World's Only Flying Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet (Kraftei)- The First Rocket-Powered Fighter Aircraft!

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 4 фев 2025

Комментарии • 3,3 тыс.

  • @knightflightvideo
    @knightflightvideo  6 лет назад +189

    Watch more videos of this event or by other airshows on the playlists of my channel below. 🙂
    Messerschmitt: ruclips.net/video/Seyd5-Thr98/видео.html
    Warbirds: ruclips.net/video/Nxf05ZRjYmc/видео.html
    Hangar 10: ruclips.net/p/PL_kDcX2_3upoEavcA1EWAHRzMmIG6CB8K
    Supermarine Spitfire: ruclips.net/p/PL_kDcX2_3upoWC3ftQ-dNfj6_cjXCxVvF
    Airshows: ruclips.net/p/PL_kDcX2_3upoftlBOhtnzEPE_eiDNejG-&disable_polymer=true

    • @semperfidelis9896
      @semperfidelis9896 6 лет назад +4

      what air show is that?

    • @richardverney6702
      @richardverney6702 5 лет назад +9

      @@ranekeisenkralle8265 You are being harsh. In real life it only had powered flight for about 5 to 10 minutes, after which it glided. Its original design contemplated that it would always be gliding into land. Just enjoy the gliding flight characterists of this replica which gives a good glimpse into the gliding characteristics of the real thing.

    • @pepzo_mix
      @pepzo_mix 5 лет назад +2

      See the flight in relive, manching Germany.. Awesome plane

    • @markcantemail8018
      @markcantemail8018 4 года назад +5

      This is great ! Thank you for the video . I enjoyed seeing this even without the Rocket being fired . People do not realize how risky that just the fueling process was ? That plane glides just the way it was designed to do . Very agile !

    • @DonBaldwin
      @DonBaldwin 4 года назад +2

      @@richardverney6702 The rocket chemicals were caustic and dangerous for the pilot, sometimes causing chemical burns on their legs. A good re-enactment that should be enjoyed by all.

  • @LighthouseCape
    @LighthouseCape 4 года назад +3082

    I know that the rocket motor is way too dangerous to use, but it's still a bit disappointing that it was nothing more than slow glider from the takeoff.

    • @mrrolandlawrence
      @mrrolandlawrence 4 года назад +114

      well there was the "rocket racing league" that proposed to use LOX and kerosene. Not too dangerous. then again maybe one of those tiny jet engines? easily slip in some NACA ducts that would be stealthy and not pollute the look of the aeroplane.

    • @mostneuter
      @mostneuter 4 года назад +115

      Those were famous to explode at landing, even with empty tank, not a good idea

    • @frankbutaric3565
      @frankbutaric3565 4 года назад +186

      The rocket motor is not dangerous the fuel is

    • @golf3ofwisdom436
      @golf3ofwisdom436 4 года назад +18

      And with that power if you dont land corect you are going to break your spine

    • @rickvanlandingham2874
      @rickvanlandingham2874 4 года назад +80

      @@mrrolandlawrence I've worked with pure hydrogen peroxide. I was told if I got it on my skin I would die. The Komet used 80% hydrogen peroxide. In the 1970s top fuel dragster teams were illegally using hydrazine mixed with nitro. Hydrazine hydrate is also deadly on contact in its pure form.

  • @rudolfabelin383
    @rudolfabelin383 5 лет назад +431

    A late friend of mine flew it. Flugkapitän Hans Pancherz, he was a "Versuch flieger" (highest test pilot level) at Junkers. At the end of the war he was in charge of the development of all jet and rocket aircraft. He was the only pilot that flew the Ju 248, all 14 flights. Basically the same aircraft as Me 163, but with two rocket engines instead. One larger and one smaller. The Ju 248 was planned to go through the sound barrier. But it never happend, as supplies was short at the end of the war. The supersonic wings for the Ju 248 was never finished of this reason. They wings were calculated for Mach 1.6. After the war, Flugkapitän Hans Pancherz lived in Sweden and worked at my fathers company, Malmö Flygindustri, MFI.

    • @RomanTheMexican
      @RomanTheMexican 2 года назад +42

      i can't tell him in person, but i would like to tell him thank you for your service

    • @AlexanderSilver1996
      @AlexanderSilver1996 2 года назад +23

      @@RomanTheMexican ... The Nazi? I can't tell if you're joking or not

    • @SubayAdamm2
      @SubayAdamm2 2 года назад +1

      @@AlexanderSilver1996 not every german soldier is nazi

    • @uptightsl
      @uptightsl 2 года назад +59

      ​@@AlexanderSilver1996 Soldiers and Soldiers, all deserve a thank you for their service, regardless of their side.

    • @roach9799
      @roach9799 2 года назад

      @@uptightsl besides, the real nazi nazis were the SS, most others were just german soldiers or airmen

  • @Radiogirl1931
    @Radiogirl1931 2 года назад +115

    This is amazing because a Komet pilot actually built this glider in his garage, and the crazy thing is, although it looks the same, he redesigned the structure to be lighter and safer and it has excellent flight characteristics. I love seeing stuff like this.

    • @mel_163
      @mel_163 2 года назад +2

      @Radagast Cartmanbra what

    • @MrSpamdagger
      @MrSpamdagger Год назад +4

      @Radagast Cartmanbra no they werent, they were a reusable fighter

    • @Benjamin_Bischoff
      @Benjamin_Bischoff Год назад +9

      @Radagast Cartmanbra there was never an intention by Messerschmitt to use this as a kamikaze plane, it was made of wood and would have had little to no fuel when it got to altitude, as well as being equipped with machine guns

    • @elliotfischer7391
      @elliotfischer7391 Год назад +1

      ​@radagastcartmanbra5845that's the Japanese Cherry Blossom.

  • @jimbradshaw4
    @jimbradshaw4 5 лет назад +215

    Ignoring the comments about the lack of jet propulsion (for obvious reasons) in the flight, thank you so much for the upload. It was a thrill to see such a legendary aircraft actually flying!

    • @paulallen8109
      @paulallen8109 5 лет назад +11

      jet propulsion isn't the same as rocket propulsion
      Rockets are purely chemical.

    • @scruffyy111
      @scruffyy111 3 года назад +11

      The plane would be extremely dangerous and risky to fly with a rocket powered engine because of the unstable fuel and the plane

    • @Thel.Vadam69
      @Thel.Vadam69 2 года назад +2

      @@scruffyy111 lol this one rocket plane was destroyed more by it's engine and lots of other hazards other than allied fire

    • @robertwilliamson6121
      @robertwilliamson6121 2 года назад +3

      @@scruffyy111 Uhm……rockets are flying all the time these days. They could easily make a safe rocket engine for this now.

    • @eatshit8034
      @eatshit8034 2 года назад +6

      @@robertwilliamson6121 not easily. Rockets are incredibly complex and temperamental machines. For a plane thats likely to fly 3-5 times a year developing a rocket that requires round the clock maintenance and tons of pre-flight prep-work is fucking stupid and cost prohibitive

  • @bobbwc7011
    @bobbwc7011 2 года назад +246

    A machine straight from hell. The climb rate was insane due to the rocket motor. 10000 meters in 3 minutes. The German pilots experienced completely new issues related to swift climbing and high service ceilings without a pressured cabin and pressured pilot suits. Risk of barotrauma of the small intenstine, colon, ear, and what not. This was insanity.

    • @theothertonydutch
      @theothertonydutch 2 года назад +37

      Also there was the flesh-melting fuel to worry about if you actually survived the landing.

    • @aloysiusbelisarius9992
      @aloysiusbelisarius9992 2 года назад +12

      @@theothertonydutch I was just about to say that. The rocket fuel was so corrosive, so volatile, and so unstable that many of those planes blew up on the ground...or, if they didn't blow up, the fuel would leak into the cockpit and literally turn the pilot into soup.
      If that weren't so tragic it would be funny, how the Nazi hierarchy thought that to be an acceptable weapon and not the nuclear research a few of their scientists were trying to develop. Since all the knowledgeable scientists in nuclear science were Jewish, and thus none left in Germany, they fell behind in that development. They could not report a timeline of when, or even whether, their research could possibly be weaponized; and our own development was so well-shielded against their espionage network (though not the case with the Russian espionage network) that they were pretty much on their own. The German hierarchy just never expressed an interest in nuclear development since there was no guarantee that it could be weaponized in short order.
      But suicide rockets...oh, yeah, put 'em up there! I wonder if that served as some inspiration for Wile E. Coyote...

