hello, sorry, to burst you bobble, but the white race never have existed,I attended school and leaned all the name of the different human races. I assume you are referring to the Romans or Indo Europeans, they are caucasians and they are sub divided example Nordic , alpine,mediterranean, etc, etc .Do not take my word for it, you research it. God speed
~Amazing, how USA-spies enabled Boeing B-29 to copy this slick Heinkel He-177 'Griffin', -albeit larger with four separate air-cooled radial-engines, whilst the He-264 version was copied by Boeing including the nose-gear (although Boeing employed a more cylindrical fuselage); -the American'izes even copied the pilot-controlled gun-turret. In contrast, the handsome Boeing B-17 was strictly American in execution. Would be interesting to know the real story about how this was done so rapidly .!!
It always surprised me that the German Air Ministry did not show any interest in the He 177 with a conventional four engine layout (Four seperate engines), Henkel did develop a few as prototypes. The probloms regards the engine layout would have simply vanished. I guess someone would then have had to admtted he had been wrong, so they trudged on with that disaster of an engine setup
@MrOrmesby Hitler forbade development of long range bombers, demanded the first military jet fighter (ME 262) be converted into a bomber. The guy was nuts. Arrogance as high as the alps. He had moments of understanding regarding strategy, but these far outweighed by mistakes. A fascination, almost a fetish inspired regard for one thing, whilst corrupting or ignoring all else. Their only really gross mistakes were few, Hitler/Auchwitz etc, but of such magnitude to still stun us today
Milch and Goring were both idiots as was Udet in favoring the smaller short range "blitz" style bomber and in supporting the requirement that all bombers be able to dive bomb. This last requirment added immensly to the weight of the design. If Wever had done his own pre-flights things might have been different.
Read a really interesting book about Field Marshall Erhard Milch which devoted quite a bit of print to this plane. If I remember correctly, the whole coupled engine scenario was tied to the insistence (by Hitler of Goring) that this plane be able to dive bomb (?!?) They said Goring was furious at the coupled DB603, saying "how are they to be serviced in the field - you can't change the spark plugs without taking the whole engine apart."
One was optimistically modified to carry the Nazi A-bomb.
Not awful engines, awful engine PLACEMENT. both in same Nacelles (it was a 4engine bomber) that lead to frequent in flight fires, losing many of them (as well as crews). Relative good defensive firepower (tail gunner had 20mm cannon) and quite fast for its size. however tremendous fuel issues (as in there was none!) used on eastern front as well as against GB in the Stienbok raids. Pilots hated it for many reasons
There were other things aircrew could not do in combat flight, which was why our aircraft always smelled of fuel, hot oil (from the dodgy heater) metal, leather and piss and shit. Occasionally if the observer was having a bad day puke would be added!!
Good aeroplane awfull engines. Shame (or rather good) tht the Germans didnt get the same idea as Avro did with the Manchester. It too was powered with a "double engine" but when they stuck 4 Merlins on it instead you had the Lancaster. Imagine this one with 4 Jumo og Daimler Bentz engines. Fortunately Hitler never liked the idea off a long range bomber.
Perhaps, but might it not be easier to just throw open the hatch and dive out, should your plane get hit, than it would be to have to try to crawl through a bulkhead section to get to the nearest exit point, especially if the plane isn't in controlled flight anymore?
@funstuff2006 I agree, bailing out should be easier. The downside being the German gunner can't even stretch his legs during normal flight when he's not needed at his station.
@luvpump1 If America allowed Nazi Germany to defeat the Soviet Union, then get some sort of truce with the Nazis. The world would of been a much better place. Then the world we live in today, where those damn commie's still exist over in Russia.
Also, there were some practical reasons. 2 engines meant less drag and better maneuverability (they wanted this giant to be capable of DIVE BOMBING(!) also. In theory, fewer engines also results in lower maintenance requirements, although the Greif would wind up requiring more. Also, in a authoritarian dictatorship, people are less willing to stick their neck out and say the official approach is a bad idea.
@carmium The Germans did develop the 177 into a four engine model (HE-277), but by then it was too late, and fighter production had priority. If they'd had the 277 much earlier, able to bomb Russian factories beyond the Urals, history might have been different. Interestingly, you'll find the Japanese also were wedded to 2 engine bombers, and both Axis powers only had four engine planes as Maritime patrol, not as bombers.
