He277: Promising? Or further development of a bad apple?

[Henk]

Oh yes I forgot about the Dornier 19, that were also a great idea for a heavy bomber.

 

[merlin]

Sorry guys but some of you missed the point. It was the original requirement by Udet that all bombers had to have the requirement to dive. That added weight (to strengthen it for the pull out), the designers solution was to use coupled engines. Goring in his pig-headedness couldn't admit that the requirement was wrong, and wouldn't allow a four engine version he277. But later when Hitler stated what he wanted (no mention of diving) Heinkel stepped in to say that his He177b (the four-engine cover name) could do that.
But by then it was too late, if the proper realistic requirement was made earlier they would have had a very good aircraft.

 

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Interesting how the German designed 177 look so differant from American bombers. In some ways, British and German bombers look more alike.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i think too much of a big deal is always made about the requirement for the He-177 to dive, i mean the lanc was cleared for dives of up to 30 degrees and that was only set because of bomb clearance out of the bomb bay, it could be greater with a different bomb load and the lanc's structure was strong enough to take it (thanks to the manchester having to be made catapult launchable) so many bombers could dive bomb to some extent, it is not the dive bombing aspect that made the aircraft poor it was the engines..........

 

[Matt308]

Lanc is right. If there is one Achilles Heel of the 177, it was the engines and transmission coupling. A technical and maintenance nightmare.

 

[merlin]

Sorry guys but I think some are missing the point.
The Luftwaffe was obsessed with all bombers having the capability of dive-bombing - even for a large heavy bomber. Heinkel designers had to use the coupled engine arrangement in order to have that capability, but the 'need' also added to the weight of the aircraft. Once the problems arose with the engine arrangement the designers realised (especially with the RAF's four engined planes flying overhead) the solution, but Goring fordade any further mention of the He277. But work went ahead under the label of He177B. Which was given the go ahead by Hitler on May 23, 1943 when Heinkel claimed that it could do what he required. But by then it was too late as in July '44 the whole programme was abandoned. Thankfully this option didn't proceed years earlier!
The He 274 was the responsibility of Heinkel's French design office.

 

[HealzDevo]

I think the He-177 was a similar issue to the Avro Manchester that was in British Service. The He-177 was too large to be a dive bomber and the coupled engines just started fires and synchronizing problems. The Avro Manchester needed to go from being a two engined bomber to being a four engined bomber. There is very little difference between a late Manchester Bomber and an early Avro Lancaster Bomber... Once these changes were made, the He-277 or He-177b would have given sterling service as a heavy bomber in a somewhat similar category to the B-17 in terms of payload. What do others think?

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

it's true, other than the higher command not allowing 4 separate engines there's no reason it couldn't be done and indeed it was done, but the fact remains it'd be too late for such a bomber! range might also suffer due to less space in the wings also.........

 

[delcyros]

I don´t think there is something wrong with the He-177 A´s payload.

B-17:
max. payload: 5.8t. (12783.2 lbs)

B-24:
max. payload: 5.45t.

B-29:
max. payload: 9.1t.

Lancaster:
max. payload: 6.45t.

He-177A:
max. payload: 7t.
(some planes were modified to handle 8.2t. payload at reduced range)

It seems to me that only the B-29 has a reasonably higher payload.

 

[Jank]

I thought the B-24 had a greater payload than the B-17.

 

[HealzDevo]

Interesting statistics and they put it right in the range between Lancaster and B-29. Wouldn't have liked to have seen the B-36 Peacemaker operational as an enemy though... That thing would I reckon have had a payload of between 11.6t and 18.2t just roughly going off that it was twice to three times the size of the B-17 and dwarfed the B-29...

 

[Jabberwocky]

I don´t think there is something wrong with the He-177 A´s payload.

B-17:
max. payload: 5.8t. (12783.2 lbs)

B-24:
max. payload: 5.45t.

B-29:
max. payload: 9.1t.

Lancaster:
max. payload: 6.45t.

