43-44, shot one down. Thanks!!

@johngault7329

3 жыл бұрын

Your grandfather had a healthy set of balls. Those ball turret gunners were a very brave group of men.. We need to remember what they went thru..

@jameshajjar9040

3 жыл бұрын

@@johngault7329 , my dad :).

@alexm7627

3 жыл бұрын

@@jameshajjar9040 what did he say of those days?

Again thanks for the shout-out and giving proper credit. If you have trouble with downloading footage, let me know. I could just send you some raw footage if needed.

@daszieher

4 жыл бұрын

Your videos deserve being shared more (with the appropriate credit, of course!)

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Paddy.

@waynebrinker8095

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks to both of you! It is good to see gentlemen work together. I'm looking forward to part two where you might discuss the engine and it's advanced control systems....or the 190's diverse armament...fighter bomber, wilde sau, escort fighter, interceptor, its flight characteristics, its weaknesses and...and...and...I hope this will be a ten part series!

@carlosperaro1605

4 жыл бұрын

@PaddyPatrone I had watched some of your videos, but only came to know your channel because this Greg's video. Excellent channel. And... Subscribed!!!

@vanmust

4 жыл бұрын

@@waynebrinker8095 Totally agree

I was flabbergasted by the speed at which the 38 minutes passed.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

That makes me happy to hear. I get a bit worried about video length.

@paulmanson253

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Don't.

@seanmac1793

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles most people I know like long vids. Just make them the way you think they will be the best product in the end

@hatman4818

4 жыл бұрын

I watch your videos, and Drachinifel's, and a few others, for long form content like this. I basically treat these videos like full length documentaries. They've basically replaced my interest in documentaries, as I've already seen so many that I already know the basics on a lot of subjects... And a lot of traditional documentaries rarely delve any deeper than the basics, the suface level, generalizations, etc. Shows that try to squeeze all of WW2 in 40 or 50 minutes. Also, after I started learning subjects more in depth, I started noticing a lot more pop history documentaries that basically spread misconception. Now that I'm a lot more interested in the nitty gritty details, I love watching channels like this. I also really appreciate the research guys like you do. I did a similar amount of research into early jet engines, when I wanted to know which was better: British, or German, or the Meteor vs ME-262 (One of the more muddied subjects). It was a lot of hard work tracking down original primary sources online about performance, and figuring out what it really means, rather than rants from opinionated gamers. I even thought about making a similar series to yours years ago on the subject to dispel myths and cover actual data. I can't imagine how much reading and researching you must do to pump out this much detailed content.

@daszieher

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles it seems that you are in the right track with your format. I am sure that quite a few will actually schedule a time slot in their lives to watch your video. I know I do that, as it would be a waste to just having it running in the background. I second all said about mainstream documentaries. They often just push established buttons to create sensation and add very little new information.

Prandtl is famous in fluid dynamics and aerodynamics and his contributions are well known in academia and the aircraft industry. His other contribution is the introduction of the concept of boundary layer theory which is used to estimate drag.

The FW190 has always been my favorite German WW2 Fighter! Many thanks for posting this video and I am looking forward for part 2. Greetings from Guatemala!

Shared this with my girlfriend(biology and high school maths teacher.) She was fascinated and impressed with delivery and content.

Kurt Tank was a common sense designer. He used what materials that were afforded to him such as the BMW engine, and sub contracting the airplanes components to be built by different manufacturers. He came up with one of the wars best fighters, and was a vary good multi roll aircraft also. It didn't get the nickname Butcher bird by being a slouch. Once again thanks for the great video, I think it's great how you go into such great detail about the subject at hand. I can't wait for part 2.

Kurt Tank's philosophy is the reason why the FW-190 is my favorite ride in WW2 flight sims. The Spitfire and BF-109 may have been an engineer's pride, but the FW-190 was designed from the ground up to be a pilot's joy.

@daszieher

4 жыл бұрын

Insert "military pilot's"

@richardlahan7068

4 жыл бұрын

Mine is the P-47 but it didn't have nearly the level of automation that German planes had.

@tamiglia

4 жыл бұрын

The Kommandogerat, the unit for engine management and control is a jewel in terms of concept and execution.

@TheSoundsage

4 жыл бұрын

The plane that is almost universally regarded as a pilot's joy is the Spitfire- even Adolf Galland, when asked by Goering what he needed, said "I should like an outfit of Spitfires for my squadron."

@stevewatson1640

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheSoundsage He was just yanking Herman's chain. See "The Most Dangerous Enemy". A bunch of romantics against an integrated air defence; a tactical airfarce (sic) tasked with a strategic mission. Swap the fighters, Jerry would still have been toast. It was a bloody pointless exercise as well. We did not say they could not come; but we did say they could not come by sea.