@DandAinTac I beg to differ with yr statement that the Allies had 4-engine aircraft only as maritime aircraft not as bombers. What about the B17 or the B25 (?) wasn't the Lancaster a 4 engine bomber? Or the Wellington?
@chloe7829 Look again--I said the AXIS only had 4 engine aircraft for Maritime patrol, NOT the allies! Also, the Vickers Wellington was a twin-engine bomber. The same with the B-25 Mitchell. It is true that the Allies had many 4 engine bombers though--such as B-17, B-24, B29, Avro Lancaster, Handley Page Halifax, and the Short Stirling. I can't think of a single, true, mass-produced, 4 engine Axis aircraft that was not primarily a maritime patrol aircraft.
@DandAinTac the Grief was technically a four engine bomber with two engine blocks welded together to make one which is why it kept going on fire, two engines using the cooling system for one.
@buidseach I know--the DB610 had two DB605 blocks welded together to turn a single crankshaft and single propeller out of a single engine nacelle. Doesn't that make it a single engine? I guess it depends on how you define it. So let's just say that it was not a CONVENTIONAL four engine aircraft. BTW--I was wrong that there were no Axis four engine bombers--the Italians had one that I forgot about--the Piaggio P108, but it was only built in small numbers.
@ilovealexjones1 I left out the words "in production" or "operational"--I thought I had said that but guess not. They had huge six engine flying boats and transports (the Gigant) and prototype 4-engine bombers, like the Junkers JU-488, but none were actually produced and made operational. I wonder if it would have made any impact if they had been able to get the JU-488 up and flying much earlier.
This was a FOUR engined bomber - it is just that each nacelle contained two engines combined into one. It didn't really work to begin with - lots of overheating, fires, crashes, and they only got it to work right at the end of the war when it was too late. Allied reports after the war said that the last versions were really very capable.
@rjstep3 Yes I know--I think the engines were DB603s? I understand they were "coupled" to a single crankshaft. So I guess it depends on what your definition of engine is--since the two engines basically formed one engine. My understanding is the problems were never really worked out, and that the only way they "coped" is with the 277, which had four conventional engines in separated nacelles. I'll bet it would have done better with two P&W Wasp Majors--although those had problems too.
This plane would have been so much better if it had been built with four separate engines instead of the disasterous "coupled" engines. It would have given the Luftwaffe a 4-engine long-range heavy bomber they needed so desperately. This is what happens when doctrine becomes dogma, over-riding sensible engineering and design.
@DandAinTac The better choice of going with four separate engines in the Greif has often been opined, but why was the two-propeller layout seen as essential? Why NOT go four props? There must have been some misguided reason behind it. Jes askin...
@carmium I think it was just dogmatic thinking. The Germans came up with some fairly successful designs in the mid-30s, and thought they had a winning formula. The Lutfwaffe was never strategically oriented like RAF Bomber Command--they were considered tactical support for the Wehrmacht. Also, the German planning was almost completely oriented around the belief in a short war, which argued against investment in long-range strategic weapons systems. (continued)
@fighter138 these planes were used in Operation Steinbock, the so called baby blitz of southern Britain in late 1943.He 117s made up a force of 500 bombers of various types used for this operation.After 3 months and the loss of over 320 aircraft the operation was cancelled and deemed a complete failure.
I have read somewhere,perhaps in "Aeroplane" that more than 55% of all losses occurred during training and exercises,on both sides of the Channel.Perhaps this was simply viewed as part of the "we can take it" attitude.Who knows now?
Good music for the video. Does not overpower concentration on the pictures. So many videos you just have to turn the sound completely down. Thank you. The He 177 was interesting. Unusual main gear retraction. Sort of silly engine arrangement. Range, range, range. The Germans still had nothing in any numbers to bomb the factories of Britain or the Russians in the Urals. The German's biggest blunder of the war.
Hitler himself micromanaged the Greif programme to death and forbade Willy Messerschmidt to introduce the necessary improvements- i.e. four engines instead of the fire prone 2 tandem, and throw out the diving brakes.
@peepeevagi the German high command thought long range bombers would not work with their doctrine so in the late 30s they opted to go with fast medium and light bombers. Once they found out they could never reach the Urals to bomb all the Soviet factories or did not have enough defense to fend off british fighters in the blitz they where in deep crap. the HE 177 engines where fucked and they went in flames all the time
But the He 177 cant have been all that bad though. I heard it was quite manuverable and well respected by it's actual crews. It had the highest survival rate out of any german bomber of the period and it's bombing accuracy-ability was great too.
