Suggested correction: MIG 21s did not make their combat appearance until the 1960s. The only jet fighter to fly against UN forces in Korea was the MIG 15. In Vietnam, our flyers faced MIG 17s, 19s, and 21a.
The MiG-17 was operational right at the end of the Korean War. I don’t believe any were operational with the North Korean Air Force (however it is known that several Russian piloted aircraft operated in North Korean markings).
@@sailingbrewer This is common on this channel - throwing in video of different model aircraft from the one being discussed. There is also a WW2 B-18 Bolo on a takeoff run, and footage of destroyed Japanese aircraft on the ground during the narration of the Korean War. I find it quite distracting from the good information being presented to have so much poor video editing quality.
Yes, likewise the crew position profile for a B-47, and WTF was the point of showing a Martin B-10 taking off? Struck by the similarity of the overall airframe to North American’s AJ-1 Savage. Whoever puts these things together (video clips) is not a Total Aviation Person. Seen to operate on the principle of “Hey, it’s an airplane ain’t it?”
@@duncanmcgee13 UK also developed the second ever operational jet fighter and developed some ground breaking designs for aircraft on board radar. Thats nothing to sneeze at.
The videos on this channel regularly show fairly sloppy research, but the inaccuracies are usually tolerable. Not this one. This one starts of with a bit of a whopper: "The United States and Germany were the pioneers of aircraft during World War 2". Please... everyone had interesting pioneering designs during the war. Both Germany and Britain had jet fighters in service by 1944. Germany also had 4 engine variants of the Ar234 and the Ju287. Meanwhile, the US managed to produce the P59 that flew thanks to a British motor, but was no faster than a piston-engined fighter and eventually the P80 which was a better plane, but again relied on a British motor. The narration itself contains some gross exaggerations (the Arado 234 Blitz wreaked havoc in the skies... really ?). It also rewrites history by claiming that Nato was fighting in the Korean war and that MiG-21s time travelled back to the the 1950-53 period in order to assist MiG-15s... This is why I cannot subscribe.
I would like to acknowledge the Avro Fighter Bomber developed by The Best Canada had to offer. Due to politics exerted by the Military Industrial Complex of the United States it was rejected for inferior military aircraft and missiles . However the Canadian Engineers who developed the Avro ended up working for NASA and greatly improved the Moon Mission capability of the U.S.A. I believe without their knowledge the First Man on the moon landings would have been delayed 5 to 10 years.
Okay, in 1939 Germany flew the Heinkel He-178 turbojet, in 1940 Italy flew the Campini-Caproni motorjet, in 1941 Britain flew the Gloster E.28/39 Pioneer turbojet, in 1942 America flew the Bell P-59 Airacomet turbojet, in 1943 Hungary built and tested the Varga RMI-1 X/H turboprop, in 1944 Russia built and tested Bereznyak-Isayev BI-III-6 with ramjets, in 1945 Japan flew the Nakajima Kikka turbojet, in 1946 France flew the Sud-Ouest SO-6000 Triton turbojet initiated in 1943, in 1947 Sweden flew the Saab J21R turbojet initiated in 1945, also in 1947 Argentina flew the Instituto Aeronautica I.Ae.27 Pulqui I turbojet also initiated in 1945, and in 1948 Switzerland flew the F+W Emmen N-20.1 Arbalete with JATO engine initiated in 1945 so, America and Germany were hardly the only jet aviation pioneers of the Second World War. The first 4-engine jet bomber was the German Arado Ar-234C with turbojets of 1944, next came the North American XB-45 of 1945, however, that same year the Russian Ilyushin Il-22 flew along with the Convair XB-46 Needle and Curtiss XP-87 Blackhawk, all four engine jets. And the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Balalaika "Fishbed" didn't fly until 1955, 2 years after the Korean War. Your videos are mostly excellent, but a bit more research would prove beneficial.
@@cad5238 then your comment makes no sense other than trying to be a know-it-all. He quite clearly stated he didn't realize there were jet bombers, big difference
The AVRO Lancaster was the first multi engined aircraft to refuel in the air not the B45. This was done in 1944 as a hedge against the B 29 mods enabling it to carry your atomic bomb not being ready. The B29 had two bomb bays neither being large enough to carry the nuclear bomb. The Lancaster had a massive bomb bay but did not have the range of the B29, requiring it be refueled on the flight to japan. It so happened that the B29 was ready and the Lancasters were not needed. The Lancaster also had a higher lifting capacity than the B29 as it routinely carried loads over 23,000 lbs. The Grand Slam earthquake bomb itself was a shade over 22,000 lbs and the Lancaster was the only aircraft with a large enough bomb bay to carry it. The refueling testing was done in early 1945.
He said multi engine meet aircraft to refuel in mid-sure, at least at the 6 minutes or so mark. I don't recall if he phrased it that way earlier in there video,
arniewilliamson BULLSHIT the Lancaster could carry a larger bomb load than a B29, B29's routinely carries 20,000 # over 3500 miles as built, Lancasters COULD carry 14,000# on short missions. 30 Lancasters were MODIFIED to carry the 22,000 grand slam, less that 30 were MODIFIED, Post war when developed the B29 carried the T12 super Blockbuster bomb, 44,500# to 25,000 Ft and dropped it, TWICE the bomb load of a MODIFIED Lanc !!! Post war the USA GAVE the Brits 100 B29's so they would have a long range nuclear bomber !!! Facts of history son IF you ever did any research. The Lanc was NEVER going to carry the Atomic bomb. USAAF had the B32 as a back up if the B29 was not ready, guess what the B29 dropped two atomic weapons on Japland !!!
the chieftain gave the best explanation on the effect of various weapons. Even partially trained infantry can (mentally) resist attack from a single type of weapon. Presumably, this is because there is a always an effective shelter method against any single weapon. A better trained soldier can resist being under attack from two different types of weapons (trajectory, solid/explosive shells, etc.) simultaneously. Even hardcore veterans had difficulty when under simultaneous attack from 3 or more forms.
Scared? By the time the Arado appeared, the war in Europe was just about over. The USAAF, United States Army Air Force had determined that the war would be won with piston engine fighters and bombers.
The US deployed P-80’s to Europe in 1944… The British had a substantial number of operational Meteor fighters by then. The Germans didn’t have the fuel for the 400 Me-262’s they had built by January 1945 however.
"The United States and Germany were the pioneers of aircraft...." What? So the Spitfire, Lancaster, Mosquito, and Typhoon were not game changers? What about the dambusters? Even better, how about British engineers putting the RR Merlin engines into their P-51's? Also, remember that the RAF started prototyping jet fighters early during WW II.
I can't think of a single Nazi superweapon which added one day to WW2. The V1, the V2, the V3, the remotely-piloted air to surface missiles, the whole f*ckin' lot of them failed. Enigma, which the British mastered better than the Germans. The German Type 21 subs, which were leaky and useless. The King Tiger, which was so heavy it couldn't cross the bridges in the Ardennes. Add a few more yourself.
@@raypurchase801 Thank you. I hope others do not get me wrong. Dark is an American channel. And I get it, when they want to amplify American feats. That statement shows that the channel thinks nobody else did anything. Engineers across GB and the Commonwealth produced equipment to defeat the Axis Powes. And when you produce a documentary, you need to refrain from discounting contributions
The footage is cool but it so wrong when facts are involved. The simplest Google verification searches can help this channel but they don't seem to be inclined. Showing the Giant confuse peacemaker was too much.
