Heinkel 'roadmap' after the He 111 and 112?

Shortround6 said:

Germans need general purpose bombers.

Not one trick wonders.

Once you have bombers that can carry eight 250kg bombs or four 500 kg bombs inside then worry about planes that can carry 1400-1600kg AP bombs.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to recall when I've suggested carrying of AP bombs.
Germans flew bombers carrying eight 250 kg bombs during the Spanish Civil War.

tomo pauk said:

Go with something similar to the He 219 as a fast bomber?

Click to expand...

Supposedly the Heinkel Projekt 1064 which eventually became the He-219 Nightfighter was originally a Kampf-Zerstörer, literally a war-destroyer but meaning a multi-role fighter, attack, reconnaissance and even torpedo aircraft. Apart from the features which were carried over to the He-219 (tandem-seat pressurised cockpit, a shoulder-high wing, and tricycle landing gear etc), it also was to have remotely-controlled defensive gun barbettes.



On a related front, here is a FICTIONAL He219 attack development I sketched up years ago:

GTX said:

Supposedly the Heinkel Projekt 1064 which eventually became the He-219 Nightfighter was originally a Kampf-Zerstörer, literally a war-destroyer but meaning a multi-role fighter, attack, reconnaissance and even torpedo aircraft. Apart from the features which were carried over to the He-219 (tandem-seat pressurised cockpit, a shoulder-high wing, and tricycle landing gear etc), it also was to have remotely-controlled defensive gun barbettes.

Click to expand...

The torpedo-bomber is lovely
Thanks for the diagrams.

The 'Kampf-' part of the designation is probably a short of 'Kampfflugzeug' - 'bomber (aircraft)':
Im deutschen Sprachgebrauch bis 1945 bezog sich die Bezeichnung Kampfflugzeug hingegen ausschließlich auf Bomber.
or, very roughly:
In German language, until 1945, the designation Kampfflugzeug meant bomber.

They were calling the bomber wings as 'Kampfgeschwader'. So indeed the Kampf-Zerstörer should mean 'heavy fighter bomber'?
The German Mixmaster - a pusher powered with separate engines and with a good bomb bay - should've been a sight to see.

tomo pauk said:

Good call on cooling system. Rack and bomb (1000-1400-1800 kg) behind the radiator might not be that draggy?

Click to expand...

tomo pauk said:

I'm trying to recall when I've suggested carrying of AP bombs.

Click to expand...

Germans had an assortment of 1000kg bombs.
they had a very limited selection of 1400kg bombs, like the Panzersprengbombe PC-1400 (dumb bomb) and the Gleitbombe PC-1400 X 'Fritz X' (smart bomb) which was the previous AP bomb with small wings and a guidance package.
Germans had a couple of Panzersprengbombe PC-1600 bombs. and Splitterbombe SD-1700
Several 1800kg bombs, One Minebombe and a couple of bombs using rockets to increase their penetration at impact. In fact the Panzersprengbombe PC-1600 A bomb was the Panzersprengbombe PC-1800 bomb with the rockets left off and a new tail cone and fins.

tomo pauk said:

Germans flew bombers carrying eight 250 kg bombs during the Spanish Civil War.

Click to expand...

That they did.
And then they ordered Do 17s, Do 215s, and Ju-88 which could not carry such a payload.
Let alone carry even four 500kg bombs inside the plane.
The DO 217 became the heavy bomber of the Luftwaffe by default. Then the question is how far could it carry 4400-5500lbs and how fast?

Germans spent a lot of time and effort trying to design planes that carried trick payloads instead of trying to carry a "standard" payload faster and further.

They wanted everything.
More speed, more range, bigger bombs and all without much increase in power or anywhere near enough.

And when you bring out the big bombs you need infrastructure to handle them. Different bomb carts and cranes/handling equipment.

Shortround6 said:

Germans had an assortment of 1000kg bombs.
they had a very limited selection of 1400kg bombs, like the Panzersprengbombe PC-1400 (dumb bomb) and the Gleitbombe PC-1400 X 'Fritz X' (smart bomb) which was the previous AP bomb with small wings and a guidance package.
Germans had a couple of Panzersprengbombe PC-1600 bombs. and Splitterbombe SD-1700
Several 1800kg bombs, One Minebombe and a couple of bombs using rockets to increase their penetration at impact. In fact the Panzersprengbombe PC-1600 A bomb was the Panzersprengbombe PC-1800 bomb with the rockets left off and a new tail cone and fins.