Only just started watching Greg's work, and this is *really* good stuff. Top notch content produced here.

That he111 masquerading as an airliner. For one row of long thin people. Who exit via the belly. Classic airliner design...

@Schnittertm1

4 жыл бұрын

Well, it does get them quicker to the ground and you can service several airports in one flight without having to land. Typical German efficiency. ;)

@hermannalberts6038

4 жыл бұрын

I believe Ryanair could be interested, faster and cheaper turnover in the airports...;-)

@scootergeorge9576

4 жыл бұрын

Would have been a better airliner than the Do-17 "Flying Pencil!"

@hermannalberts6038

4 жыл бұрын

HiWetcam : Well, no it is the cheapest, and the less comfortable and flies to second grade airports, and it is worst than Easyjet...well popular tough...

@MostlyPennyCat

4 жыл бұрын

@@hermannalberts6038 We really loved flyBe, real shame about them

The word was "Dienstpferd", which translates directly to duty-horse or service-horse. Your reliable good friend that gets the job done and needs only little care. Love your content by the way.

Very good to hear about the mindset and intentions of the designer, one of the more interesting and oft neglected aspects of design.

awesome video greg, learned a lot man thanks for your work on it.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks GS. I love your channel, and I noticed you added some WW2 dogfighting, nice work.

Man this guy should have a podcast just like his channel, this stuff is so in depth, keep up the good work dude.

I’m just finishing up A&P Schwerin and working as a mechanic. I love these videos because of all the similarities I see in general aviation aircraft. Thank you Greg

I love your explanations, detail, and sensitivity to the personalities involved in these machines.

I absolutely appreciate all the time and effort that goes into these thoroughly researched videos. I’ve always been fascinated by WWII aircraft and the technical detail you give these magnificent warbirds is just fantastic. Great work as always. Cheers

Thankyou for covering one of my favourite planes, love the horse anlage, it reminded me of one about the typhoon. It has the temperament of a stallion and the handling of a cart horse.

Best channel on youtube. Love the in depth analysis explained so clearly, must take a lot of time to present this content... it's appreciated.

Can't wait for part 2. Always love Greg's videos, so many interesting tid bits and insights.

Excellent Greg. I vastly appreciate the time and effort you put into these vids. The content is superb. I have learned so much and my admiration for all things in aviation..has increased. Good day and I look forward to the next vid in the series.

This guy is so homely and humble.Stumbled onto this by accident and now I'm hooked!

I always wondered why Tank designed the 190 with so many electrically actuated features. As a “converted” electrical engineer, this makes perfect sense and demonstrates his forward thinking.

@philperry4699

4 жыл бұрын

Just look what it did for the B-787: lots of batteries, lots of fires.

All else aside, Greg, the Fw-190 is one of the most beautiful and intimidating-looking fighters of any time, and they painted it so well. And the Panther tank was designed by Hans Flugzeug. I once saw a ceremonial smooth-bore artillery piece at Edinburgh Castle that had a plate on it that said "Camera" :D

Keep up your sidetracks, they are what make this channel unique and interesting👍The fact that your videos are long and well researched because they are based on extensive reading has actually motivated me to start reading up on the stuff I used to live on (history and philosophy) once upon a time. Now I don't know how many channels really motivate people instead of just getting them their pastime kicks, but yours sure as hell is one of them....!!!

Your videos are fantastic. As a aircraft enthusiast born in 85 I watched endless aircraft documentaries on TV, built models and read books. Your in depth analyses give so much more insight and I appreciate them very much. Keep up the good work!

As usual, great in depth technical analysis! Nice to see a full size replica 190 flying as well. Can't wait to see Ep, 2!

Another jewel of a video. Many thanks, Greg.

Thank you Greg for making this video! It is one of my favourite planes and I appreciate the effort you put it to give us information that we do not usually hear/ is harder to find. More of this would be wonderful!

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Zayn, there will be much more of it.

@PlaneDrawings109

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles As an early aerospace student this videos are part of the inspiration for me. Its very interesting to look at the solution people develop at these times where the competition is high. I like the breakdown and analysis these provide

Having just finished building a 1/32 scale model of the FW190 I found this video fascinating. So thank you sir.