@ (7:18) you speak of the B45 being extremely vulnerable to Mig 21's. The Mig 21 made its maiden flight on 16 June 1955. Mig 21's weren't operational with soviet forces untill 1959. At which time the B45 Tornado was already retired.
This is typical of Dark Skies presentations. While entertaining and somewhat informative, I grow weary of their constant mistakes in equipment identification often accompanied by visuals that don't correspond to the subject at hand. Yet here I am, still watching. It's like junk food that's hard to give up.
Correction: the B-45 was not the first 4 engine jet bomber to fly. The JU-287 first flew on 16 August 1944 (A heavy bomber with swept forward wings) and a 4 engine version of the AR-234 the AR0234 also flew in 1944.C
Arado's had a four engine variant in WW2, btw. Mig-15's were the newest Russian jet in KOREA, btw. I see a lot of B-47 shots in this, as well a lot of general historical shots not related to the B-45, which are interesting, but not relevant.
That's the fun part of Dark Skies. You learn that the MIG-21 traveled back in time to participate in the Korean War and that the B-45 could be configured to look like a B-47.
Come on man. To lie is the in thing to do nowadays. Aren't you on board with it? Seems to be the norm in today's world especially since all history is racist according to the sheep.
The Arado AR 234, starting with the 2 Jet Engines. But starting with the 234 V6, it had 4 jet engines in separate nacelles, the 234 V8 had the 4 jets in paired nacelles. Then there was the unique JU 287 that also had 4 jet engines. 2 under the forward swept wings and 2 mounted on the side of the fuselage. It is positive that at least 1 flew before the end of the war. There are several production versions listed, some may have been completed and flown, but records are sketchy at best. The JU 287 was a very unique aircraft and must have had some merit as the Russian's built and flew some after the war. However they used 2 under wing mounted Russian built Jet engines. There may have been a few others under development before the end of the war. Some may have flown as a test bed aircraft. But by 1944, Germany was having problems with obtaining materials and other supplies making it difficult to mas-produce their established aircraft. Germany could have had air superiority much greater than they had at the beginning of the war. Heinkel flew the first Jet Aircraft, the HE 178 in 1939. But the corrupt Nazi government and certain manufactures that had the ear of that government, like Messerschmidt and not forward thinking generals like Goering, push others, like Heinkel to the side in favor of the few, until it was to late. Thank God!
The MiG-21 did NOTserve in the Korean war it entered service at the end of the 1950s, the premier Soviet fighter was the MiG-15 and if the war had lasted another year we'd have seen an early appearance of the MiG-17.
The Ar-234 was originally designed as a reconnaissance aircraft. However, it was the first four-engined bomber (14 Ar-234C built), not the B-45, although it didn't make it into squadron service.
@FF Freedom 1st February 1944 for the first four-engined version but it was the V19 that was the true -C prototype, and much later in 1944, but I don't know the date. Production was delayed by bombing until February 1945.
@@buckhulit2718 those variants barely made it past prototyping 14 were barely built and the allies finished building after the war the bmw units were sorely underpowered
It was at one time called a B-25 with jet engines. The North American XB-28 Dragon was a remarkable aircraft design that few have heard of . One still remains off the Laguna Beach area in California.
The wildest collection of disassociated airplanes I've seen since watching a 1950's movie in which the hero took off in a DC-3 and crashed in a P-40E. Also, a Korean war era MiG-21, really?
There's gotta be a lack of film of the B-45 as here are shown lots of images that obviously are not B-45, but 47, 17, 25 or even 52 ot T33...But that does not stop me from loving this channel and the darkwhateversphere in general. Greetings from F-Normandy.
I love how he’ll be talking about a post war jet bomber…then slip in footage of a bomber with propellers. Or mention the end of the war and show U.S. soldiers with WWI dish shaped helmets. It’s almost like he’s planting Easter eggs for us to find.
No mention at all about the B and RB 45s based at RAF Sculthorpe and Alconbury in England, painted with British markings, and flown by British crews (to give plausible deniability) on reconnaissance missions over Soviet territory. Used on several flights before the advent of the vastly superior English Electric Canberra (Built as the B-57 in the USA). 3 B-45s exist in the U.S. and 2 large components exist in the UK.
I'm just impressed that footage of a B-10 exists! Honestly, it's as if these videos are compiled completely separately from the narration, given how infrequently the aircraft shown match the aircraft being mentioned in the audio portion.
@@SkyhawkSteve I agree, that was actually a bonus. I think that the DarkSkies guy just gave up trying to match up what stock footage he could find. He needs to just start showing either models of the aircraft, or animations. Check out youtube channel "Yarnhub" for good military history videos that are animated.
@@joeshmoe9978 I've concluded that it is a scheme to get people to comment on the video, giving him a higher youtube score. :) OTOH, DarkSkies did a great job on the XF-85 Goblin video, so I guess he can do a good job once in a blue moon.
OMG, I missed that first time around... an actual B-10... didn't know there were videos of it... amazing... but i'd be worried the B-10 would get shot down by those Korean War Mig-21s.
A few glitches brought the quality of this video down from the usual level... examples include labeling only the US and Germany as aircraft pioneers, obvious B-36 footage while talking about several other planes, repeatedly talking about NATO opposing the NKPR and PRC... Still an informative video, but a little more research & editing would've been helpful.
I noticed the B-36 footage as well. I wish there were more videos discussing the B-36 so i didn't mind seeing a couple clips of it but that's just my opinion
@@oseansoldier Thanks, missed that one as they showed the right picture of the MiG-15 (they showed actually swept wing B-47s instead of straight wing B-45s)
0:32 No, the Arado Ar 234 was the first four engined bomber to fly. It even came in two versions, one with four separate engines, one with two twin engines.
I like to believe I know a great deal about military aircraft but I am often humbled when I see how much more informed some of you are. I did not even know the B45 existed so I am totally un qualified to critique the narrator on his mistakes. I did flag the Mig 21 discontinuity but that is a well known aircraft. Kudos to all of you well educated aviation historians. Often I learn more in the discussion threads than I do from the videos themselves.
Wow, this one just has random videos and stills of aircraft having nothing to do with the B-45, along with errors and goofs in almost every line of narration. Seriously, if you don't have time to do it right, just don't do it at all.
So many silly errors that are so obvious to anyone but Dark Skies isn't the only one that's a screw up . Latest Simply Space episode got solar systems and the universe mixed up then got moons and planets mixed up.
@@TheDkeeler do you think due to the rarity of this AC and video he needed to keep the subject of B45 as a bomber kept in the watchers mind by filling in with other bomber video? Just a thought.
For instance, he mentioned the Mig 21 in the Korean War, but it wasn't around until after the Korean War. He also mentioned bombing demilitarized zones, but they're "demilitarized", so bombing them defeats their purpose! I don't think, that it's the fault of his "newsreel" style delivery. I think, that sometimes, he just wings it, instead of doing his homework.
I've begun to absolutely enjoy your videos with the speed at .75 and in full screen. They're more comprehensible and there's an additional moment to enjoy visuals that normally flash past due to the editing. Thanks for the posts.
I had decided to stop watching these videos because of his rapid speech. I'm glad I read your input on reducing his speech rate. Thanks for this information.
Greatly enjoy your videos! Could you please add subtitles to all the images, (e.g. type of aircraft, date, location). Quite often, I see an image, and wonder which aircraft it is, and where it is flying. Thank you.
Note the plane at 5:41. This is Pratt & Whitney's test bed with the test engines installed in the bomb bay and lowered into the airstream for test runs. This was the last flightworthy B-45 and is the one at Wright-Patterson today.