If they built it in larger numbers i imagine it would have made the war go on for a year or two more.
@tHeWasTeDYouTh the problem of the engine flames was sold by 1942, after that, pilots liked the plane. Anyway, the order for mass-production was delaying until late 44, when there werent enough capacity to build 4400 per year. But look, it had the top speed of 350 mph at 1941(!), when the allied fighters (the spitfire mk V) could reach 370-380 mph... was an amazing bird.
Hey it's just a habit to correct spelling and I'm sorry if I offended you but the name was griffon with an o and not an e. Other than that you have better spelling than some "other" people on YouTube and I'm not talking about texting spelling.
Again, great video showing the griffon in it's true glory. Unlike the spitfire which is eye candy, the 177 has a hidden beauty. It may not be safe to fly, but it makes a wonderful asthetic piece to your airfield or museum.
The greif, except for the engine configuration, was an exceptional bomber with good aerodynamics and fearsome defensive armament and should have been one of the best WWII bombers and a war winning aircraft. Also, the b17 couldn't divebomb at all, while the 177 could to some extent; plus anti-ship missiles were a bonus. If you were a fighter pilot, would you(alone) take on a 177 with it's potent armament?
The British also had their share of "flying coffins" during this period.Apparently the life of a highly trained and skilled pilot did not count for much in those days.After all,the men in the ministeries did not have to fly them!
@Squarerig The loss rates for all aircraft during WWII are just boggling. Bomber Command's losses in 1943 were 2,751 aircraft with an establishment of 764. In effect, Bomber Command was wiped out three and half times over in 1943 alone.
By comparison, the Luftwaffe's fighter arm lost 42% of its aircraft in October of the same year, while their bomber arm lost 32% in August. These are losses PER MONTH!
@Squarerig What about the U.S.? Everyone knows the story of the "Belle", but they don't know that not one other crew or plane in that bomber group survived during the Belle's 25 missions. In Memphis Belle the movie, they explain this, and that teir group suffered the highest causlauties of any other group in the entire Mighty 8th.
the bomb group in the 8th air force that suffered the highest losses during operations over europe operating from england was the 96 th bomb group based at snetterton heath and not the 91st bomb group that was based at bassingborn to which memphis belle was attached but it is a very sobering thought that hundreds of US aircraft took off from the east of england and never came home lost forever in the skys !
@afvnut75 Where did you get this info? Please don't say Wikipedia. Also, highest causilties or bomber losses including planes shot up to the point the where scraped after they landed? I'm wondering that becuase I just watched another film on B-17's and B-24's pre- P-51. When they used P-47's and my favorite (it was an allright fighter but looked cool!) P-38's for escorts. In '43 all groups going into Germany where taking "unexceptable losses". It's great the ME-262 didn't come out in '43!
@afvnut75 Where did you get this info? Please don't say Wikipedia. Also, highest causilties or bomber losses including planes shot up to the point the where scraped after they landed? I'm wondering that becuase I just watched another film on B-17's and B-24's pre- P-51. When they used P-47's and my favorite (it was an allright fighter but looked cool!) P-38's for escorts. In '43 all groups going into Germany where taking "unexceptable losses". It's great the ME-262 didn't come out in '43!
@FadeToGrayLLC The history and the activitys of the 8th airforce in england during ww2 have long been an interest to me as well as growing up in east anglia and exploring all the old airfields i eventually found myself working at the imperial museum duxford so after 20 years of accumlilating info of what flew from what base and where, i finally got to work on the planes themselves it will no doubt remain a great passion of mine next thing for me to do is my twin rating flying licence in the us
I believe the only surviving examples of these are suck at the bottom of several lakes in the Ukraine - frozen lakes that were once used as airstrips.
Freshwater lakes probably contain a number of Luftwaffe wrecks that should be recovered like those retrieved from Lake Jonsvatnet recently. Getting local government permission to do that is another obstacle. There is also the problem of contaminating the water with oil and fuel spills, and unstable live ammo to deal with.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I have never watched a video with a more unsuitable music. It is a piece of deep romantic era. I play it, by the way. To use it to underline deadly machinery and war is like playing the Blankenese when your mother has died...
They should have done what the British did with the Avro Manchester.
