The dangers of the Me 163: Hard landing: explode. Fuel leak: explode. Engine failure on takeoff: explode. Shrapnel in any part of the fuel system: explode. Carelessly refuel: explode. Forget the lyrics of Erika: explode.

I flashed back to Ian at Forgotten Weapons channel on how to equip the Elbonian military, namely how to make the WORST choices in guns. This would be the perfect airplane for the Elbonian Air Force.

So, regarding the propellants, to summarise: they used two indistinguishable liquids which explode on contact with each other. Both of which have their own sets of materials they should not be allowed to contact with (including each other's tanks and fuel lines), else there'd be an explosion. They put the most dangerous of the two in a tank right behind the pilot, and later proceeded to install two extra tanks in the cockpit. They did all this in a small, fast aircraft and sent it up against other aircraft firing bullets at it. And finally, they did not tell the pilots what the fuels were. I don't care how technologically brilliant this all was, the Germans were completely out of their minds back then. Excellent video, thank you very much. Looking forward to the next instalment!

Back in the late 1990's we had a German exchange pilot at our Squadron at Cannon AFB, NM the 524th. We both shared a love for WWII German aircraft and he told me through some of his research on the ME 163, his favorite aircraft, that if the wings had been swept back just 3 degrees more the aircraft could have hit mach 1. According to him, there is a team of Germans who want to build a modern version of the 163.

"Negotiable virtues". Thanks for the tour and the laugh!

Lippisch was a genius. He worked for Convair on F 102/6.

Thanks Greg! Very interesting. I just shortly want to mention the development of the ME 163. The following has been told to me by either my father or Flugkapitän Hans Pancherz: Long, long story short. After the war the Russians made two attempts to kidnap Flugkapitän Hans Pancherz, along with his wife and young son, in the American sector in Berlin. The Russians came in American uniforms and Jeeps. The commandant of the sector advised Hans Pancherz to flee to Sweden. He had kept one inflatable rubber raft from either the Ju 290 or Ju 390. Hans Pancherz was in charge of the test flying of the Ju 390 (America bomber). He paid a fisherman to drop him off outside of Trelleborg, Sweden. My father was reached of a rumor that there was a former Chief Test Pilot (in German, Versuchflieger) from Junkers operating a crane in the harbor of Landskrona. My father checked up his credentials with his contacts in Germany (among others, he knew Hanna Reitsch personally since his time in England prewar). It all checked out. Hans Pancherz was also an Engineer. My father employed him at his company (MFI, Malmö Flygindustri) where Hans Pancherz worked until his retirement (and a little after that. Including, but not limited to Saab 340). After the crash that killed the test pilot of the He 162, Pancherz was reassigned to finish the test flying of the He 162. There was a problem with inverted aileron effect, but in the other end of the speed scale that you mention. Hans Pancherz sorted that out. He was also assigned to oversee all development of jet and rocket aircrafts. This brings us to the Ju 248. A development of the Me 163. It had a retractable landing gear, 3 point. The engine were also different. Depending on how you look at it you can say it had two rocket engines for longer endurance. The goal was 30 minutes of endurance. Hans Pancherz did all 14 test flights with the Ju 248, maybe all towed. Anyway, the ambitions was much higher, with supersonic flight in mind. These new supersonic wings was never finished in the work shop in 1945 as all resources vanished. The wings were calculated for Mach 1.6. When I was chairman of the Malmö section of "Swedish Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics" I persuaded onkel Hans to give a presentation of the Ju 248. Unfortunately I did not record it, my loss.... So, the books could have said Hans Pancherz instead of Chuck Yeager. Thanks again Greg! Looking forward for more!

Stoff translates best to "material" or "substance"

If there were leaks and the C-stoff mixed with the T-stoff, the pilot would be P-stof.

Stoff has a number of meanings Today it’s mostly “fabric” as in a woven material for clothing It can also mean material a bit as the “stuff” that things are made from There is Werkstoff which for an engineer generally means the material used to manufacture something (eg the specific alloy or wood etc.) Or Wirkstoff as in a chemical used for a certain purpose In the list you show us I would translate it with compound or material

Last time I was this early the Luftwaffe still had spare aviation fuel! On a more serious note, thank you for the consistently thorough and fascinating content, Greg.

