# Mossie nf vs He 219 nf



## Erich (May 20, 2004)

Gents since I am a new guy here has this topic been covered at some length ? If not I would like your opinions on the two night fighters. I have my own, but have it.............. !







E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 20, 2004)

its not been covered, but the mossie was better 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 20, 2004)

it's been done somehwere, but the mossie is my favourite, i think the 219's ugly..................


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 20, 2004)

nah, not that ugly 8) aint the 219 essentially a Henschel Hs-129?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 20, 2004)

but the mossie's one of thebest looking planes of the war...............


----------



## Erich (May 20, 2004)

I ask this because there are many He 219 afficiando's out in cyberland. the Heinkel was Mossie fodder, but will let other's respond before my lenghty diatribe..........

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 20, 2004)

the mossie only looks good to you lanc because its british, i suppose you think all british planes look great


----------



## kiwimac (May 20, 2004)

The HE219 was certaily NOT the Hs129. As for the 219 being Mossie fodder, the 219 was by far the better plane.

Kiwimac


----------



## Erich (May 20, 2004)

I must make a rebuttal now. thanks for opening this up............maybe this was on purpose ? hmmmmmmmmmm

the He 219 was a piece of crap and only I./NJG 1 flew the a/c in combat. NJG 5 tested one as well as nachtjagd staffel Norwegen with un-impressive results. NJGr 10 had two and were tested with new weapons and radar systems and both failed with broken backs and left on the side of the tarmac at Werneuchen. so unimpressed was NJG 1 with the machine that only the I.gruppe flew it along with possibly 2-3 other pilots of II and III. gruppe, III./NJG 1 transferring out of the Bf 110G-4 to the Ju 88G-6 but still flew a mixture of 110's as well.

the He 219 suffered primarily from a weak engine power components along with weak wing spars. Crews of I./NJG 1 pulled usually two of the 2cm weapons from the ventral tray as 6 cannon were not needed. Most of I. gruppes Uhu's did not have rear warning radar and this is where the term Mossie fodder came into being. the a/c had mechancial faults with it's ejection seat system and there is docs covering at least two seperate crew fatalities where the crewmen were ejected through the canopy.
No rear gunner or defence although this was being worked on by war's end. another pair of eyes was a necessity in 1945 as Ju 88G-6 units were making this an almost common place with a fourth crew-member.

lastly for some unknown reasons the He 219's were not equipped with the latest in radar technology possibly due to the narrow nose and limited space thus not able to encorporate the newer Berlin AI dish and a limited cockpit for the radar operator..................

some things to consider

v/r

Erich


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 20, 2004)

I have heard that the He-219 never received the official backing that other types had. That would probably explain the lack of the newest electronics being installed. I've heard several conflicting reports on the 219 that maybe you could clarify Erich. On one hand, I have heard that a 219 shot down several Mossie bombers on one of its first sorties (something most Luftwaffe nightfighters couldn't match). On the other hand, I have heard that it was woefully underpowered for a plane of its size.


----------



## Erich (May 21, 2004)

I./NJG 1 in it's career with the Uhu shot down 12 mossies. I beleive the first sorties were agasint RAF 4 engine bombers

E


----------



## plan_D (May 21, 2004)

This isn't on the He219 because we all know, with little exception, that the Mosquito was better. But, Erich, was the Bf-110 first used by Jg7? I've read it in two different books, but I want to make sure...


----------



## Erich (May 21, 2004)

no it wasn't. JG 7 or it has been claimed that in II. gruppe there were Bf 109's. Some pics have been attributed to that gruppe showing cracked up Messer's but the rumpfbands are not red/blue but yellow/red of JG 301.

III. gruppe and then I. gruppe operated the JG 7 from the start and II./JG 7 was developed extremely late in the war.............

E ~


----------



## plan_D (May 21, 2004)

See, I said even books can be wrong.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 21, 2004)

Anything can be wrong.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 21, 2004)

even you guys.............


----------



## Erich (May 21, 2004)

nobody has all the answers that is why we should research as much as possible, and I do not mean the internet as the prime source. go grab some good references and go interview some vets to capture the best of all around experiences............

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 21, 2004)

interview vets?   woof


----------



## Erich (May 21, 2004)

Uhu's looking a little lonely............


----------



## Gemhorse (May 22, 2004)

I've got it the Bf110 first flew with I/LG 1 [Intructional Division], this Gruppe becoming I[Z]LG 1 on Jan 1st 1939. - Others were issued to I/ZG 1 and I/ZG 76 in the early months of 1939 also....and....the DH 98 was the supreme nightfighter....


----------



## plan_D (May 22, 2004)

Yes, I've read that they flew with I/ZG 76. 'like hannibals cavalry protecting the elephants; the elephants are my bombers' The 'indestructable' Bf-110s soon found how wrong they were in the BoB.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 22, 2004)

I think of the funniest things of the war was using 109s to escort the 110s escorting the bombers.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 22, 2004)

na, the funniest thing had to be when the germans thought the stuka was invincible ....................


----------



## Gemhorse (May 29, 2004)

I think the funniest thing was they never really employed four-engined bombers, considering how much they liked 'bombing'....they seemed to like watching them come over day and night bombing them - and they never could decide which of their awesome designs to really use, to sort the compounding problems out with......


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

in truth they did need a heavy...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 29, 2004)

the He-277 could have been good, same with the P.108.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

but the problem was they didn't see the need for one, by the time they realised they needed one, it was to late..................


----------



## Erich (May 29, 2004)

the funniest thing here is how you guyz manage to take threads and get them off topic............so please get back on it ok ? !

geez


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

it's the mods job to get them on topic, but C.C.'s normally the one to take them off topic, but you can't stay on topic forever, for example in the best tank killer thread we all agreed the IL-2 was the best, how can you argue something when you're all on the same side..................