Imo the Fw-190, Yak-3, & Corsair, are my two favorite looking planes of the type. I think perhaps because most books I had growing up were full of mustangs, spitfires, and lightnings and wanted more. So when I saw the sleek Yak, the angular Corsair, and the Brutish fw 190, I fell in love. Also love the Condor, I really wish it had been an airliner and allowed to develop.

can’t wait to learn more a bout that engine, i’ve always found that the control system (what little info is out there about it) is very interesting

20:31 in model airplanes we call this feature "Exponential" done by computer mixing. Amazing that the Germans had that in the FW-190

@hatman4818

4 жыл бұрын

I can see why it's called that. In flight simming, you can usually set up a control sensativity curve for your joystick that accomplishes the same thing. Never started messing with it till trying to fly extra 300s in FSX or play competitively in War Thunder sim mode. Anyway, it looks like a graph with an exponential curve (like, Y=X²) when you set it up to deflect a lot less close to the deadzone, and not ramp up till the stick is near the end of its limits. Planes like the extra 300 in FSX, or the fighters in War Thunder sim mode, really need this. Otherwise, aiming guns will be a chore of constant over correction, snap rolling too far on accident, and pulling back on the stick to turn immediately stalling you out.

@HeavensGremlin

4 жыл бұрын

Not an unusual feature.

@NoNameAtAll2

Жыл бұрын

@@hatman4818 y=x^2 is not exponential

Awesome content Greg, truly one of the most in depth and enjoyable channel on YT! Thank you, sir:)

once again Greg, you have managed to answer most questions that have been nagging me concerning most systems covering my favorite fighter. An all around aircraft serving the needs (right place, right time) of the typical fighter pilot, and doing it quite well.Thank you.

The awkward german word noted translates to duty horse. The word Dienst (pronounced deenst) is duty and in german you make from two nouns one if they relate to each other. In english your duty wagon is a staff car and in german it’s a Dienstwagen. Felddienstanzug is 3 nouns tied together. Feld Dienst Anzug or field duty uniform/ dress. The american BDU or battle dress uniform would be Kampfanzug oder Gefechtsanzug in german.

Greg, Outstanding Presentation! It is great to watch the segment with a high level of technical description as well as pilots' perspective. as a pilot myself I greatly appreciate the knowledge and pictorial representation of the key points that are discussed. I thought I knew quite abit about the 190 series but I realize there is still much to learn about Tanks' approach to designing a very "user friendly" high performance airplane.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Rich.

Man!This narration is as beautiful as the subject matter!Its like a genial, genteel professor has taken me aside to explain the finer points of a rugged, practical yet refined WW2 war horse of an airplane. Thank you!

The Fw 190 variants is one of my favourite airplanes, great! Keep posting 👍👍👍

While I just sell car parts, IMHO, Electrical systems has a slight advantage over hydraulics. Hydraulic systems are an enormous pain when they go wrong, at least compared to electric. They spill hydraulic fluid all over the place, special high pressure hoses and pipes and fittings need replacing. That, and spilled hydraulic fluid costs money, but "spilled" electricity is costs almost nothing and is easily manufactured on the spot. While electrical components are just as specialized as hydraulic ones, they are smaller, cheaper, easier to make and replace, and far more common. Electricity has standards that are more universal, amperage and voltage; two components may require different specs, but understanding what goes where and how is far easier than the hassle of hydraulic fluid compatibilities and different measurements of pressure and viscosity. The upside to hydraulics is that it is FAR more intuitive than electricity. Pump builds pressure and velocity, more of these makes more power, end devices use this pressure and velocity and return slower and lower pressure fluid back to the pump. Resistance is caused by too small of a pipe or a blockage, and leaks are announced by drips and sprays and emptying reservoirs. Repair, while more expensive and time consuming once found, is far easier to find and understand and can be easily discovered before function is effected. Electricity on the other hand, its faults are usually only discovered when something suddenly stops working or catches fires or sparks and shocks are found.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Those are great points.

@superdupergrover9857

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles I appreciate it. Especially since it ended up being... longer than intended.

@superdupergrover9857

4 жыл бұрын

@HiWetcam Yeah... then there are some things that just work better with hydraulics. IDK if it's the power density, the longer design history, or the ease with which hydraulics can be made to self dampen.

@martynrowse5638

4 жыл бұрын

I worked in subsea robotics for many years as a Hyd tech /supervisor - I have worked on both types in the same application as a general rule hydraulics have a level of reliability far better than the elec equivalent --also for the same power hydraulics were generally reckoned to be aprox 1/8 of the size.

@idanceforpennies281

3 жыл бұрын

@@martynrowse5638 In ROVs you can pump hydraulics down the umbilical as much you want for as long as you want to compensate for leaks and loss of power. But electrical is always more compact and reliable. An HPU is many times bigger and heavier than an electrical motor which does the same job.