This used the same idea (two engines bolted togther), but as it was troublesome, the idea was dropped and four smaller engines were used.
This created the classic Avro Lancaster.
Maybe the He177 could have been a classic too if this had been the case? As has been mentioned, the 'dive bombing' requirement was pretty ridiculous for such a big bomber.
The two most obvious solutions to the engine fire problem were to either fit four separate engines, or use the 'Dornier' method of placing two engines in opposed tandem - one pushing, one pulling. The latter method would have required massive redesigning of the wing, but would have preserved much of the 177's excellent drag coefficient.
Allerdings darf man nicht vergessen das die HE 177 auch das Fliegende Feuerzeug genannt wurde. Sie hatte Probleme mit ihren jeweils 2 Motoren in 1 Gondel.
The Luftwaffe's dead racehorse.
FreeSpeechSmuggler 2 weeks ago
hello, sorry, to burst you bobble, but the white race never have existed,I attended school and leaned all the name of the different human races. I assume you are referring to the Romans or Indo Europeans, they are caucasians and they are sub divided example Nordic , alpine,mediterranean, etc, etc .Do not take my word for it, you research it. God speed
pavelavietor1 3 weeks ago
~Amazing, how USA-spies enabled Boeing B-29 to copy this slick Heinkel He-177 'Griffin', -albeit larger with four separate air-cooled radial-engines, whilst the He-264 version was copied by Boeing including the nose-gear (although Boeing employed a more cylindrical fuselage); -the American'izes even copied the pilot-controlled gun-turret. In contrast, the handsome Boeing B-17 was strictly American in execution. Would be interesting to know the real story about how this was done so rapidly .!!
AryanKnight 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
AryanKnight 3 weeks ago
It always surprised me that the German Air Ministry did not show any interest in the He 177 with a conventional four engine layout (Four seperate engines), Henkel did develop a few as prototypes. The probloms regards the engine layout would have simply vanished. I guess someone would then have had to admtted he had been wrong, so they trudged on with that disaster of an engine setup
MrOrmesby 1 month ago
@MrOrmesby Hitler forbade development of long range bombers, demanded the first military jet fighter (ME 262) be converted into a bomber. The guy was nuts. Arrogance as high as the alps. He had moments of understanding regarding strategy, but these far outweighed by mistakes. A fascination, almost a fetish inspired regard for one thing, whilst corrupting or ignoring all else. Their only really gross mistakes were few, Hitler/Auchwitz etc, but of such magnitude to still stun us today
ToxicHolocaust2050 4 weeks ago
or a mini b-29.
spoada 1 month ago
Milch and Goring were both idiots as was Udet in favoring the smaller short range "blitz" style bomber and in supporting the requirement that all bombers be able to dive bomb. This last requirment added immensly to the weight of the design. If Wever had done his own pre-flights things might have been different.
TheSinisterPorpoise 1 month ago
its like being glued together :), but cant stop loving it..like all great German inventions
mjdajmi 1 month ago
Comment removed
AnakSamahKotaBelud 1 month ago
Read a really interesting book about Field Marshall Erhard Milch which devoted quite a bit of print to this plane. If I remember correctly, the whole coupled engine scenario was tied to the insistence (by Hitler of Goring) that this plane be able to dive bomb (?!?) They said Goring was furious at the coupled DB603, saying "how are they to be serviced in the field - you can't change the spark plugs without taking the whole engine apart."
One was optimistically modified to carry the Nazi A-bomb.
hibob418 1 month ago
@hibob418 "Life and Death of the Luftwaffe"by David Irving.
tmenator 1 month ago
Great video and subject ! Regards.
MrSlitskirts 1 month ago
I recently dug up the remains of one of these. Check out my video: Hunt for the Heinkel 177
arcadia449 2 months ago
Not awful engines, awful engine PLACEMENT. both in same Nacelles (it was a 4engine bomber) that lead to frequent in flight fires, losing many of them (as well as crews). Relative good defensive firepower (tail gunner had 20mm cannon) and quite fast for its size. however tremendous fuel issues (as in there was none!) used on eastern front as well as against GB in the Stienbok raids. Pilots hated it for many reasons
usmctanks1 2 months ago 4
There were other things aircrew could not do in combat flight, which was why our aircraft always smelled of fuel, hot oil (from the dodgy heater) metal, leather and piss and shit. Occasionally if the observer was having a bad day puke would be added!!