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (May 29, 2004)

Gemhorse said:


> I think the funniest thing was they never really employed four-engined bombers, considering how much they liked 'bombing'....they seemed to like watching them come over day and night bombing them - and they never could decide which of their awesome designs to really use, to sort the compounding problems out with......


Technicaly... they did have a four engined heavy.
The "Grief" had four Db605's paired in two to form a Db610. In other words, it was two engines to a propellor. Why they didn't just use the 801, I don't know... (Yes, I DO KNOW fighters got priority, but the Do217N's had Jumo 213's, which Doras and Ta-152's used)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

we know they had them, they just didn't the advantage in them, and the He-177 wasn't that good..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

but the He-277 had the more conventional 4 engined layout, i dont think it actually saw service though


----------



## Gemhorse (May 30, 2004)

Only 8 He 299's were produced, and considering the He 199 program was initiated in the late 1930's, it was yet another case of RLM vacillation that led to the failure of them reaching operations. Their design wasn't much chop anyway; - Erich's mention of the Ju 290, Kiwimac mentioned the Me 264, these were two potentially good 4-engined bombers - They also had a Ju 488 and the Ju 390 6-engined job, all of which sadly never reached much of an operational status, which was probably a good thing from an Allied point of view...- All bloody sad; - the big stuff-up for the Germans here, was the He 219, which was woefully underpowered to hunt such energetic quarry as the glorious Mosquito...got a few preoccupied Mossies on it's initial debut, but fell far short of it's 'raison d'entre' as a Mossie-killer supreme...


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 30, 2004)

Regardless of how successful it was or it wasn't (I've heard evidence from both sides and I'm not sure which is correct) the He-219 was the only German aircraft that seemed to have a chance at challenging the Mosquito. What else were the Germans going to use? Perhaps the radar equipped 109s and 190s that Erich mentioned?


----------



## Erich (May 31, 2004)

the 262 ! remember my mentioning Kommando Welter in December of 44 when he created this till war's end............? what the heck you can read it all in my book next year.

E ~


----------



## Gemhorse (May 31, 2004)

Well they had a few, probably their most successful being the Ju 88. The wooden Fw Ta 154 was supposed to be it, but their glue wouldn't stick, the Do 217 J N models had a go, Me 110's etc. etc. - But it was a tragedy the He 219 fell short mainly because of under-powered engines, particuarly when they had Methanol/Water and Nitrous Oxide injection systems...I liked them, very unique design, good armament, their handling was abit hairy, but that was the engine-power again...by that stage of the War, their aircraft assembly was becoming plagued by deteriorating quality-control, air-raids, let alone parts availability and the RLM interference, and the jets were getting priority.....


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 31, 2004)

So if the German goverment had stepped out of the way and given Heinkel free reign to do what was needed with the He-219, would it have been a more successful design then?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 31, 2004)

that depends on weather they could find better engines...............


----------



## Erich (May 31, 2004)

speculation again guyz.

we are dealing with what-ifs as we do not know what may have happened if the Heinkel program would have had full on support and the revision of exteranl arms and parts, including replacement of the engines. It may well have seen a redesgined cockpit/canopy, rear armament and radar as standard with a three-four man crew. In any ivent the time of a Mossie chaser had appeared in the successful Me 262A-1a.

possibly go here and check through the older threads for some answers. this IS the German ight fighter forum run by friend Greg Kopchuck of Canada

http://disc.server.com/Indices/169401.html


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

The Me-262A-1a within in the first month of service apparently shot down two F-5 Lightnings and a Photo-Recce Mosquito...it's good to read...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

is there something you're not telling us plan_D, the "its good to read" phrase has appeared on a few of your posts now


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

My brother gave me a book yesterday, and I'm flicking through it.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

ah right 8) good book?


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

It's old it was published in 1978...he found it under his bed and gave me it when I went to his house. So far I have to say its good, but you never know being that old it could be wrong about a lot of things...so I'm testing it on here against Erich and LG


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 1, 2004)

It wouldn't surprise me. Both the F-5 and the Mossie were fast, but they couldn't begin to compare with the 262. And it terms of books, for historical purposes, older isn't always bad since it is closer to the events in question.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

good point 8)


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

Very true but sometimes they are still affected by propaganda and general misinformation. I cannot say it is a poor book because it is old, but because a lot of books are often revised you must take some of their information with a grain of salt. 
In any case, I believe this book to be written by a Spitfire pilot of the war (Bill Gunston) if anyone has heard of him. He holds a lot of respect for the Fw-190.


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

title bitte ? I probably have it. Kommando Nowotny shot down the three a/c you mention........


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

It actually says that but I failed to mention it well it actually says it was EKdo that became Kommando Nowotny  

Not an inventive name just 'Classic Aircraft:Fighters'...


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

unless you are strapped for the dosh go find a copy of the Messerschmitt combat diary-Me 262 by John forman and S.E. Harvey. woth every penny as well as Claissic Pubs me 262 volumes, 3 and 4 on the jet.......

many first person accounts both Allied and Luftwaffe

E ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 1, 2004)

a good tip is to check out second hand bookshops, they normally have a good selection...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

and at a reduced rate too 8)


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 2, 2004)

Yeah, I mentioned that priority was being given to the Jet Development - Aside from that, the He 219 and the Do 335 were the two piston-engined designs that were the main Nightfighter Programs, as regard to progressing past the Do 217 N, the Bf 110 and the Ju 88, although the latter's G series was still in the running...- The He 219's main problems were the Generalluftzeugmeister Erhard Milch, who despised Heinkel and Kammhuber, and wanted to push the Ju 88 G and the Do 335 programs instead. - Also, the availability of the DB 603 G L series engines, which were initially specified for the He 219, were well behind delivery schedule, so earlier models had to make do with the lesser-powered DB 603 A engines. They eventually got the right engines in them, the He 219 A7 becoming the most important service version of the fighter. Albert Speer, Minister for Armaments, got this version rolling, overiding Milch.- By late 1943, I/NJG 1 were the main operators, 7/NJG 5 in Flensburg also having them with their Ju 88's Bf 110's. - They played around with a He 319 419 version, and tried using Jumo 222's on them, but the basic He 219 A series stayed-on and did the work up to War's end.....- IMHO , the He 219 was an outstanding aircraft, suffering few teething troubles that other contemporaries had, vacillation by Technisches Amt, Milch's interference and Allied bombing doing the most damage to it's program....If they'd had more sooner, the dear old Mossie might've had a tough time....but then again, they never got around to trying Griffons on the Mosquito....would've really left 'em behind then.....P.38's too....!!!