I've been waiting for this video. It was worth the wait. IMO this is your best episode. The FW 190 was my favorite fighter of WW2. Didn't get the publicity of the 109. As an electrical engineer I agree with Mr Tank's philosophy of using electrical vs hydraulic systems. Your P 51 schematic of the hydraulic system demonstrates the complexity of hydraulics ... the system looks horrifying for performing maintenance. Plumbing, seals, pumps .. potentially flammable liquid. Give me electric systems anyday. The radial engine with the unique cooling .... the visibility .. the very looks of this fighter makes it one of the best. Thank you for this video. Bravo to your demonstration and teaching skills.

@myparceltape1169

2 жыл бұрын

I have the impression that a radial engine draws the centre of gravity forward and hence the wing forward for support. If so, the aircraft will be shorter and the pilot will have a slightly wider view.

Greg, I enjoy every one of your uploads, both aircraft and automobiles. But, I've really been looking forward to this FW-190 series. It's always been one of my favorite single seat, piston driven, fighters. Thanks for all of your time and effort! Semper Fi, TreeTop

Been looking forward very much to the start of this series. Thanks Greg!

And an odd aside on the Frise balanced ailerons. They were used on the Piper Warrior I, which was intended as a training airplane. They were too effective in countering adverse yaw, and the Warrior II reverted to conventional ones so the student could learn to use the rudder!

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Now that you say that, I always felt the Warrior had an odd feel compared to some of the other Pipers, that may have been it.

@The_ZeroLine

7 ай бұрын

Love these type of details.

im hype for this. enjoy listening to these while playing flight sims. keep up the good content greg!

@dukecraig2402

4 жыл бұрын

"Talk to me Goose!!!"

@bojanivanisevic1072

4 жыл бұрын

War Thunder?

@Abbeville_Kid

4 жыл бұрын

Bojan Ivanisevic because I want to get shot down by red starred ufos all day. 😂

@neth7826

3 жыл бұрын

@@bojanivanisevic1072 lol flight sim

Another supurb production Greg. Thank you! By far the most informative, engaging, perceptive work i've seen - online or in print. You provide what to me are fresh perspectives and new detail in your videos, even though I've had a life-long interest in the more technical apects of aviation

Wow, such a good video. You really let things make sense for me. Keep up the good work!

Ooooooo the 190, this will be a blast to listen to as I get home from school

@spottydog4477

4 жыл бұрын

Only after your homework!

@thebobs9343

4 жыл бұрын

@@spottydog4477 Spottydog 4477 still lives! Waiting for a release from you. Great stuff.

@spottydog4477

4 жыл бұрын

@@thebobs9343 ahaha - Thanks, yes I must do something...all the best!

What do planes and tractors have in common? Push rods are a king. Hydraulics leak. Cables snap or get stuck. Push rods just work.

@thebobs9343

4 жыл бұрын

My Harley shifts with "pushrods".

@bakters

4 жыл бұрын

@@thebobs9343 Harley that shifts? Impressive! ;-)

@rolandzoske448

4 жыл бұрын

Some West Germans still believe that we used to push the moon in East Germany with push rods. ;-)

@polentusmax6100

4 жыл бұрын

Dude, a radial engine can only use pushrods, and any aero engine of the 40's didnt rev past 4000 rpm, so pushrod was good, now try that on a american car that should go to 7000 rpm and you will start to see they fliyng to the moon.

@Biriadan

4 жыл бұрын

essentially all inline aviation engines since ww1 are overhead cam. Since the crankshaft to valve distance could change dramatically due to temperature variations during operation, engineers worked to minimize the length of valve stems, pushrods and rockers so that the variation wouldn't negatively impact valve lift or duration. The most efficient way to do this was to use overhead cams and eliminate pushrods entirely.

Awesome video with technical details. I love it! Thank you very much. Loving fw190-D

Highly informative and interesting as usual. Thank you, Greg.

hello Greg, thank you for your brilliant work. on the elliptical wing look for the Brothers Siegfried & Walter Günter ; they used this design since the mid 20´s . Pilot of the Fw190 in the Video was sympathic Alsacian Marc Mathis; died in 2015 test flying a homebuild aircraft of his friend Gruß Linus

@noteanotell937

4 жыл бұрын

I duff my cap to that man, must of been in he's 90s. RIP Mr mathis

Dammit Greg, I will be busy at school when this premieres. That all said, I will be eager to watch this long awaited video. From the description alone I am eager to see what you make of Kurt Tanks philosophy that resulted in a remarkable fighter that.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Hi Cannon, I'll be sure to check the comments well after the premier so if you have a question, I'll be here for you.