@@daneaxe6465 They work out of Ton Son Nhut and Bien Hoa. In both cases staffed by USWAF and worked bombing missions in the southern portion of the nation. They were being phased out.
@@daneaxe6465 I forgot to mention that the B-45's at Ton Son Nhut were reassigned to Danang in early 1966. They didn't have a good performance history either.
"Additionally the Reich's enemies began developing aircraft that would exceed the performance of many produced by the Luftwaffe" Shows Link trainers at 1:54 ☺
The Soviet Mig 21 didn't enter service till well after the Korean War, and to follow the Mig 15 there were the Mig 17 and 19. I would suggest a script review!
@@APFS-DS It FLEW, before the B45. Its like the Wright brothers bullshit. They admitted in the US High Court that Weiss/White was first - yet we get the same BS. First in service possibly, first in flight, no.
Yikes! Most of Whittles seminal work on jet engines was pre-WWII for just One. War does greatly accelerate development, largely by making funds available.
I have enjoyed every single "Dark" vid that I have seen. Your choice of topics and delivery are unique and absolutely first rate. You are an excellent presenter and your voice and pace make the content fascinating. I have a small channel, and I've done a few videos of my own. I am a rank amateur, but I do know about some of what it takes to put a channel together and to build a signature brand. You have done these things with a real flair that I have not seen in anyone else's channel. Thank you for all the trouble and time that I know you have had to put into it! Cheers! Michael
It was the MiG-15, not the MiG-21, that shot down the B-45 in Korea (1952). The MiG-17 was introduced in 1952, & the MiG-21 in 1959. The -17’s weren’t available for the Korean War. According to Wikipedia, it was a MiG-15 that shot down the B-45 in 1952.
I dare say that the British and the Germans were at the the forefront of aviation during WW2. The US needed both these counties designers and engineers after the war to get anything decent off the ground
Everybody still fighting at the end had great aircraft in the air or about to become operational. Japan had one out-flying our best fighters, just no fuel or competent pilots left. And most everyone was stealing any good idea anyone else had. The late war Yaks held their own well against the Luftwaffe, and so on.
As usual for Dark Skies, there is the sloppy research and video editing. At 4:41 is a B-47, not a B-45. Then there is a schematic showing the B-47 crew stations, again, not the B-45. At 5:59 is a photo of a B-47 pilot or copilot in his seat--not the B-45. At 5:27 is a B-36 with propellers. At 5:47 is a 6-engine B-47. At 5:51 is a B-47 pilot (actually, Brigadier General Jimmy Stewart) closing the canopy on his B-47. This clip is from the film "Strategic Air Command." At 6:07 and 6:14 are RB-47 clips, not RB-45. The two do not look anything alike. At 6:53, NATO was not involved in the Korean War; it was the UN which was involved.
I know you have a disclaimer on the video clips, but what does the stuff on C-47 para drop and Harvard trainers have to do with jet bombers? There must be something more relevant that you can use? The Ar 234 did not 'wreak havoc in the skies'. They only built 200 in total, they were grossly unreliable and many were destroyed on the ground. They were a side-show. What you should have said was that they showed which way bomber technology would go and the US realised they would eventually need something similar. And the US requirement was not to 'withstand the 234'. There was never any thought that these 2 aircraft would ever come into contact. Poor choice of words. Ditto 'the aircraft would be commanded by a crew of 4'. Just 'would have a crew of 4' is more accurate. There's a lot of footage of the far more advanced B-47 when you're still talking about the B-45. This might be a little deceptive for those who don't know their post-war US bombers. 'The first NATO offensive of 1950'? You do know that this was a UN operation, surely? OK, defensive systems. The B-45 was designed, like the Mosquito a few years earlier, and the Ar 234, to rely primarily on its speed to evade interception. The guns were there for pure tokenism, and habit I guess. The 50 cal machine guns didn't make the aircraft vulnerable and they wouldn't have been less vulnerable with cannon. What made them vulnerable was the unexpected arrival of Soviet jet fighters which did have the speed to catch a jet bomber. And you must mean the Mig-15, as the Mig-21 was still not even a twinkle in its daddy's eye at this point. Again odd to talk about the first jet-on-jet kill while showing WWII P-40s. And then more shots of WWII aircraft and production lines. There has to be something at least of the right period? Again this betrays a worrying lack of background knowledge and/or a lack of preparation and proof reading. This is a good subject but again so full of mistakes!
Love theses guys. Great bits of new info and gobs of inaccuracies, errors and just made up stuff. Fun to sort it out. I wonder what drugs their editor is on? LOL at the random footages spliced in, in no particular order.
@@scootergeorge7089 Hey there goofy! Ill have you know I leave quiet often due to the overabundance of texts from your mother begging to give up that neck
@@anthonyducoutumany6585 Yeah, and he talks about the end of the war and shows somebody checking out a new P-40 which was obsolete by 1945. Also, he mentions new aircraft superior to those of the Luftwaffe, and shows a line of SNJs (Texans). What a joke. Makes me doubt everything else he says.
The good news for 1/72 scale aviation plastic model builders is that there is now lovely model kit of this early jet bomber by Valom. I got mine on Ebay. looks just fine.
Are you old enough to remember the "box scale" model planes? They were whatever scale fit in the box! I'm old enough to have bought old shelf stock at a shop like 38 years ago! None of them matched,so your fleet were all the same basic lenght and wingspan. I built one of these in "box scale" when I was like 10/11 years old. I liked it,but I couldn't tell you if it was a good model or not!
Like who was "watching from the sidelines"? Definitely wasn't the US. Of course the US wanted nothing to do with another war in Europe, but the US navy guarded convoys to Europe, sank uboats and ferried aircraft from the U.S. and Canada to Britain. And they started lend lease where the US sold 50 destroyers to Britain for literally nothing. Oh and the p51 was an American design. Because the p51b and c were under powered at higher altitude, Britain asked to put in their engine. Definitely worked. Lol. But you brits and always throwing out either veiled comments or straight up attacking the US with the same old cliched crybaby excuse. Never fails.
I mean, at least they gave the other guys 'escape hatches'. Yeah.. that'd be real fun trying to throw yourself out of a tiny hatch with full flight gear and a parachute while the bomber is pitching and rolling out of control 😂
The navigator/bombardier and the tail gunner each had a full-sized door. Those doors had deployable wind shields to create a low-dynamic-pressure egress zone.
Korean war was a UN effort not NATO, also as several others have pointed out the mig 21 was not in service at the time of the Korean war. Additionally there is no need to read the title cards
Gobs of B-47 vids... even one with Jimmy Stewart in one from the movie Strategic Air Command. I like this channel but It requires a bit of factual cleanup..... especially when most everybody who watches this channel are pseudo subject matter experts.
@@joeshmoe9978 I see pictures of b36, B47, Generic bomb dropping from b17, bomb loading for fighter aircraft bays, and near the end pictures of destroyed Japanese bomber aircraft clearly from World War II. If you just Google b45 and look at images you will see some great pictures of the different versions of the aircraft and even the internal cockpits just at first glance.
I love this channel but I cannot hardly watch it. Sometimes I wish that I had only listened and not watched it. You really need to get someone that knows something about the subject to put the video together. Half of the video does not match what you are talking about. Please
They need to get over the idea they have that changing to any random pic every 10 seconds is better than a static pic that has relevance to the video and what they are talking about. Get the video editor off crack or meth or whatever the hell they are on.