Wordsmith37 2 months ago
Good aeroplane awfull engines. Shame (or rather good) tht the Germans didnt get the same idea as Avro did with the Manchester. It too was powered with a "double engine" but when they stuck 4 Merlins on it instead you had the Lancaster. Imagine this one with 4 Jumo og Daimler Bentz engines. Fortunately Hitler never liked the idea off a long range bomber.
ovemunk 2 months ago
0:34 Looks like the German is stuck there, unlike his English or American counterpart who could leave his station.
kolbpilot 3 months ago
@kolbpilot
Perhaps, but might it not be easier to just throw open the hatch and dive out, should your plane get hit, than it would be to have to try to crawl through a bulkhead section to get to the nearest exit point, especially if the plane isn't in controlled flight anymore?
funstuff2006 3 months ago
@funstuff2006 I agree, bailing out should be easier. The downside being the German gunner can't even stretch his legs during normal flight when he's not needed at his station.
kolbpilot 3 months ago
культурная нация придумала бухенвальд и эти этажерки
stas19689889 3 months ago
4 engines but only a two airscrews. But this construction wasnt good.
maraskin777 6 months ago 2
Злые фашисты.
turboleot 7 months ago
Wunderbare Flugmaschine.
Die Technik der deutschen Flugzeugen war spektakulär !
Groß-Deutschland und seine Menschen.... Grüße an alle
caterpillar964 8 months ago
"Good Greif" (sic) get it?
patrickwinslow 9 months ago
Great time for the white race ! ... Shame we ended up fighting each other ..
luvpump1 10 months ago 2
@luvpump1 If America allowed Nazi Germany to defeat the Soviet Union, then get some sort of truce with the Nazis. The world would of been a much better place. Then the world we live in today, where those damn commie's still exist over in Russia.
gravelandx88 9 months ago
@gravelandx88 ..,keep sniffing buttcracks, dude. On Dec 11, 1941' Germany unilaterally declared war on the US not the other way around.
The soviet union collapsed at the end of the 'Cold War' decades ago.
fluffy1931 9 months ago
@luvpump1 ..,you forgot 'cockblocking' Finland u nazi fagtard, assclown.
fluffy1931 8 months ago
Also, there were some practical reasons. 2 engines meant less drag and better maneuverability (they wanted this giant to be capable of DIVE BOMBING(!) also. In theory, fewer engines also results in lower maintenance requirements, although the Greif would wind up requiring more. Also, in a authoritarian dictatorship, people are less willing to stick their neck out and say the official approach is a bad idea.
DandAinTac 1 year ago
@DandAinTac Thanks for an interesting reply. I guess we can all be thankful for German rigidity of thought!
carmium 1 year ago
@carmium The Germans did develop the 177 into a four engine model (HE-277), but by then it was too late, and fighter production had priority. If they'd had the 277 much earlier, able to bomb Russian factories beyond the Urals, history might have been different. Interestingly, you'll find the Japanese also were wedded to 2 engine bombers, and both Axis powers only had four engine planes as Maritime patrol, not as bombers.
DandAinTac 1 year ago
@DandAinTac I beg to differ with yr statement that the Allies had 4-engine aircraft only as maritime aircraft not as bombers. What about the B17 or the B25 (?) wasn't the Lancaster a 4 engine bomber? Or the Wellington?
chloe7829 10 months ago
@chloe7829 Look again--I said the AXIS only had 4 engine aircraft for Maritime patrol, NOT the allies! Also, the Vickers Wellington was a twin-engine bomber. The same with the B-25 Mitchell. It is true that the Allies had many 4 engine bombers though--such as B-17, B-24, B29, Avro Lancaster, Handley Page Halifax, and the Short Stirling. I can't think of a single, true, mass-produced, 4 engine Axis aircraft that was not primarily a maritime patrol aircraft.
DandAinTac 10 months ago
@DandAinTac the Grief was technically a four engine bomber with two engine blocks welded together to make one which is why it kept going on fire, two engines using the cooling system for one.
buidseach 9 months ago
@buidseach I know--the DB610 had two DB605 blocks welded together to turn a single crankshaft and single propeller out of a single engine nacelle. Doesn't that make it a single engine? I guess it depends on how you define it. So let's just say that it was not a CONVENTIONAL four engine aircraft. BTW--I was wrong that there were no Axis four engine bombers--the Italians had one that I forgot about--the Piaggio P108, but it was only built in small numbers.