Well done Greg. Did seem you were grasping for the right word to use when talking about the fuel reaction. The type of reaction between these liquid bi-propellant fuels that ignite on contact is called a hypergolic reaction. There are many types of these fuels that have been used in various rocket program's, and they are indeed very dangerous to work with. Almost always toxic, and even carcinogenic, however, very necessary; especially when in a vacuum where ignition of safer fuels is harder to achieve. Looking forward to part two.

I thought I knew a lot about the Komet and then came Greg with this video and put me in my place.

Greg considering reading/listen to the book "Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants" for a wonderful review of all the insanely dangerous propellants they tried to make rocket fuel out of between the 40's and 60's. The book is not at all dry, almost gonzo even, fun read!

These videos are just amazingly interesting, well presented and well narrated. You, sir, are a scholar and a gentleman.

As an aircraft addict, I find your work on utoob to be fantastic in just about every way.

I heard a lecture in the 1980s at the Smithsonian by Rudolf Opitz, who was a Messerschmitt test pilot who flew Me 163s. There is a photo in a book I own of a plane he flew at over 600 mph, if I recall correctly. I took the book to the lecture, and have his signature alongside that photograph.

Greg, "Stoff" just means a chemical substance of kind. It could be a mixture or a pure element. Hydrogen, H2, is Wasserstoff (stuff from which water comes); Nitrogen, N2, is Stickstoff (stuff that will asphyxiate you); Oxygen, O2, is Sauerstoff (stuff from which sour things come, i.e., acids); Fuels are Brennstoff (stuff that ignites and burns); Bombs contain Sprengstoff (stuff that springs violently, i.e., explodes).

Thank you for your time making these

To keep pilot safe from fire, or attempt to keep him safe, he wore an asbestos flight suit :D

Stupidly dangerous+painful beautiful+stunningly fast= ME163

I've got a tattoo of the Me-163 Komet across my chest; Gregg made me feel that I don't deserve to have it... Man! What a great report..!!!

Absolutely fantastic. Keep up the good work Greg!

31:45 'On the 163a, tho', this is a 163b picture here, but just go with it **Heini Dittmar left the chat*

Excellent video Greg. For all of its high performance, the ME 163 sounds like a right pain to service and fly. Mistakes could be fatal and people make mistakes regularly, so consequences follow rapidly.

Absolutely fantastic video on the ME comet . It's incredible how much information has not ever been available that I've seen on this futuristic and extremely interesting plane what a great job and thank you this is what the Internet is for again great job thank you

Note the Me 163 had an autostable (reflexed) air foil. It could not be stalled with the tanks more than half empty. 1 Me 163A was a small test bed with a "cold" monopropellant rocket that worked by decomposing hydrogen peroxide 2 Me 163B was the combat version with a HWK 509A1/A2 that used a bipropellant rocket hydrazine hydrate + 57% methanol + 13% water (the fuel) and Hydrogen Peroxide (oxidiser) The Me 163B had a couple of problems. a/ the Me 163 could intercept because it could climb at speed in a minute what would take a piston fighter at least 10 minutes. Once there it only had a few minutes to conduct the attack and this was often not enough to form up for a coordinated attack. b/ the two 30mm MK 108 guns were not quite enough for the speed of the attack. c/ no pressurisation d/ the skid could not accept high sink rates and was the cause of must accidents. The solution to the short endurance was the HWK 509B rocket which had the same rocket motor but added a much smaller sustainer for cruise that was much more efficient. That would give the Me 163 a few more minutes. However the Me 163B was never upgraded. Instead development of the larger Me 163C was begun. This was enlarged aircraft, had a pressurised bubble canopy and 4 x Mk 108 guns and of course the improved HWK 509B and latter C. The Me 163 was perhaps to much work so the Me 163D also known as the Me 263 or Ju 248. This was a stretched Me 163B with the boost/sustainer motor and retractable undercarriage. It did fly as a glider at least. The short range was not so much an issue as the ultra high climb rate and speed meant it didn't waste 10-15 minutes time getting there. It was at bomber height in a minute. Rudy Opitz, Me 163 test pilot said that pilots did survive over turned aircraft. They were fairly solid and precautions were taken.

Greg, that’s always been a fascinating aircraft to me - and the more I understand about it the more I realize its dangerous characteristics. There’s something incredibly appealing about it. Thanks for giving us a chance to learn from your deep research on the subject. Part 2: is on my list. Good luck!

I love your videos Greg! They are well thought out, and you speak intelligently on each subject!

Love your videos, looking good too! Can't wait for part 2. Thank you sir!

The Komet is my favourite IL2 mission. Burn, roll, dive attack and repeat. Great fun. Thanks Greg.