Click to expand...

They indeed had the AP bombs, although I'm not really favoring those unless they are carried by a dive bomber, since accuracy will be insufficient. For the 'normal' bombers' tasks, like the attack on enemy factory, some elaborate & important military base/airport, port/harbor, the 'oridnary' 1000-1400-1800 kg bombs are better, and those I'm suggesting. Like the thin-walled SC 1000 or SC 1800, or the thick-walled SD 1400.

Shortround6 said:

That they did.
And then they ordered Do 17s, Do 215s, and Ju-88 which could not carry such a payload.
Let alone carry even four 500kg bombs inside the plane.
The DO 217 became the heavy bomber of the Luftwaffe by default. Then the question is how far could it carry 4400-5500lbs and how fast?

Click to expand...

The shortcomings of the Do 17, 215 and Ju 88 are one of reason for this thread.
Do 17 was indeed meh, but then again in the Z version it carried twice as heavy a bomb load as the Blenheim No wonder they went with the much more capable Do 217.
The Do 215 was probably passable as a fast bomber? Not much of difference that it made, due to small numbers produced, and indeed a small payload.

As for the bombs vs. fuel, the Do 217E-1 with 1800 kg/~4000 lbs in bomb bay, it carried 2200 kg of fuel, or 3550 kg if drop tanks were also carried. In liters, it is 2930 or 4730, respectively (a bit more in reality, I've used 3/4 for weight:volume of fuel). Or, in imp gals, 644 or 1040. The Do 217-E2 carried 2000 kg inside, and also 2760 kg of fuel (3680 L, or 809 imp gals). Max bomb load was 3000 kg for the E2, with 2200 kg of fuel. As for the speed - Do 217 had it's qualities, speed was not one of them. Even light and clean it was unable to beat 500 km/h mark; fast cruise was ~430 'heavy' and 480 km/h 'light' at 5 km.

We should probably get about the same fuel mileage as it was the case with Wellingon III? It was capable for 1440 miles with 3500 lb of bombs and 750 imp gals, or 1200 miles with 4500 lbs and 638 imp gals; all at 180 mph. Do 217E-4 carried about 25% more fuel than the later example of Wimpy Mk.III.
With 1030 imp gals, the Mk.III did 2040 miles, 1500 lbs of bombs. Do 217E-1 carried more than double the bomb load in this extra long-range case.

Shortround6 said:

Germans spent a lot of time and effort trying to design planes that carried trick payloads instead of trying to carry a "standard" payload faster and further.

They wanted everything.
More speed, more range, bigger bombs and all without much increase in power or anywhere near enough.

And when you bring out the big bombs you need infrastructure to handle them. Different bomb carts and cranes/handling equipment.

Click to expand...

They certainly made a mess with Ju 88 as a bomber (why the blocky cockpit? why it was not a high-wing design from day one??). The He 177 was a painful and expensive mistake. Ju 288 - finnaly - had a proper bomb bay, but engine choice was non existing once the size and weight spiraled out control. Me 210 - tried to do it all, failed badly in any role. Ju 188 with V12s - waste of Jumo 213s. Ju 388 - too late; granted, the engines required were not there before 1944

The Ta 154, He 219 - should've been designed as bombers 1st, night fighters second; Ta 154 in metal, please.

Infrastructure for the big bombs was there. Big bombs (1000 kg and bigger) were carried by Ju 87, Ju 88, Do 217, He 111...

Was the He-219 conceptually influenced by the Ju-288A?

delcyros said:

Was the He-219 conceptually influenced by the Ju-288A?

Click to expand...

Do you have some input about that?

To the best of my knowledge, the only design feature that the Ju-88 and He219 had in common, were annular radiators and even then, the Heinkel's radiators were more streamlined.

delcyros said:

Was the He-219 conceptually influenced by the Ju-288A?

Click to expand...

GrauGeist said:

To the best of my knowledge, the only design feature that the Ju-88 and He219 had in common, were annular radiators and even then, the Heinkel's radiators were more streamlined.

Click to expand...

Well,
They were both twin engined,
They both had twin tails,
They both had high or shoulder mounted wings.

Wait a minute.............................................They were both copied from this

Twin engines, twin tails, high wing............................................It all fits..............................