    • @n.l.3776
      @n.l.3776 Год назад +7

      @Radagast Cartmanbra The japanese had a license to produce and possible plans for using them as kamikaze bombers but they werent intended as such by the developers and only seven were produced in japan. Armed with 2 Mk 180 cannons in the nose they were inteded to fly a swift attack on bombing formations over germany, land, refuel, repeat.
      Reports state that the sled, which was used instead of conventional landing gear due to aerodynamics, in combination with the insane speeds these had made the landing so incredible bumpy that it quote "shook the pilots till total exhaustion" (roughly translated, my english isnt so great), so they needed a short break before being thrown into the sky again. The same source states that they were only able to fly two attacks instead of the intended 3-4.
      So contrary to the comments here, although this thing was absolutely terrifying to be in, pilots did often fly multiple sorties in them. The abundancs of ways to die in this thing and the not existant care/research into accelerating or climbing this fast made it incredibly dangerous and the pilots could only attack once before gliding back to base making it pretty bad at its job.
      And no, its not kamikaze, why would you say something like that. The body consists of wood, the fuel would be mostly used up by the time they finally found a target, the germans barely had any good pilots left, an untrained pilot wouldnt last in this thing and there is no mention of it ever being used like that.
      Sources on this: "Welt" article from the eighth of may 2018 on the me 163 and the (german) Wikipedia article on the me 163

    • @DevSolar
      @DevSolar Год назад

      @radagastcartmanbra5845 False. I./JG 400 lost a total of 14 Me 163's (6 shot down, 9 to other causes). Several members of that squadron lived for quite some time after the war. Mano Zeigler wrote several books about the Me 163 before he died in 1991, age 83. Paul Rudolf Opitz was one of the test pilots during the development, and later flew in I./JG 400 as well. He died in 2010, at the ripe age of 100 (!). The squadron commander, Major Wolfgang Späte, later became supervisor for air safety in West Germany's Luftwaffe, and retired in 1967 as Lieutenant Colonel. He, too, wrote a book about the Me 163 before he died in 1997, age 86.
      Please stick to things you actually *know* instead of making things up.

    • @Whitpusmc
      @Whitpusmc Год назад +1

      I assume this is a replica?

  • @leokimvideo
    @leokimvideo Год назад +119

    Even today it still looks incredibly futuristic, maybe a little gas turbine in the rear would be a nice addition.

    • @LucasTheUltimate
      @LucasTheUltimate Год назад +16

      All the german aircraft towards the end of the war were truly WAY ahead of their time. It's actually real lucky that they got to that advanced technology only when the war was about to end...

    • @zap2747
      @zap2747 Год назад +1

      @@LucasTheUltimateYeesh no kidding

    • @cubegears
      @cubegears Год назад

      @@LucasTheUltimate unlucky* look at the state of the world now

    • @EperogiLimousine
      @EperogiLimousine Год назад +1

      A lot of this futuristic stuff was improbable and expensive, either way it wouldn’t work @@LucasTheUltimate

    • @EperogiLimousine
      @EperogiLimousine Год назад +1

      This is why you have no friends Jared @@cubegears

  • @rickdavis3593
    @rickdavis3593 7 лет назад +3629

    World's only GLIDING Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +332

      Two of the three Me 163B prototypes were un-powered gliders. Also some un-powered Komet were build, used as training aircraft.

    • @9999plato
      @9999plato 7 лет назад +156

      They began as gliders. Motors came LATER.

    • @sonny2dap
      @sonny2dap 7 лет назад +134

      As far as I'm aware every flight ended up with them gliding back to a landing.

    • @marymargaretapplin8510
      @marymargaretapplin8510 7 лет назад +63

      The video's title intrigued me too. Is the T and S fuel and engine too volatile for today's safety standards?

    • @MrArmybiker
      @MrArmybiker 7 лет назад +86

      Rick Davis The Rockets only burned for 10 Minutes or so, after that, they where not more than very fast Gliders. The Me163 was used for defending smaller Areas like an Airfield or something else like that. Sorry for my English, i don't use it too much😉

  • @SillyPuddy2012
    @SillyPuddy2012 7 лет назад +465

    Flying on rocket power or being towed and gliding, makes no matter. It's amazing to see one of these in flight period.

    • @rocketboy917
      @rocketboy917 5 лет назад +2

      My sentiments exactly.

    • @mbolduc
      @mbolduc 4 года назад

      I WAS LIED TO

    • @ark-mark1
      @ark-mark1 4 года назад +9

      I think that title was misleading. That is not flying but gliding and I really expected and would have liked to see it fly with rocket power. There are modern safe and affordable rocket motors so it's not impossible. What comes to gliding, yes it's a beautifull sight still. Thank you for the video but not the title.

    • @waterlicker8635
      @waterlicker8635 4 года назад +4

      I know, probably one of the main reasons why it was towed is because the two liquids they used in the fighter were extremely explosive and they didn’t want to damage this plane, the liquids were so explosive to where when refueling, they had a special cleaning crew to clean the plane and the fueling pipe and tank in case there is still some left of one liquid and they refueled it with the other one and they had to do everything so fast that a few planes exploded, another reason is probably due to lack of sources for the two liquids

    • @waterlicker8635
      @waterlicker8635 4 года назад +2

      istván read what I typed

  • @Glenn-kc5eu
    @Glenn-kc5eu 4 года назад +1038

    its crazy how modern looking it is despite being made in the 40's

    • @BestGorillaJoke
      @BestGorillaJoke 4 года назад +31

      Kinda like the de havilland comet, but it was built in the 60s I think

    • @chrisdiehl-cannon2620
      @chrisdiehl-cannon2620 4 года назад +15

      They had info giving to them. Look up what Warner Von Braun had to say on the subject. Bet you'll be surprised by what you find.

    • @dietergoes5626
      @dietergoes5626 4 года назад +23

      @@chrisdiehl-cannon2620 Wernher von Braun

    • @chaowingchinghongfingshong3109
      @chaowingchinghongfingshong3109 4 года назад +7

      @@BestGorillaJoke Late 40s, actually!

    • @凸凹島
      @凸凹島 4 года назад +40

      This thing is no way at all modern looking

  • @ryanhampson673
    @ryanhampson673 6 лет назад +200

    Imagine seeing this for the first time back then.. No propeller roaring rocket noise.. Straight up science fiction!

    • @poochie6062
      @poochie6062 4 года назад +13

      Sorry but from what I know, back then these aircraft used highly explosive chemicals to create thrust for about 30-45 min in the air and were used to intercept high altitude bombers. These things were very unsafe for instance they needed the two different fuel trucks to fuel at different times in the case the chemicals don’t mix up and blow everything sky high.

    • @danielwhyatt3278
      @danielwhyatt3278 4 года назад +13

      Yeah and it looks like something straight from a science fiction book of the old days. Totally retro looking, even by first generation standards.

    • @javiergilvidal1558
      @javiergilvidal1558 4 года назад +6

      @@poochie6062 More German over-engineered nonsense. In a year's operation time, that contraption only downed 19 bombers, for the loss of at least 15 Komets. Another thing that stupefies me: the ultra-speed fetish, both of this thing and all the jet-powered "Wunderwaffen". If your target is moving at well below 500 km/h, I can see no practical way of approaching, firing and hitting target while moving at well over 700 ... All in all, that was extremely expensive, dangerous and resource-consuming technology for technology's sake!

    • @D_U_N_E
      @D_U_N_E 4 года назад +15

      @Javier Gil Vidal
      During this time Flak and other ground based anti-air were not cutting it. Standard fighters could not easily rapidly respond to the bombers that are flying extremely high. The German people viewing their, distinctive disadvantage believed they could not succeed via conventional approaches.
      They were interceptors. Today we could just use Ground to Air guided missiles to take down high altitude targets accurately. Though back the. You had to either use inaccurate flak cannons, which used a colossal amount of ammunition, for usually low return rates.
      Thus the German people thought a high-speed glider would be more successful at taking down the bombers. When you work out the cost to a bomber to a komet, while the numbers they delivered are by no means a success, they are neither a total failure.
      Though like many say, the Germans had too many R&D programs, though when you are fighting at an overwhelming disadvantage, you can't really fight a conventional war. If anything, had the Germans been a little crazier and tried harder in developing atomic weapons, perhaps things may have went more their way.

