If I understood correctly (maybe I'm wrong and it was about pilots), you mentioned about some escaped PZL-37 in UK in '39. It wasn't. No PZL-37 was exported. Negotiation was in progress, but we have no documents to confirm agreement with any interested country. Paradoxically, the contract with Belgium was the closest to being finalized (license for Renard). Circumstances of destroying the last PZL-37 are controversial. One of version claim that afterwar romanian government wanna resolved one of survived plane to Poland. After no agreement it was scrapped. First combat flight was in 3 September '39. Before was probably recco flights (in 2 September). BTW: nice movie :)
It was nice and modern aircraft, but had its issues: 1) Profile had laminar flow characteristics, but phenomenon was not understood. Unfortunately it didn't work with rough wing of serial airplanes, only in aerodynamic tunnel. 2) Tail was around 2 meters too short, test pilots suggested improvements but were ignored by the designer. Only the development version of the PZL-49 had a longer fuselage. 3) The fuselage was unnecessarily narrow, extremely tight and unnecessarily profiled as a wing profile. This forced the placement of bombs in the wings and created a wing profile that had poor correlation with the wind tunnel. 4) It had no armor or self-sealing fuel tanks. The 5 fuel tanks scattered over the fuselage and wings provided a large area to hit. 5) The bomber designed to be a schnellbomber was no longer fast enough, and remained poorly armed. 6) The oxygen system was missing, and the engines reached a maximum power at a ceiling of less than 4 km. 7) Poland did not need bombers, the development and construction of this machine was at the expense of introducing a modern fighter that could fight Bf-109E and bombers.
Yes, Poland had great military plane projects, just a few more years and Poland would have had fighters that could compete with those of Germany the great military power.
Actually, William Green and Gordon Swanborough produced many reference works that identified many platforms that have been noted but are listed as “recently uncovered”.
Yes, they had their own fleet of bombers and they were even the first to lead a bombing attack in Germany when a single PZL.23B managed to bomb a factory in Ohlau.
A book by Kenneth Munson had a beautiful plate of the Polish bomber as an example of what the Polish Air Force was capable in operations against the Luftwaffe.
I wonder how Poland's air force would have fared had they another year to prepare against the Germans. Combined with the Hurricanes and Morane Saulnier 406 fighters on order, plus the newer Polish fighter under develpoment when the war began, and more bombers like these, the air war over Poland might have gone very differently.
I also asked myself this question when making this video. Poland had projects to develop modern fighters like the the PZL.50 or even the PZL.55 which were equivalents of what the Luftwaffe had in 1940. Plus, they had also fighter bomber projects like the the PZL.38 Wilk which was like a derivative of the PZL.37 and was extremely powerful. So yes, if the War started in 1940, the German would have had much more difficulties to take control of the skies and apply the Blitzkrieg. We could even imagine that it would have motivated the French to lead a more serious offensive in Germany.
@@F-14DTomcat (Very) Unfortunately it wouldn't change anything :( Why? The Germans would have even more planes. Their industry was several times bigger than the Polish one. Only chance was a successful of programs French Air Forces, but spring '40 shown something opposite....
In fact, 5-year program of renewing of air forces was supposed to end in '42. But it was a only plans. Wilk project was a catastrophe due to technical problem with experimental Foka engine. In other programs was other problems... :(
Indeed, Poland had fighter plane projects which could have rivalised with the German ones, so I also don't really understand why they first developed bombers...
@@F-14DTomcat In VERY simple words: Because there was a projecting and production plan. Resources in Poland was not enough to produce few types in the same time. Poland was poor county (regained independence in 1918 without industry destroyed during Great War and Polish-Soviet war in 1920) In 1935 main fighter (P-11c) was a quite good (for a while), and successors developing was in progress. First prototypes (PZL-50) was flown early '39. Too late... It was a difficult choice what should to be produced first...
Poland already had moder (for the time) fighters in early 1930's (p.11z p.24) while they still had obsolete 20's bombers. It was logical to make better bomber. Poles were also developing pzl 38 (interceptor with 465km/h top speed 20mm arnament) wich didnt fly bc there werent engines for it. But it was mostly about how much money can you get from exporting the łoś that could make bulding better fighters possible
The Polish army had a lot of cavalry but the idea that they charged the tanks with horses was extremely amplified by the Soviets, quoting the historian Harold Hyman of the French channel CNews.
It's a fake story. There were a few charges by cavalry on infantry (and they were reasonably successfull), and during one of them - armed forces that were hidden nearby came to help the infrantry. Nobody charged tanks with horses on purpose. BTW - all the armies used horses early in WW2.
We, here on you tube, often see hat something or other is amazing, ahead of its time, or simply plain old underrated, a term I have now learnt to despise but yet we are never told why it is said to be amazing, ahead of it time or underrated. I hope this doesn't turn out to be yet another all headline, no substance video.
![The Polish-Built Hero Of Eastern Europe | PZL.24 [Aircraft Overview #94]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qM141DqhBJw/mqdefault.jpg)
![The Polish-Built Hero Of Eastern Europe | PZL.24 [Aircraft Overview #94]](/img/tr.png)
If I understood correctly (maybe I'm wrong and it was about pilots), you mentioned about some escaped PZL-37 in UK in '39. It wasn't.
No PZL-37 was exported. Negotiation was in progress, but we have no documents to confirm agreement with any interested country. Paradoxically, the contract with Belgium was the closest to being finalized (license for Renard).