I love how he doesn’t even mention the fact that Britain was the first to create jets. He says that Germany and Britain were the biggest for the advancements of technology while the British invented the jet engine. They created the spitfire. They created and designed the engines in the p51. The Americans only used the 76mm Sherman after the British showed them how it was useful. It was in the Sherman firefly
This is a great video about an aircraft that I don't think I have ever heard of. Great work as always, your videos are always smooth, polished and interesting. Thank you for your continuous coverage of fascinating topics!
I'll go as far as this being a good video about an aircraft that is largely forgotten. I've seen one at the Air Force Museum so I knew they existed, but there's little information available about them and it's a worthy subject for a video. Some of his facts are iffy and the use of unrelated aircraft footage is a bit distracting, but I still enjoyed the video and will give it a like.
![Kumamoto Masters Japan 2024 | Gregoria Mariska Tunjung (INA) [5] vs. Akane Yamaguchi (JPN) [2] | F](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EIjZybhsWqA/mqdefault.jpg)
Suggested correction: MIG 21s did not make their combat appearance until the 1960s. The only jet fighter to fly against UN forces in Korea was the MIG 15.
In Vietnam, our flyers faced MIG 17s, 19s, and 21a.
The MiG-17 was operational right at the end of the Korean War. I don’t believe any were operational with the North Korean Air Force (however it is known that several Russian piloted aircraft operated in North Korean markings).
And why did you show b-47 and never talk about them. and imply the Russians were building up there nuclear arsenal with B-29 and B-36
@@sailingbrewer The Russians were flying B-29 derivatives - the Tu-4.
The current Tu-95 Bear actually carried over some Tu-4 parts…
@@allangibson2408 yes, I believe they reverse engineered US B-29’s that had had to land in Russia for various reasons.
@@sailingbrewer This is common on this channel - throwing in video of different model aircraft from the one being discussed. There is also a WW2 B-18 Bolo on a takeoff run, and footage of destroyed Japanese aircraft on the ground during the narration of the Korean War. I find it quite distracting from the good information being presented to have so much poor video editing quality.
"Six turnin', four burnin'", wait?!?! how did THAT get in there?? "Just throw in random aircraft, nobody will notice", they told me.
Yes, likewise the crew position profile for a B-47, and WTF was the point of showing a Martin B-10 taking off? Struck by the similarity of the overall airframe to North American’s AJ-1 Savage. Whoever puts these things together (video clips) is not a Total Aviation Person. Seen to operate on the principle of “Hey, it’s an airplane ain’t it?”
Mig21's în Korean War?
So I wasn't the only one to catch that mistake. Should have been MIG-15.
And NATO wasn't involved in the Korean War. The allied forces in Korea were under the auspices of the UN.
imagine fighting mig 21s with your much slower f86 sabre, like seriously your airwing wasn't informed of such a very advanced aircraft for the 50s
@@joshcrys The one shown in the video looked like a mig-19 but could be a 17.
Ya, I caught that too... was going to say something, but I'm late to the comments.
My Grandfather was 1 of the first Airforce pilot's to fly the b 45 tornado. He was part of the Langley crew.
First sentence "The USA and Germany were the pioneers of aircraft in WW2"
Errr, hello, UK here...
F
All Uk did was upgrade the Spitfire several times and make like 2 new planes
Mikhail Gurevich has entered the chat
@@duncanmcgee13 UK also developed the second ever operational jet fighter and developed some ground breaking designs for aircraft on board radar. Thats nothing to sneeze at.
please dont forget that arado also tested a four engine variant of the ar234 blitz.
I believe the alliance fighting the Communists in Korea was the United Nations, not NATO.
The "Dark Skies" channel's sloppy fact checking strikes again!
@@Otokichi786 Not even Wikipedia is this bad.
Yep last time I checked Australia and New Zealand were not part of NATO but were there in Korea
Also, it was Mig-15s used by the Communists, not Mig-21s (those came a couple of decades later).
@@patrickglaser1560 That is a pretty narrow-minded statement
And do ignore Frank Whittle .....the man forgotten who inovated the turbojet
You mean *_Hans von Ohain . . ._*
@@letoubib21 nope
I think I said inovated, not flew......
You mean Elling, don't you?
@@leifvejby8023 Eyyy, thanks! Didn't know him, admitted *. . .*
The videos on this channel regularly show fairly sloppy research, but the inaccuracies are usually tolerable. Not this one. This one starts of with a bit of a whopper: "The United States and Germany were the pioneers of aircraft during World War 2". Please... everyone had interesting pioneering designs during the war. Both Germany and Britain had jet fighters in service by 1944. Germany also had 4 engine variants of the Ar234 and the Ju287. Meanwhile, the US managed to produce the P59 that flew thanks to a British motor, but was no faster than a piston-engined fighter and eventually the P80 which was a better plane, but again relied on a British motor. The narration itself contains some gross exaggerations (the Arado 234 Blitz wreaked havoc in the skies... really ?). It also rewrites history by claiming that Nato was fighting in the Korean war and that MiG-21s time travelled back to the the 1950-53 period in order to assist MiG-15s... This is why I cannot subscribe.
agreed, but i did subscribe, for the chuckle, for the fun, for the info and for the " WFT was that again!? "
I would like to acknowledge the Avro Fighter Bomber developed by The Best Canada had to offer. Due to politics exerted by the Military Industrial Complex of the United States it was rejected for inferior military aircraft and missiles . However the Canadian Engineers who developed the Avro ended up working for NASA and greatly improved the Moon Mission capability of the U.S.A. I believe without their knowledge the First Man on the moon landings would have been delayed 5 to 10 years.
Also no atomic weapons of the early 50s could fit in that plane.
Agreed. They threw in a short video of a Martin B-10. 1935 design. WTF? Also showed a village being strafed. Not by a B-45. Again, WTF?
Right?!?!
Okay, in 1939 Germany flew the Heinkel He-178 turbojet, in 1940 Italy flew the Campini-Caproni motorjet, in 1941 Britain flew the Gloster E.28/39 Pioneer turbojet, in 1942 America flew the Bell P-59 Airacomet turbojet, in 1943 Hungary built and tested the Varga RMI-1 X/H turboprop, in 1944 Russia built and tested Bereznyak-Isayev BI-III-6 with ramjets, in 1945 Japan flew the Nakajima Kikka turbojet, in 1946 France flew the Sud-Ouest SO-6000 Triton turbojet initiated in 1943, in 1947 Sweden flew the Saab J21R turbojet initiated in 1945, also in 1947 Argentina flew the Instituto Aeronautica I.Ae.27 Pulqui I turbojet also initiated in 1945, and in 1948 Switzerland flew the F+W Emmen N-20.1 Arbalete with JATO engine initiated in 1945 so, America and Germany were hardly the only jet aviation pioneers of the Second World War.
The first 4-engine jet bomber was the German Arado Ar-234C with turbojets of 1944, next came the North American XB-45 of 1945, however, that same year the Russian Ilyushin Il-22 flew along with the Convair XB-46 Needle and Curtiss XP-87 Blackhawk, all four engine jets.
And the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Balalaika "Fishbed" didn't fly until 1955, 2 years after the Korean War.
Your videos are mostly excellent, but a bit more research would prove beneficial.
As much as I studied the Korean war as an ROTC Cadet I never knew we had jet bombers in combat. Thank you so much for the information, well done.
UK had the Gloster Meteor at the end of WW2 - Dark Skies confuses "The World" with "USA" - first in USA is often actually AFTER other countries.
Damn son the banshees were flying off the deck! Get an education
Wasn't a bomber but jet powered.
