Me264 "Uberfortress"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июн 2024
- The second in the Amerika Bomber Series, the Me 264 was a good-looking airplane! But could it be developed to bomb the United States?
Like this video? Hit me with a SuperThanks to get more!
Please support me via: patreon.com/WorldofWarbirds 
Наука
Uber fortress..; an armored limosine with the bulletproof divider up, and the childproof door locks on.
The B-29's Wright engines were so cutting edge, they had a tendency to catch fire. When the Super B-29, the B-50 was produced, it used the same Pratt & Whitney engines as the B-36.
The flaps were also a death trap if they opened them fully it caused too much drag, which wasn't discovered till after the war.
The problems of the R-3350 were solved. Fuel injection eliminated hot spots from uneven fuel distribution as well as smoothing out of the exhaust manifold curves to stop hot spots.
@@davidlittle7418 You must mean the cowl flaps? I think they knew about this during the war as the training manual warned that the airplane would not get airborne with the cowl flaps fully open.
This is from the Sept 1944 B-29A Before Takeoff Checklist:
COWL FLAPS.-At start of take-off, set 15°,
then milk cowl flaps slowly closed to obtain 7½ deg.
at time wheels leave ground.
@@gort8203 Yes I did mean the cowl flaps, but I heard a different take on it as it claimed that it cause losses & the full extent wasn't understood till the Soviets reverse engineered it. Probably a bit of both or more likely the authorities playing it down as they didn't have to fly it lol.
@@davidlittle7418 We hear all sorts of things, but you can see the issue was known and addressed in the training and operating manuals. This is the type of issue that is discovered during flight testing before a plane enters operational service.
Next time I will get this instead of Uber
Moreover, the Me-264 consumed too many resources.
- It required a large ground crew, which would prevent other units from getting support. An American equivalent needed 1000 people for just 1 bombardment group.
- It consumed a huge amount of fuel. The fuel tanks are not for show, and its fuel could go to many Heinkels and JU-88s to generate more combat mass against supply chains. Unlike strategic bombers, tactical bombers had a passable cost-benefit ratio.
- There was no long-range escort available. Even legends like the Zero traded high altitude performance for weight savings. That made any mission pointless, because only America and the British Empire could throw away that many resources on planes not expected to return, or even hit their targets.
- Basing was too demanding. A heavy bomber like that would require hard surfaces like proper concrete, and that is largely unavailable in the eastern front. If you did, it would be bombed 3 times a day because it is the only one in the area, and everyone will know where your amerikabombers live.
You had to sacrifice a lot of combat mass from other Kampfgeschwaders to form a single heavy bombardment group, but CAS is much more in demand on the eastern front, and fighters and light bombers are needed on the Atlantic. It also takes away production for existing needs.
There was no benefit to such a large investment either.
- Statistics clearly show that mining oceans were far more effective than bombing raids against shipping, and strategic bombing did not generate good value for your sacrifices.
- Those capabilities are easily replaced by more efficient platforms and means.
- British targets are already in range of existing bombers, and those are much smaller, efficient and more survivable.
- The ussr is entirely reliant on the USA for crucial resources, so there is no practical difference between carpet bombing the Urals than interdicting supply lines and depots with JU-88 strikes + generating U-boat missions from Norway, only U-boats are less costly.
Germany did not have the vast population and resources, so trading symmetrically = instant defeat. All efforts and resources had to be focused on immediately beneficial and resource-effective means. That is the driving force behind projects like Me-262, Panther and Tiger, because 1 panther used less fuel than 2x Pz.IV, while being much more survivable and capable.
Also, your names were all butchered.
Erhard Milch is pronounced Air-hard Mil-h
Heinkel's hein- is pronounced like Heineken, so like High-n-kl
Heavy bombers cost a lot. The Lancaster cost 40 percent of the RAF budget, the B29 cost more than the Manhattan project as did the V2 program.
