# would the He112 instead of the Bf109 have made any difference



## Marcel (Jul 12, 2007)

I was reading this book about the Heinkel He112 and I wondering, what if the luftwaffe had choosen the He112 instead of the Bf109 as a standard fighter would it have made any difference? or maybe the He100 with it's superb speed?

What do you think


----------



## net_sailor (Jul 12, 2007)

Yes, I think He 112B with range twice greater than Bf 109 colud give a chance to win Battle of Britain.


----------



## Thorlifter (Jul 12, 2007)

hmmm. I'll have to think about it for a bit. Right now, and before I vote, I'd say that it would not have made that big of a difference.


----------



## The Basket (Jul 12, 2007)

The He 112 was far too complex for mass production and was a lower performer than the 109 so no. But there was probably a fine fighter in the 112 somewhere.

The He 100 was one of the first aircraft to exceed 400mph. With the DB605 engine it would have probably been much faster than the equivalent Gustav. Would have been mature by 1942 and maybe faster than a P-51 come 1944.

But all opinion.


----------



## bigZ (Jul 12, 2007)

Although I am no 109 fan I can find no fault the RLM's decision. The early 112 prototypes differed vastly to the final version even Heinkel complained about the amount of design changes. 

I doubt whether it would have effected the outcome of the BOB. The sortie rate and fatigue, attrition really put the Luftwaffe through the wringer.


----------



## Glider (Jul 12, 2007)

I certainly believe that the He100 was a better plane and would have made a difference. As for the He112, had she been fitted with the DB601 as the 109 I also believe she would have made a difference if only for one reason.

The Achilles heal of the 109 was it landing difficulties and as we know more were lost in accidents than action. Had the replacement reduced this loss by even 10%, then that would have been thousands of extra planes for the LW.

As for complexity I don't believe that. If the UK could produce thousands of Spitfires then I don't see why the Germans couldn't have built Heinkel fighters.

The one advantage that the 109 had was that it was a more mature design than the Heinkel aircraft when contracts had to be placed. That said there was no reason why the Germans couldn't have produced both. 
The RAF did that with the Spitfire and Hurricane, the USA with the P47 and P51 or the P40 and P39, even Germany later on with the 109 and 190, so why not?


----------



## The Basket (Jul 12, 2007)

Heinkel was not flavour of the month and so buying his aircraft was not politically correct at the time.

The 112 was outflown by the 109 and so won the competition.

The DB601 engine was marked for the 109 and 110 and killed the He 100...that is why the Fw 190 was radial engined.

I think also it must be remembered how good the 109 was. And it still had some growth potential.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 12, 2007)

Thorlifter said:


> hmmm. I'll have to think about it for a bit. Right now, and before I vote, I'd say that it would not have made that big of a difference.


Ditto........


----------



## Graeme (Jul 12, 2007)

Spanish facts.

The He 112 V9 was sent to Spain in April 1938, and flown operationally by Hptmn Harro Harder, who had led 1.J/88 through most of 1937. It was also tested by several Spanish pilots, including Joaquin Garcia Morato and Miguel Garcia Pardo. In their opinion it was a Rolls-Royce of an aeroplane spoilt by a bad engine and they were none too pleased when they were offered the He 112Bs rejected by Japan, since they would have preferred, and asked for, Messerschmitt Bf 109Es. Under the political circumstances, however, they were obliged to accept.

Garcia Pardo led a squadron of Heinkels based at Balaguer, which took part in the Calatonian campaign. Garcia Pardo scored the squadrons first and only victory, over an I-16, during its first sortie on 19 January 1039. With enemy opposition eliminated, the Heinkels had little to do but escort bomber formations without incident. 

On the day of the Republican surrender, 31 March 1939, Garcia Pardo and another veteran, Rogelio Garcia de Jaun, collided during a festive aerobatic display above Almaluez aerodrome, both men being killed and the two Heinkels destroyed.

The remaining Heinkels were transferred to Melilla in Spanish Morroco. Fifteen were still in service on 1 March 1940 and in December 1942, shortly after the allied landing in Algeria, a Spanish He 112B shot down an American Lockheed P-38 Lightning which strayed over Spanish colonial airspace.