Definitely one of my Favorite Aircraft... Looking forward to part two.Thank You for posting!

This video is evidence of why this channel is golden! Great work, Greg!

Great video as always. Years ago, say 50, I made some hand launched gliders with swept back paper wings. By bending the paper back on itself you can make a decent airfoil and they were super light. It was hard to get them to be stable. Dihedral didn’t work to well. The cg was basically in the wing, no righting lever. But I read in some forgotten book that twisting the wing so the angle of attack at the wing tip was GREATER than the angle of attack at the root (the opposite of the ME163 ) would stabilize the glider. It worked like crazy! I have no idea why. Of course it was a paper airplane it had no ailerons to worry about.

The Me 163 seems to be essentially a surface to air missile built at a time when the only available guidance system was a human. Suppose that it was nice for that human that the "missile" was often reusable.

Excellent videos, hit the taste buds real good

Wow! Wasn't expecting this but very fascinating subject. Thanks Greg. Will eagerly await episode 2 while still hoping for the definitive series on the FW190 series. ;-)

Great video, Gregg...just at terrific job on a difficult topic. The discussion on sweptback wings is so informative...lots of new stuff to me. Enjoyed all of it...I would not have enjoyed riding in the cockpit surrounded on three sides by T-Stoff! Seriously dangerous stuff that stoff. Thanks for all the hard work and insights. Always exciting to see a new video from you.

Thanks for sharing. Absolutely love your content. I’m not an airplane fanatic and don’t know much about them. I love the way you manage to explain fairly complex shit the way I can understand it.

Wow! Great video! Thank you for the quick tour of the Imperial!

Another absolutely fantastic video. The human aspect you covered provided a good look and understanding into the circumstances surrounding this planes development. It took a lot of bravery to willingly get into and fly that plane, understanding what it very likely would do to the pilot, reguardless of which side their country fought on.

Another great one Greg! Keep em comming!

Hang glider and sailplane pilot checking in. The sweep in a flying wing is also essential for pitch stability. They will always have geometric or effective washout (twist) so that the tips replicate the downforce function of the H-stab on a conventional aircraft. So not only does the washout avoid tip stall, but it is required for pitch stability. It IS just possible to do without the sweep by using reflexed airfoil, but sweep is far preferable because the tips are less effective at producing lift anyway, so losing that to negative lift is preferable to the loss at the TE of a straight wing you’d have with a reflexed ‘foil. Also the swept tip is farther aft, so has a longer moment, so less negative lift is required. There is a book (my friend had it) that details the Hortons work that goes into this in great detail.

One of the test pilots named Rudy Opitz had an article in Flight Journal a couple of years ago. This expands on his article a lot and gives some background that was missing from the magazine, thanks for making the video Greg and keep it up.

Great video - looking forward to part two - thanks, Greg.

Highly interesting video! Now I once read a very similar story to what happened to Joschi. In that case, after the wheels hit the plane, the engine also cut off and the plane basically landed itself on the end of the runway. So from the outside the plane looked undamaged, but then they also found out, that the pilot had been dissolved. Many ICBM`s also use hypergolic fuels. Also many of chinese space rockets and the russian proton rocket run on hypergolic fuels. Nasty stuff.

Hey, I remember seeing this pop up yesterday

Great video, as always! Keep them coming!😃

Very well done good video I watched it before this is a rewatch now have to rewatch number two

Thanks for re uploading with sound :)

Eric "Winkle" Brown considered the ME163 to have excellent handling characteristics; And considering he has flown more aircraft types than anyone in history he should know. Hanna Reitsch did a lot of the glide testing on the ME163. Heini Dittmar reached a max speed of 700mph in one. It also possible that Dittmar reached an altitude of 70,000 feet on one flight, that was towed to altitude; But Reitsch, Brown and Dittmar all suspiciously gloss over the true performance of the 163. All were friends - Brown covering extensively for Reitsch after the war. Reitsch’s memoir “The Sky My Kingdom” being an exercise in “I am just a bit dizzy innocent girl me” This from the Lady that went on to become the Mother of the Ghanaian Air Force.

Another episode filled with amazing details and clear explanation without the fluff of national or company advocacy viewpoints!

Thanks Greg. Love your aircraft stuff.