Like the Mahattan Project. The Germans didn't have 100k men and $5 Billion to dump into a project that NOBODY knew for certain would even work. So of coure a project like the Me-264 wasn't appealing in terms of the necessary manpower costs. Germany never had a chance in hell to win a war against the British Empire, the USA and the Soviet Union. They never wanted to fight the UK or USA and only attacked the Soviets as a last ditch pre-emptive prayer to try and knock the Soviet Union out before Stalin attacked Germany and FDR brought the USA (officially) into the war. After Stalingrad when FDR was sure that the Western Aliies would win the war, he then and only then, demanded "unconditional surrender". The UK could have had an easy peace anytime they wanted one but they were under the spell of FDR and the war dragged on and killed millions of more people than it ever had to.
@@karlheinzvonkroemann2217 You had to build an entire system around a nuclear weapon too. An atom bomb is only a landmine on its own.
You needed a delivery system for the bomb that can actually reach the target, which is the one-of-a-kind b-27. V-2 missiles did not have enough precision back then.
You need absolute air superiority to not be interdicted with disastrous results. The US also had superior high-altitude performance on top of it.
The Germans never had any of the requirements, so they lost interest in this project very quickly
@@charlesc.9012 "a project that NOBODY knew for certain would even work".
@@karlheinzvonkroemann2217 Was not the Allied concern that the Germans might be developing their own Atomic Weapon? It was only the chance to examine German efforts after VE Day that revealed how poorly organised and unsuccessful the German effort had been.
It was a great looking aircraft!
This is great. Thank you for your time and effort.
My pleasure!
The Germans didn't have a strategic airforce because they could not afford having one NOT because they felt they didnt need one. They lacked the strategic resources (fuel!) to operate such a force. Mind you that about half the resources the Western Allies had at their desposal in the ETO went to the strategic bombing campaign. It was just too expensive for the Germans to justify it, especially if it had to be created at the expense of the Tactical bombing and fighter units of the Luftwaffe.
Thank You for Your efforts. I am looking forward to the next episode.
Best Wishes Brian.
Many thanks!
You might also like to look up Helen Dorch Longstreet. The widow of Confederate General Longstreet who lived long enough to be a Rosie the Riveter on B-29s.
Really? That’s pretty cool!
Love it. Learn something every day
Lol. She would have been over 95years old. Lol
She was 80. She was featured working on B-29s in Life Magazine Dec. 27, 1943 Also see on RUclips "Taste of History Honoree: Helen Dorch Longstreet" a short 3:35 min. video.@@willthorson4543
German bomber over New York.’AI image!’ Thanks,I would never have guessed!
Just covering my butt…
It would have been considerably more likely that New York would have been fired upon from submarines using V1 cruise missiles or V2 rockets. Because the Nazis could have done that easily. The technology (after all, there were already mobile launch pads for V2 rockets) could have been easily adapted...
great doco, thanks
You are welcome!
Best looking of the bunch for sure.
I'm curious: the Germans had some excellent long-range flying boats. Why not adapt them for the purpose, especially since their diesel engines allowed them to refuellable by any ship or submarine along the way, reducing the need for an extra-large, extra heavy fuel load ? Short of a Germany developing the A-bomb, these raids, had they occured, could never hope to have any impact on North American industrial production, so since it would be nothing more than a psychological weapon, why not adapt something that already existed rather than waste resources developing a near-useless specialized aircraft.
The plan was to use the Azores as a transit airfield to reach the United States - a better option than flying boats which cannot carry anything like the bomb load of a land-based aircraft. A rationale for the plan was to force the US to defend US targets with aircraft & AA thus reducing the supply of the same material to the British Isles. Not at all practical since the Azores could be attacked. But then the Nazis were a totalitarian terror state which is an ideal environment to grow hair brained, wasteful ideas.
Because the Germans were in a master class all of their own when it came to wasting resources on a multitude of unnecessary projects & variants!!!