In 1945 the He 112Bs received the new type code C.5 and *they continued flying into the 1950s. *


----------



## Njaco (Jul 13, 2007)

_from He 100, 112 - Aero series by R.S. Hirsch and Uwe Feist_

The last of the He 112 prototypes was the V-12 in the long developement. Like the V-10, it had the high output engine, this being the DB 601A powerplant of 1175hp. It carried "D-IRXS" registration. This airframe was sold to Japan under the export designation of A7 He-1. According to Japanese files, the A-7 He-1 had a powerplant from DB 601A of 1070hp. It carried bomb racks for 10 bombs of 6kg. The Japanese studied it very intensely but did not undertake to serial produce it.

The last series to be produced by Heinkel on his own was the "E" series. There were 18 built, 10 of these were actually delivered to the Luftwaffe for photo propaganda purposes. This was to make the Allies believe that squadrons were active with this equipment also. There were 8 sold to Japan. These saw action in the Japanese-Chinese war. Japan also purchased some He 112E-2 models which had the weaker JUMO 210 EA engine.

In November 1935, Ernst Heinkel and Werner von Braun got together to discuss a project of rocket boost powered airplanes. The He 112V-1 was given to von Braun for experimentation of a bi-fueled rocket motor. Tanks for hydrogen peroxide and menthanol were installed in the rear section of the fuselage with the rocket motor and exhaust at the extreme rear. When Heinkel saw the installation in 1936, he was quick to ready 2 He 112s for the flight experiments and personally supervised the plane modifications for the rocket motor and fuel tank. The 2 airframes were the V-1 and V-4. Several ground runs were attempted with the rocket motor alone activated during which course the two He 112 airframes were destroyed. A Heinkel lead project engineer, Kuenzel, and test pilot Warzitz, did all of the experimental runs and preparation. Warzitz was blown from the cockpit from one explosion but was not seriously injured.

In March 1937, a third He 112 was readied for flight testing. This was the He 112V-5 airframe but with the enclosed canopy modification of the V-3. The test site was the Neuhardenberg airfield. The take-off was by the JUMO 210 engine alone with Flugkapitaen Warzitz at the controls. At 1,500 ft he leveled off and then started up the rocket motor. In a few seconds his speed climbed from 300kph to 400 kph. However, troubles started almost immediately when the temperature in the cockpit became almost unbearable and Warzitz was nearly overcome by fumes. He fully expected the flight to culminate in a violent explosion at any second so he jettisoned the canopy and prepared to bail out. But to his surprise he discovered he was too low, estimating his altitude to be about 900ft. He abandoned the bailout and started setting up a landing pattern to the airfield. here he discovered that the gear lock / unlock mechanism was jammed so he came on in gear-up, for a clean belly-landing. As soon as Warzitz got clear of the plane, it caught fire around the tail section. Mr. Kuenzel and ground crew came running up with equipment and the flames were extinguished. Repairs were soon made.


----------



## HoHun (Jul 13, 2007)

Hi Glider,

>The Achilles heal of the 109 was it landing difficulties and as we know more were lost in accidents than action. 

Hm, I don't think conventional wisdom can be right with regard to this. Here is a link to an analysis I prepared:

http://hometown.aol.de/HoHunKhan/me109accidents.html

To sum it up: Despite the obvious advantages of the Fw 190 landing gear and the great reputation of the aircraft, the JG 26 numbers give no indication that the Fw 190 was any less accident-prone on take-off and landings than the Me 109 with its narrow-track landing gear and much-maligned landing characteristics.

>As for complexity I don't believe that. If the UK could produce thousands of Spitfires then I don't see why the Germans couldn't have built Heinkel fighters.

Ernst Heinkel in his autobiography "Stürmisches Leben" makes a point of listing the great productivity advances that have been achieved in the He 100 design. I'm pretty sure that implies the concession that the He 112 was overly complicated. With regard to the elliptical wing, there obviously was a productivity penalty attached to it as Heinkel abandoned the elliptical shape during He 111 development. Germany had serious economical problems prior to WW2, and the price tag of an aircraft was a major factor in any procurement decision.