No Irony needed, Shortround, its a serious question. The architecture of the He-219 changed from one reminiscent of the He-119 away just in the time, when Milch dropped the Ju-288A. And the stage now bears close architectural relationship during the dec. 1941 stage with the -288A and apr. 1942 with the -288B.

Even in the fuselage cross section or wing planform.

tomo pauk said:

After the important and very useful He 111 and decent, if uninspired He 112, Heinkel IMO had a lot of problems to come out with a remarkable design worthy to mass produce.

Click to expand...

A credible ground attack aircraft would be useful.

A-10 Warthog?

delcyros said:

No Irony needed, Shortround, its a serious question. The architecture of the He-219 changed from one reminiscent of the He-119 away just in the time, when Milch dropped the Ju-288A. And the stage now bears close architectural relationship during the dec. 1941 stage with the -288A and apr. 1942 with the -288B.

Even in the fuselage cross section or wing planform.

Click to expand...

You only have so many fuselage and wing shapes. You are going to find all sorts of "close architectural relationships" if you ignore size/scale and you squint real hard.

He 219 drawing


A lot of bombers/large aircraft used semi-rectangular cross section fuselages (rounded corners), amount of taper forward and aft varied.
Your other choices are round, oval/elliptical and triangular unless you want to use something truly strange (octangle?) and wind tunnels are going to keep from using truly square corners the radius of the corners are going to somewhat standard. Good internal volume vs flow eddies at the "corners" and ease of fabrication.

Same with wings, very few designers after the 1920s used true straight, plank or Hersey bar wings (no taper front and back).
Most used either front or back taper, some used both, some varied the taper at one or more points along the wing span.

A very few tried full elliptical wing spans. Most of the so called elliptical wings, including the Spitfire, used semi-elliptical plan forms.

That pretty much runs out the choices for the wing unless we want to dive into the circular wing zone.

Deferent design dept in the same country are going to be somewhat familiar with each other, or at least keeping up with the information coming out of the research facilities.

Getting airplanes that somewhat resemble each other is not going to be uncommon. Especially if you are trying to fit in common components like weapons stations/turrets//barbettes. Germans had dragged a JU-188 nose section underwater to study drag/pressurization. Not surprising that some other companies didn't copy the general shape?

A lot of questions are asked about one company "copying" another (The Japanese Zero was supposed to have been copied from at least four different American/British airplanes) but if you have several different designers trying to do close to the same thing it isn't surprising that sometimes they choose similar solutions.

Not as fun as the copying stories or theft of plans or conspiracies.

Take look at the He 280 jet drawing. especially the wing.


Considering the He 280 was undergoing glide testing in 1940 it is more likely that they scaled up the wing of the He 280 (sort of) than copied the plan form of the JU 288 (which changed at least 4 times)

The He219 was originally designed by Robert Lusser, who had previously worked at Messerschmitt.

In addition to the He219, he designed the He280.

As far as "look alikes" go, the Do215 looked close to the Ju88 and the Do317 looked similar to the He177 at first glance.

for a small single engine aircraft the He 100 wing doesn't look that different.

Straight leading edge, straight trailing edge to start with, straight taper from the "break" to near the tip. Rounded tip with max span near the front edge.
Like the He 219, gentle anhedral until break in the wing and then dihedral if the drawings are correct.

Look at the planform of the He112, it has elliptical shape, too.

SaparotRob said:

A-10 Warthog?

Click to expand...

Something better than an underpowered Henschel Hs 129, for instance.

Looking at twin-engined ground attack aircraft from other nations, the Russian Tomashevich Pegas is a funny looking bird.

Admiral Beez said:

Something better than an underpowered Henschel Hs 129, for instance.

Looking at twin-engined ground attack aircraft from other nations, the Russian Tomashevich Pegas is a funny looking bird.

View attachment 690467

Click to expand...

Is that thing on fire or do the engines burn that much oil?


BTW you could put 5 of those engines together and get the power of one of the underpowered engines on the Hs 129.

Shortround6 said:

Is that thing on fire or do the engines burn that much oil?


BTW you could put 5 of those engines together and get the power of one of the underpowered engines on the Hs 129.

Click to expand...

Per Wikipedia it looks to be powered by something equal to Pobjoy Niagara.

Admiral Beez said:

Something better than an underpowered Henschel Hs 129, for instance.

Looking at twin-engined ground attack aircraft from other nations, the Russian Tomashevich Pegas is a funny looking bird.

View attachment 690467

Click to expand...

I've never seen that one before. It reminds me of a crop-duster.