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 2, 2004)

Hey, the Brits never thought to fit Merlins in the Lightning either. If an Allison-engined P-38 could match the peformance of a Merlin-engined P-51, what could the Lightning have done with those engines?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

thats an interesting point


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 3, 2004)

> and at a reduced rate too



actually those shops can be suprisingly expensive................



> what could the Lightning have done with those engines?




i think it would have made a hell of a fighter......................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

it already was a hell of a fighter


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 3, 2004)

The USAAF never did the expirements with the Lightning that it should. Part of the reason was that a second line was never openned until 1945 and the USAAF was unwilling to accept any delays in the production of Lightnings from the only exsisting plant.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 4, 2004)

one plant isn't much to produce a fighter.............


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 4, 2004)

No its not, especially when some of the planes that had two or more plants set up to produce them are considered.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 8, 2004)

i think the most amazing production facilities were the factories producing T-34s in russia, they could literally roll tanks straight out the factories into battle....................


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 8, 2004)

That's one of the saddest aspects of the Lockheed Lightning, that come War's-end, they appear to have trashed them all...A real waste of a legendary fighter, even with the advent of the emerging jet-age, it still had much to give, and it never was further developed....Considering it was the highest scoring Zero-killer, the Lightning never got the prestige and chance to become a prolific Warbird like the Mustang, which I might add, ended up in a similar configuration as the P.82... -The main Lightning Factory was in Burbank, California, wasn't it ?...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 8, 2004)

That was the only Lightning plant until the Vega factory in Nashville started producing them shortly before the war (producing the grand total of 113). The 'low-mileage' Lightnings in the Pacific were nearly turned over to the South Korean Air Force where they might have been very handy 6 years later . . .


----------



## plan_D (Jun 9, 2004)

Those T-34s rolling off the production line, going straight into battles didn't have the 'extras' like optics or radio. Not a tank I'd want to be fighting. Aiming by looking down the barrel isn't accurate. 
And 16 hour shifts at 3/4 rations of what the British workers had. It's not impressive, it's slave labour.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 9, 2004)

small question, when did P-38 production begin and when did it enter service?


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 9, 2004)

First flight of the XP-38 was on Jan. 27th, 1939. The YP-38 deliveries started in Sept. 1940. As near as I can tell, the first production P-38s started coming out in June 1941. I believe the first Lightnings into regular service were the D models which started production (and service almost immediately after) in Aug. 1941.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 9, 2004)

ah right, thanks 8) i thought it was sometime around 1940, the lanc thought it was about 1938 and i was just wondering 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 9, 2004)

It was being designed in 1938. The final set of requirements for the project were issued by the USAAC in Feb. 1937.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 9, 2004)

i imagined that, but we was discussing when it first started being produced 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 9, 2004)

but the USSAF didn't arive in England 'till 42, so it didn't see much sevise before then....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 10, 2004)

Well, considering the US didn't enter the war until Dec. of '41, there wasn't that much service for anything to see.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 10, 2004)

August 1942..I might add.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 11, 2004)

sorry, the USSAF didn't arrive in England 'till august '42, so it didn't see much servise before then...............


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 11, 2004)

Yeh, there was. A little place with little land called the Southwest Pacific.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 12, 2004)

so lets see, war in the pacific started december '41, P-38s flying many missions against the japs not much more than 6 moths later??


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 13, 2004)

P-38s initially were intially rushed to the west coast due to the fears of a Japanese invasion and were not deployed overseas initially.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 13, 2004)

exactily, so they didn't see any action during that period.............


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 13, 2004)

Because they were considered too valuable to the defense of the American mainland. They were clearly the best fighter America had at the time and they were flying combat patrols during this time.


----------



## Erich (Jun 13, 2004)

ah what happened to the Mossie vs the Uhu ?


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 13, 2004)

Yeah, seems everytime 'Mosquito' is mentioned, LG CC get an inferiority-complex and are compelled to start rabbiting-on about the bloody Lightning again...


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 13, 2004)

Yeah, seems everytime 'Mosquito' is mentioned, LG CC get an inferiority-complex and are compelled to start rabbiting-on about the bloody Lightning again...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 14, 2004)

I was just answering the questions asked, seemed a polite thing to do. And no one was saying anything about the Mossie v. Uhu anyway.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 14, 2004)

topics never really stay on topic for many pages............


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 14, 2004)

Yeah, I understand that Lanc, but there does seem to be this 'Mossie vs Lightning' thing, where on one hand 'Lightnings' were the best thing since sliced [cheddar] cheese, to 'some', and Mossies were some kinda 'airborne-wheelbarrow...'- While I've always said the Lightning was a superb aircraft, they didn't have SFA to do with ETO Nightfighting, and only just scraped into the Pacific scene as a Nightfighter...This NF Topic was an integral part of the Battle for Europe, between what was hailed as the best of what the Germans had to combat the 'Mossie Menace', and this remarkable 'Wooden' Aircraft that played a huge part , defensively and offensively, against a numerically superior enemy [at the time]...I for one, are greatly interested in discussion about it, because it wasn't JUST the aircraft, but the crews, the electronics, the whole Battle's strategy tactics, that make it a Topic worthy of relative discussion...