    • @martinw9568
      @martinw9568 4 года назад

      ruclips.net/video/dvncIrQ-AxM/видео.html

  • @Kimdino1
    @Kimdino1 6 лет назад +150

    I was thinking 'Surely, they ain't gonna fly it, that fuel was so f*%!&ing dangerous. But it was well managed and a joy to see. I was amazed at what a floater it was, it didn't want to come down, once in ground effect had it just wanted to go on and on & on & ...... Amazing! Thanks for showing it.

    • @Perktube1
      @Perktube1 5 лет назад +1

      Imagine showing up with that to a sailplane competition.

    • @space__idklmao
      @space__idklmao 4 года назад +6

      I heard it was a better glider than most purpose built gliders of its time.

    • @louisavondart9178
      @louisavondart9178 Год назад

      The originals had to be fitted with air brakes because they just didn't want to land.

    • @marvindebot3264
      @marvindebot3264 Год назад +2

      It's considerably lighter than an original one, they landed hard.

    • @robertchapman6795
      @robertchapman6795 Год назад

      I remember seeing a doco on these, with original test footage in my early teens. One landed hard and caught fire. The pilot literally dissolved as he tried to escape!

  • @christophermccoy4605
    @christophermccoy4605 4 года назад +184

    "Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom!" - Marvin The Martian

    • @tuga_ace
      @tuga_ace 4 года назад +1

      😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @Whiteshell204
      @Whiteshell204 3 года назад +4

      this one isn't powered by hydrogen-poroxide

    • @alexanderweigand6758
      @alexanderweigand6758 3 года назад +4

      @@Whiteshell204
      Would be interesting to add the engine.
      Or to add one engine.
      Must mit be the original.
      But close to the original.

  • @nachtjager77
    @nachtjager77 7 лет назад +277

    My somewhat adopted grandfather, Joachim Hohne, flew these at Udetfeld and Sprottau with III/JG 400 in November and December of '44. Wish he could've seen this.

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +15

      Thanks for watching and the interest information! :-)

    • @argh1989
      @argh1989 7 лет назад +10

      Curious about how to adopt a grandfather. Grandpa died when I was still a kid and I think Grandma could use a little company sometimes. Where did you get yours from?

    • @willusa2927
      @willusa2927 5 лет назад +4

      Hats off to your grandfather

    • @eliaslundstedt5607
      @eliaslundstedt5607 4 года назад +3

      Mad lad. I have no Idea how theese could fit the balls of the people flying them

    • @brzezu8697
      @brzezu8697 4 года назад

      nachtjager77 ich wohne aus Sprottau

  • @anonimosu7425
    @anonimosu7425 4 года назад +210

    He float
    He attack
    Most importantly
    He no explode

    • @donkeyslayer4661
      @donkeyslayer4661 4 года назад +3

      He gets shot down by hungry Allied pilots, who ruled the skys over Germany at this time.

    • @ConnerV
      @ConnerV 4 года назад

      Amen

    • @derbenutzer5958
      @derbenutzer5958 4 года назад +3

      @@donkeyslayer4661 who got shot down by hungry veteran pilots for bombing all the innocent civilians. Whats your point with that ignorant comment?

    • @definitelynotjames
      @definitelynotjames 4 года назад +5

      he protecc
      he attacc
      but most importantly
      for 6 minutes he sit in the bacc

    • @beanron8035
      @beanron8035 3 года назад

      @@donkeyslayer4661 Other way around

  • @robbbarnett4978
    @robbbarnett4978 3 года назад +53

    Great to see! I like seeing the flights of this back in the 40's. I remember it having wheels that would drop off after takeoff. What a beast. Amazing, but more amazing were the ones who actually were brave enough to pilot this thing.

    • @judodavid1
      @judodavid1 2 года назад

      I believe Yeager flew one on it’s dual-fuel

    • @montylc2001
      @montylc2001 2 года назад

      Ya. A few didn't live to brag about it.

    • @charlesyoung7436
      @charlesyoung7436 2 года назад +1

      Those detachable wheel trucks could even take a bad bounce and hit the aircraft off the rebound. If the rocket fuel tank got hit and split open, the pilot could end up melted by the corrosive propellant.

    • @hydrolito
      @hydrolito 2 года назад

      If wheels drop off how do they land it in a river?

  • @GJones462-2W1
    @GJones462-2W1 7 лет назад +432

    While scanning through available videos, I saw this one, and shouted out loud "WHAT?"
    I had no idea there was a flying ME-163 in existence. Way too cool.

    • @nomidubidabi
      @nomidubidabi 7 лет назад +18

      Yep, but not an original though.

    • @MrCcragg27
      @MrCcragg27 7 лет назад +26

      yea it dosent even have an engine, or they didn't fire it up. what the damn hell. shouldn't even be allowed to exist

    • @deltavee2
      @deltavee2 7 лет назад +21

      Failed the hell out of a couple of service crews too. The fuel was extremely nasty to work with. Apparently a pilot was dissolved in his cockpit when a fuel line broke. Nasty Stoff.

    • @vet6822
      @vet6822 7 лет назад +5

      c and z stoff turned a few folks into jelly in ww2....aka "back in the day".....

    • @beaconrider
      @beaconrider 7 лет назад +5

      They only went on one mission because on a raid, the British put some bombs into the factory that made the fuel. The factory never came back on line.

  • @snarkymatt585
    @snarkymatt585 4 года назад +402

    Well it's more like a Komet trainer than the actual Komet... still cool though.

    • @CaCidinho
      @CaCidinho 4 года назад +29

      I mean... Who would bring 30 milimiter cannons and a dangerous outdated rocket engine to an air show?

    • @jacplac97
      @jacplac97 4 года назад +39

      We are talking about an aircraft that had high probability of exploding, at literally any moment. During re-fueling, take-off, mid-flight, and landing, or leaking its fuel into the cockpit, turning the pilot into a half-liquid pile of goo.

    • @quackityalt7213
      @quackityalt7213 4 года назад +6

      @@CaCidinho Many people? that's typically what people watch the video for when it has "komet" in the name

    • @HatcheDWheeL
      @HatcheDWheeL 4 года назад

      ​@Jay Millar It's litterally "just" bleach.

    • @brandons9398
      @brandons9398 4 года назад +4

      HatcheDWheeL Right, just hydrazine and methanol, lol

  • @Hawkeye2001
    @Hawkeye2001 2 года назад +98

    Imagine the technology that went from the Wright flyer in 1903 to the first flights of the ME-163 in just 40 years.

    • @jonaspersson122
      @jonaspersson122 2 года назад +2

      I never thought about that. That is actually mindboggling!

    • @davebrittain9216
      @davebrittain9216 2 года назад +1

      With that being said you would think by this time we would have transporters like on Star Trek lol.

    • @terraflow__bryanburdo4547
      @terraflow__bryanburdo4547 2 года назад +4

      That is what happens to war technology with two world wars 20 years apart. Tanks went from nonexistent in 1914 to the Centurion in 1945.

    • @steffenrosmus9177
      @steffenrosmus9177 2 года назад +3

      Actually it is from Gustav Whitehead to Me 163 in 42 years😉

    • @thekaiseroftheeast3895
      @thekaiseroftheeast3895 2 года назад +6

      @@jonaspersson122 We went from not being able to fly at all to landing on the moon in just 60 years.

  • @joelmartin2549
    @joelmartin2549 7 лет назад +711

    I see a few life-saving changes had to be made from the original design.

    • @SilverShamrockNovelties
      @SilverShamrockNovelties 7 лет назад +252

      yeah. such as removing the rocket motor entirely.

    • @Maximilian7992
      @Maximilian7992 7 лет назад +153

      Doosh Bagg and replacing the landing skid with a wheel

    • @BrettonFerguson
      @BrettonFerguson 7 лет назад +41

      I doubt these changes would have saved any lives if they had done this in 1944 when it was used. Try towing it up to altitude with allied fighters flying around.

    • @provablegrub4581
      @provablegrub4581 7 лет назад +85

      Joel Martin There weren't many problems with the original design. Only, you know, the high chance of exploding on landing... nothing major.

    • @dentidens7834
      @dentidens7834 7 лет назад +9

      ist ja aber eher ein „kraftloses Ei“

  • @tubewatcher3100
    @tubewatcher3100 5 лет назад +11

    Outstanding camera work tracking and keeping the Komet in frame. The plane is very cool too. Thanks for the video.