>That said there was no reason why the Germans couldn't have produced both. 
>The RAF did that with the Spitfire and Hurricane, the USA with the P47 and P51 or the P40 and P39, even Germany later on with the 109 and 190, so why not?

The German economy couldn't support it. Luftwaffe procurement always had to cope with a desperate shortage of skilled labour (and actually of engineering capacity, too), and an aircraft requiring as much extra labour as the He 112 obviously did was not acceptable.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Marcel (Jul 13, 2007)

HoHun said:


> The German economy couldn't support it. Luftwaffe procurement always had to cope with a desperate shortage of skilled labour (and actually of engineering capacity, too), and an aircraft requiring as much extra labour as the He 112 obviously did was not acceptable.
> (HoHun)




Hmm, they did however use a lot of skilled labour on the development of advanced prototypes with doubtfull use. Take the Me262, a great plane in itself, but influence on the outcome of the war was nill. Still it must have taken an enormous efford to design and build this type, labour better used for building other planes. Somehow the germans thought this was acceptable, and they obviously had the resources for it.


----------



## The Basket (Jul 13, 2007)

There is a big difference between pre war and war production in Germany. 

The new fighter role was filled by the Fw 190 anyway.

In hindsight , the Me 262 was not important but if the war had continued and with more time...who knows. The differnce is that the allies could waste rescources and the Germans couldn't. 

I feel the He 100 should have gone in limited service to see how effective it really was rather than scrap it. I feel it could have been the Bf 109 replacement they were after.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 13, 2007)

I dont think the He 112 was any better than the Bf 109. The He 100 may have been able to make a difference but not the He 112. Either way it does not matter because political fools like Hitler and Goerring would have screwed it up anyhow.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 13, 2007)

If the He100/112 had a longer range than the Bf109, it could have replaced the Bf110. That would have meant more fighter cover over London and could have put things a little more on a knife edge IMO.


----------



## Marcel (Jul 13, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I dont think the He 112 was any better than the Bf 109. The He 100 may have been able to make a difference but not the He 112. Either way it does not matter because political fools like Hitler and Goerring would have screwed it up anyhow.



Totally correct, that's what they would have done! 

Still, the He112B was an interesting design, having a bubble canopy and armed with 20mm canons. It was considered to be better than the Bf109B that flew at the same time.


----------



## HoHun (Jul 13, 2007)

Hi Marcel,

>Hmm, they did however use a lot of skilled labour on the development of advanced prototypes with doubtfull use. Take the Me262, a great plane in itself, but influence on the outcome of the war was nill. 

If you'd ask yourself "What else should the German industry built with the resources instead in order to win the war?", you'll notice that you'll come up with a rather short list.

And the Me 262 was the one aircraft that was needed to protect the German industry from the Allied bombers which were destroying resources and disrupting production - and if you'd built anything else, it would have been unprotected by the Me 262 and bombed, too.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Njaco (Jul 13, 2007)

I don't think its a matter of type of plane. Everything was bombed regardless of the Me 262. There was too few of them. Same would've happened, IMHO, with anything that was produced.


----------



## HoHun (Jul 13, 2007)

Hi Mosquitoman,

>If the He100/112 had a longer range than the Bf109, it could have replaced the Bf110. That would have meant more fighter cover over London and could have put things a little more on a knife edge IMO.

The He 112B-2 carried 230 kg of fuel. The Me 109E carried 304 kg. Though the tanks of the He 112 could have been increased in size when upgrading the engine to a DB601 (as the Me 109's were), I don't think there is any reason to assume the He 112 could have had a markedly superior range.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## net_sailor (Jul 13, 2007)

HoHun, according my sources:
He 112B-1 (powered by Jumo 210Ea):
fuel: 317 litres
range: 1150 km

He 112 V10 (DB 600Aa):
fuel: 317 litres
range: 950 km

Bf 109B-2 (Jumo 210Da):
fuel: 230 litres
range: 450 km

Bf 109E-1 (DB 601A):
fuel: 400 litres
range: 560 km

Summarizing Bf 109 had too many aerodynamical disadvantages.