Hi Greg, Fantastic video of one of my favourite planes of all time. I learnt a number of new things as well. Thank you so much for the video! One point I’d like to make is that the T-Stoff was a minimum of 80% hydrogen peroxide, also called High Test Peroxide. As an oxidiser, it performs well but has some handling and cleanliness requirements that are hair raising at best. It didn’t really take off as a mainstream storable propellant for these reasons. A sobering thought given the characteristics of the storable oxidisers that did prevail - Nitrogen tetroxide and IRFNA. Cheers, Tim from Australia 🇦🇺

Greg ! Thankyou ! I love airplanes ! Many different Airplanes ! Many German planes ! How ever as a young boy , This was my favorite German Machine ! I would have volunteered to fly this without fear ! I was a weird kid ! Not brave ,. However very enthusiastic . Now being old and far more cautious my dream plane would be a Me 263 powered by liquid oxygen and kerosine, and because of your report a pressurized model !

Great to see what you look like Greg! Love your videos!

I always enjoy with your videos of planes of ww2 by depth of analysis and point of view, among the best that can be found in youtube. Thank you very much for your time and effort, keep going, maybe improving the sound a bit. Waiting for next. Best regards.

A good record for operational issues with the ME163, Rocket fighter is excellent. It is part of my book collection.

thanks again Greg. love your stoff!

Excellent. Thank you for posting.

Excellent commentary. This obviously takes a lot of research. Thanks and you got a new sub!!

Looking good, love it. Gotta stay positive.

wow what an incredible subject, this entire airplane concept was just nuts, really enjoyed learning about, the history and technical insight in to this egg shape death trap

Almost 40 min? When you said that's it, I was like "Already?!" I thought I was itching for a Spitfire video, but it seems you know me better than I know myself. ;-)

Fantastic stuff. Looking forward part two. Your selfie was a surprise to me - I expected a much older man. You are indeed “looking good.”

Greg are you a professor? This is fantastic information, thank you! I hope Military Aviation History aka Bismarck will cooperate with you in the future (for translation etc.)

17:50 If this helps, in German, you can replace umlauts over a vowel with an E after the vowel.

I love your videos, they are so informative

Great insight into this interesting unique aircraft.

Thanks for posting. I finally learned about the development of all wing air crafts in Germany. In America I'm familiar with the Northrop designs.

33:56 "the tail" or empennage - Etymology: French empennage (“feathers of an arrow”) Thanks Wiktionary And thanks Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles I'm sure most people who watch this channel know about 'empennage,' but for the few who don't I hope this helps.

Thanks for going into some detail about the control surfaces of the airplane! I was always puzzled about their arrangement. I first knew about this unique machine from the expansion for the IL2 1946 video game. I did not realize how unbelievably dangerous the plane’s fuel was, and thought it was some kind of suicide unit just due to the way its gears fell away. Thanks for letting me know!

Thanks for the mini hotel tour. If you spend time on foreign soil it’s always interesting to see the local history and learn how it interfaces with your own. I was born in Frankfurt to a career NCO and his new bride. Dad was stationed at Darmstadt. My penultimate duty station in the Army was at Wiesbaden, not far from Frankfurt or Darmstadt. I recently saw a picture of Ernst Udet standing in front of his last WWI mount, a Fokker DVIII. That photo was taken at Darmstadt. When you get out in it, the world is a smaller place than one would think. The ME-163 has always fascinated me if for no other reason than it seems to have been a really good way to kill some of the few remaining Experten that the Germans had. Thanks Greg.

Nice video. Thanks for the peak of the hotel in Taipei. 👍

The German word for fuel is "Treibstoff" (also translatable as "propellant"). It is a contraction of two words derived from "treiben" (= to propel), and "Stoff" (= substance). On this basis, it is simply convenient to call two different components of a propellant to also end with "stoff". Thus calling them C-Stoff, T-Stoff, and Z-Stoff makes sense (if you're German!)

Given the success of the Komet as a flying machine, it's a wonder that they didn't pursue some of the Lippisch variants like different P.15 that put jets in it. They ranged from single jet and the same dolly & skid, to twin jets and actual retractable wheels. Once pilots understood its particular quirks & features, it flew very well. Lippisch's last iteration of the "Delta", with substantial fin (eventually without the little canards) also flew well. Several modern delta type variations also work well: see the Dyke and the Verhees light planes which are quite well mannered and pilot friendly. Then there's the remarkable Wainfan "Facetmobile" of the '90s, which is currently working on a modern 2seat upgrade. Arguably better in all important criteria than "normal" planes.