  • @JaleelJohanson62
    @JaleelJohanson62 7 лет назад +1011

    Folks..... The rocket powered version was a virtual death trap..... Enjoy this version....

    • @admiralpawz4699
      @admiralpawz4699 7 лет назад +15

      JaleelJohanson62 siting down in the cabin and driving = INSTANT DEATH

    • @Dondolini94
      @Dondolini94 7 лет назад +13

      we have no evel knievel of the sky to try

    • @jamesricker3997
      @jamesricker3997 7 лет назад +90

      The rocket version killed more German pilots than allied pilots

    • @harrison00xXx
      @harrison00xXx 7 лет назад +32

      virtual? the Komet sent many good pilots, also a woman (in the WW2) in the hospital.
      i think it was one of the most dangerous aircrafts ever built, thanks to the (pretty unique) rocket motor...
      but i saw some fights of onboard cams in ww2, and i think, as a dive bomber and fighter, this plane was awesome for this time
      landing is the most dangerous, what i knew were more Me163 destroyed while regular landings than allied fire...

    • @Renodox
      @Renodox 7 лет назад +4

      is that a warning or a advertisement 🤔

  • @Trojan0304
    @Trojan0304 5 лет назад +25

    Classic plane. Thanks for capturing this rare bird.

  • @hisheighnessthesupremebeing
    @hisheighnessthesupremebeing 4 года назад +471

    Looks like someone got the scaling wrong on the propeller drawing..

    • @flightisallright
      @flightisallright 4 года назад +63

      Actually, it's not meant for propulsion. It's just there as a generator.

    • @operatorpsyduck2035
      @operatorpsyduck2035 4 года назад +131

      @@flightisallright Actually, it's not meant to be a serious comment. It's just there to entertain people.

    • @NotNicot
      @NotNicot 4 года назад +53

      Me 163: *Attacks a B-17 Bomber*
      Jerry: "That thing has no propeller, how does it fly??"
      Johnny: "It does have one! But it's so small, how does it power the aircraft?!"
      Nicky: "That's really weird, what'd ya think Micky?"
      Micky, the top gunner, with Four 30mm Mk103 cannon shots to his chest: "I don't know mate, but it sure does pack'up some blasting."

    • @Saipan2297
      @Saipan2297 4 года назад +14

      Nicolas Tohá
      I like to read this in a calm Australian accent

    • @hochspannunglebensgefahr5339
      @hochspannunglebensgefahr5339 4 года назад +2

      General Psyduck shut the fuck up loser.

  • @DEeMONsworld
    @DEeMONsworld 7 лет назад +286

    I had the pleasure of meeting Rudi Opitz, one of the few men who survived flying the Komet. A very diminutive man, (you had to be small to fit). His recollections were very interesting to hear first hand, he said few pilots had the skills to fly the plane, and even if you did your chances of surviving several flights without injury was slim, He was burned by the corrosive fuel while flying, when it leaked from the fuel tank and got under his protective suit. Other pilots broke their backs on landing as the skid often malfunctioned.

    • @christopherterrell1805
      @christopherterrell1805 7 лет назад +80

      In the late 90's Rudy Opitz was one of my Glider flying mentors, along with Al Santilli who was still an FAA Examiner into his 90's who's original Glider pilot's license was signed off by Orville Wright. Very proud to have both of their signatures in my logbook.

    • @andrewpearson106
      @andrewpearson106 7 лет назад +14

      Wow thats amazing

    • @soundpainter2590
      @soundpainter2590 7 лет назад +6

      C.M. Terrell WOW, that is, Priceless !

    • @marcosalvarez7096
      @marcosalvarez7096 6 лет назад +17

      Guss Kvist not every soldier of the third reich was nazi ...

    • @GraemePryce1978
      @GraemePryce1978 6 лет назад +13

      @@marcosalvarez7096 Hmm. They all declared allegiance to Hitler, but I agree with you broadly. A lot of them just wanted to be good soldiers with what began as the most advanced army in the world. They were quite heavily indoctrinated and propagandised as well, so it's only fair to let sleeping dogs lie and leave history in the past where it belongs.
      Regardless of who they were fighting for, a lot of them were very brave and honourable men, and to fly craft like the ME163 they certainly must have had nerves of steel.

  • @msquaretheoriginal
    @msquaretheoriginal 7 лет назад +17

    The actual 163 was essentially a rocket-powered glider, if that makes any sense. It was designed from the outset to fly well without power because the rocket motor could only run for about 8-9 minutes total. So the ones that did make it home did so on the glide.

    • @Someguy6571
      @Someguy6571 5 лет назад +3

      And were more often than not shot to hell while they were gliding. Since there was nothing they could do to dodge the allied fighters.

  • @g.a.c.4139
    @g.a.c.4139 4 года назад +207

    Even without a rocket motor, its an impressive craft, and the pilot is gutsy to get in that thing. Its basically a modified flying wing, with teeth. The landing looks tricky without spoilers and no horizontal stabilizers. Would the Komet be a good candidate for a modern turbine engine conversion? I'd like to see that conversion, as long as the originality of the Komet is not permanently altered (this aircraft is historically significant, and it should be preserved as well as flown). Thanks for posting this video.

    • @sergeig685
      @sergeig685 3 года назад +15

      It is not a flying wing. It has a tail and clearly defined fuselage. And its landing characteristics are described as "very docile".

    • @RsRj-qd2cg
      @RsRj-qd2cg 3 года назад +5

      Actually I think a modern replica could be safely built with a new rocket engine. Or steam powered.

    • @2adamast
      @2adamast 2 года назад +6

      G.A.C. It's a replica glider. Putting a motor would permanently alter it's nature.

    • @jamesthornton9399
      @jamesthornton9399 2 года назад +2

      Where would you put the inlet???

    • @TheHenirik
      @TheHenirik 2 года назад +1

      this is a replica built in 2006 if understand the german correctly

  • @brantsemallory726
    @brantsemallory726 7 лет назад +45

    Thanks for the upload, great to see some of the German planes from WW2 still being flown. As a Brit we get to see our planes quite often but never anything from the 'other' side.

    • @rabbitbmx
      @rabbitbmx 7 лет назад +2

      Check out Flying Legends, plenty of German planes shown there every year :)

    • @pickfairguy
      @pickfairguy 6 лет назад +1

      A true expression of British sportsmanship and fair play !

    • @Kay_213_
      @Kay_213_ 5 лет назад +1

      pickfairguy
      Well what else did you expect from the British? That’s there whole thing isn’t it?

    • @gamertardguardian1299
      @gamertardguardian1299 5 лет назад

      History is sensitive to some people

    • @joesantamaria5874
      @joesantamaria5874 5 лет назад +1

      Nonsense. Duxford flies lots of German aircraft every summer at Flying Legends. Best air show there is. They also have many aircraft on static display, 163, 262, FW190, etc........you should go, it’s wonderful.

  • @airailimages
    @airailimages 7 лет назад +48

    Remarkable to see. Thanks for uploading it.

  • @ballooningonmars4888
    @ballooningonmars4888 5 лет назад +349

    My father was a test pilot on a gliding-only pre-version - when he was 17....

    • @bzzzz1314
      @bzzzz1314 4 года назад +10

      Wow, amazing. Did he tell you much about it?

    • @NotNicot
      @NotNicot 4 года назад +81

      @@bzzzz1314 He probably did, with a note on his grave saying
      "and his last words were: 'SCHEIZE THE GLUE IS NOT HOLDING ON'"

    • @howcanyoureadthistheresnop9244
      @howcanyoureadthistheresnop9244 4 года назад +12

      Nicolas Tohá they used glue on the he 162

    • @2spooky2play66
      @2spooky2play66 4 года назад +6

      Nicolas Tohá Wrong plane.

    • @viruspter1dactl
      @viruspter1dactl 4 года назад +8

      This has 69 likes so i cannot like it

  • @zenzen9131
    @zenzen9131 6 лет назад +11

    My friend's father, Hans Becker, used to fly the Do27 tow plane for this until he sadly died a few years ago. A wonderful man and sadly missed :(

  • @meganary876
    @meganary876 7 лет назад +22

    Amazing! I had no idea one of these was still in existence, much less actually flying...well done!

    • @teecar9868
      @teecar9868 5 лет назад

      It's not.... it's a new copy. There's only one in existence, in pieces in the Smithsonian.