@identitydixie1061

4 жыл бұрын

I'm watching it right now

So much research and work was put in this video. Made it interesting and fascinating. Great job, sounds like a lot of the design features are somewhat still in use. Bravo to the plane designers.

Thank you Greg that was fantastic I really enjoyed the research and knowledge you uncovered about Kurt Tanks engineering design philosophy behind the FW190. I felt that wonderful glow you get when you learn something new, I for one will certainly appreciate the engineering in that aircraft than I ever did before, together with Kurt Tanks design work. I,m looking forward to part 2 Greg, cant wait !!

I had to strain my ears to ear you Greg, Very interesting

Once again, thank you, SIR Greg. There was a lot of stuff I had never known before, and I used to think of myself as an expert on these things. How wrong was I.

Thanks for the effort you put into these, Greg.

Another superb video Greg! Thanks. Really looking forward to the next installment.

Judd Peterson, son of Major Richard 'Pete' Peterson of the 357th FG flying various P-51 versions. In your video of the comparison between P-51 and Me109 performance, I commented on a dogfight my father had with an Me109 in which they got tangled in a counterclockwise, Lufberry chase circle, and he successfully utilized the lowering of his flaps to create greater lift in his P-51 and cut the radius of the circle smaller. That allowed him to gain on the Me109 and ultimately catch him in the circle and down the enemy plane. During later debriefings to learn and share how to get out of a Lufberry chase successfully, there was further discussion about how to deal with an enemy fighter pilot who might be employing the same flap strategy. During this discussion, one conclusion was that, if the enemy plane were a FW190, then you wouldn't have to worry about their similar use of the flaps for better lift in a Lufberry chase circle. Because the FW190 has "split flaps" which do not modify the aerodynamic shape of the upper face of the wing, they cannot generate increased lift and, therefore, cannot be used in a tight Lufberry chase circle to shorten the turning radius by increasing lift. Something my father was advised of during those debriefings.

Who would dislike this video? To me, this is some of Greg’s best work. Looking forward to part 2.

@princeofcupspoc9073

4 жыл бұрын

Someone expecting video game cheats.

@ivanthemadvandal8435

3 жыл бұрын

Spitfire fanboys

Superb work Greg... can't wait for the next part!

As always great job and most of all very informative. Cant hardly wait for part 2 👍

Dienstpferd = “Horse which serves”-> Horse soldier ...

@daszieher

4 жыл бұрын

Literally a "service horse".

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

Brilliant guys, thank you!

@phunkracy

4 жыл бұрын

Workhorse is a better translation

@hermannalberts6038

4 жыл бұрын

phunkracy : I may disagree: Workhorse = Arbeitspferd (Common word in german but not the word used by Tank) . Dienstpferd is a horse which is drafted for military service and is currently on duty. (Yes Horses were drafted !)

@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188

4 жыл бұрын

A work-horse may be a translation? In Denmark we still have very heavy horses pulling beerwagons from the wellknown Danish Brevery, "Tuborg", during summer when tourists come to Copenhagen and may see them in town, delivering beer to restaurants and shops!

Well done, Greg, as usual. Excellent background information, and - since my Dad was an F6F combat pilot - I couldn't help noticing the similarities between the design philosophies of Kurt Tank and Leroy Grumman: make the plane pilot-friendly, rugged, easy to maintain, straightforward to operate, and so on. While a few Hellcats did fly a handful of missions over southern France after D-Day, to my knowledge, the FW190 and the F6F never met in combat. My amateur's hunch is that any dogfights between the two would have been very interesting, and more than "interesting" for the pilots involved.

@smithy2389

4 жыл бұрын

Ray Schoch the FW-190 would have won thanks to better climb, speed and roll rate. Not having to lug around naval gear helps.

@rayschoch5882

4 жыл бұрын

@@smithy2389 You're likely correct, at least in the main. The FW190 weighs about 500 lbs. more (empty) than the F6F, but the climb rate is significantly better (I'm guessing the FW190 is much more aerodynamic). On the other hand, the F6F's wing loading (37.7 lb/sq ft) is significantly less than the FW190's (49 lb/sq ft), so its roll rate and turn performance might have been (I'm neither pilot nor aeronautical engineer) just a bit better than the 190's - enough to keep it in the game for at least a little bit if the fight was under 20,000 feet. Yes, the Navy hardware imposes a weight penalty, not least of which is that missions generally covered longer-distances, so more fuel was required. Hellcats carried 150-gallon external fuel tanks so often that they eventually became standard equipment, in addition to 250 gallons internally. The Fw190 A-8 (the only model I have easy access to figures for) carried 169 gallons internally - obviously not intended for long over-water flights. After his combat tour in 1944, Dad flew the F4U-4 during the last year of the war, training for the invasion of Japan that never took place. The Corsair was about 50 mph faster than the Hellcat, with a climb rate of about 4,400 ft/sec., so it was a better climber than either the FW190 A-8 or the F6F, and I've read (no direct experience here) that it had the best roll rate of any WW 2 fighter (Greg may have alluded to that in his video on the Corsair). Blah, blah, blah. As I said, you're likely correct, and we'll never know…