'Negotiable virtue'. Great term...new one for me. I hope I remember it. ☮

Looking forward to part two. Liked, subscribed.

what a great channel ! merci de partager votre savoir.

I've been to the Kansas Cosmosphere Space Center a few times as a kid, and they had a whole section on WWII German rocket work, including a corner devoted to the 163. At twelve years old I thought it looked really cool, like a full-size paper air plane with a rocket strapped to it, but I wondered what madman would dare to fly such a contraption, especially given the fuels.

Once again outstanding!

Looking forward to part 2. What an amazing little death trap. Poor souls who lost their lives fighting for a lost cause.

A great deep dig of information as per usual. "Negotiable Virtues"... haha.. a new phrase in my lexicon.

Again, fantastic content, Greg! Thank you. Maybe an idea for future content: "WW2 - Link Trainer", the simulators that were used to train airforce pilots back then.

The Me-163 is probably one of the craziest projects the Luftwaffe used and I still don't know why carried on with it for so long given how dangerous it was. I think I'd rather be in a Zero in 1945 than in that thing.

And did you record that in one go? Fascinating and thank you for bringing to us. Like vids on YT of Me 163 still used as a glider in Germany, living proof of a genius!

Just viewing this and brought memories of seeing one of these at an Ottawa museum. When I saw one as child I thought how cool it was but this video reminds me how terrible the cost of War is

Incredible video! Thanks for posting it! Let us know when you publish the part 2 video! Greetings from Guatemala!

Greg. Praise. That is all.

For the german "Ö" just imagine the sound one makes when falling badly and not being able to breathe ;)

Stay healthy my friend great work

Nice series. Found it fascinating. Better than most stuff on the "history channel".

Thanks for your work, 👍 it has been extremely informative and hilarious at the same time. Great sense of humour you have, a few occasions I started giggling and couldn't stop for while. ... at least T-Stoff and C-Stoff were water soluble ... so mechanics did not have to be working on a ticking bomb ... : )) ... Erprobungskommando 16. I'm not gonna try that German name ... ... His wing clipped that flag tower. Just barely, but in airplanes just barely is a problem ... ... Guess where they decided to put the additional tanks holding the flesh dissolving T-Stoff. If you answered, in the cockpit, you were correct ... And at the very end: ... Women with negotiatiable virtues ... Greg, you made my day

I have always seen , and used the term "washout" preferable to "wing twist" . On RC Airplanes without flaps it really works to prevent tip - stall.Another thoroughly researched video. thanks.

"Stoff" tanslates quite simply to "stuff", "textile tissue", "matter", "material", in this case most aptly "substance".

One of the best 163 documents online

Fascinating video.

Dear lord, as a person studying for an A&P license I should have thought more about how the 163 fuel system worked. The dangers and restrictions of such a fuel are simply baffling and scary. Such a dangerous system as you talked about. Never truly thought it through. Its even scarier to me now. 32:44 And I just cringed when you mentioned that they put more T-Stoff inside cockpit. I will stick to a He-162 instead. Great video though, I very much look forward to Part 2.

Hey Greg ! Congratulations on the channel. Real good, detailed and proper technical explanations. Fantastic "stoff", really XD I'd like to make a comment, and I'm not sure if someone pointed this out already. If so, I apologise in advance...anyway, here it goes: You are absolutely right when pointing out that the Me-163 have a noticeable wing twist, but I suspect the reason behind that aerodynamic feature does not have to do with aileron isues or wing tip stall...but rather with pitch stability. Wing twist is a common feature to all early tail-less aircraft designs, and its purpose is to create an opposing force-and therefore a momentum- to produce some leverage to counteract the momentum generated by the lift and the distance betweet the center of pressure (CP) and CG. Kind of a built-in trimming feature, if you like. By the way: that´s also the reason pretty much all flying wings have swept wings. This goes all the way back to the very early designs, like the D-8 for instance, since it constitute a kind of intuite way of dealing with pitch stability without elevators. Yes, it provides yaw stability and have a lot advantages at high speed...but the combination of wing twist + swept wing planform was the only way of dealing with flying wing's fundamental problem, at least in the minds of early 20th century aircraft designers...waaay before pressure distribution and aileron reversal became an issue (or even dreamt of, I'd say). In their defense, I'd only say it is kind of a natural way of thinking... -Need pitch stability w/o elevators => make a built-in counteracting force in the only aerodinamic surface available-the wing itself-and move it as back as possible ! All the best, man ! Carlos

Greg, you are the best :)