----------



## Erich (Jun 14, 2004)

here here ! and lanc you should be interested in the RAF that defended the Lanc bomber streams as well as the enemy who tried to knock it out of the skies over the Reich. Again a very little known aspect of the war with few books written about the subject compared to the Daylight energies by the US 8th air force both bomber and fighter........

E ~ 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 15, 2004)

I will agree with that. The technological side of the war after dark is absolutely fascinating.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 15, 2004)

i know about the electronic warfare used by the brittish bombers (suprise suprise) throught reading about it, and i never said i wasn't interested, just that, through no fault of my own, topics don't stay on topic for long.................


----------



## Erich (Jun 15, 2004)

good for you Lanc but my young friend you make the choice whether you stay on topic or not as well as brad and CC. if it is all going to be fun and games here then start up a seperate thread instead of ranting off the topic header. That is only showing courtesty to everyone here including yourself. Since I did start this particular thread I would like if possible to stay on task.................please !

v/r

Erich ♪


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 15, 2004)

ok, my personall preaferance would be the mossie, proberly jst for the whole idea, it was an amazing aircraft by any standards, but even moreso as it was wooden..............


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 15, 2004)

If the He 219 could have gotten its engine problems worked out it might well have proven to have been more than a match for the Mossie. As it is, the Mossie's Merlins provided the British plane with eye-watering performance and power to spare. That was probably the Mossie's biggest edge.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 16, 2004)

the mossie was just about the fastest thing up there untill '44............


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 22, 2004)

I think the Mossie's manoevrability had alot to do with it too, the weight difference between the He 219, at 33,000 lb AUW, to the Mossie's 20,000 odd lbs. - The Wooden construction obviously gave great benefit here, and even though they tried to 'copy' this construction in the Fw 154, they failed with the glues; - it did certainly show though, that the wooden aircraft was noticably quicker, top speed in the low 400's mph in the initial trials. - But even with the improved engines, the He 219 would still have been hard-pressed to get it over the Mosquito...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 22, 2004)

Well the Mossie couldn't have run flat out over the length of the entire mission. Does anyone know what the typical cruising speed of a Mossie was? The He 219 did shoot down some Mosquitoes so obviously it was capable of catching it. If a Mossie could be surprised while it was cruising, I imagine it would still be vulnerable.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 22, 2004)

About 255 mph on average, but it's climb rate was twice the He 219's, and if they had warning, well...that was the game, wasn't it ? It's quite conceivable the Mosquitos they did shoot-down were Bomber or Pathfinder variants, but one thing's for sure, they were light , fast and manoevrable, something the He 219 had to work at....


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 22, 2004)

They were bomber variants, but that was what the Luftwaffe was most concerned with shooting down. If they could knock out the Mossie pathfinders then the accuracy of the raid would drop considerably. 255 mph isn't all that fast and could be caught with only some difficulty.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 23, 2004)

but they would obviously speed up on their bombing run, and i've seen higher cruising speeds than that.....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 23, 2004)

I'm sure they did speed up on the bombing runs. The thing is, Berlin was a distant target, about 600 miles straight line. The Mossie couldn't run full-out there and back. Most fighters were only capable of sustaining maximum power (ie speed) for about 5-10min per mission. Whenever the Mossie was in a cruise, I imagine it would have still be vulnerable.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 24, 2004)

but bomber varients had a range of 2000+ miles (while cruising), so they have allot of extra fuel to burn, and whenever they got jumped, they would hit the throttle and would propberly be safe, they could just outrun the fighter with ease.........................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 24, 2004)

Engines burn up fuel a whole lot faster at high power (3-4 times faster or more) plus the fact that the engine itself generally can't take continuous high power for very long effectively limits the continuous speed of the Mossie or anything else. Yes the Mossie was very difficult to intercept and yes it could usually avoid an attacker by going to high power. However, it could be intercepted and going to high power is only an option if the attacker can be spotted or some form of warning given. As great as it was, combat in the Mossie was dangerous, just like it was in anything else.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 24, 2004)

but like you say, combat in anything is dangerous, truth is, piloting a mossie in late 42/43 was one of the safest places to be.....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 24, 2004)

Probably one of the safest. But so often people talk of the Mossie as if it equipped its crew with invulnerability. It was very good, but nothing was THAT good.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2004)

> But so often people talk of the Mossie as if it equipped its crew with invulnerability



becuase the pilots had great faith in their aircraft, they knew she was a good bird and they had a dam good chance of coming back.......................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 25, 2004)

I've never denied that . . . but she wasn't invulnerable, nothing was. And the successes that the He 219 had against the Mossie proves it. The Mossie was the better plane, but the crew still had to be on their toes.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2004)

but even then fighter varients of the mossie were well equiped to take them out..................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 26, 2004)

Fighter marks, yes . . . bomber marks, no.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 26, 2004)