@smithy2389

4 жыл бұрын

HiWetcam the 190 supercharger was more sophisticated because it was a variable speed unit enabling full throttle from sea level to 20,000ft. Greg has already gone through German supercharging. The merlin 60 used a two stage supercharger with aftercooler. That is why those aircraft had excellent high altitude performance. The Hellcat had a single stage supercharger and was optimised for low altitudes used in Pacific theatre. In terms of roll rate the Corsair had best roll rate of any allied fighter but the FW-190 was always regarded as the king (although a lot would depend on airspeed).

@smithy2389

4 жыл бұрын

www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/ptr-1107.pdf

@smithy2389

4 жыл бұрын

HiWetcam F6F-5 was in service two years after the A5. So not a fair comparison. You’re right about the supercharger my bad but when compared to the F6F-3 it doesn’t make much difference.

Great job Greg and I'm looking forward to part 2! I bet you raised some blood pressure with the wing discussion.

Impressive on both info & presentation fronts. I learned more about “der Würger” in this video than from anywhere else - can’t wait for part 2! Only Greg can keep me interested in flap, aileron & rudder control systems

Wake up from after work nap: Greg video waiting on me. Why cant everyday be like this?

Damn you made my request to a reality! Thanks sir, hats off to you.

These videos are so great!! Thank you so much for your hard work and time!!!!!

Been waiting a long time for this! I'm sure it will be worth it. 😺

Everybody here including me is scrambling to get home to watch this haha

@kyle857

4 жыл бұрын

Fuck it. I'm watching it at work.

As somebody who has actually worked in aircraft design, the whole idea of "copying is shameful" in industry is just absurd fanboyism from armchair aviation enthusiasts. Yes, Supermarine absolutely copied Heinkel, there is no doubt in my mind that is exactly what happened because looking at existing solutions and applying lessons learned prior is a core part of advancing engineering and making a successful product. But Supermarine, nor any other company that made elliptical winged aircraft could never admit that because it would look bad from a PR perspective. Science, and by extension engineering, is not a competition, it is a global collaborative effort. Everybody gains from sharing info. Building on what already exists the the very soul of engineering as a whole. It's the *companies* that are in competition, not engineers, and they have a vested interest in promoting the idea that other designs are in some way "shameful" because they used things another company pioneered.

@szut88

4 жыл бұрын

@Nixod I agree with you about engineers that need to improve on each other designs...But there is a lot more to a wing than its plantform shape !! I believe that the Supermarine engineer just say the truth about their wing section being much thinner. After all lifting line theory, which is the theoretical basis behind "elliptical" wings, was published in the 1920s. In fact, for an aerodynamicist, a wing is "elliptical" if the lift is distributed in an elliptical fashion along its span. This can be achieved using any combination of section, plantform shape, and twist... The wings on a PA-28, a 747 or an A380 are all "elliptical" in this sense, because it is the most efficient design. However, I do not think it is appropriate from the video author to try to judge on this kind of topic if he does not really understand the science behind it.

@stevewatson1640

4 жыл бұрын

@Confederate Nationalist Wasn't that more to do with area and loading? I think it is as much, if not more, about the pilot than the 'plane. By the time the Tempest got into the fight, the Luftwaffe was way short in all areas.

@michalmilko8347

4 жыл бұрын

It is refreshing to read comment like this on youtube under war machines video. As an engineer i totally agree and we were even taught in our first year of the university, that inventing something already invented is the stupidest thing engineer can do.

@CrusaderSports250

4 жыл бұрын

@@michalmilko8347 totally agree don't spend time reinventing the wheel!. Concorde and Concordski both performing in the same environment, at the same performance envelope, both looked remarkably similar, aerodynamics are not worried about who uses them they work the same for everyone.

@daseladi

4 жыл бұрын

@@szut88 I agree completely.

I think you've covered plenty of stuff I've never seen or read before already. Enjoy your work a great deal mate, well done again. Thorough,detailed and interesting.👍

Greg, your videos are wonderful. Always with info and not too much opinion. I will watch every video I see that you make....