The issues of the using flying boat are basically that it would have to be done in the Atlantic. This is the Atlantic ocean north the Pacific Ocean. Pacific means peaceful. Atlantic Ocean is full of heavy swells that suitable for rendezvous with a submarine. That was one of the main issues. Many of these flying boats were developed for civilian purposes and did not have protected fuel tanks.
Well short of the A bomb, they did have other WMDs available. German chemist's had already developed a handy selection of nerve gases and other CBW. A few tons of one of those sprinkled over an East Coast US city would have been memorable. Why didn't they use them on Great Britain? Well fear of retaliation maybe, the British had tested a handy line in anthrax spores, not nice but war isn't. Also on a just in case basis, prior to WWII the British Government had issued something like 30 million civilian gas masks to the population. There were colourful versions for children and sealed hand cranked versions for babies and toddlers. A range of toxic chemical weapons were used by both sides in WWI, there was no reason to assume they would not be deployed more widely in a future conflict. A civilian could be arrested if caught in public without their gas mask. If you see civilians in documentaries of the war period you may see them with a cardboard box slung from a string strap. That will hold a gas mask.
An Amerika bomber was always unlikely. The only practicable aircraft c ould only get the range by launching from the Azores. I believe that those were occupied by the Allies. Also with several thousand miles of empty ocean to cross, radar would have seen them coming.
Great video.
Glad you enjoyed it
A Six Engine Version crashed off the Coast of Maine at Owls Head. I knew Witnesses
I have been enjoying your content, but I think you should drop the spoken "chapter marks" like "Introduction" and "Prototypes." Saying those aloud makes your presentation sound a bit like that of a student reading his or her project in front of the class.
I’ve been wondering that myself. Is that for videos, audio podcasts or both? Thanks.
@@worldofwarbirds Although I've only ever consumed your video content, I would think it's true for both video and audio-only.
Another channel does this as well and I’ve always thought it was kinda odd.
Just video. For audio it's essential to include since you on tube video can separate and tag the chapters, as I see you haven't.
I liked it
Great video
Thanks!
Times 7:50 and 10:21 could be _mistaken_ for the same mirror imaged *He 177s* being strafed, *twin* engine nacelles, *single* tall rectangular vertical stabiliser, that sort of thing. Not the two different Me 264 prototype attacks.
ok wow great video thank you
Glad you enjoyed it!!
The Uberfortress could make the Kessel run in less then thousand years😂
I think the onstructionsplan had been sold to USA -by Messerschmitt ...😂😂😂
@@foenikxsfirebird3067 operation paperclip
I used to bullseye wamprats in my Uberfortress back home and they were less than two meters
It was more like a B 17 in terms of size .
I'm not certain the Amerikabomber concept made any sense beyond perhaps dropping leaflets.
Assuming it was actually able to carry an effective bomb load to the US East coast or further, it would have been a one way mission, potentially suicide. The US had radar and ships at sea which might spot these and they could be expected to put a formidable interceptor force in the air to meet and down them before they could do much damage. No country had escort fighters with this kind of range and mid-air refueling was not available back then. Never really understood this.
The correct pronunciation of Wever is "VEVER" not "WEAVER"
Thank you!
7:11 V2 does not mean "version 2". It's German for "Versuchs" or "prototype".
Thank you for informing me!
Is it just me, or does the Heinkel He-277 look like a Lancaster with dihedral given to the horizontal stab?
Only with the small difference that the 277 was developed from the 177, which made its maiden flight before the war, long before Avro launched the Lancaster...
@@melchiorvonsternberg844 True, but the Avro Manchester, which answered a RAF request (Specificatuon P 13/36) released the same year as the Luftwaffe's specification for the He-177, was a twin-engined bomber that had twin rudders. Unlike the Manchester, the first version Heinkel designed, the Heinkel He-177A, had a single vertical stab and rudder. This remained the same well into 1943 when the He-177B specification with four engines was requested by Goring. The first B model had a larger wing and the requisite four Daimler Benz engines, but still had a single rudder. The twin rudder arrangement came next. Oddly enough...