@@malteseowl isn't the meteor a fighter or attacker
@@cad5238 then your comment makes no sense other than trying to be a know-it-all. He quite clearly stated he didn't realize there were jet bombers, big difference
The AVRO Lancaster was the first multi engined aircraft to refuel in the air not the B45. This was done in 1944 as a hedge against the B 29 mods enabling it to carry your atomic bomb not being ready. The B29 had two bomb bays neither being large enough to carry the nuclear bomb. The Lancaster had a massive bomb bay but did not have the range of the B29, requiring it be refueled on the flight to japan. It so happened that the B29 was ready and the Lancasters were not needed.
The Lancaster also had a higher lifting capacity than the B29 as it routinely carried loads over 23,000 lbs. The Grand Slam earthquake bomb itself was a shade over 22,000 lbs and the Lancaster was the only aircraft with a large enough bomb bay to carry it.
The refueling testing was done in early 1945.
He said multi engine meet aircraft to refuel in mid-sure, at least at the 6 minutes or so mark. I don't recall if he phrased it that way earlier in there video,
Wow, I didn't know any of that. Thanks for posting the information.
To be fair, at 6:07 he says it was the first multi-engine JET aircraft to successfully aerial refuel.
arniewilliamson BULLSHIT the Lancaster could carry a larger bomb load than a B29, B29's routinely carries 20,000 # over 3500 miles as built, Lancasters COULD carry 14,000# on short missions. 30 Lancasters were MODIFIED to carry the 22,000 grand slam, less that 30 were MODIFIED, Post war when developed the B29 carried the T12 super Blockbuster bomb, 44,500# to 25,000 Ft and dropped it, TWICE the bomb load of a MODIFIED Lanc !!! Post war the USA GAVE the Brits 100 B29's so they would have a long range nuclear bomber !!! Facts of history son IF you ever did any research. The Lanc was NEVER going to carry the Atomic bomb. USAAF had the B32 as a back up if the B29 was not ready, guess what the B29 dropped two atomic weapons on Japland !!!
the chieftain gave the best explanation on the effect of various weapons. Even partially trained infantry can (mentally) resist attack from a single type of weapon. Presumably, this is because there is a always an effective shelter method against any single weapon. A better trained soldier can resist being under attack from two different types of weapons (trajectory, solid/explosive shells, etc.) simultaneously. Even hardcore veterans had difficulty when under simultaneous attack from 3 or more forms.
Scared? By the time the Arado appeared, the war in Europe was just about over. The USAAF, United States Army Air Force had determined that the war would be won with piston engine fighters and bombers.
The US deployed P-80’s to Europe in 1944…
The British had a substantial number of operational Meteor fighters by then.
The Germans didn’t have the fuel for the 400 Me-262’s they had built by January 1945 however.
@@allangibson2408 there were on engines for 200 of the M262's the rest never got engines !!!
"The United States and Germany were the pioneers of aircraft...." What?
So the Spitfire, Lancaster, Mosquito, and Typhoon were not game changers?
What about the dambusters?
Even better, how about British engineers putting the RR Merlin engines into their P-51's?
Also, remember that the RAF started prototyping jet fighters early during WW II.
Yep, normally I don't watch Dark Skies, I watch Mark Felton videos, but, the subject matter was new so I cringed through it.
Oh THANKYOU for writing your comment, it saved me the trouble, and it's number 3 on the comments.
I can't think of a single Nazi superweapon which added one day to WW2. The V1, the V2, the V3, the remotely-piloted air to surface missiles, the whole f*ckin' lot of them failed. Enigma, which the British mastered better than the Germans. The German Type 21 subs, which were leaky and useless. The King Tiger, which was so heavy it couldn't cross the bridges in the Ardennes. Add a few more yourself.
@@raypurchase801 Thank you. I hope others do not get me wrong. Dark is an American channel. And I get it, when they want to amplify American feats.
That statement shows that the channel thinks nobody else did anything. Engineers across GB and the Commonwealth produced equipment to defeat the Axis Powes.
And when you produce a documentary, you need to refrain from discounting contributions
@@gryph01 That's OK, I always get annoyed at TV documentaries about WW2 aviation as well.
The errors, the omissions.
what i love about this series is that the entire content is explained in 30 seconds or so and then the drawn out part is explained.
The footage is cool but it so wrong when facts are involved. The simplest Google verification searches can help this channel but they don't seem to be inclined. Showing the Giant confuse peacemaker was too much.
@ (7:18) you speak of the B45 being extremely vulnerable to Mig 21's. The Mig 21 made its maiden flight on 16 June 1955. Mig 21's weren't operational with soviet forces untill 1959. At which time the B45 Tornado was already retired.
Yes. The video producer should've said MiG-15.
This is typical of Dark Skies presentations. While entertaining and somewhat informative, I grow weary of their constant mistakes in equipment identification often accompanied by visuals that don't correspond to the subject at hand. Yet here I am, still watching. It's like junk food that's hard to give up.
@@peterfable Agree. It's pretty horrible, really. There are so many inaccuracies from start to finish.
Come on!!! B-47s over and over! B-45 Straight Wing! B-47 Swept Wing! B-45 4 Engines 2 Nacelles! B-47 6 Engines 4 Nacelles! Get it together.
he just doesn't care I think
@@mikepette4422 Or he just doesn't know.
Correction: the B-45 was not the first 4 engine jet bomber to fly. The JU-287 first flew on 16 August 1944 (A heavy bomber with swept forward wings) and a 4 engine version of the AR-234 the AR0234 also flew in 1944.C
Arado's had a four engine variant in WW2, btw. Mig-15's were the newest Russian jet in KOREA, btw. I see a lot of B-47 shots in this, as well a lot of general historical shots not related to the B-45, which are interesting, but not relevant.
Another video that could have used some fact checking before release, an fair number of easily caught errors in this one yet again.
That's the fun part of Dark Skies. You learn that the MIG-21 traveled back in time to participate in the Korean War and that the B-45 could be configured to look like a B-47.
@@MakeMeThinkAgain that’s exactly the eyebrow raise I had
Come on man. To lie is the in thing to do nowadays. Aren't you on board with it?
Seems to be the norm in today's world especially since all history is racist according to the sheep.
Cringe from start to end.
In all fairness it’s hard to fact check everything and stay on a schedule as a (presumably) 1 man team
The Arado AR 234, starting with the 2 Jet Engines. But starting with the 234 V6, it had 4 jet engines in separate nacelles, the 234 V8 had the 4 jets in paired nacelles.
Then there was the unique JU 287 that also had 4 jet engines. 2 under the forward swept wings and 2 mounted on the side of the fuselage. It is positive that at least 1 flew before the end of the war. There are several production versions listed, some may have been completed and flown, but records are sketchy at best. The JU 287 was a very unique aircraft and must have had some merit as the Russian's built and flew some after the war. However they used 2 under wing mounted Russian built Jet engines.
There may have been a few others under development before the end of the war. Some may have flown as a test bed aircraft. But by 1944, Germany was having problems with obtaining materials and other supplies making it difficult to mas-produce their established aircraft. Germany could have had air superiority much greater than they had at the beginning of the war. Heinkel flew the first Jet Aircraft, the HE 178 in 1939. But the corrupt Nazi government and certain manufactures that had the ear of that government, like Messerschmidt and not forward thinking generals like Goering, push others, like Heinkel to the side in favor of the few, until it was to late. Thank God!
The MiG-21 did NOTserve in the Korean war it entered service at the end of the 1950s, the premier Soviet fighter was the MiG-15 and if the war had lasted another year we'd have seen an early appearance of the MiG-17.