DandAinTac 9 months ago
@DandAinTac the germans did have 4 and 6 engine bombers which made prototype stages...
ilovealexjones1 8 months ago
@ilovealexjones1 I left out the words "in production" or "operational"--I thought I had said that but guess not. They had huge six engine flying boats and transports (the Gigant) and prototype 4-engine bombers, like the Junkers JU-488, but none were actually produced and made operational. I wonder if it would have made any impact if they had been able to get the JU-488 up and flying much earlier.
DandAinTac 8 months ago
@DandAinTac
This was a FOUR engined bomber - it is just that each nacelle contained two engines combined into one. It didn't really work to begin with - lots of overheating, fires, crashes, and they only got it to work right at the end of the war when it was too late. Allied reports after the war said that the last versions were really very capable.
rjstep3 1 year ago
@rjstep3 Yes I know--I think the engines were DB603s? I understand they were "coupled" to a single crankshaft. So I guess it depends on what your definition of engine is--since the two engines basically formed one engine. My understanding is the problems were never really worked out, and that the only way they "coped" is with the 277, which had four conventional engines in separated nacelles. I'll bet it would have done better with two P&W Wasp Majors--although those had problems too.
DandAinTac 1 year ago
sehr schön video und flugzeug!
bravazon 1 year ago
wow, nice! 3:38 is a very impressive pic...
Pacafeliz 1 year ago
Very impressive collection of HE 177 photos!
Jman
Kabul81 1 year ago
Germans made many blunders in WW2. This was one.
boofheadrules 1 year ago
@boofheadrules They had the coolest gear and uniforms, though.
kukenimunnen 1 year ago
It's very pretty. So is the soundtrack.
ThatsMrMoronToYou 1 year ago
This plane would have been so much better if it had been built with four separate engines instead of the disasterous "coupled" engines. It would have given the Luftwaffe a 4-engine long-range heavy bomber they needed so desperately. This is what happens when doctrine becomes dogma, over-riding sensible engineering and design.
DandAinTac 1 year ago 2
@DandAinTac The better choice of going with four separate engines in the Greif has often been opined, but why was the two-propeller layout seen as essential? Why NOT go four props? There must have been some misguided reason behind it. Jes askin...
carmium 1 year ago
@carmium I think it was just dogmatic thinking. The Germans came up with some fairly successful designs in the mid-30s, and thought they had a winning formula. The Lutfwaffe was never strategically oriented like RAF Bomber Command--they were considered tactical support for the Wehrmacht. Also, the German planning was almost completely oriented around the belief in a short war, which argued against investment in long-range strategic weapons systems. (continued)
DandAinTac 1 year ago
Interesting aircraft. Does anyone know if it was used operationally and if so against which targets?
fighter138 1 year ago
@fighter138 these planes were used in Operation Steinbock, the so called baby blitz of southern Britain in late 1943.He 117s made up a force of 500 bombers of various types used for this operation.After 3 months and the loss of over 320 aircraft the operation was cancelled and deemed a complete failure.
southlondon63 1 year ago
I have read somewhere,perhaps in "Aeroplane" that more than 55% of all losses occurred during training and exercises,on both sides of the Channel.Perhaps this was simply viewed as part of the "we can take it" attitude.Who knows now?
Squarerig 1 year ago
Potentially a great bomber. Luckily they killed more of their own crews than anything else.
jonewer 1 year ago
Nice pics...make mine an early one from 2/KG40.
furyman66 1 year ago
Good music for the video. Does not overpower concentration on the pictures. So many videos you just have to turn the sound completely down. Thank you. The He 177 was interesting. Unusual main gear retraction. Sort of silly engine arrangement. Range, range, range. The Germans still had nothing in any numbers to bomb the factories of Britain or the Russians in the Urals. The German's biggest blunder of the war.
49bobbyk 1 year ago
nice:) the tail gunner has his own door:)
xazoulini1 1 year ago
Are surviving examples today??
majormannfred 1 year ago
Good set of pictures, great music. Typical German screwup. Too many versions. Odd gear arrangement. Still not a Ural bomber.
49bobbyk 1 year ago
great looking plane, stupid engine arrangement
BuddyFantastic 1 year ago
Great images of the He 177 but Beethoven would be rolling in his grave to hear his music accompanying them.