This was well after the Manchester had grown into the Lancaster, which had not only flown for the first time, but was already flying over German cities dropping Britain's thanks for Hitler's devotion to "peace" when the He-177B got its twin-rudder arrangement.
@@johngregory4801 I would like to admit that. But you could also say that the same problems lead to similar solutions. This applies by far, and not just to technical problems. However, it is a bit strange to say that the first variant of the He 177 would not be a four-engine aircraft. It had the Daimler-Benz engine 610, which consisted of 2 coupled DB 605 engines and developed an output of 2900 hp, making it practically a 4 mot.
The swipe at Hitler's "love of peace" was unnecessary. Because one could certainly say that Sir Winston's love of peace was not particularly strong when he was first Sea Lord in 1914. He was the greatest war agitator in the Asquit cabinet and thus became the gravedigger of the Empire...
@@melchiorvonsternberg844 Conjoined V-12's doth not two engines make on either the. British or German planes. Ad for comparing Hitler with Churchill...
One was a megalomaniac, one wasn't.
@@johngregory4801 Are you crazy? I didn't compare Hitler with Churchill. The Brit was a Germanophobe and the other was an Anglophile. That completely contradicts itself, doesn't it? But one thing is also completely certain. Churchill was not a man of peace. And because one played a crucial role in driving forward the expansion of the war in Europe in 1914, the other was later given the opportunity to become a warmonger. Because one thing is also completely clear... Without the stupid and audacious peace treaty of 1919, the Nazis would not have been possible. And there were people who already foresaw this. Surprisingly, it was the British who first saw what a mess they had done by entering the war without being directly threatened and felt guilty about it. The then British Prime Minister, Sir David Lloyd George, had already realized this in Versailles in the spring of 1919. He said:
"One may strip Germany of her colonies, reduce her army to a mere police force, and reduce her fleet to the strength of a fifth-rate power. Nevertheless, in the end, when Germany feels that she has been treated unjustly in the peace of 1919, she will find means, to compel its conquerors to make restitution.To obtain recompense, our conditions may be severe, they may be harsh and even ruthless, but at the same time they may be so fair that the country upon which we impose them feels it in its heart have no right to complain. But injustice and arrogance, displayed in the hour of triumph, will never be forgotten nor forgiven. I can think of no stronger reason for a future war than that of the German people, who will certainly prove themselves to be one of the most vigorous and powerful tribes in the world, would be surrounded by a number of smaller states, some of which had never before been able to establish a stable government for themselves, but each of which would contain large numbers of Germans who longed for reunification with their homeland .”
But that's exactly what happened! And since the emperor no longer existed as the highest authority (also a clever idea from the Entente), the idiot from Austria was able to become sole ruler. Curtain up, on the Nazi show...
Problems with an Amerikabomber.
1) No escorts. Sending bombers to the US without fighter escort is essentially a suicide mission.
2) It would require not only the range to reach the US, but to be able to strike at targets that might be well inland. Which means flying over land and antiaircraft batteries.
3) Damaged bombers on the return trip would be unlikely to make it back. Which means ditching in the Atlantic... with low survivability.
When you see a B29 close up they actually look small.
On RUclips I have seen an overhead photo of a B-36 beside a B-29. The impression that stuck with me was that the B-36 was gigantic.
I like the way you talk ,I think you are kind of funny.
Informative and kind of funny is just what I'm aiming for!
German B-24-29 Liberafortress....
I love it!
@@worldofwarbirds 🙂😆😎
Zwie und noinish luft balloons?
@@jeffpotipco736 "Ya Vol".....hahahaha
Interesting! Nitpicking: Milch is not pronounced like Miltch, but like the German ch gutural sound or the Spanish j (San José)
Thank you! I rely on the nitpicking to keep me honest! I usually check the non-English words with a pronunciation guide, but fell short this time.