    • @chrispassauer3960
      @chrispassauer3960 4 года назад +1

      There in a complete and original one in the Australian war memorial

    • @angelsone-five7912
      @angelsone-five7912 4 года назад

      @@teecar9868 There is one in the Imperial War Museum.

    • @makuwusky
      @makuwusky 4 года назад

      @@teecar9868 The Flying Heritage and Combat Armor museum in Everett WA has one as well
      flyingheritage.org/Explore/The-Collection/Germany/Messerschmitt-163-B-Komet.aspx

    • @kelby810
      @kelby810 4 года назад +6

      @@teecar9868 That's totally incorrect. There are ten surviving Me-163s on display around the world. Might you be confusing this aircraft with the Ho-229? The Ho-229 is the larger flying wing design with twin jet engines, and the only surviving example is indeed in pieces awaiting restoration. Please fact check yourself before trying to correct others.
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet#Surviving_aircraft

  • @clintatk
    @clintatk 4 года назад +9

    The Komet was designed to be towed and released just as demonstrated. It also was designed to be a very good glider and always landed as a glider. To have fueled this rare museum piece would have been insane.

  • @countrysamurai
    @countrysamurai 7 лет назад +36

    Beautiful aircraft...I was able to write, talk to Rudolf Opitz (Test Pilot) and wrote to Wolfgang Spate (C/O of Erprobungskommando 16 and JG 400) years ago.
    Rudi Opitz flew the Me-110 that towed Heini Dittmar to altitude for both the first gliding flights and when he broke the powered record of 1000 kph. And on many other occasions, and flew the 163 himself. Both testing and combat.
    These were two of the most influential men (and Dittmar) testing and using it in combat..
    The Germans were very advanced...first aircraft to break 1000 kph in level flight and perhaps broke the sound barrier years before Chuck Yeager did.
    Alexander LIppisch and Hellmuth Walther.
    Incredible

  • @RCHeliJet
    @RCHeliJet 7 лет назад +611

    Fantastic i saw the Model just over 10x time but not the real Me 163, Thanks thumb up

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +11

      Vielen Dank fürs anschauen und kommentieren! :-)

    • @maviba
      @maviba 7 лет назад +29

      It looks good, but thats not a real Me 163, its a replicat, built as a pure glider ;-)

    • @idasmith8644
      @idasmith8644 7 лет назад +11

      [Nephew of Ida] An original fly with the rocket engine is impossible. You need a 2 component "gas" , the "C" and the "T". One drop before the fly together and you have an explosion like with nitroglycerine.

    • @nicomeier8098
      @nicomeier8098 7 лет назад +20

      I'm sure there are modern rocket engines that could be mounted and are not as dangerous......? Seeing it fly on its own and taking off would be fantastic.

    • @WgCdrLuddite
      @WgCdrLuddite 7 лет назад +28

      Obviously a fake. It didn't explode.

  • @Perktube1
    @Perktube1 5 лет назад +112

    With no T-stoff or D-stoff, at least have an Estes engine in it, or a smoke trail. Still nice tho.

    • @gahrzahk
      @gahrzahk 4 года назад +6

      Good book: Ignition! An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants, by John D. Clark, Rutgers U. Press. Great history of the development of rocket fuel, from propellants more dangerous that nitroglycerin to chemicals less worse.

    • @lebensraummetal
      @lebensraummetal 4 года назад +2

      @@gahrzahk Excellent book. and after that try Taming Liquid Hydrogen: the Centaur

    • @rogertycholiz2218
      @rogertycholiz2218 4 года назад +1

      Perktube - I assume that D-stoff and T-stoff were hydrogen peroxide and pure oxygen.

    • @charlesborden8111
      @charlesborden8111 4 года назад +4

      @@rogertycholiz2218 C-Stoff und T-Stoff (substance C and substance T) too be correct. C-Stoff was a mixture of Methanol, Hydrazine hydrate, water, and Potassium tetracyanocuprate. T-Stoff was Hydrogen peroxide, water, and stabilizers. And guaranteed to kill a person if they looked at it funny.

    • @LouAlvis
      @LouAlvis 3 года назад +1

      @@charlesborden8111 i love it when you talk that way

  • @kenirwin276
    @kenirwin276 5 лет назад +4

    My brother-in-law Phil Owen somehow acquired a complete engine from an ME 163 Komet. When Rudi Opitz heard about it, he paid him a visit as he just had to see it and they had a great talk about it. This was in the '50s. I recall the turbine fuel pump, which ran on Hydrogen Peroxide, was larger than the rocket combustion chamber. He donated it to the Air Force Museum and they were glad to receive it because it was in better condition than the example they had.

  • @peterbird7979
    @peterbird7979 2 года назад +5

    RN pilot Eric Brown flew a powered one of these after WW2, his comments were something like 'most flying wings were just dangerous death traps, but the designers got this thing just perfect, it was just amazing to fly.'

  • @gooscooby5988
    @gooscooby5988 4 года назад +2

    Amazing, I have read lots about this aircraft but never thought I would see one still flying ! Thank you 🙏 for posting

    • @sascha-ger666
      @sascha-ger666 4 года назад

      In GTA you can "fly" it ^^ is hard to fly but if you can, it is the best Jet in the Game, no Joke!

  • @ironpizza5150
    @ironpizza5150 5 лет назад +494

    All yes the lf-22 starling

    • @yourdad2932
      @yourdad2932 5 лет назад +28

      Is not GTA

    • @kermudgeounthepowerful7642
      @kermudgeounthepowerful7642 5 лет назад +21

      So what? I looked this up because of the starlings power in the air

    • @xXNexxus_-MindXx
      @xXNexxus_-MindXx 5 лет назад +19

      IKR but I don’t see the flame like in gta XD

    • @shanehannigan7895
      @shanehannigan7895 5 лет назад +2

      Why u do dis because there was two variants one with a rocket witch was a death trap and the other without a rocket

    • @wpso2859
      @wpso2859 5 лет назад +11

      @@yourdad2932 stfu pussy

  • @walterpalmer2749
    @walterpalmer2749 5 лет назад +114

    Powered or not, it’s still impressive.

  • @terraboundmisfit
    @terraboundmisfit 2 года назад +2

    Fell asleep waiting for him to light the candle, woke up to a dry dream.

  • @lauraradigan4114
    @lauraradigan4114 7 лет назад +7

    Magnificent piece of flying of a extremely challenging historic aircraft. It glides well but seems difficult to get down without airbrakes. Well done.

    • @harrison00xXx
      @harrison00xXx 7 лет назад +1

      Laura Radigan its extremely lightweight. especially with no rocket motor.
      it would be really nice to see this thing with rocket start and flight :)
      someone should make it R/C, and lets go,.....

  • @walterconcrete5017
    @walterconcrete5017 4 года назад +6

    The really amazing thing is that Rudy Opitz lived to 99

  • @maxwellcrazycat9204
    @maxwellcrazycat9204 Год назад +2

    This aircraft reminds me of those carvings that look like small airplanes that were found in South America. Either Aztec or Inca.

  • @mikestanmore2614
    @mikestanmore2614 5 лет назад +163

    I was wondering who was crazy enough to refuel and fly that little firecracker. No-one since Winkle Brown, it seems.
    Oh well, they spent most of their operational life gliding.

    • @Peasmouldia
      @Peasmouldia 5 лет назад +1

      I bet Captain Brown RN didn't have that much float on landing. The original had the glideslope of a house brick.
      His record of most military types flown is quite safe I recon.

    • @planpitz4190
      @planpitz4190 5 лет назад +2

      Are you sure famous test Pilot Winkle Brown flew the original one with the Walter rocket engine fueled with highly corrosive and flammable chemicals?

    • @gregbuck701
      @gregbuck701 4 года назад

      They would only glide on their RTB, when the bombers came over they'd zip all over doin their thing......but sitting ducks gliding home. Faster than shit under power.

    • @andrewpease3688
      @andrewpease3688 4 года назад +2

      @@Peasmouldia my understanding is that allied test pilots were keen to fly the me 163 with the rocket but none actually did, including Brown. Dr Walter managed to talk them out of it with a demonstration of the explosion resulting from just 2 drops of the propellant mixing together.

    • @tlangdon12
      @tlangdon12 4 года назад +5

      @@andrewpease3688 Eric Brown did fly the ME163 fuelled with T-Stoff/C-Stoff. His interview confirms it.

