Great narration. No stumbling and no 'place-holders' like um, er, duh and the like. Apparently at least one commenter can't keep up without those.
Great subject matter.
The coupled engine concept appears along the way in history, and not just in aviation. The Caterpillar 797-b mining (haul) truck has tandem coupled v-12 diesel engines and nearly 3400 hp. Emerson Fittipaldi, the formula One racer, initially came to fame by 'smoking' the field in formula racing in Brazil driving a car built around tandem-coupled VW 4 cylinder aircooled engines.
dereksollows
As a model builder that really likes WW2 German aircraft this is one of my more popular models. Planet Models makes a resin kit of this plane. I have the model but have not started building it yet. Another thing you missed mentioning is that the DB606/610 coupled engines were later used in the Heinkel He-177 Grief bomber. That could have been an excellent bomber but Hitler and the RLM decided that it had to be capable of dive bombing, something unplanned for a heavy bomber, which created a huge host of issues but the -261 was used as one of the first test beds for that engine in a multi-engine configuration (Heinkel made a racing plane (He-119) with one of them as well).
klwnkiller
counter rotating here as in the two engines each having single props that rotated in different directions to each other rather than each engine having two props which would be contra-rotating.
geesehoward
Never heard if this aircraft, thank you.
billballbuster
It is good to remember that so-called coupled engines always suffered from serious overheating issues especially with the inner parts. All of them resulted in many serious crashes caused by the interior manifolds between the two coupled engines. Curiously the Germans never have managed to put in production the contra-rotatng propeller blades as the Brits managed with the late production Spitfires...
Good job 👏 👍 👌
paoloviti
Intresting to note, that while they may not have used the system of having each engine drive contra-rotating propellors, the plans do show the prop's rotating in opposite directions. This would also have eliminated the tendency of the aircraft to swing at takeoff.
mandoprince
Interesting concept. Thanks for sharing Brian. Best Wishes.
richardlincoln
Oficial long range bomber research died in the 30s when the General pushing for it died in a crash.
arthurmosel
The DB 606 double-engine had problems with massive vibration, engine couplings fsiling, and oil distribution at high altitudes leading to overheating.
The engine was used in the He 177, and was difficult to maintain AND needed a lot of maintenance. It caught fire so often, that it earned the nickname 'Luftwaffenfeuerzeug' or 'Luftwaffes cigarette lighter.'
robert-trading-as-Bob
There's arguments for an against counter-rotation. It removes the so-called critical engine, simplified, the one that causes worse yaw depending on *which* one fails - generally the left one, the way most piston engines rotate. What surprises me here is that the Me-261 - as well as the P-38 - decided to go with "top outward" counter-rotation. To me that would imply you now have *two* critical engines because either of them will cause massive yaw when which can no longer be overcome with applying rudder to the opposite direction when going full-throttle - which is standard procedure in every twin I've ever flown. (and pray you have a turbo-charged engine, because otherwise even then you won't be able to maintain altitude). Unless it's a DA-62, where you feather the dead engine, full throttle on the other, give a bit of rudder trim, and find an airport at your leisure, grumbling about your A&P all the way. 😆
michaelhoffmann
The Bf-261 showed that Germany could build a long range aircraft. It also showed that the DB-606 was a potentially feasible and reliable powerplant and may not have been the source for the problems that bedeviled the He-177.
masbeetleboy
The same engine solution was used on the Heinkel Grief which also only had single propellers. These tended to set themselves on fire though.
marcbrasse
did the white wall tail wheel make it fly father?
Mongoa
If there was a lot less infighting and personality wars within the German System, the resulting products would have changed the outcome, I think...
marcatteberry
( I'm glad that Brian has the courage to say who he is. Too many You Tuber/narrators aren't. What are they afraid of? Internet stalkers? Doxing? Do they have false modesty? Phony privacy concerns? Absurd.)
marvwatkins
The ME 261 had it's props spinning in Opposite directions, which was EASILY done at the joint Gearing of each Pair of motors. However, the Germans did what North-American did on the XP-82 Twin-Mustang; but without the Disaster Result that N/A experienced. It seems that Wind-Tunnels of the Era couldn't predict Vortex-Lift from Prop-Wash. So, while the ME-261 seemed to 'fly OK'.. The XP-82 could not even Lift-Off the runway, until the engines were swapped, Left-to-Right, to make each Prop spin THE OTHER WAY, thus giving LIFT by way of Vortices from the Props. From head-on, in a Still-Picture in This video, you can clearly see that the RH prop spins CCW, while the LH prop spins CW. They had it backwards; The P-38, YP-58, and YP/P/F-82 did not; but instead spun their props at each point, in the Opposite rotation.
ericbrammer
I wonder about the need for four engines if you are going for long range. Wouldn't four engines guzzle more fuel than two?
prieten
Interesting. Didn't know about this one. Subscribed.
draganjagodic
Why didn't the conjoined engines make it into a 'single' engined fghter?
Too much torque perhaps, or just another unsung aircraft we haven't heard about yet?
robert-trading-as-Bob
It would have been way too late to do anything serious with that speed of development. I guess by 43 priorities were different. Seems urprising that it wasn't recognised earlier as useful in a long range maritime recon role.