Well, the fastest variants of the Mosquito was naturally the PR ones, which un-armed and well fueled, flew long distances and great heights...they were usually very 'on their toes...'- The bomber/pathfinders were also un-armed, and depending on their role, may have carried bombs, or else flares and TI's [target indicators], which weren't as heavy...My contention is the one's shot-down by He 219's were possibly these. -You say that that was the He 219's Job, shooting down bombers...The NF/Intruders were a different breed, and being hunters, probably kept their eye's-peeled for their 'opponents'. - I'm not exactly sure , just at this point , whether these variants carried 'tail-warning radar';- the books I've originally read on these chaps, I don't presently have, to check on this now; - But I suspect that some NF variants did carry this type of equipment, as the radar started to improve about the time Mosquitos took over the NF role from Beaufighters, and IFF was starting to come on line. - As Lanc says, the crews knew they had a superb aircraft, and yes, they weren't invulnerable, but they could take enormous damage, and still return....There is alot of documentation to support this, it was a special feature of the wooden design that it 'could take damage', but especially, how easily repaired they could be in most circumstances...- In a nutshell, I feel about the Mosquito, the way you feel about the Lightning, LG...-They were both exceptional aircraft, in their chosen roles...the Lightning particuarly as a single-seater;- the Mosquito, for firstly the 'un-armed' aspect of it's Bomber/Pathfinder/PR variants;.. and the hitting-power and all-round aspects of the Fighter/Bomber variants.....- I saw you 'drooling' over the comment I made about 'putting Griffons' in the Mosquito... -Your immediate comment was 'what about the Lightning too...' - [let alone Merlins..! ].. -They were exceptional aircraft, Mosquitos, considering they were only supposed to last for a few missions....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2004)

what i think was even more stupid was that in typically british style we didn't even want it at first, it wasn't untill we thoguht we could do with something that didn't use "stratigic material".......................


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 28, 2004)

Yeah, Geoffrey de Havilland had a real friend in Sir Wilfred Freeman, I think it was, because the Govt. blokes nick-named it 'Freeman's Folly' originally...the idea was that they had a way to make use of the very valuable Woodworking Craftsmen, and as you say , the Wood as a not needed 'strategic material'....What a success that idea was !!!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 28, 2004)

i bet we were pretty pissed off we didn't accept it earlier................


----------



## Gemhorse (Jun 29, 2004)

I feel that it came at the 'right' time... it certainly impressed all it's critics straight-off, being 50 mph faster than the current Spitfire. When you consider that it was wood and proposed as an 'un-armed' aircraft, it was natural that there would be sceptics, but what it went on to become, probably Britain's 'Best All-rounder', I'm inclined to think it was 'Divine-intervention'....


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 29, 2004)

The emphasis of just about every country between the world wars was on the strategic bomber carrying withering firepower and acting like an airborne battleship. Given that background, the idea of the Mossie was a bit hard to swallow. There were similar reservations with using the P-38 as a strategic bomber.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 29, 2004)

but you can see why they were skeptical of the mossie, IT WAS MADE OF WOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 29, 2004)

Several of the Russian aircraft used wooden compontents to cut down on the requirements of aluminum.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 30, 2004)

but they were wooden COMPONENTS, this whole thing was wood, and a bet the russian planes you're refering to weren't as impressive as the mossie......................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 30, 2004)

No they weren't, but the Mossie wasn't ENTIRELY wooden either.


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 30, 2004)

Unless.... It had magical Balsa-Oak composite Merlins....

If this please you Hot Space, the wood is from Wales.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 30, 2004)

Don't forget landing gear, instruments, seats, windows, etc.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 1, 2004)

well obviously i meant the fusilage and wings were wood, the controll surfaces were fabric covered...........................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 2, 2004)

But it wasn't what you said . . .


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 2, 2004)

don't get picky...............................


----------



## Gemhorse (Jul 4, 2004)

It was a pretty 'ballsy' idea in 1938 to build a wooden aircraft as an unarmed bomber capable of outflying all contempary fighters, but DH's success with the DH 91 Albatross as a wooden airliner proved this 'wood structuring' idea. After the Mosquito's service introduction and the variant developments that evolved, I think Germany was lucky that the Mosquito's single-seat version didn't make quantity production earlier...The DH 103 Hornet was probably the fastest piston-engined aircraft of it's type produced...the prototype achieving 485 mph level-flight, back in July 1944. - It was also unique in that it was the first aircraft in the World to have wood glued successfully to metal, using 'Redux Adhesive'. Apart from having Laminar-flow wings, it was also a very successful Carrier aircraft, and the Nightfighter two-seat version was developed thru the Sea Hornet's role. The Hornet stayed in service until 1956 and settled the FAA's need for an exceptional Offensive/Defensive fighter. - Our earlier discussions concerning putting Griffon engines into Mosquitos Lightnings was interesting in the light of the Hornet's engines, Merlin 130/131's or 133/134's, capable of 2,070 2,030 hp respectively...Built essentially for the PTO, they had very long range with external tanks, and carried everything except the Molins cannons and heavy bombs of the Mosquito. But it's undeniable what a successful construction technique De Havilland had evolved using wood, principally cedar ply, sandwiching a layer of Balsa wood. - They used Birch ply on the Hornet, with reinforced Alclad, but these types of designs were and probably still are, unique in the World....Put up against ALL the metal-built aircraft, performance in all aspects is astonishing in comparison, and even with jets, the He-219 still would not have had the manoevrability....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 5, 2004)

> the He-219 still would not have had the manoevrability



for what........................


----------



## Erich (Jul 5, 2004)

to get out of the way of a Mossie XIX or XXX. Incidently the Uhu besides being an overly large twin engine nf was a heavy one too. Several I./NJG 1 pilots thought it best to stay at the 20,000 foot altitude and when Mossies were indicated on the rearward warning radar(when equipped), they simply would dive vertically and pull up the very last minute. This was felt that their signal on a British AI radar set would be there at once and then disappear when diving at a tremendous speed.

E ~


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 6, 2004)

But wasn't it a very simple matter to maneuver out of the field-of-view of those early radar sets?


----------



## Erich (Jul 6, 2004)

Actually the British AI was an excellent system and I personally feel although the Germans made much use of radar systems they were in no way on par equal with the Allies sets. also to it depended alot on the experience of the radar operator trying to get a sense of the "enemy" through all the visual clutter shown on the cathode tube screen, so yes the early sets as well as th later sets did have problems, usally could bring an a/c to within 800 yeds then it was up to the crewmens eyes visually to fix the target.

E ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 7, 2004)

you wouldn't expect a radar system to bring you any closer than 800yds anyway, like you said, you should be able to see it from there..................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 7, 2004)

800yds is quite aways to see on a dark night. I've heard 400yds as a more common figure. But the FOV on those early sets was very limited. If the attacking fighter got too close, the defending fighter could change heading or alitude quickly and be off the scope before the attacker had a chance to react.


----------



## Erich (Jul 7, 2004)

800 yards and less. sometimes 75 yards on a coal black night. My remark is during 1944-45 there was much clutter in the air and even the US AI in the P-61 had problems with the many fires and atmospheric conditions present during late 44 through the spring of 45. Sure enough the attacker had to be quick and most likely attack from behind and below so he would not be seen and also if the prey had rear warning radar then of course the target could easily be lost in a simple hard bank towards the earth.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 7, 2004)

Over Korea, the F4U-5N pilots would usually hang back at about 1,000yds to see if their target was taking an evasive action before moving in. At that range, there was usually enough time to detect a targets maneuvers and counter them.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jul 7, 2004)

With the introduction of the Mk.VIII AI Radar, the Nightfighting War went from strength to strength for Britain. They constantly had the German Nightfighter Arm on the defensive, electronicly, but credit to Germany, they tried hard to keep up...when they had to use single-seat day-fighters to 'night-vision' around in support of the twin-engined radar-equipped aircraft, this was an indication they were throwing all they had at it...The major Allied losses often occurred due to things like un-forecast weather , but also the Allies became predictable sometimes with their 'feint attacks' such as in the Peenmunde Raid, Mosquitos attacking other cities drawing the enemy NF's away, but they caught-on during this one, and shredded the last wave of bombers on the way out....


----------



## Schrage Muzik (Jul 17, 2004)

Lightning Guy said:


> I have heard that the He-219 never received the official backing that other types had. That would probably explain the lack of the newest electronics being installed. I've heard several conflicting reports on the 219 that maybe you could clarify Erich. On one hand, I have heard that a 219 shot down several Mossie bombers on one of its first sorties (something most Luftwaffe nightfighters couldn't match). On the other hand, I have heard that it was woefully underpowered for a plane of its size.



That's true, Ernst Heinkel built it out of his own pocket.

I think it could have been a better night figher, if it had been given official backing, and been allowed to prove itself.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 21, 2004)

but to be honest how much would it have chaged the outcome of the war??


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 22, 2004)

It wouldn't have changed the outcome. But it may have made things considerably tougher on Bomber Command.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 23, 2004)

but surely we would have just sent out more mossies, i'm not saying this would cancel out the threat, i'm just asking if that's what the RAF would have done??


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 23, 2004)

It may have caused the British to produce more Mossies. But most German nightfighters had little trouble changing the four-engined heavy so I'm not sure more He-219s would have had a different result from simply having more nightfighters period.


----------



## Chocks away! (Jan 30, 2005)

bollocks. the 219 was a Mosquito KILLER! i don't buy any of this. Look at ot's first operational sorties. Take a look at it's armament and performance.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

The He-219 was fantastic...


----------



## Erich (Jan 30, 2005)

I have the proof as I own the Mossie kills listing from I./NJG 1. 12 mossies does not make the He 219 a Mossie killer. 10.(N)/JG 300 with Bf 109G-6/AS did better from September to November 44.

the Uhu needed work and only one gruppe took the Uhu on for ops. No BS here chocks


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 31, 2005)

The He-219 was a good looking aircraft, and had an impressive armament, but as stated before, it was grossly under-powered for such a heavy fighter....because they scored a few Mossies on their debut, it didn't make them a Mossie-killer....they were abit quicker than the Bf-110 and Ju-88 that were essentially used as the main radar-capable Luftwaffe Nightfighters, which I guess was why they clobbered a few, and quite possibly the one's they got may have been unarmed Bomber Command Pathfinders and Master-bombers; - Nightfighter Mossies were equipped with tail-warning radar as well as their frontal radar.... - But the He-219's were too few, too slow and too late to compete against an established RAF Nightfighter Force......

Just out of interest, '' shrage Musik ''wasn't a German invention....It was actually traced back to first being used during WWI by the RFC in the Sopwith Dolphins... The first German credited with using it, was Oberleutnant Schonert [...with the umlaut...can't figure-out how to do it on my PC...] who whilst serving with 4/NJG 2, experimented with a Do-17Z-10, using a 7.9mm MG, as a free-moving or a fixed-to-fire-obliquely-upward, weapon. It was not used operationally, but he then proposed a twin-upward-firing 20mm cannon to be tried on the NF version of the Do-217. He got permission to modify 3 of these, which were tested in the Spring of 1943, and Schonert, who was then serving with a Bf-110 unit, scored the first operational victory in May 1943, shooting down an RAF bomber over Berlin....
Over in the Pacific, Commander Yasuna Kozono of the 201st Naval Air Corps was nutting-out how to intercept B-17 B-24 Night-bombers, and his proposal was to have two 20mm cannon fixed to fire up, and two to fire down, both at 30 degree angle....This was first fitted to a Nakajima J1N1-C Gekko [Irving] in the Spring of 1943 [also!].., and the first recorded success was the destruction of two B-24's over Rabaul in May 1943.......


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

Schragwaffen were developed in NJG 5 not 4./NJG 2 with Paul Mahle of 5 staffel mounting the first set up in a Bf 110G-4 and receiving quite a bit of monies for his efforts


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jan 31, 2005)

Being of wood construction, how well did the German radars acquire the Mossie?


A general over view of German radars. http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/gweapons.html

Another site on radar. http://www.radarworld.org/index.html


Mossies on a night bombing mission usually climbed to 25-30k ft over the North Sea/Dutch coast and then went into a shallow dive to arrive at the target at the bombing height.