Circumstances of destroying the last PZL-37 are controversial. One of version claim that afterwar romanian government wanna resolved one of survived plane to Poland. After no agreement it was scrapped.
First combat flight was in 3 September '39. Before was probably recco flights (in 2 September).
BTW: nice movie :)
It was nice and modern aircraft, but had its issues:
1) Profile had laminar flow characteristics, but phenomenon was not understood. Unfortunately it didn't work with rough wing of serial airplanes, only in aerodynamic tunnel.
2) Tail was around 2 meters too short, test pilots suggested improvements but were ignored by the designer. Only the development version of the PZL-49 had a longer fuselage.
3) The fuselage was unnecessarily narrow, extremely tight and unnecessarily profiled as a wing profile. This forced the placement of bombs in the wings and created a wing profile that had poor correlation with the wind tunnel.
4) It had no armor or self-sealing fuel tanks. The 5 fuel tanks scattered over the fuselage and wings provided a large area to hit.
5) The bomber designed to be a schnellbomber was no longer fast enough, and remained poorly armed.
6) The oxygen system was missing, and the engines reached a maximum power at a ceiling of less than 4 km.
7) Poland did not need bombers, the development and construction of this machine was at the expense of introducing a modern fighter that could fight Bf-109E and bombers.
Thanks for the story of the Moose. Polish industry had quite advanced designs in many fields before the war.
Yes, Poland had great military plane projects, just a few more years and Poland would have had fighters that could compete with those of Germany the great military power.
This plane was sublime! It was even better than the Heinkel 111
It is true as for the performances as for its look.
An L with a slash is pronounced as a W
Oh sorry for this mistake, I really feel stupid. Thanks for correcting me.
Actually, William Green and Gordon Swanborough produced many reference works that identified many platforms that have been noted but are listed as “recently uncovered”.
Very interesting fact, thanks for the share
It was never been told that Poland had their own bombers during world war two.
Yes, they had their own fleet of bombers and they were even the first to lead a bombing attack in Germany when a single PZL.23B managed to bomb a factory in Ohlau.
A book by Kenneth Munson had a beautiful plate of the Polish bomber as an example of what the Polish Air Force was capable in operations against the Luftwaffe.
PZL 46 Sum, PZL 23B Karaś
and also shitty LWS 6 ZUBR
I wonder how Poland's air force would have fared had they another year to prepare against the Germans. Combined with the Hurricanes and Morane Saulnier 406 fighters on order, plus the newer Polish fighter under develpoment when the war began, and more bombers like these, the air war over Poland might have gone very differently.
I also asked myself this question when making this video. Poland had projects to develop modern fighters like the the PZL.50 or even the PZL.55 which were equivalents of what the Luftwaffe had in 1940. Plus, they had also fighter bomber projects like the the PZL.38 Wilk which was like a derivative of the PZL.37 and was extremely powerful. So yes, if the War started in 1940, the German would have had much more difficulties to take control of the skies and apply the Blitzkrieg. We could even imagine that it would have motivated the French to lead a more serious offensive in Germany.
@@F-14DTomcat (Very) Unfortunately it wouldn't change anything :( Why? The Germans would have even more planes. Their industry was several times bigger than the Polish one. Only chance was a successful of programs French Air Forces, but spring '40 shown something opposite....
In fact, 5-year program of renewing of air forces was supposed to end in '42. But it was a only plans. Wilk project was a catastrophe due to technical problem with experimental Foka engine. In other programs was other problems... :(
@@karolkamilski1891
What kind of country invests all its resource into a bomber and neglects an equivalent fighter ?
Indeed, Poland had fighter plane projects which could have rivalised with the German ones, so I also don't really understand why they first developed bombers...
@@F-14DTomcat In VERY simple words: Because there was a projecting and production plan. Resources in Poland was not enough to produce few types in the same time. Poland was poor county (regained independence in 1918 without industry destroyed during Great War and Polish-Soviet war in 1920)
In 1935 main fighter (P-11c) was a quite good (for a while), and successors developing was in progress. First prototypes (PZL-50) was flown early '39. Too late... It was a difficult choice what should to be produced first...
Poland already had moder (for the time) fighters in early 1930's (p.11z p.24) while they still had obsolete 20's bombers. It was logical to make better bomber. Poles were also developing pzl 38 (interceptor with 465km/h top speed 20mm arnament) wich didnt fly bc there werent engines for it.
But it was mostly about how much money can you get from exporting the łoś that could make bulding better fighters possible
Kyboshed by army who charged at tank on horseback with lances although a few were successful it was tragicomic
The Polish army had a lot of cavalry but the idea that they charged the tanks with horses was extremely amplified by the Soviets, quoting the historian Harold Hyman of the French channel CNews.
It's a fake story. There were a few charges by cavalry on infantry (and they were reasonably successfull), and during one of them - armed forces that were hidden nearby came to help the infrantry. Nobody charged tanks with horses on purpose.
BTW - all the armies used horses early in WW2.
It is pronounced "Wash", not "Loss".
Sorry for the mistake, I recognize it is a but stupid😓
We, here on you tube, often see hat something or other is amazing, ahead of its time, or simply plain old underrated, a term I have now learnt to despise but yet we are never told why it is said to be amazing, ahead of it time or underrated. I hope this doesn't turn out to be yet another all headline, no substance video.
Watch the video and you will see that it is not a clickbait.
Yeah right cope harder.
Yeah
Wasnt one of the best.