  • @yuppy1967
    @yuppy1967 5 лет назад +16

    That is such a advanced design for its time,so amazing! ✈️

  • @User16666
    @User16666 11 месяцев назад +2

    Jesli by dzisiaj zamontować temu bojowemu szybowcowi ,odpowiednie silniki , zamiast rakietowego , to była by perełka .

  • @OldEastGermany
    @OldEastGermany 4 года назад +9

    Chuck Yeager (USA) was never the first to break the sound barrier, it was definitely Germany.

    • @omaliveatlast4688
      @omaliveatlast4688 4 года назад

      I believe it happened when the poor pilot had the canopy fly off and he was knocked out and during its tragic decent it broke the sound barrier shortly before impact . Unless anyone knows better ?

    • @Gallus-gallus
      @Gallus-gallus 2 года назад

      What, the whole country?!

    • @RacerXGTO
      @RacerXGTO Месяц назад

      @@omaliveatlast4688 The Komet never broke the sound barrier, at best, it could true 620mph, still not the sound barrier. P-51 pilots were discovering a mysterious barrier while in a high speed dive with their planes. The flight controls had no effect once that barrier was crossed, because the air would float right over their elevators. Some pilots died. The lucky ones who knew how to slow down, regained control of their flight controls, but shared the experience as some sort of barrier in the sky that should never be crossed if they wanted to live again. All the planes in WW2 lacked the flight controls for mach 1 flight, where Bell technicians discovered there had to be a dramatic change in the X-1's elevator design past 700mph.The traditional hinged 2-piece elevator was the problem, Bell solved it by making the entire elevator move as 1 piece. Then the sound barrier was broken beyond 700 mph. Pay attention to all models of the Bell X1, the two piece hinged elevator was not the X1 that broke the sound barrier.

  • @firefightergoggie
    @firefightergoggie 4 года назад +15

    I was actually really worried they were going to light that thing up for real. Thank God it was a glide demo.
    Komets were real widow makers.
    Great to see though. Living history.

    • @Shaun_Jones
      @Shaun_Jones 4 года назад

      Actually, the Komet had a lower crash rate than the bf 109, it’s just that me 163 problems were especially horrific.

    • @firefightergoggie
      @firefightergoggie 4 года назад

      @@Shaun_Jones - wrong. Considering the death rate from the test phase alone, it's a miracle that there hundred examples were even built. Finding volunteers to fly the the aircraft proved a challenge because of the death rate of flying the machine in combat.
      Next time, try and check your facts a little more closely.

    • @Suo_kongque
      @Suo_kongque 4 года назад

      Shaun Jones yeah, but a lot of early jets had problems. The engines tended to blow up.

    • @iv9545
      @iv9545 4 года назад

      @@Suo_kongque It's not a jet, it's a rocket. Pulse jet = / = Rocket.

  • @frederikhein4195
    @frederikhein4195 Год назад +2

    Great to see one of these technological wonders still fly today

  • @cley123
    @cley123 7 лет назад +383

    The Komet used peroxide as fuel and was in many ways more dangerous to its pilot than it was to its enemy, as it tended to explode on landing.

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +11

      This is true. Thanks for watching and commenting! :-)

    • @derptank3308
      @derptank3308 7 лет назад +3

      Yeah...that's probably why they didn't fit it with the actual rocket engine it had during ww2

    • @jamesclukey7488
      @jamesclukey7488 7 лет назад +6

      Or break their back .... no landing gear, ...

    • @lordraptor11
      @lordraptor11 7 лет назад +24

      considering upon landing there was no fuel left in the aircraft that is not possible.

    • @lordraptor11
      @lordraptor11 7 лет назад +32

      so now an empty tank will explode on landing i really wish i knew where you guys get this innacurate information from.

  • @obfuscated3090
    @obfuscated3090 7 лет назад +7

    Komet is descended from gliders and was tested as a glider before rockets were fitted. After the rocket burned out it glided to attack bomber formations then back to base.

  • @BAVBavarianAviationVideonews
    @BAVBavarianAviationVideonews 4 года назад

    Was für ein Anblick, auch als Segelflieger ein schöner Warbird! Alle Daumen hoch Olli! ;)

  • @feedingravens
    @feedingravens 2 года назад +4

    It seems little is known about that plane, so some info.
    This replica is from Josef Kurz, usually building replicas of gliders from the 1930s.
    His "masterpiece" might be the DFS Habicht from 1936 (for the Olympics in Berlin), from the original planset, the first dedicated aerobatic glider, designed for a max speed of 380 km/h, more than any other glider in the world. In a time of spruce, plywood and fabric...

    For those that say "why not with engine":
    The ONLY flight pattern the Me 163 was capable of was to start and climb to 12,000 meter (36,000 feet) in 5 minutes until the engine burnt out, from then on it was ONLY gliding (including the attack run).
    So displaying the plane as glider is how you would have seen it. Seconds after the start you would have seen nothing more than the streak of the jet exhaust goin vertically upwards with 900 kph.
    The engine could hardly be throttled, and not relit. Premature engine flameout was extremely dangerous, the fuel remains tended to explode when landing on the skid the original had.
    Leaking propelliant dissolved organic matter (humans), so you better took care to get rid of that stuff asap.
    Just to say it, the plane was NOT designed for supersonic flight, it would have needed a different airfoil for that. So should you go into horizontal under power you ran into a high-speed stall due to the supersonic compression shockwave delaminating the airflow, making the plane uncontrollable and braking it down (not necessarily apart).
    But if it did not kill you, the pilots said it was a delight to fly.
    They built about 350, and formed a combat test group.
    But the concept was pretty insane: the range was nil, so you needed to have the airfield directly there where the bombers came.
    The fighter escorts soon found out, just wait til the Me 163 runs out of speed, it cannot pull away anymore.
    And when the planes were on the ground, they just lay around in the middle of the runway, perfect targets for strafing runs.
    So the airfield needed heavy flak defence and an own protective fighter screen around the airfield, usually Fw-190s.

    Maybe something interesting regarding escort fighters 1943/44:
    It was decided by the USAAF that whilst bombing was important, fighting down the german air defence (incl .the Me-163) was of the higher importance.
    So the bombers were almost used as bait to get the germans in the air, and the prime task of the escort fighters was NOT to fence off the attacker from the bombers, but to chase after the german fighters and shoot them down, even if that meant leaving the bombers alone.
    Of course that meant at some point you have gotten rid of the german fighters, but in the meantime...
    The german could then make use of that, lure away the US fighters, and then another group attack the lone bombers.
    That tactic cost the lives of about 50,000 bomber crews.

    What is even more amazing, it took the Allies until July 1944 to attack the german fuel production in earnest. The fuel production needs space, it could not "easily" be relocated underground like e.g. fighter production.
    And within weeks the german had lost about 70% of their fuel production capacity.
    Fuel had always been a problem, the germans were always notoriously short on fuel, great tanks and planes with hightech that could hardly be used due to lack of fuel.
    Had the allies realized that this is an absolute achilles heel, that going for that one industry incapacitates EVERYthing, and started this campaign a year earlier, I am pretty certain that the war would have lasted a year less.
    It was even so that because the fuel production was the main source of sulphur in Germany, and the fuel production in the end was at about 2% of the max value, the germans would have run out of gun powder a few months after capitulation.

  • @martentrudeau6948
    @martentrudeau6948 7 лет назад +57

    Me 163 Komet, futuristic for the 1940's, way ahead of it's time.

    • @martentrudeau6948
      @martentrudeau6948 7 лет назад +1

      Beautiful aircraft, incredible technology.

    • @jeffmoore9487
      @jeffmoore9487 7 лет назад +6

      How many production rocket planes types have there been since flight began? I think just one - the Me163.

    • @loskop100
      @loskop100 7 лет назад +2

      The planes that first broke the sound barrier were rocket powered

    • @SilverShamrockNovelties
      @SilverShamrockNovelties 7 лет назад +1

      Germany was losing the war. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Alot of the weapons forced into service late in the war were ill-conceived. Still, some of them saw a degree of success in the right situation.

    • @charlestorruella6140
      @charlestorruella6140 7 лет назад

      Jeff Moore not true the USA had a number of rocket planes they where called the x planes google them Chuck Yeager broke the sound barriers with one

  • @irvingnerdbaum7256
    @irvingnerdbaum7256 2 года назад +1

    GREAT VIDEO OF THE Me-163! Thanks!