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

German radar was sophisticated enough to pick up the starting engine noise in Great Britian, and it was usual procedrure to have staffeln of single engine a/c roaming at 30,000 feet "waiting" for the Light night strike force mossie's to appear. the only way the 109's could catch the mossie was from a higher altitiude and a dive onto the tail.....


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jan 31, 2005)

Erich said:


> German radar was sophisticated enough to pick up the starting engine noise in Great Britian, and it was usual procedrure to have staffeln of single engine a/c roaming at 30,000 feet "waiting" for the Light night strike force mossie's to appear. the only way the 109's could catch the mossie was from a higher altitiude and a dive onto the tail.....



The Germans had very good sound detection equipment but how does radar pick up sound? Iirc Flak was directed by this equipment.

Erich, I meant airborne radar which is not nearly as powerful as ground radar.


----------



## Gemhorse (Jan 31, 2005)

Well, Schonert is indicated as being in a Bf-110 unit, at the time of the first victory with the 'schragewaffen'....I discovered these details from an article in Air Enthusiast International, 1974....Interesting that the British didn't use it again in WWII, the Defiants could've wreaked some havoc during the bombing of England....although it's not really 'cricket', is it, abit like shooting someone in the back, really............


----------



## Erich (Jan 31, 2005)

yes they had radar specifics to pick up the Mossie but it was usually intercepted by visual sight and the useage of searchlioght lanes....

Schoenert first developed the idea with a Do 217 wiwth 4 2cm weapons and then used this a/c along with Bf 110G-2's while in NJG 5. As i said one particualr staffel was very successful and that was 5./NJG 5 with one of the mechanics plating the two guns to the floor of one of the Bf 110's in the radio-ops position/rear gunners.


----------



## Gemhorse (Feb 1, 2005)

Thanks there Erich....

It was important on both sides that when an aircraft was picked-up on radar, when then chased, it had to be identified first before action could commence....although aircraft mis-identification often still occurred, especially at night.......

Gemhorse


----------



## Guchi (Jan 2, 2007)

In my opinion, the He 219 was a very good nightfighter. The best the Germans fielded, but it was still no match for the Mosquito (esp. the nightfighter version).

The main drawback of the uhu was that it _was _underpowered. Not "grossly" as has been claimed by some on this thread, but underpowered nonetheless.

Let’s not forget that it was faster than the mossie, in "clean" conditions. Loaded up, and with those radar antennae, it slowed down considerably. Yet, for the NachtJagd, it was a weapon with the greatest chance of bringing down the elusive Mosquito.

It had great, well placed guns, good speed and ceiling and excellent range. The great advantage of the He 219 was the fact that due to its speed, range and efficiency, it was better able to make multiple _successful _engagements of British four engined heavies esp. Lancasters than any other German nightfighter. And that was Nacht Jagd's main priority. Catching the Mosquito was more of a secondary, though emotional and prestige bound issue. Being the only aircraft with the best chance of succeeding, it was tried out in the A-7 variant, but even that barely matched the performance of the British bomber.

What really amazes me, though, is _what _made the Mosquito such a superlative aircraft? 

The engines on both aircraft are about the same hp. Infact the DB engines of the uhu claim higher hp than the Merlins. 

The mossie weighs out lighter, which is also amazing considering that it was made out of wood, a material discarded in favour of metal-skin due to its weight penalties!

The wing area of the mossie is (I think) less that that of the uhu, which should even out the weight difference (I believe), yet Mosquito _*bombers *_would routinely fly at 10,000m (33,000 - 34,000 ft) while carrying a (4,000lb) cookie and easily evade a uhu staggering up to 8,000 - 9,000m (30,000ft) and struggling to keep up!

Phemenomal! I've still not figured out how....?


----------



## Erich (Jan 2, 2007)

Baloney the Ju 88G-6 outdid the Uhu plain and simple ..........

NJGr 10 field tested the Uhu as well and portions of NJG 3 .......... they left their craft sitting on the grass fields, some with broken backs and were never used operationally. EVen NJg 1 as a whole was not impressed as only I./NJG 1 used the craft on ops. There is much more than underpowered issues that hampered the big craft as stated elsewhere in this thread, go re-read it.

the what if had there been time and the A-7 put into full scale production and inserted in the field, then yes possibly, the nose area was not large enough either to house the A-I radar dish and electronics and the cockpit layout was a joke as there was not enough room similar to the bf 110G-4


----------



## johnbr (Jan 2, 2007)

The HE 219 was to get the Jumbo 222 for power but as we now that did not happen.The Db 603n or 603q also have worked. How is nasm doing on the he 219.


----------



## Guchi (Jan 3, 2007)

Erich, the understanding I have (never having the opportunity of flying either aircraft) is that in the fly-off competition, between the two aircraft, the uhu came out on top. Also, according to the performance data (from a couple of sites on the web), I see that the uhu was faster with a slightly better ceiling.

Performance: Junkers Ju 88C-6
Maximum Speed: 300 mph (480km/h)
Service Ceiling: 32,480 ft. (9,900m)

Performance: Junkers Ju 88G-7b Nightfighter
Maximum Speed:
- 270 mph (435 km/h) at sea level
- 363 mph (584 km/h) at 33,465 ft. (10,200m)
- 389 mph (626 km/h) at 33,465 ft. (10,200m) with MW 50
- 402 mph (647 km/h) at 29,855 ft. (9,100m) without flame dampers
Time to 32,315 ft. (9,850m): 26.4 minutes

Performance: He 219A-7
Maximum speed: 416 mph (670km/h)
Service ceiling: 41,660 ft (12,700m)
Range: 1,243 miles (2,000km)

Performance: He 219A-7
Maximum speed: 616 km/h (knots, 385 mph)
Range: 1,540 km (nm, 960 mi)
Service ceiling: 9,300 m (30,500 ft)

Now I understand that a roomier nose section with room for four crew members and a larger “dish” antenna can definitely be considered a benefit, but it comes with its penalties of increased weight and drag. In addition, as per my information, the German “dish” radar (code named Berlin, I believe) was not ready at the time frame in consideration.