3945war 1 year ago
Great stuff!!
xxxChrist 1 year ago
Hitler himself micromanaged the Greif programme to death and forbade Willy Messerschmidt to introduce the necessary improvements- i.e. four engines instead of the fire prone 2 tandem, and throw out the diving brakes.
IanHunedoara8 1 year ago
@IanHunedoara8 ummm Willi Messerschmitt did not build this Hienkel bomber and it was Goering who forbade the He-177 A-4 series in October 1942.
Tazjet100 1 year ago
The germans highly despised the He 177, often making it sound as if it were totally unflyable. They were probably just using it wrong XD
peepeevagi 1 year ago
@peepeevagi the German high command thought long range bombers would not work with their doctrine so in the late 30s they opted to go with fast medium and light bombers. Once they found out they could never reach the Urals to bomb all the Soviet factories or did not have enough defense to fend off british fighters in the blitz they where in deep crap. the HE 177 engines where fucked and they went in flames all the time
tHeWasTeDYouTh 1 year ago
But the He 177 cant have been all that bad though. I heard it was quite manuverable and well respected by it's actual crews. It had the highest survival rate out of any german bomber of the period and it's bombing accuracy-ability was great too.
If they built it in larger numbers i imagine it would have made the war go on for a year or two more.
peepeevagi 1 year ago
@tHeWasTeDYouTh the problem of the engine flames was sold by 1942, after that, pilots liked the plane. Anyway, the order for mass-production was delaying until late 44, when there werent enough capacity to build 4400 per year. But look, it had the top speed of 350 mph at 1941(!), when the allied fighters (the spitfire mk V) could reach 370-380 mph... was an amazing bird.
Stoneballer91 1 year ago
super....
xem1969 1 year ago
Hey it's just a habit to correct spelling and I'm sorry if I offended you but the name was griffon with an o and not an e. Other than that you have better spelling than some "other" people on YouTube and I'm not talking about texting spelling.
Belphegor177 2 years ago
Again, great video showing the griffon in it's true glory. Unlike the spitfire which is eye candy, the 177 has a hidden beauty. It may not be safe to fly, but it makes a wonderful asthetic piece to your airfield or museum.
Belphegor177 2 years ago
Crazy Germans and their penchant for dive bombers.
The GREIF is a large bomber that was ruined by over-designing it.
the82spartans 2 years ago
1:46, is that a remote operated gun turret similar to that found on the b29?
agentolshki 2 years ago
The greif, except for the engine configuration, was an exceptional bomber with good aerodynamics and fearsome defensive armament and should have been one of the best WWII bombers and a war winning aircraft. Also, the b17 couldn't divebomb at all, while the 177 could to some extent; plus anti-ship missiles were a bonus. If you were a fighter pilot, would you(alone) take on a 177 with it's potent armament?
Belphegor177 2 years ago
duh yup. and many did, fool.
halburd1 2 years ago
u silly person the nazi's didnt have any good bombers. they all were mediocre
halburd1 2 years ago
The British also had their share of "flying coffins" during this period.Apparently the life of a highly trained and skilled pilot did not count for much in those days.After all,the men in the ministeries did not have to fly them!
Squarerig 2 years ago 8
@Squarerig The loss rates for all aircraft during WWII are just boggling. Bomber Command's losses in 1943 were 2,751 aircraft with an establishment of 764. In effect, Bomber Command was wiped out three and half times over in 1943 alone.
By comparison, the Luftwaffe's fighter arm lost 42% of its aircraft in October of the same year, while their bomber arm lost 32% in August. These are losses PER MONTH!
jonewer 1 year ago
@Squarerig What about the U.S.? Everyone knows the story of the "Belle", but they don't know that not one other crew or plane in that bomber group survived during the Belle's 25 missions. In Memphis Belle the movie, they explain this, and that teir group suffered the highest causlauties of any other group in the entire Mighty 8th.
FadeToGrayLLC 1 month ago
the bomb group in the 8th air force that suffered the highest losses during operations over europe operating from england was the 96 th bomb group based at snetterton heath and not the 91st bomb group that was based at bassingborn to which memphis belle was attached but it is a very sobering thought that hundreds of US aircraft took off from the east of england and never came home lost forever in the skys !
afvnut75 3 weeks ago
@afvnut75 Where did you get this info? Please don't say Wikipedia. Also, highest causilties or bomber losses including planes shot up to the point the where scraped after they landed? I'm wondering that becuase I just watched another film on B-17's and B-24's pre- P-51. When they used P-47's and my favorite (it was an allright fighter but looked cool!) P-38's for escorts. In '43 all groups going into Germany where taking "unexceptable losses". It's great the ME-262 didn't come out in '43!