Going out on a limb here, but is it a literal translation of 'milk'?
@@worldofwarbirdsI would suggest simply using Google Translate and listening to the pronunciation of any German words.
👍
@@jonr6680 exactly 👍
@@worldofwarbirds BTW: I like your series about the Amerika Bomber program.
What *IS* that music at the start?
RCAF March-past!
The Me - 264 was a near copy of the Boeing model 334. See "Superfortress" by Curtis LeMay , page 30.
No it most definitely was not
@@davidkavanagh189 Read the book. I didn't say it was exactly the same. There was a slight difference in the wings, and of course it used different wings.
...and of course it used different engines , I meant to say.
The Me 264 flew in November 1942, and the B-29 flu two months early in September 1942. There’s not really any opportunity for the Germans to copy the B-29 in two months. Funding for development of the 264 was triggered by the signing of the Lend Lease Act in early 1941. Prior to that Messerschmitt had done some privately conceptual studies for maritime a reconnaissance bomber.
-The Me 264 that flew in 1942 could only have gotten 1450 hp Jomo to 211J but needed 2250-2400hp class engines. These became available to the Germans in January 1945 in the form of the Juno 213E, DB603L and DB603H. They may have been able to conduct mine laying operations with lightly armed Me 264 using BMW801 or even Juno 211 by end of 1943. The these underpowered variants also had problems with requiring a very long runway that would be highly vulnerable to Allied bombing.
The only way the German get through Me 264 in service time to make a difference is the stock development at the same time as the He 177 in early 1938 straight for the six engine stretched variant Me 264/6m. If it has the first flight in late 1939 just like the He 177 and entry in the Service 2 years latter in 1942 with standard engines it would cause a lot of problem for the convoys and for US Defences which would need to be massively, bolstered. You’d have to get rid of Milch who hated Willy Messerschmitt and all of the bungalows at emphasise dive bombing, but couldn’t push the excellent computing bomb sights. The Germans had that made dive bombing redundant in 1942
@@williamzk9083 Read the book. Plans for a long range bomber capable of reaching the U.S. started about 1940 , a year after Boeing developed the model 334.
No, not Uberfortress. This is not a word. Überfortress is correct.
Actually, it was also to be used as a ride-sharing bomber and had an app. So, Uber was correct 😅
Silly me, I had an excuse to use an über-cool umlaut and I blew it!
seria genial que estuviera doblado al español
Curious AI generated 3 engined plane at 0:20.
God, no wonder they lost! And this is just for a north america bomber. They must have had half completed
War material all over the continent. They should have kidnapped Lord Beaverbrook and forced him to straighten out their production problems!
Deutschland hat den Krieg nicht verloren, weil wir weniger
Ressourcen hatten, sondern weil die Angelsachsen die ganze Welt gegen uns in Stellung gebracht haben.
Deutschland hat fast gegen
die ganze Welt gekämpt,nur
weil die Schwachsinnigen
Staatsmänner aus Amerika
England und Frankreich unbedingt einen Weltkrieg
vom Zaume brechen wollten.
Das selbe geschah im Korea
Krieg,Irak Krieg, Afghanistan
Krieg.Immer die selbe Vorgehensweise..Wie heißt es
bei den Amis so schön:
Die Koalition der Willigen.
Von wegen, Deutschland hat
den Krieg begonnen. Der Krieg
ging,wie immer,von den
Angelsachsen aus.
History is sprinkled with these "edge of the envelope" aircraft that never made it. The US had a number of these, post-WW2, but the numerous failed German designs have not been made widely public.
I like to research them and people seem to like hearing about them.
That ME 264 airframe and the aeroplane as a whole, was literally riddled with engineering faults and the results of a protracted poor quality build.
👍👍👍❤❤❤✈✈✈
Wow. I had no idea that the Germans had built such incredibly ugly airplanes. The JU 290 has a face that even a mother couldn't love! Blech! 🤣
You think the Ju 87 Stuka looked good? 🤣
Mate, you aren't supposed to read titles like that. Titles are only for the written word. If you're reading it out, you have different methods of indexing subjects.