I was aware, from my own reading, that only a part of NJG 1 used the uhu operationally. I therefore find your claim, that other Nachtjagd units “rejected” the uhu interesting. I can think of many other reasons why a newer and controversial aircraft can have a long and slow gestation period; Production may be slow and there may not be enough aircraft to go around, the initial aircraft may have “teething” troubles, and may have many new and unproven features, and a controversy may give it a “bad name”, just to name a few.

If you have sources that show, that the crews of the other Nachtjagd units rejected the uhu on the basis of its (inferior) performance, I’d certainly like to be enlightned.


----------



## Erich (Jan 3, 2007)

the A-7 was never operational of the Uhu. Also the G-7b of the Ju 88 never existed. only I./NJG 1 had the UHU on ops and I have the docs to prove it, also a book will be coming out shortly thought there are twangs right now for NJGr 10.

My own work on Mossie hunters will show why the Uhu was rejected with only 12 Mossies claimed by the Uhu in NJG 1.

go back and check the archivs of these forums and you will find my responses over the years.

the Uhu was not favoured and produced in a number of test pieces with overarms. NJG 1 pulled the heavy forward 30mm's off and kept the 4 forward 2cm's as standard in most cases and this according to I./NJG 1 log books


----------



## abhiginimav (Jan 3, 2007)

Cheddar Cheese, if u read this then jus wanted to say....I LOVE THE MOSSIE! it looks great and was a hell of a beast. Im not saying that cuz im british, becasue i think that the Halifax bomber looks UGLAY! im saying that cuz the Mossie was plain beautiful!!


----------



## lesofprimus (Jan 3, 2007)

abhiginimav said:


> Indian Air Force + Royal Air force -The Best airforces in the world


 That was seriously like the gayest signature ever put up here dude.... 

And completely inaccurate to boot....

As far as the topic goes, I have come to the same conclusions as Erich concerning the Uhu.... It was not well recieved by the majority of pilots....

And for the record, those little "stats" u posted up there from the internet dont mean squat... Most of the internet garbage is recycled misinformation, and most of the time, completely wrong...

And besides the point, stats dont prove the better aircraft, the pilot does...


----------



## lesofprimus (Jan 3, 2007)

Alot of Ands huh??


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 4, 2007)

Gotta go with Erich and Les on this.

As for Ju-88 or Uhu, Id take a Ju-88 anyday.


----------



## Guchi (Jan 4, 2007)

lesofprimus, you and Erich keep saying that the uhu was not well recieved by the pilots, and I have no contention with that. All I'd like to know is that how do you know? (i.e. where have you read / heard / seen it). I truly like to know, just for my own education. Because in what I've read, It says taht the uhu was liked by those who flew it although they did have initial trepidition as it was a _new _weapon with quite a few _novelties_...


----------



## Erich (Jan 4, 2007)

will be revealed in the NJGr 10 war diaries when published and also if NJG3 veteran accts become available. I'd personally like to know with the latest A-5's and A-7's sitting on the fields why was the Ju 88G-6 preferred and the Uhu allowed to sit collecting dust and the looks of Allied escort fighters on strafing runs.

One RK winner in III./NJG 1 and I will have to confirm that or II./NJG 1 took an A-0 and flew it several missions making 2 kills but still went back to the Bf 110G-4 and some flights on the Ju 88G-6.

the lack of another pair of eyes in the cockpit was crucial during 1945, besides no rear gunner and yes it was strategic in case of Allied night fighters. Any type of deterent in 45 was necessary.......... an important case in point was the several instances of cockpit canopy failure on the ejection of pilots during emergencies, the poor crewmen were blown through the glass and killed. Also the attitude that the crew sat too far forward of the engine props, another nasty case of bail out and hopeful you wouldn't be chopped up......

dang haven't I said all this before in earlier threads ? hopefully the I./NJG 1 war diary will all come available and then the fluidness of the accts by the crews from their mouths will be understood once and for all, an none of this B.S. on the internet making the Uhu the king of German craft at night


----------



## Udet (Jan 4, 2007)

Before becoming a member, also i was used to read the He 219 "Uhu" made a fearsome night fighter. I can find comments in that direction in about every account i have had the chance of reading.

But that is one the reasons i enjoy discussing and reading here; after Erich, is that i learned further about the Uhu and its potential.

We know the kind of source Erich is, so i am grateful i learned from someone like him that the "generally accepted" accounts regarding the performance of the Uhu are flat wrong. Thanks mate!


----------



## Denniss (Jan 4, 2007)

Why was the A-7 not operational ? It is thought to be in production from 12/1944 onwards.
How many A-5 have really been built except from prototypes ?


----------



## Erich (Jan 4, 2007)

A-5's and A-7's were committed to I./NJG 1 but did not fly on ops but left on the fields. A-0's and A-2's especially are listed in loss reports up through wars end in spring of 45. why not A-5 or A-7's ?

this thing is getting stretched to the limits


----------



## Udet (Jan 5, 2007)

lesofprimus said:


> That was seriously like the gayest signature ever put up here dude....
> 
> And completely inaccurate to boot....
> 
> ...




     Very nicely put Primus!!!


----------



## Denniss (Jan 5, 2007)

What was the problem with A-7s ?
Too heavy or engine reliability problems ?
It sounds somewhat strange they did not use the newer version with more powerful DB 603E engines. Or was the extra power not needed in case of a different mission profile? Maybe the DB 603AA was enough (as installed in A-2 and maybe retrofitted to A-0)


----------