The Ar-234 was originally designed as a reconnaissance aircraft. However, it was the first four-engined bomber (14 Ar-234C built), not the B-45, although it didn't make it into squadron service.
Yep, came to say the same thing.
@FF Freedom 1st February 1944 for the first four-engined version but it was the V19 that was the true -C prototype, and much later in 1944, but I don't know the date. Production was delayed by bombing until February 1945.
That was bad but Dark Skies has the Mig 21 flying in the Korean War!
Dark Skies: "Here's my video on the B-45."
Also Dark Skies: "Here's a bunch of footage of planes that are NOT the B-45."
I watch these videos but I cringe a lot.
Versions of the Arado 234 had four engines so the B-45 was not the first four engined bomber
2 jets 2 jato units
Four engines plus JATO
@@buckhulit2718 those variants barely made it past prototyping 14 were barely built and the allies finished building after the war the bmw units were sorely underpowered
@@mrwolf9335
Nevertheles, they did be the first four-engined jet bombers *. . .*
@@mrwolf9335 Somewhat underpowered, the reason for four engines.
It was at one time called a B-25 with jet engines. The North American XB-28 Dragon was a remarkable aircraft design that few have heard of . One still remains off the Laguna Beach area in California.
Dark Skies: We don't care WHAT pictures we throw up to "illustrate" the alleged content!
Raise your game Dark Skies!
Compared to the whacky scripts full of bs, the photos are fine
@@ecpgieicg I see the whacky scripts are related to the inapplicable pictures.
That is always a huge distraction.
Turn off the sound and watch the video. Then come back and listen to the sound with the video off. Makes more sense that way.
The wildest collection of disassociated airplanes I've seen since watching a 1950's movie in which the hero took off in a DC-3 and crashed in a P-40E. Also, a Korean war era MiG-21, really?
There's gotta be a lack of film of the B-45 as here are shown lots of images that obviously are not B-45, but 47, 17, 25 or even 52 ot T33...But that does not stop me from loving this channel and the darkwhateversphere in general. Greetings from F-Normandy.
I love how he’ll be talking about a post war jet bomber…then slip in footage of a bomber with propellers. Or mention the end of the war and show U.S. soldiers with WWI dish shaped helmets. It’s almost like he’s planting Easter eggs for us to find.
No mention at all about the B and RB 45s based at RAF Sculthorpe and Alconbury in England, painted with British markings, and flown by British crews (to give plausible deniability) on reconnaissance missions over Soviet territory. Used on several flights before the advent of the vastly superior English Electric Canberra (Built as the B-57 in the USA). 3 B-45s exist in the U.S. and 2 large components exist in the UK.
7:46 Martin B-10 making a rare appearance during the Korean conflict. 😜
I'm just impressed that footage of a B-10 exists! Honestly, it's as if these videos are compiled completely separately from the narration, given how infrequently the aircraft shown match the aircraft being mentioned in the audio portion.
@@SkyhawkSteve I agree, that was actually a bonus. I think that the DarkSkies guy just gave up trying to match up what stock footage he could find. He needs to just start showing either models of the aircraft, or animations. Check out youtube channel "Yarnhub" for good military history videos that are animated.
@@joeshmoe9978 I've concluded that it is a scheme to get people to comment on the video, giving him a higher youtube score. :) OTOH, DarkSkies did a great job on the XF-85 Goblin video, so I guess he can do a good job once in a blue moon.
@@SkyhawkSteve true!
OMG, I missed that first time around... an actual B-10... didn't know there were videos of it... amazing... but i'd be worried the B-10 would get shot down by those Korean War Mig-21s.
There is one on display at the SAC aerospace museum along interstate 80 between Omaha and Lincoln Nebraska. Visiting this museum is time well spent.
great video as ever, but I do have the idea that you increased the pace, and its a but fast for an informatic format for me
A few glitches brought the quality of this video down from the usual level... examples include labeling only the US and Germany as aircraft pioneers, obvious B-36 footage while talking about several other planes, repeatedly talking about NATO opposing the NKPR and PRC... Still an informative video, but a little more research & editing would've been helpful.
There's also prominent footage of a B-47 when discussing the B-45 around 6:12
Mig15,s in the picture and talking about mig 21s
I noticed the B-36 footage as well. I wish there were more videos discussing the B-36 so i didn't mind seeing a couple clips of it but that's just my opinion
There were no NATO troops in the Korea War, this was a UN mission
And pretty sure there were no Mig-21s there either
@@oseansoldier Thanks, missed that one as they showed the right picture of the MiG-15 (they showed actually swept wing B-47s instead of straight wing B-45s)
@@TheRealRedRooster Actually, I think some of the footage was of MiG-17s
A lot of the footage had nothing to do with the B-45 and then there was the jarring mention of the Mig-21 .... in 1950!
You didn't know that the Martin B-10 was used in the Korean conflict?! 😜
0:32 No, the Arado Ar 234 was the first four engined bomber to fly. It even came in two versions, one with four separate engines, one with two twin engines.
The Ar 234C was the 4 engine version
I like to believe I know a great deal about military aircraft but I am often humbled when I see how much more informed some of you are. I did not even know the B45 existed so I am totally un qualified to critique the narrator on his mistakes. I did flag the Mig 21 discontinuity but that is a well known aircraft. Kudos to all of you well educated aviation historians. Often I learn more in the discussion threads than I do from the videos themselves.
Wow, this one just has random videos and stills of aircraft having nothing to do with the B-45, along with errors and goofs in almost every line of narration. Seriously, if you don't have time to do it right, just don't do it at all.
So many silly errors that are so obvious to anyone but Dark Skies isn't the only one that's a screw up . Latest Simply Space episode got solar systems and the universe mixed up then got moons and planets mixed up.
When you're speaking as fast as the narrator, errors are bound to occur.
@@wolfshanze5980 Right. Sure. That's the problem...
@@TheDkeeler do you think due to the rarity of this AC and video he needed to keep the subject of B45 as a bomber kept in the watchers mind by filling in with other bomber video? Just a thought.
For instance, he mentioned the Mig 21 in the Korean War, but it wasn't around until after the Korean War. He also mentioned bombing demilitarized zones, but they're "demilitarized", so bombing them defeats their purpose! I don't think, that it's the fault of his "newsreel" style delivery. I think, that sometimes, he just wings it, instead of doing his homework.
Thanks
I've begun to absolutely enjoy your videos with the speed at .75 and in full screen. They're more comprehensible and there's an additional moment to enjoy visuals that normally flash past due to the editing. Thanks for the posts.
I had decided to stop watching these videos because of his rapid speech. I'm glad I read your input on reducing his speech rate. Thanks for this information.
@@deepbluesea615
You're welcome. Glad to help out.
@@deepbluesea615 You can custom set the speed in .1 increments. Great tool for making some slow and fast talkers more understandable.
@@deepbluesea615 Agree. Narrator's speech here is the Achilles' Heel. If you wanna emulate Ben Shapiro, be able to match his enunciation.
That was new to me, the MIG 21 in the Korean war, I didn't think they had their first flight till 1955, my respect for you is faltering!
7:20
“Such as the lethal MiG-21.”
*Literally shows MiG-15s*
Names incorrect aircraft in the Korean War, but shows the correct one instead.
But as we all know the soviets had the Mig 21 back in Korea thats why russia won the Korean War.... right ? *crickets*
Not a lot of B-45 footage out there, huh?