Thanks for the feedback
I think the reading of titles would be helpful for any vision impaired folks, or for people listening to a video like you would a podcast.
What titles did he read out? I feel like it might be a somewhat strange question, but what titles?
It was absurd attempting to build a bomber to attack America. What were they going to do, drop a few bombs on Manhattan Island or Boston? America is vast and spread out, most of the defense plants were located far inland or on the West Coast. The Germans should have focused on interdicting Allied shipping to England and Russia, a 4 engine bomber like the B-24 would come in real handy for that. As it was, transports like the Condor did good work even thought their structure was weak and they were underpowered for the bomber role in the Atlantic. If Germany could have based 4 engine bombers near L'Orient, France they could have really threatened allied shipping. Even the Italians had a viable 4 engine bomber, there is no excuse for Germany not having one.
The idea of an American Bomber wasn't to drop down thousands of bombs...one point was propaganda if they could cross the Atlantic they could attack all places on earth. The other point was the plan for a more powerful bomb which used only one plane. But the German leadership was thinking they needed this for another war and not for World War 2. That was the reason such planes and the bomb wasn't on a high priority plus there was a guy who showed them rockets which could do the job much cheaper.
Lots of good points!
A10 rocket was cheaper and more effective.❤
Thanks for a great vid.
However Germany's Amerika bombers would have to take of from Europe, fly all the way to the US, drop their bombs and return. US bombers typically took of from the UK and later Italy. So the range quite a bit longer.
Also, allied bombers were escorted and the German bombers, if they were ever put into action, would not have been.
The entire project was simply unfeasible.
Probably, but still an interesting concept!
That is not General Milch. That is Ernst Udet
At 6:22 it's Field Marshal Erhard Milch, not Udet
AI Generated?
Not this one! The Me 264 was real!
They had theju90 why they didntdevelope it further beats m.because the more important target lay in the east bhind the uralswhixh is where the s.u.maininwar industrylaybut if they had a heavy bomber by whichthe germansbritishmilitary installarions milicould be attacked at nightand deliver a heavy bomb load😮?
I wonder why the Germans where so possesed by the twin horisontal stabilizers.
The Allies had quite a few with twin stabs too!
Oh idk, we had the P-38, B-24, B-25, XF-5, F-82, P-6, C-119
The British had the Lancastor, Manchester, and Halifax and probably a few others…So it’s not just a German thing
Yes, it seems neither the Germans nor the Japanese put much thought into strategic bombings. The Japanese thought we would sue for peace and the Germans were ticked that the US was brought into the war at all. At least until they were ready. Lesson learned.
Hey mate, don't drop the spoken "chapter marks" some of us listen to your content whilst working!
I may drop the clunky “pause chapter title pause” and just use a clear introductory sentence to indicate the beginning of a new section.
Interesting video, but not adding to knowledge of the subject.
Scheiss Amis 😅😅
A bit amateurish. I suggest you drop the sing-song delivery and approach your narration more traditionally. Think Mark Felton. Drachinfel can be a bit cheeky which makes his videos interesting but he uses it sparingly. Mostly he is straight ahead serious and factual.
If you're going go to do "easymoneycumentaries," at least learn how to pronounce German names. "Miltsch" - good grief!
A perfect illustration of the difference between a constructive correction and a snotty know-it-all response
If you're going to take the the time to comment, why not include the answer for everyone?
@@worldofwarbirds How's he supposed to do that when there is no way to spell a guttural pronunciation in English ?
@@worldofwarbirdsIf you just dropped the 't' but kept the rest of you current pronunciation, that should be close enough. Though personally I don't mind if the names are a bit butchered.
Who regarded butchery as a disqualifier among Nazis?
Questionable channel. 123k views, 13.k subs,3.4k likes. Sketch.
+