Early Access - Why German bombers had no range

Hi, Chris, Thanks for covering this subject. Given all the technical challenges, these raise the question of why other countries did pursue design and production of heavy bombers. I'm guessing a lot of it was geography. Counting Hawaii (which we stole) and the Philippines, plus other islands, The US, not just Great Britain, had imperial territory across large stretches of water. So long range, rather than heavy payload, may have been the main driver. The Soviet Union had large internal space to cross. Something usable now, rather than something amazing, still in development, makes more sense. And it helps to realize Germany had limitations, and had to use a lot of leverage. I always remember that most of the German Army was horse-drawn - in World War 2.

Bill Lemmond

I always feel like I'm enrolled in a graduate school course on Military History when I watch your videos. Which is a good thing! Thanks so much.

Thanks John! Now I understand :)

Military Aviation History

Chris, I was responding to your comment at around 27:10 in the video about your upcoming video on the FW200. I was trying to indicate my support of your excellent work on this video, probably that FW200 video, and all the others in your channel.

;)

Military Aviation History

Hey John, thanks for the message. Could you let me know what you feel is rushed in this one. This video wasn't rushed from my point of view (for example the scripting and reviews took longer than usual because I wasn't happy with it), so it would be good to know what you mean.

Military Aviation History

This is definitely worth a discussion, might make a future video about this

Military Aviation History

Good question, not that I am aware of.

Military Aviation History

Speaking only for myself, Chris, I would rather see videos from you of your usual high quality rather than anything you rush to get out. Take care and, as you say, "Happy Hunting!"

In case you are taking suggestions for future videos, it would be great to hear you about the consequences of disbanding the Schlachtflieger once the Sudetenland crisis of Nov 38 was over in order to give priority to the Stukagruppen in formation. For sure the Heer would have greatly benefited in the early years for having multiple close air support Gruppen made up by a cheap but sturdy little plane like the Hs 123.

Miguel Aldaz

I also wonder if the Luftwaffe missed a good opportunity in developing the Junkers 89 instead of embarking on the ruinous Heinkel 177. The Ju 89 was underpowered at the beginning, but time and new series would have fixed it. At the end of the day, my understanding is that the evolution of the Ju 89 ended being a capable platform (Ju 290).

Miguel Aldaz

Do you know if L.Dv.16 is available to download in English anywhere?

Miguel Aldaz

Before watching the video, I'm going to say it was down to the intended role of the Luftwaffe - to support the Army in attacking advances, to overcome enemy strongpoints and defences. The idea of creating something to hit a target well beyond the reach of the ground forces, was not anticipated or considered as a requirement. EDIT After watching the video, kinda, but not the whole picture. :-)

Julian Corbett