Today, 24 February (1898) Kurt Waldemar Tank was born (died on 5 June 1983)...

@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188

4 жыл бұрын

Kurt Tank was probably one of the most giftet airplane designers of that time? Sadly there isn't a book about him!

@stevewatson1640

4 жыл бұрын

@@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188 If you have German: Kurt Tank - Konstrukteur und Testpilot bei Focke-Wulf Wagner, Wolfgang. - Bonn : Bernard und Graefe, 1991, 2., durchges. Aufl.

@markhassan6203

4 жыл бұрын

RIP

Thanks for the content!

Here from Greg, who recommended you and rightly so. Subscribed immediately after I saw the 109 DB605 low passes. What a sound!

I never thought I'd hear the 190's performance described as "generally mediocre;" so I'm charged up to hear about that in part 2. Thanks Greg for another remarkable video.

@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles

4 жыл бұрын

A lot of the claims about it's performance are in relations ship to early Yaks and the Spitfire Mk V. As newer enemy planes came out, the tables turned a bit, so on average, yes, the 190's performance was about average among front line fighters.

@mirrorblue100

4 жыл бұрын

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Mmm, maybe, maybe not. While there is some merit to the fact that the performance of later war Allied aircraft was improved - I think a lot of those tables being turned on the 190s was more due to the fact that by 1944/45 German pilot training was nowhere near the quality of the pre-war and early war standards. That and the fact that the Germans were being numerically overwhelmed on all air fronts. As I believe Stalin said "Quantity has a quality all its own."

I absolutely love your videos and I really appreciate how you work things out. I would really love it more if you could improve your sound quality. Not easy when you're recording in hotels between trips, but some consistency and compression will go a long way. I usually get to hear these videos in the morning and with the kettle or microwave found, you're too easily drowned out. Keep up these! They really are fantastic

@maxmartini9382

2 жыл бұрын

Wonderful job great amount of ybinhehd

Fantastic, been waiting for this for ages, thanks so much....

Love these videos. So informative without any kind of bias.

I've always found the Fw 190 an interesting type, especially given it's performance whilst having a radial engine and the aerodynamic profile associated with that. Thanks for another thoroughly researched and informative video.

@dukecraig2402

4 жыл бұрын

The difference in drag between radial engine aircraft with their profile and the drag of an in-line engine aircraft like a P51 or a Spit is less then you'd think it is, I saw the drag numbers on a P47 and a P51 from the NACA tests and wherein it's been a while and I can't quote what they were I was shocked to see how close they actually were.

@Otokichi786

4 жыл бұрын

If not for the FW-190, 200+ engineless Ki-61 frames would have stayed on the ground. Instead, with a Mitsubishi Ha-112-II radial engine, the Ki-100 became a successful Imperial Japanese Army interceptor. kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y5mausZ-hc2pj9o.html

@doc7000

4 жыл бұрын

People tend to overstate the drag difference between an inline engine and a radial engine, after all the fastest prop plane during this era (both prototype and production) was the XP-47j. It only had the same amount of power as the P-47M and P-47N yet was able to hit 505MPH (not that shy of an ME-262). Really the factors of airplane speed are such that you really can't put so much weight into just one factor.

@dukecraig2402

4 жыл бұрын

@@doc7000 One thing that people don't realize about in-line engine planes is that they have to have some sort of scoop for their radiator which causes drag, people only look at the nose of the plane and think that's the end story but it isn't. And before anyone even goes there that whole "meredith effect" thing is a myth, the NACA reports from test flights show that. Another myth is the "laminar flow wing", NACA tests showed that the benefits from it were not only negligible but what little benefits did come from it are completely negated by any imperfections in the wing such as from manufacturing and even bug strikes completely cancelled what little effect it had.

@mirrorblue100

4 жыл бұрын

@@dukecraig2402 There were some attempts to do away with the radiator scoop and use "evaporative cooling" - but it never made it onto a combat aircraft as far as I know - and of course then the jet engines came in.

My favorite WW2 fighter, in all its forms all the way to the Ta152. Difficult to find a more versatile platform that Kurt Tank's masterpiece.

Wow, you put out some of the best videos on KZread. Thank you for all your meticulous research.

I look forward to this series. Your content is always excellent. Keep it up sir!

The engine cowl design development is a fascinating story and is one of features of the Fw-190 that was copied in other designs like the hawker sea fury. A special video on the Fw-190 cooling spinner design and subsequent cowl design development?