  • @PatriceBoivin
    @PatriceBoivin 4 года назад +12

    I am always happy to see that some people are repairing, maintaining vehicles from WW2. It's sad when we see rusted hulks pulled out of lakes or farmers' fields, or abandoned in industrial parks or other places to rust and rain. Even if it was just for educational purposes, having functional vehicles is so useful.

    • @mjd4174
      @mjd4174 Год назад

      But you miss the point, like many here, that this only LOOKS Like an Me 163 but is not even close to being constructed in the same manner. It is a sailplane replica. Well done but it is not a real Me 163, it is a great lightweight replica.

  • @mysticvirgo9318
    @mysticvirgo9318 7 лет назад +6

    She does glide extraordinarily well :)

  • @FritzKraut
    @FritzKraut 2 года назад +2

    It is a reconstruction in wood. Very nice to show the aerodynamical potential of Alexander Lippischs design. He designed the plane. Not Messerschmitt. Makes no sense to complain that this privat reconstruction has no engine. Just enjoy what we have here. As a young glider pilot in the mid 1980ies at Dornier airfield in Oberpfaffenhofen i had an ex ME 163 B fighter pilot as instructor. Any time our plane was hooked on he told me "take the sun between your legs son!"

  • @1985_Honda_CRX_Si
    @1985_Honda_CRX_Si 4 года назад +3

    I love the comically smol propeller it has

  • @HagersvilleHunk
    @HagersvilleHunk 7 лет назад +5

    Very,very impressive. Excellent workmanship and flying skills.Keeping history alive!

    • @bootchop88
      @bootchop88 5 лет назад

      well to keep history alive, the aircraft would have proudly displayed its original war markings. The history is being erased.

  • @elorex1661
    @elorex1661 4 года назад +1

    The Me163 was built to climb up to 30000ft in 2 or 3 minutes to intercept enemy bombers. It then glided back down to base. After takeoff the landing gear was detached to reduce drag so when landing they just skidded down the runway. Many accidents happend there, many young pilots lost their lifes because their plane exploded or ended up upside down somewhere next to the runway.
    "Raketenjäger Me163" is a great book by Mano Ziegler, a test pilot who survived this plane. He talks about his colleagues jumping out of the skidding plane at high speeds because they feared an explosion, about how they sent a casked full of rocks to the deceaseds family because they couldn't find a single part of a pilot whos plane exploded. Also talks a lot about technical stuff... Really interesting book.

  • @guenterschmidt5982
    @guenterschmidt5982 2 года назад +79

    Habe das modell von mir entworfen und gebaut 1972zur DM in Roothenburg Wümme vorgefürt

  • @jeaboud
    @jeaboud 6 лет назад +12

    Just one word to describe this Plane. Marvelous. If we realize that the Me-163 was designed und built almost 80 years ago we can only say: brave GERMAN technology.

    • @rustykilt
      @rustykilt 5 лет назад

      It looked great but was a killer..

    • @DFX2KX
      @DFX2KX 5 лет назад

      Brave is... Not the word you'd use to describe this thing.
      Innovative and suicidal are better descriptors. Don't get me wrong, these things are cool, but when your aircraft uses a hypergolic mix of kerosene and 90% Hydrogen Peroxide that requires the entire plane be hosed down after each fuel was added so it didn't *explode*, you might have a problem.

    • @paulallen8109
      @paulallen8109 5 лет назад +1

      You can also say this was born more out of *desperation* . They knew they could never compete with the allies when it came to quantity of war material so they put all their faith in "wonder weapons". By the end of the war they gambled really high because they knew they couldn't play it safe anymore or attempt any "poker face". Btw, the atomic bomb was way more technically advanced than this plane and no Germans were involved in the making of that one. Oh, and the allied computers used to decipher the German Enigma code.

  • @arcosprey4811
    @arcosprey4811 2 года назад +1

    I love the tiny little propeller in the front. So cute.

  • @mrmanch204
    @mrmanch204 Год назад +3

    Crazy, brilliant, thank you.

  • @WildBillCox13
    @WildBillCox13 7 лет назад +11

    Nice. Thanks for posting.
    It was a great glider. That much is in the record. The gliding characteristics, according to Hannah, were absolutely adorable. The model in the video looks like the unpowered testbed used to test the flying characteristics, before series production began.

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +1

      My pleasure. Thanks for watching and commenting! :-)

    • @Namminamm
      @Namminamm 7 лет назад +4

      I think its a replica actually...

    • @locutus155
      @locutus155 6 лет назад

      Apparently they were also a complete sod to land because of the tailless design.

    • @geoffphillips8029
      @geoffphillips8029 6 лет назад +1

      It's a replica,has no engine and a fixed wheel landing gear.I read it was built entirely by eye by its designer,/builder.

    • @magoolew5131
      @magoolew5131 5 лет назад +1

      @@geoffphillips8029 Yes, the original planes had a skid to land on in the front and a small tail wheel. They took off on a set of wheels that would be dropped by the pilot by releasing the skid, then pulling the skid back up for flight. They were carted off the field after landing by a buggy, taken back and put on wheels on both wings where they sat ready to be fueled for their next mission.

  • @keithmartland6463
    @keithmartland6463 2 года назад +1

    The pilots who flew these must have had balls made from steel, brave men indeed!

    • @Exodon2020
      @Exodon2020 2 года назад

      After the Germans surrendered a British Test Pilot had a Luftwaffe Ground Crew prepare a 163 for him to test flight and their chief had him sign a form relieving himself and his crew from all fault if he was to blow himself up at any point in flight. Dude was concerned the Brits would have him shot.

  • @bifflowenklein5037
    @bifflowenklein5037 5 лет назад +9

    I had no idea there was one of these around, let alone still flying. Incredible!

  • @BlueStar712
    @BlueStar712 6 лет назад +17

    Loved this plane since I first saw it when I was very young. This and the me262 were incredible for their time, thank you so much for posting this glimpse into the past!!!

  • @michaelprocter1298
    @michaelprocter1298 3 года назад +2

    To the men and woman who take the time and care to restore these aircraft to either static or flying condition must be a labour of love. But to see them flying is amazing....to think all of them were designed to kill people in war and to the men that flew them now friends and swap stories of there exploits and say which plane was the best. But you can't deny how good the German pilots were in there score of kills and how they keep flying till they either couldn't fly anymore or were killed in action. And that also goes for all WW2 pilots in defending there country. The bravest warriors.

  • @mrdfac
    @mrdfac 5 лет назад +7

    Wow. WOW!
    Thank you. I never thought I would see that.

  • @althejazz
    @althejazz 6 лет назад +5

    Utterly amazing - such a clean aircraft and even unpowered it was very, very fast. I read Mano Ziegler's book 'Rocket Fighter' many years ago and I was impressed with the sheer guts of the chaps who flew these things and thank goodness the current pilots don't have to take those risks.

  • @luizcarlosdeiricci8957
    @luizcarlosdeiricci8957 3 года назад +2

    The Luftwaffe Jet Flea
    Thanks for the post 👍😉👏

  • @satriyayogananda2442
    @satriyayogananda2442 7 лет назад +255

    what a cute plane

    • @MrDaiseymay
      @MrDaiseymay 7 лет назад +76

      That's what Allied bomber crew thought---or--what the fucks that?

    • @firepower7017
      @firepower7017 7 лет назад

      Philip Croft Why would they question something that they had like literally a few months after this was built the brits had made the Meteor

    • @YDDES
      @YDDES 7 лет назад +36

      Fire Power701
      The Gloster Meteor was nothing like it.
      The Meteor had a turbojet engine and the Me 163 had a rocket engine.

    • @SilverShamrockNovelties
      @SilverShamrockNovelties 7 лет назад +14

      because allied bomber crews probably never saw a meteor before they were getting raked by a "glider" moving faster than their gunners could track it.

    • @LuisRamos-ou8zb
      @LuisRamos-ou8zb 7 лет назад +26

      That was what most allied pilots would say... until fired upon with the two 30-mm cannons...

  • @Pfsif
    @Pfsif 7 лет назад +5

    The flight characteristic look beautiful.

  • @paulsnell534
    @paulsnell534 4 года назад +1

    Omg that is totally amazing. Anyone who could fly such a machine let alone land it has to an awesome pilot.