----------



## The Basket (Jul 13, 2007)

Can you imagine saying in 1938...we would beat the French in six weeks and then we fight the British and so we need long range aircraft.

Thrown out the Luftwaffe for sure.


----------



## Marcel (Jul 14, 2007)

net_sailor said:


> HoHun, according my sources:
> He 112 V10 (DB 600Aa):
> fuel: 317 litres
> range: 950 km



According to my sources, the V10 was equiped with a DB601Aa. V7, V8 and V11 were equiped with a DB600.


----------



## net_sailor (Jul 14, 2007)

Hi Marcel
You are right... and I am right 
V8 build with DB 600Aa
V7 build with DB 600Aa
V9 build with Jumo 210C later changed for Jumo 210Ea
V10 build with DB600Aa later changed for DB 601Aa
V11 build with DB 600Aa later changed for DB 601Aa

I've got data about range for prototype V10with DB 600Aa only.


----------



## HoHun (Jul 14, 2007)

Hi Netsailor,

>Bf 109E-1 (DB 601A):
>fuel: 400 litres
>range: 560 km

The range chart for the Bf 109E/B as reproduced in Radinger/Schick's "Me 109" gives a penetration depth of 250 kg for a Bf 109E with a 500 kg bomb, including 7 min full throttle flight over the target. Fuel consumption for warm-up, climb and all other non-productive uses is considered, and the table is called "operational figures with tactical deduction", indicating that the table is purposefully pessimistic. The idea is that not even the squadron dog will run out of fuel when missons are planned according to this chart.

(Unfortunately, Radinger/Schick features only the 500 kg bomb case, which was tested with the Emil but never used operationally. A clean Me 109E would have been more interesting of course.)

For the He 112 with a DB601 engine and just 317 L fuel even to reach parity with the Me 109 with the same engine and 400 L fuel capacity, it would have had to enjoy a 26% cruise speed advantage - and to beat it, even more. As far as I can tell, the He 112 did not have such a speed advantage even judging it by Heinkel's own numbers.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## HoHun (Jul 14, 2007)

Hi again,

>The range chart for the Bf 109E/B as reproduced in Radinger/Schick's "Me 109" gives a penetration depth of 250 kg for a Bf 109E with a 500 kg bomb

This should read "250 km for a Bf 109E with a 500 kg bomb", of course.
Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Marcel (Jul 14, 2007)

net_sailor said:


> Hi Marcel
> You are right... and I am right
> V8 build with DB 600Aa
> V7 build with DB 600Aa
> ...



Ah, that's interesting, in my book, the V10 was designed for a Jumo, but got a DB601 instead because of shortage of Jumo's at that moment. No DB600 is mentioned regarding to the V10. Also about the V11, a DB601 is never mentioned. Hmm, maybe I should buy a new book?



HoHun said:


> Hi Netsailor,
> 
> For the He 112 with a DB601 engine and just 317 L fuel even to reach parity with the Me 109 with the same engine and 400 L fuel capacity, it would have had to enjoy a 26% cruise speed advantage - and to beat it, even more. As far as I can tell, the He 112 did not have such a speed advantage even judging it by Heinkel's own numbers.
> 
> ...



Is there anything known about the cruisespeed of a DB601 equiped He112? I know it's top speed was something like 570km/h.


----------



## HoHun (Jul 15, 2007)

Hi Marcel,

>Is there anything known about the cruisespeed of a DB601 equiped He112? I know it's top speed was something like 570km/h.

That's about the top speed of the Me 109E, too, and with the same engine, that probably works out to a virtually identical cruise speed (which is mostly determined by the engine setting).

Accordingly, I don't expect any range advantage for the He 112 - on the contrary, with a smaller tank it should have an inferior range.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## net_sailor (Jul 15, 2007)

Hohun, Bf 109 was a aerodynamical crap, even Germans noticed that and introduced a F version with "face lifting". Jumo-schmitts and Emils airframes gave too much resistance, that influed on fuel consumption.
Heikel had very smooth gull-shaped wings (wing area 17,2 m2 against 16 m2 on Bf 109) and movable radiator to minimize resistance. Anyway I'm a litte confused about He 112 prototypes range, cause Rumanian sources (single air force which used Heinkel figters in large number) claims operational range 825 km for He 112B-1 .