Nice to see the Martin B-10 though, huh? 😁😜
Greatly enjoy your videos! Could you please add subtitles to all the images, (e.g. type of aircraft, date, location). Quite often, I see an image, and wonder which aircraft it is, and where it is flying. Thank you.
Mig-21s didn't exist in 1950, and what the heck was the reason for the appearance of the B-10?
Who invented the ... ejector seat? Also, how was the B45 the first four-engined jet when the Ar234 was?
The ar234 only had 2 engines, hence, not a 4 engined bomber.
Most Ar234's were twin engined. The only four engined variant to make it past prototyping was at the end of the war and only 14 were half built.
B-45A is on display at the Castle Air Museum, Very interesting plane and a great museum.
The B45 was not designed as a light Bomber the 45 and 47 were both listed as heavy Bombers but were re classified as mediums
Note the plane at 5:41. This is Pratt & Whitney's test bed with the test engines installed in the bomb bay and lowered into the airstream for test runs. This was the last flightworthy B-45 and is the one at Wright-Patterson today.
I worked on that B-45 at Prat & Whitney's flight test hangar in East Hartford, CT, in 1967.
I saw the last of the B-45's in use in my early Vietnam assignment. I think they were in their last assignment. BUT they did serve successfully.
Thank You, Sir
Interesting. What role were those B-45s performing at that time? I never heard of this model or seen one until this video.
@@daneaxe6465 They work out of Ton Son Nhut and Bien Hoa. In both cases staffed by USWAF and worked bombing missions in the southern portion of the nation. They were being phased out.
@@daneaxe6465 I forgot to mention that the B-45's at Ton Son Nhut were reassigned to Danang in early 1966. They didn't have a good performance history either.
I think you are confusing B-45 with B-57.
Gloster does not approve of your pioneer statement
Arado Ar-234C was the first 4 engine bomber to fly in Early 1945.
It was not first 4 engined jet bomber. That was Arado 234 version with 4x BMW engines. NATO in Korea, MiG21.. and bunch of other mistakes in video..
"They would NOT show mercy until the Reich surrenderd"
Germany: Tell me about it.
"Additionally the Reich's enemies began developing aircraft that would exceed the performance of many produced by the Luftwaffe"
Shows Link trainers at 1:54 ☺
Arado was the first 4 engined jet bomber with the AR 234C
The Tornado dropped the first "live" A-bomb from a jet. A B-45 dropped a 31 kiloton TX-7 at Operation Buster Jangle in 1951.
The Soviet Mig 21 didn't enter service till well after the Korean War, and to follow the Mig 15 there were the Mig 17 and 19. I would suggest a script review!
Love the way the UK was omitted in the introduction!
Who researched this? MiG 21 in Korean War? NOT! Why all the videos of B-47s?
And B-36s? Many are these videos are like this - inaccurate film clips.
@@nevrock1 Agreed, the increasingly poorly researched material is beginning to annoy me.
The Ar 234 C-3 had four engines, the B-45 was not the first four engined jet bomber
I like that he highlights obscure aircraft but these constant errors that seem to be in every video get annoying.
Oh which.... 14 airframes were built and they only flew prototype flights a couple of times
@@APFS-DS It FLEW, before the B45. Its like the Wright brothers bullshit. They admitted in the US High Court that Weiss/White was first - yet we get the same BS. First in service possibly, first in flight, no.
Well, he also mentioned that the B-45 came across Mig-21s in Korea, when the first flight of that jet was 1955 and was not in production until 1959...
@@rosiehawtrey This is the first I've heard of Weiss/White - can you post a good search string?
What about the UK? They give the US all the key tech!
Pretty amazing what war can do almost all technology advancement was created during war
Yikes! Most of Whittles seminal work on jet engines was pre-WWII for just One. War does greatly accelerate development, largely by making funds available.
Why mix in film footage of B-47s in this video????
I have enjoyed every single "Dark" vid that I have seen. Your choice of topics and delivery are unique and absolutely first rate. You are an excellent presenter and your voice and pace make the content fascinating. I have a small channel, and I've done a few videos of my own. I am a rank amateur, but I do know about some of what it takes to put a channel together and to build a signature brand. You have done these things with a real flair that I have not seen in anyone else's channel. Thank you for all the trouble and time that I know you have had to put into it!
Cheers!
Michael
Entertaining, but poor fact checking. AR-234C was the first four jet bomber to fly, but B-45 was the first fully operational.
Also the first flight was 1947 so hardly a threat at the end of WW2 fact checking would be great.
This video is shit. He read a few facts from Wikipedia and threw several film clips together of mostly not B45 images.
It was the MiG-15, not the MiG-21, that shot down the B-45 in Korea (1952). The MiG-17 was introduced in 1952, & the MiG-21 in 1959. The -17’s weren’t available for the Korean War. According to Wikipedia, it was a MiG-15 that shot down the B-45 in 1952.
The MiG-21 wasn't flown in Korea
I dare say that the British and the Germans were at the the forefront of aviation during WW2.
The US needed both these counties designers and engineers after the war to get anything decent off the ground
@ How is that new guy in the WH working out for y'all...lol.
Everybody still fighting at the end had great aircraft in the air or about to become operational. Japan had one out-flying our best fighters, just no fuel or competent pilots left. And most everyone was stealing any good idea anyone else had. The late war Yaks held their own well against the Luftwaffe, and so on.
The first four engined jet bomber was also the Arado…
It was the first jet bomber, the first twin engine jet bomber, and later the first 4 engine jet bomber. Really it set a lot of firsts
As usual for Dark Skies, there is the sloppy research and video editing.
At 4:41 is a B-47, not a B-45. Then there is a schematic showing the B-47 crew stations, again, not the B-45.
At 5:59 is a photo of a B-47 pilot or copilot in his seat--not the B-45.
At 5:27 is a B-36 with propellers.
At 5:47 is a 6-engine B-47.
At 5:51 is a B-47 pilot (actually, Brigadier General Jimmy Stewart) closing the canopy on his B-47. This clip is from the film "Strategic Air Command."
At 6:07 and 6:14 are RB-47 clips, not RB-45. The two do not look anything alike.
At 6:53, NATO was not involved in the Korean War; it was the UN which was involved.
7:20 “The lethal MiG-21” Shows a trio of Mig 15s. The MIG 21 entered production in 1959. Thus was not a factor in the Korean War of 1950-53.
He fills in areas of the video that doesnt have what is needed for dramatic effect, read the descriptions, that is this channels disclaimer
They are actually MiG 17`s which were a slightly improved version of the airframe.
america, italy, and germany.
you should check out soem of the ww2 italian planes they're pretty neat.
The _United States_ and _Germany_ were the pioneers?
Really?
Nothing from the British then? 🤣
This plane needs to be in Warthunder. Rear Facing 50's would be interesting.
Any chance that you can add the RB-45c used by the RAF on site-seeing visis the other of the Iron curtain
I believe mark Felton productions may have already covered that one.
@@Falcon-15 Yeah, I think so, too. Guess it flew over Stalingrad *. . .*
That was an English Electric Canberra and that only has two engines
When talking specifically about the aircraft, stop showing other aircraft.
I know you have a disclaimer on the video clips, but what does the stuff on C-47 para drop and Harvard trainers have to do with jet bombers? There must be something more relevant that you can use?
The Ar 234 did not 'wreak havoc in the skies'. They only built 200 in total, they were grossly unreliable and many were destroyed on the ground. They were a side-show. What you should have said was that they showed which way bomber technology would go and the US realised they would eventually need something similar. And the US requirement was not to 'withstand the 234'. There was never any thought that these 2 aircraft would ever come into contact. Poor choice of words.