  • @camil721
    @camil721 6 лет назад +6

    Wonderful! Such grace and precision in a (supposed to be-) rocket fighter ! My admiration for the builders (original AND replica) and for the high class pilot!

  • @MrOrmesby
    @MrOrmesby 7 лет назад +29

    I never thought I would see the day when an Me 163 would be back in the air, even if it was just in glider mode. I know they used to glide back to their landing strips once their fuel was spent, but with them being so small and compact I don't really think of them as gliders. They were of course an exceptionally dangerous aircraft to fly, if either of their two fuel systems came into contact with one another, say in a hard landing, it resulted in a massive explosion. More German Me 163 pilots were killed in flying accidents than in combat.

    • @MarionOhioPolice
      @MarionOhioPolice 7 лет назад +3

      That and the front wheels bouncing back up at the aircraft on takeoff.

    • @taylorsukoshi6126
      @taylorsukoshi6126 7 лет назад +1

      Or the peroxide leaking and vaporizing the pilot.

    • @justforever96
      @justforever96 7 лет назад +2

      Not a surprise. They spent a hell of a lot more time in testing, and in trying and failing to intercept bombers than they ever did in actually shooting at said bombers. Stands to reason that more pilots would die that way...even if they WEREN'T fatally flawed aircraft.

    • @justforever96
      @justforever96 7 лет назад

      Um....yeah, peroxide doesn't do that.

    • @jamesricker3997
      @jamesricker3997 7 лет назад

      When landing the fuel tanks we're filled with highly combustionable fumes

  • @TK5Dmovie
    @TK5Dmovie 3 года назад +2

    Thank you very much! I could see flying Komet for the fiest time!

  • @NickPDX22
    @NickPDX22 6 лет назад +22

    I dunno why but the whole time rather than honking hold my beer I was thinking “Hold my wing bro! *I SAID JUST HOLD MY WING*

  • @radiantjet418
    @radiantjet418 7 лет назад +7

    Amazing! To think that was designed in the early 1940s and glides perfectly!!!

    • @charchee1950
      @charchee1950 5 лет назад +1

      It's designer was amazing at glider designs, not a rocket scientist though for obvious reasons. He lacked proper research because his projects were extremely rushed. Still it's an amazingly good design, im pretty sure it was the first plane to go over 1000km/h and he had other designs for supersonic aircraft. Imagine seeing a jet break the sound barrier in the 40s! Lippisch was his name if your interested, it has been 2 years since your comment so idk

    • @chosh3637
      @chosh3637 5 лет назад +1

      German engineering

  • @hadrianaugustus5712
    @hadrianaugustus5712 2 года назад +1

    There’s one of these on display at the air and space museum in Chantilly, Virginia

  • @miletello1
    @miletello1 3 года назад +5

    I read the title and was like who's the dumb enough to fly the damn thing.

  • @curtite
    @curtite 7 лет назад +5

    Dagmar, I want so much see landing finish. Just the same I love this ole bird as a lad reading Mano Ziegler's book. Thank you for posting this video.

    • @pickfairguy
      @pickfairguy 6 лет назад +1

      "Rocket Fighter" was always an inspiration for me. The "Right Stuff" is independent of nation or time period.

    • @davefloyd9443
      @davefloyd9443 4 года назад

      Looks like it wanted to keep flying

  • @georgec2126
    @georgec2126 2 года назад +1

    A very neat little plane. I'd never heard of it before! Thanks for the video!

  • @BASavage81
    @BASavage81 7 лет назад +7

    Impressive! Most impressive. That was very neat to see a Comet in the air again, even without its most dangerous rocket motor. I wonder if somepone will make a replica with a safe rocket motor and safer landing gear so we can get a glimpse of what it was really like to see a Comet operate at full capacity.

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +1

      Thank you for the kind comment! Yes, that would be fine to see a flying replica with a safe rocket motor. But i think it will never happen in Germany.;-)

    • @bbelcher4355
      @bbelcher4355 7 лет назад +1

      Would someone there be willing to assist someone here in the U.S. in building one with a rocket on it? What about prints for the plane itself? Are they available?

    • @blonder70
      @blonder70 7 лет назад

      B Belcher You should contact the "Flugmuseum Messerschmitt" (Flight museum Messerschmitt) in Manching noth of Munich: www.flugmuseum-messerschmitt.de/messerschmitt/flugzeug/me163/index.html

    • @Angelum_Band
      @Angelum_Band 7 лет назад

      As long as it happens. Spain maybe?

    • @93corollausa94
      @93corollausa94 Год назад

      A hydrogen peroxide cold rocket might do it

  • @johnmauriciohernandez2528
    @johnmauriciohernandez2528 7 лет назад +7

    thank for the video, it is a beautiful machine!!!

  • @counciousstream
    @counciousstream 3 года назад +2

    It takes a lot of courage to fly in that thing. Back in '44 and now.

  • @malcolmstreet1
    @malcolmstreet1 4 года назад +6

    Interesting that it's part of the EADS Heritage flight, along with at least an Me109G and a new-build Me262.
    The big difference from the original is weight - 500kg at take-off vs 3500! Note also that they've replaced the original retractable landing skid with a deepened fuselage and wheel - the skid sometimes didn't extend and injured the pilot's back in the ensuing hard landing.

  • @mikeb.5039
    @mikeb.5039 6 лет назад +8

    Cool, It would be interesting to see something like a JATO type rocket system used to get it airborne. thanks for the vid

  • @PRH123
    @PRH123 Год назад +2

    Incredible that an aircraft that is capable of flying at high Mach close to the speed of sound, also glides so beautifully with no power…. I don’t think there was or is any other aircraft that had - has such a broad flight envelope…

  • @w.w.2restorations.vehicles698
    @w.w.2restorations.vehicles698 7 лет назад +5

    Ach du lieber Gott! Ich wünschte, Ich hätte es persönlich sehen können. Gut gemacht!!!

  • @johnjephcote7636
    @johnjephcote7636 4 года назад +7

    Flugkapitän Hanna Reitsch, who loved gliding, would have enjoyed piloting this one.

    • @ralphhofmeier8840
      @ralphhofmeier8840 4 года назад

      john jephcote the one which took out and saved Hitler & Co from besieged Berlin? She was a hell of a pilot!

    • @mikeromney4712
      @mikeromney4712 4 года назад

      Actually she did. She had the permission to test any of the new aircraft types from Hitler imself. Much to the displeasure of the head of the Erprobungsgruppe Wolfgang Späthe. Because she was so small, a thick pillow was put on her seat, so she could straped somehow with the seat belt. Thats and the circumstance, she did not know that she can fold the Reflex-Visir (scope) to the side, led to an unnecessary accident. During the landing, she slipped with the pillow under the seat belt and slammed her face into the ReVi. Result: broken jaw and nose and a few theets were also lost.....

  • @Nighthawke70
    @Nighthawke70 4 года назад +1

    You'd be bonkers to do this but... One could put a hybrid solid motor in it, similiar to what SpaceShip One and Two use, Rubber/Nitrous combination. It'd smoke like the devil and the thrust absolutely mind-boggling, it'd kick you in the pants and FLY!
    That is if the local aviation authority would even consider it...

  • @Franky46Boy
    @Franky46Boy 7 лет назад +17

    That's how the first prototypes were tested!

    • @knightflightvideo
      @knightflightvideo  7 лет назад +7

      That's true. Two of the three Me 163B prototypes were un-powered gliders. Also some un-powered Komet were build, used as training aircraft.

  • @dawnbirbeck1505
    @dawnbirbeck1505 4 года назад +8

    Thank God for that - I thought they were going to use the original fuel!

    • @z6u5
      @z6u5 4 года назад

      @@epicgta5btctutorialsyrd353 thats not his point the fuel and engine would randomly explode on the komet

    • @poison03218241
      @poison03218241 4 года назад

      "This plane is T-liquid FREE."

  • @jamesjames3525
    @jamesjames3525 4 года назад

    We never give enough credit to trail blazers of modern aircraft design. Great video. Loved it.

  • @Tbonyandsteak
    @Tbonyandsteak 6 лет назад +5

    Always thought they used the komet wrongly.
    It must be an excellent fighter, with its light weight design. If they used a lesser volatile fuel.
    It could protect airfields, would be perfect for that.
    Fast in air, quick turns, lots of power and the best of all it did not needed to fly in a long time.
    No fighter at that time would match it.