Marcel, He 112 cruise speed:
425 km/h for V9 prototype (Jumo 210C)
447 km/h for V10 (DB 600Aa)
420 km/h for B-1 (Jumo 210E)


----------



## HoHun (Jul 15, 2007)

Hi Netsailor,

>Hohun, Bf 109 was a aerodynamical crap, even Germans noticed that and introduced a F version with "face lifting". 

By the same logic, I could condemn the He 112 as aerodynamic crap because Heinkel couldn't save the type despite numerous face-lifts, having to design the much cleaner He 100 to be competetive with the Me 109.

However, that kind of logic doesn't address the engineering facts and doesn't help us at all.

>Rumanian sources (single air force which used Heinkel figters in large number) claims operational range 825 km for He 112B-1 .

With a different engine and an unknown mission profile, that figure unfortunately is a bit difficult to compare. Trying to reverse-engineer the Me 109E/B chart in Radinger/Schick, I'd say that you'd get a range of 680 km for the Me 109 with 7 min combat and a climb back to 7 km altitude from 1 km in mid-flight for a "clean" Me 109.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Shortybrucs (Jul 21, 2007)




----------



## Njaco (Jul 21, 2007)

Here we go again!  

SPAM ALERT!


----------



## markbenoit (Jul 21, 2007)




----------



## iglesyas (Jul 26, 2007)

I am an idiot..............


----------



## Ganzalkin (Jul 26, 2007)

I too am an idiot............


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 26, 2007)

And we're still getting them spamming.
So, anyway the He112 or 100 weren't as good as the 109? Or were they?


----------



## Marcel (Jul 26, 2007)

Yeah, strange as they are attrackted to this tread  

IMHO the He100 could have been. It was much faster and had a longer range. The He112B was probably better than teh contemporarely BF109B, but was never developed further. As it turned out to be a "rolce royce with a Fiat engine" as some pilots described it.


----------



## CPWN (Jul 29, 2007)

I think Luftwaffe should produce both Bf109 and He112. It's like British Spitfire and hurricane.


----------



## Njaco (Aug 4, 2007)

I don't know how good it would've been. just found this in a book I have. "Heinkel He 112 in Action"/Squadron Signal. They are speaking about the combat performance of the He 112 while with the Rumanian _Escadria 51 vanatoare_.
pg.48
"...The results of investigations into the combat activity of the Heinkel fighters were far from encouraging. In order to form a broad picture of the He 112, it is necessary to quote from the official report, compilied in August of 1941: _The clumsy He 112E, powered by a Jumo 210E, proved to be unsuitable for aerial battles due to its low horizontal speed, insufficent climbing capacity and lack of maneurability compared to the modern aircraft encountered. Its diving speed, which could be reached very quickly was, however, adequate. The possibility to carry six 12 kg bombs was useful as well, being successfully employed in low level attacks. If the fuel tanks and pilot's seat would have been protected by armour, the heavy human losses endured in such kind of missions could have been avoided. The armament fitted, consisting of a practical combination of cannons and heavy machine guns was also sufficent numerically and concerning firepower. The ammunition used, however, proved to be totally inadequate, as the armour {protecting} enemy aircraft wasn't penetrated by the He 112's existing armament. There occured several occasions when tracer bullets fired by their own cannons and guns indicated to the pilot that the whole load had hit the target without causing its destruction."_

I think they made the right choice with the Bf 109.


----------



## Marcel (Aug 5, 2007)

Well, just remember this was a machine comparable in time to the Bf109B. The same book you refer to claims that the He112B, was better than the Bf109B. The Bf109E was a further and later development. The Heinkel was never allowed to be developed further, with, say a DB601 engine which could have made it on par or better than the Bf109E. Had the He112 been choosen instead of the Bf109, it would have made the same development and who knows how good or bad it would have been.


----------