Ditto 'the aircraft would be commanded by a crew of 4'. Just 'would have a crew of 4' is more accurate.
There's a lot of footage of the far more advanced B-47 when you're still talking about the B-45. This might be a little deceptive for those who don't know their post-war US bombers.
'The first NATO offensive of 1950'? You do know that this was a UN operation, surely?
OK, defensive systems. The B-45 was designed, like the Mosquito a few years earlier, and the Ar 234, to rely primarily on its speed to evade interception. The guns were there for pure tokenism, and habit I guess. The 50 cal machine guns didn't make the aircraft vulnerable and they wouldn't have been less vulnerable with cannon. What made them vulnerable was the unexpected arrival of Soviet jet fighters which did have the speed to catch a jet bomber.
And you must mean the Mig-15, as the Mig-21 was still not even a twinkle in its daddy's eye at this point.
Again odd to talk about the first jet-on-jet kill while showing WWII P-40s. And then more shots of WWII aircraft and production lines. There has to be something at least of the right period?
Again this betrays a worrying lack of background knowledge and/or a lack of preparation and proof reading. This is a good subject but again so full of mistakes!
I dunno, I actually kinda enjoyed actually seeing a video of a Martin B-10... had nothing to do with the video, but nice random plane drop!
well said
Love theses guys. Great bits of new info and gobs of inaccuracies, errors and just made up stuff.
Fun to sort it out. I wonder what drugs their editor is on? LOL at the random footages spliced in, in no particular order.
Could you please do a history on the P26 Peashooter? It’s an interesting plane that I still haven’t found it’s origin
warthunder poop
@@aw2quest - Hey there video dude! How often do you come out of your mom's basement?
@@scootergeorge7089 Hey there goofy! Ill have you know I leave quiet often due to the overabundance of texts from your mother begging to give up that neck
Maybe I'm wrong (I don't think so), but you're talking about the B-45 and showing numerous clips of B-47s.
and even B 36s
@@anthonyducoutumany6585 Yeah, and he talks about the end of the war and shows somebody checking out a new P-40 which was obsolete by 1945. Also, he mentions new aircraft superior to those of the Luftwaffe, and shows a line of SNJs (Texans). What a joke. Makes me doubt everything else he says.
The good news for 1/72 scale aviation plastic model builders is that there is now lovely model kit of this early jet bomber by Valom. I got mine on Ebay. looks just fine.
Are you old enough to remember the "box scale" model planes? They were whatever scale fit in the box! I'm old enough to have bought old shelf stock at a shop like 38 years ago! None of them matched,so your fleet were all the same basic lenght and wingspan. I built one of these in "box scale" when I was like 10/11 years old. I liked it,but I couldn't tell you if it was a good model or not!
I loved working on DC-3'S. Infact I have a piston in my shed.
Ahem...P-51, Spitfire, Lancaster, Hurricane, Mosquito to name a few and fighting from 1939 while others stood and watched from the side lines
Like who was "watching from the sidelines"? Definitely wasn't the US. Of course the US wanted nothing to do with another war in Europe, but the US navy guarded convoys to Europe, sank uboats and ferried aircraft from the U.S. and Canada to Britain. And they started lend lease where the US sold 50 destroyers to Britain for literally nothing. Oh and the p51 was an American design. Because the p51b and c were under powered at higher altitude, Britain asked to put in their engine. Definitely worked. Lol. But you brits and always throwing out either veiled comments or straight up attacking the US with the same old cliched crybaby excuse. Never fails.
I love nearly all your videos. Why nearly all you ask? Because I know I did not watch all the videos you put out. Thanks for your effort
4 crew, only 2 get ejector seats. Just so you know how much you're valued.....
Let´s talk about the Vulcan.....
I mean, at least they gave the other guys 'escape hatches'. Yeah.. that'd be real fun trying to throw yourself out of a tiny hatch with full flight gear and a parachute while the bomber is pitching and rolling out of control 😂
The navigator/bombardier and the tail gunner each had a full-sized door. Those doors had deployable wind shields to create a low-dynamic-pressure egress zone.
The Vulcan was more dangerous, I read that only in 2(!) times the whole crew succesfully evacuated a falling plane!
@@MrKentaroMotoPI Good insight, that's some awesome engineering.
Specious on so many levels.
Korean war was a UN effort not NATO, also as several others have pointed out the mig 21 was not in service at the time of the Korean war.
Additionally there is no need to read the title cards
The MIG21 first flew in 1955 and didn't enter service until 1959. It was probably a MIG-15, not a 21.
Yet another dog's dinner of factual errors and terribly mismatched footage.
Gobs of B-47 vids... even one with Jimmy Stewart in one from the movie Strategic Air Command. I like this channel but It requires a bit of factual cleanup..... especially when most everybody who watches this channel are pseudo subject matter experts.
Makes me wonder whether the producer here is Harvard-, Yale-, Princeton- or Dartmouth-educated in History.
Then don’t watch , nobody’s forcing you 🤷🏼♂️
No way you dudes get hole... no way..
@@zrandom4896 I find it useful to know when videos are inaccurate
See?
I never even heard of this Bomber!
Nice Research Work!
Yeah for some reason a lot of history books about aircraft leave out the B-45. Not sure why it was a first in so many ways
Your use of incorrect b-roll spoils the factual theme of this video. If you don’t have correct video then just stick to pictures that are relevant.
Or at least, models of the relevant aircraft
@@joeshmoe9978 I see pictures of b36, B47, Generic bomb dropping from b17, bomb loading for fighter aircraft bays, and near the end pictures of destroyed Japanese bomber aircraft clearly from World War II. If you just Google b45 and look at images you will see some great pictures of the different versions of the aircraft and even the internal cockpits just at first glance.
7:06 "...first NATO offensive" NATO was not involved in Korea. You may be referring to the first U.N. offensive.
I love this channel but I cannot hardly watch it. Sometimes I wish that I had only listened and not watched it. You really need to get someone that knows something about the subject to put the video together. Half of the video does not match what you are talking about. Please
They need to get over the idea they have that changing to any random pic every 10 seconds is better than a static pic that has relevance to the video and what they are talking about. Get the video editor off crack or meth or whatever the hell they are on.
Grayfox 707 You said it way better than I did.
Our version of the first of the Brit victory series, years earlier.
I love how he doesn’t even mention the fact that Britain was the first to create jets. He says that Germany and Britain were the biggest for the advancements of technology while the British invented the jet engine. They created the spitfire. They created and designed the engines in the p51. The Americans only used the 76mm Sherman after the British showed them how it was useful. It was in the Sherman firefly
You got that right. The Rolls-Royce Merlin engine was a major reason the Luftwaffe could not live up to Goering's boast of early air supremacy.
@@happysawfish I see I have a fellow spitfire connoisseur
I have been honored to work with the last RB-45 in existence, she is my personal favorite of the cold war aircraft.
This is a great video about an aircraft that I don't think I have ever heard of. Great work as always, your videos are always smooth, polished and interesting. Thank you for your continuous coverage of fascinating topics!
^ What he said.
I'll go as far as this being a good video about an aircraft that is largely forgotten. I've seen one at the Air Force Museum so I knew they existed, but there's little information available about them and it's a worthy subject for a video. Some of his facts are iffy and the use of unrelated aircraft footage is a bit distracting, but I still enjoyed the video and will give it a like.
Hey dude i love your videos and was wondering if you could do a video on the horton 229 made by the germans