FadeToGrayLLC 2 weeks ago
@afvnut75 Where did you get this info? Please don't say Wikipedia. Also, highest causilties or bomber losses including planes shot up to the point the where scraped after they landed? I'm wondering that becuase I just watched another film on B-17's and B-24's pre- P-51. When they used P-47's and my favorite (it was an allright fighter but looked cool!) P-38's for escorts. In '43 all groups going into Germany where taking "unexceptable losses". It's great the ME-262 didn't come out in '43!
FadeToGrayLLC 2 weeks ago
@FadeToGrayLLC The history and the activitys of the 8th airforce in england during ww2 have long been an interest to me as well as growing up in east anglia and exploring all the old airfields i eventually found myself working at the imperial museum duxford so after 20 years of accumlilating info of what flew from what base and where, i finally got to work on the planes themselves it will no doubt remain a great passion of mine next thing for me to do is my twin rating flying licence in the us
afvnut75 1 week ago in playlist Favorite videos
I believe the only surviving examples of these are suck at the bottom of several lakes in the Ukraine - frozen lakes that were once used as airstrips.
CharmingLordSausage 2 years ago
sunked, they sank, not suck hehe.
kdawur 2 years ago
Freshwater lakes probably contain a number of Luftwaffe wrecks that should be recovered like those retrieved from Lake Jonsvatnet recently. Getting local government permission to do that is another obstacle. There is also the problem of contaminating the water with oil and fuel spills, and unstable live ammo to deal with.
FiveCentsPlease 2 years ago
This plane was VERY heavy. Heavier than the B-17.
Latvietis96 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I have never watched a video with a more unsuitable music. It is a piece of deep romantic era. I play it, by the way. To use it to underline deadly machinery and war is like playing the Blankenese when your mother has died...
silverbud 2 years ago
very nice photo of this relatively ugly plane
motoTOM10 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fuck U
PissedDwarf7 2 years ago
great video, love the music that accompanies it, what is it?
bougeac 2 years ago 10
Ludwig van Beethoven - Pathetique Sonata - part 2/3
igorks 2 years ago
Thankyou for an excellent set of photographs/stills.
BRILLIANT!
Stilletoe01 2 years ago 4
They should have done what the British did with the Avro Manchester.
This used the same idea (two engines bolted togther), but as it was troublesome, the idea was dropped and four smaller engines were used.
This created the classic Avro Lancaster.
Maybe the He177 could have been a classic too if this had been the case? As has been mentioned, the 'dive bombing' requirement was pretty ridiculous for such a big bomber.
Xiolablu3 2 years ago
Yeah the guys at the RLM weren't thinking too clearly when they made that decision.
The Greif: Surely it must rank among the great "what if's" of WWII
TK42100 2 years ago
nice, but not for crews!
whiteadderextras 2 years ago
The two most obvious solutions to the engine fire problem were to either fit four separate engines, or use the 'Dornier' method of placing two engines in opposed tandem - one pushing, one pulling. The latter method would have required massive redesigning of the wing, but would have preserved much of the 177's excellent drag coefficient.
ProjectFlashlight612 2 years ago
To paraphrase what BladerunnerGer said, it had many issue with tandem engines in each nacelle. They use to chronically overheat and catch fire.
The HE-177 was further hobbled by it having a dive bomber requirement, which added a lot of weight in the form of structural reinforcement.
gaff2006 2 years ago
Starkes video!!!! und gute musik.
Allerdings darf man nicht vergessen das die HE 177 auch das Fliegende Feuerzeug genannt wurde. Sie hatte Probleme mit ihren jeweils 2 Motoren in 1 Gondel.
Aber auf diesen Bildern sieht sie toll aus.
BladerunnerGer 2 years ago 2
Excellent.
Well done.
Interesting story, this Greif...
the82spartans 2 years ago 4
do you have a website? those pictures are fantastic
hrgiyzueghe 2 years ago
5*****
kdawur 2 years ago 10
Very impressive. Rare pictures of a rare plane. Well done.
kolbpilot 2 years ago 4
really good vid, hard to find pix on the net so this helps
TX8080 2 years ago 4
5*****
megatwingo 2 years ago 10