@spindash64

4 жыл бұрын

graham hufton The bearcat also shares some passing resemblance to parts of the 190. Could be inspiration, could be they thought of it already and saw a plane using it and decided “k, now we know it works, don’t gotta test it too much”

@stevewatson1640

4 жыл бұрын

@@spindash64 Wildcat>Hellcat>Bearcat, Grumman's own special sauce. I'd be interested from the under-cart perspective, rate of descent and what-not, if you could carrier qual an FW. Probably a more likely carrier fighter than the Seafire.

@spindash64

3 жыл бұрын

@@stevewatson1640 That’s true. For what it’s worth, the P-51D actually underwent carrier trials, and while it wasn’t a perfect fit, the USN was satisfied enough to consider the ETF-51D project for more serious production before the capture of Iwo Jima made the idea unecessary. The 190, meanwhile, definitely seems a solid carrier plane basis, and if the Kreigsmarine ever got the Graf Zeppelin, a modified 190F probably would have been the backbone of their AirPower: Resilient engine that can run high power at low speeds without overheating Rugged landing gear that can survive multiple rough deck landings Short wingspan allows for multiple 190s to be fit into a carrier, even if folding wings weren’t part of the design Really, its worst traits for Carrier landings would be worse forward visibility than the 109, and rather hard stalls. And both of those could be dealt with, especially since the 190 was burly enough to survive a hot landing

@stevewatson1640

3 жыл бұрын

@@spindash64 The Mustang is listed as such in "The Pentagon Paradox", I didn't know about the Iwo Jima detail though. "Forget it, it's a 'Frank' mightn't have been a thing around Okinawa with P51s on flat tops! Thanks for the info.

45 waitng, 90 likes even before the video is viewable.... :-) Edit: and the video is great as usual and well worth watching !!

Great video, keep up the hard work. Can’t wait for Part 2 :)

Incredible presentation. Greg, this is awesome.

14:23 "Dienstpferd" could be translated as service/duty horse. And thanks for all the great content its really enjoyable. Greeting from switzerland

@shooter2055

4 жыл бұрын

"Labor horse". In english, this is usually expressed as "workhorse" -- a 'jack of all trades' or multi-role aircraft.

@stephenyoud6125

4 жыл бұрын

You beat me to it i should have read a bit further before posting, Gruezzi aus Hirzel, 8816

@foreverpinkf.7603

4 жыл бұрын

Dienstpferd means an all-purpose, every-day, multi-tool horse in contrast to a fancy full-blood racing horse or a toy for rich-mans daughters.

@sukalanger

4 жыл бұрын

But they didn't design their tanks like that fortunately

@allangibson8494

4 жыл бұрын

The correct English translation would be destrier. Not exactly a draft horse as it is not bred to pull anything but a heavy riding horse bred to carry a knight in armor at speed on a battlefield or on a tournament ground.

"Dienstpferd", literally "service horse" - or "work horse", if you will.

@davegrenier1160

4 жыл бұрын

Correct. It's pronounced "deenst-pferd." In German, both letters of the "pf" are pronounced, so the sound is "pf" - exactly as it's spelled. Sounds strange to us because it's not a sound used in English. So it's "pf," both pronounced, with the "ferd" part pronounced like the name "Ferdinand." "Dienst" is also found in another important term from WWII - "Sicherheitsdienst," the SS intelligence service, AKA the SD.

@symmetrie_bruch

4 жыл бұрын

@@davegrenier1160 your pronounciation advice only makes sense if you prononce ferdinand in the german way if you could do that you wouldn´t need the pronounciation advice. ferdinand in english is pronounced quite differently not like the german pferd at all. i emphatise though since there´s no pf sound in english you just have to listen for examples online dict.cc usually has prononciation examples for almost every word

@spindash64

4 жыл бұрын

Symmetrie Bruch So F-urd as the English way, and F-ehrd or Fayrd as the German way?

@symmetrie_bruch

4 жыл бұрын

@@spindash64 yup pretty much but like i said listening for yourself is usually the way to go www.dict.cc/?s=pferd

@dominicanbikinibeauties6537

3 жыл бұрын

@@symmetrie_bruch As a German I would write it for English native speakers "deensed fared" since we here in the north (I'm from Bremen, the city the FW was assembled and now parts of the Airbus) dont pronounce the "pf", we just say "f" In conclusion: in the city they made the FW 190 they said: "deensed fared" and it means a horse as how the police or cab drivers use it. A "work(ing)" horse, if you will.

Fantastic airplane and Greg's videos are fantastic!

Excellent! Thanks for the Vid! Looking forward for more parts in FW190...Cheers!

Fantastic!