He-177A:
max. payload: 7t.
(some planes were modified to handle 8.2t. payload at reduced range)

It seems to me that only the B-29 has a reasonably higher payload.

The Lancaster could technically carry up to 17,200 lbs on missions less than 800 miles round trip, but I don't think it was ever done, and the extra weight capacity was generally devoted to "Window" rather than bombload. Apart from load testing, the highest weight for a standard Lancaster I've read of was for short range anti-ship missions, with 6 x 2000lbs AP bombs and 6 x 500lbs GP bombs (which had a CTW of around 25% and actually made very good AP bombs as well). The general standard maximum loadout was 14,000 lbs (cookie and area bombing or incendiary loards both max out at 14,000 lbs)

The "Special" Lancasters could carry a single 22,000 lbs Grand Slam bomb.

The Halifax was rated to 13,750 lbs (just a squeak less than the Lancaster).

 

[Matt308]

Interesting statistics and they put it right in the range between Lancaster and B-29. Wouldn't have liked to have seen the B-36 Peacemaker operational as an enemy though... That thing would I reckon have had a payload of between 11.6t and 18.2t just roughly going off that it was twice to three times the size of the B-17 and dwarfed the B-29...

I don't know. I think the B-36 was just a large target. Wasn't the cruise speed with load less than 200mph? What a fish outta water in the world of jet fighters.

 

[johnbr]

And the B 36 was very under powered.Remember it was to have 6 7000hp not 3500.

 

[bigZ]

I think the Pre War economic/material availabity made any atempt of Germany of creating a heavy bomber strategic force impossible. The twin engined bomber approach also makes more sense due to Germanys concerns of being ovrrun by her neighbours before being able to retaliate.

Also it was impossible for Germany to create a large heavy bomber force during the war due to the low output of aircraft early on and the non-stop attrition of the Luftwaffe. When measures had been taken to correct output, the initative had long since shifted to the allies. Also of concern would be where they would have gotten the crews to man them due to their disatrous training policy and the use of instructors in supplying beleagued pockets of troops when the emergency arouse.

At the end of the day its more down to production/economics/material availablity rather than superior technical merits of a heavy bomber which make a heavy bomber force viable.

I too agree on the sentiments of others regarding the V2. Dont forget it also tied up the electronic/instrument industry. Should have concentrated on promising anti aircraft missiles. Although the V1 was effective in tying up RAF resources that could be better used else where and it didn't effect production of aircraft much.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

I don't know. I think the B-36 was just a large target. Wasn't the cruise speed with load less than 200mph? What a fish outta water in the world of jet fighters.

yes she was but what other means of delivery to another continent were around at the time? she was the only option of reaching moscow from America and with the type of bomb we're talking here only one needs to get through......

 

[HealzDevo]

It is the ultimate in nuclear diplomacy in that it might be able to carry a few nuclear missiles in one mission, to drop on different cities. All you needed even then was a small nuclear bomb to drop on each city as a demonstration piece, due to the Hiroshima and Nagasakie drops that had been carried out at the end of WWII...

 

[Kiwikid]

Did any He-177's survive the war? I seem to remember seeing a picture of an He-177 in U.S.A.A.F. markings, taken at the end of the war.

RAE (Farnborough) tested one He 177A-5. Aircraft (formerly F8+AP from 6./KG 40) captured by French Resistance in September 1944 at Toulouse-Blagnac airfield. Transferred to the UK was repainted with British roundels and serialled TS439. Pictured below :

...and there are other claims that this aircraft below was an A-7 test flown by the British:

 

[Njaco]

The biggest problem that needed to be eliminated was the requirement for these planes to be able to dive-bomb.

 

[Soren]

The He-277 wasn't required to dive bomb AFAIK, this idea was dropped after experience with the He-177. The He-277 was just meant to haul A LOT of bombs a long way at very high altitude and carpet bomb what'ever target it was set out to hit. It was the German equal to the B-29.