PDA

View Full Version : It would be nice to have the He-219 in IL2FB



fantumfan2003
10-25-2005, 08:17 AM
It would be nice to have the flyable He-219 in this sim along with AI Lancaster, Stirling and Wellington. It would be nice to dogfight with a Mosquito in almost dark conditions...the map can be used as a radar in the dark....

I have great admiration for the He-219...Can someone point links on the web to this Night Fighter ??

fantumfan2003
10-25-2005, 08:17 AM
It would be nice to have the flyable He-219 in this sim along with AI Lancaster, Stirling and Wellington. It would be nice to dogfight with a Mosquito in almost dark conditions...the map can be used as a radar in the dark....

I have great admiration for the He-219...Can someone point links on the web to this Night Fighter ??

Opiate364
10-25-2005, 09:28 AM
here's a good one:
http://www.google.com

johann63
10-25-2005, 10:53 AM
as you may know there has been allot of good discussion about this plane in the past. This was one increadible plane, would love to see it, but I dont believe it is planned. A Mossie/ 219 fight would be a hoot and a half.

http://modelstories.free.fr/histokits/boxartbloopers/DML_HE219A0_CAT.JPG

major_setback
10-25-2005, 11:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Opiate364:
here's a good one:
http://www.google.com </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Also try:

http://www.yoohoo.com


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif...get it?



m-s

luftluuver
10-25-2005, 11:06 AM
A Mossie NF 30 vs the He219?

No contest, the Mossie wins hands down.

tigertalon
10-25-2005, 02:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
A Mossie NF 30 vs the He219?

No contest, the Mossie wins hands down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

From http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/heinkel_219.htm

"A small batch of preproduction He-219A-0s was nevertheless delivered to 1st Squadron, 1st Night Fighter Group (I/NJG-1) at Venlo, The Netherlands, in April 1943. In the first operational mission, on the night of June 11-12, 1943, one of these preproduction aircraft downed five British "Lancaster" bombers. Over the next 10 days, 20 RAF bombers were shot down, including six of the extremely fast "Mosquitoes" (which commonly hit speeds near 650 kph/400 mph)."

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Waldo.Pepper
10-25-2005, 04:01 PM
I like the plane and would welcome it. I don't mean to pee on the parade either but some sense needs to be added to the discussion I think..


-----


He 219 Operational Assessment

So, how does one assess this controversial aircraft? There is no doubt it was a 1940 design of exceptional merit which could in a more ordered society have been developed for many roles with telling effect, as it was the UK€s Mosquito. The mass of sub-types merely diluted from the main production effort, and the consistent failure of Daimler-Benz and Junkers to deliver the hoped-for engines killed the advanced versions that would have kept the He 219 in front. As for the aircraft itself, opinions are divided.

According to Gebhard Aders (author of Geschichte der deutschen Nachtjagd) the He 219 €œnever achieved the values given in its manual. With almost full tanks and armament the He 219 could not get above 8000m (26,247 ft) €¦With Lichtenstein and flame dampers the maximum fell to about 500 km/h (311 mph) at this height€¦€
On the other hand he states €œThe 219 was the only German night-fighter that could still climb on one engine, and even go around for another landing attempt€ , a brief echoed by many Uhu pilots. Yet the greatest of test pilots, Captain (FAA) E. M. €˜Winkle€ Brown, who flew several captured He 219s, wrote in Air International that the type was €˜somewhat overrated€¦It suffered from what is perhaps the nastiest characteristic that a twin-engined aircraft can have: it was underpowered. This defect makes take-off a critical maneuver in the event of an engine failing, and a landing with one engine out can be equally critical. There certainly could be no overshooting with the He 219 in that condition.€

This marginal performance is the more remarkable when it is remembered that the DB 603 was the largest of the inverted V-12 engines used by the Luftwaffe, with cubic capacity 65 per cent greater than that of the Merlin. The problem lay squarely in the growth of systems and equipment with which the Uhu was packed, so that a typical He 219A-7 version weighted more empty than any Ju 88 night-fighter, and more than a Mosquito fully loaded!

(Bill Gunston in Heinkel He 219 Uhu, Airplane No. 182 pages 5088-5094)

"In June [1944] a few He 219 As were also flown operationally by II./NJG 1, but the pilots €" all old Bf 110 hands €" were not at ease with the Uhu. They found that its performance was not significantly better than that of their usual mounts, felt most uncomfortable sitting ahead of the engines, and most of all bemoaned the fact that the He 219 had only a two-man crew. At their request the front-line workshops replaced the rear entry hatch (intended for access to the oblique guns) with a Plexiglass panel through which a third crew member could observe the airspace beneath the fighter. Some pilots are even supposed to have had a machine gun on a simple lens-type mount fitted in this position for defence against Mosquito attacks. The request for a three-man crew was met by Heinkel with Rüstsatz 4 applicable to the He 219 A-5. This consisted of an additional cockpit with a defensive weapon, fitted on top of the main cabin. The pattern aircraft, He 219V30, was also test-flown by NJGr. 10 and criticised because of a 25 km/h (15.5 mph) loss in speed. The 150 hp of extra power available on the He 219 A-5 series cancelled this out, but that was all."

---

I think that the kills of the Mosquitos are 'claims' only... and post war research has failed to confirm them. But I shall poke around some more.

major_setback
10-25-2005, 06:14 PM
It's certainly elegant! Though a bit like a stick-insect.

http://www.jg53-pikas.de/Uhu.ht1.jpg

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/He219-A7-2s.jpg

danjama
10-25-2005, 07:08 PM
elegant? are u sure? lol nice plane though, ive never heard of it until now, im a rare-bird noob im afraid...

luftluuver
10-25-2005, 09:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:
"A small batch of preproduction He-219A-0s was nevertheless delivered to 1st Squadron, 1st Night Fighter Group (I/NJG-1) at Venlo, The Netherlands, in April 1943. In the first operational mission, on the night of June 11-12, 1943, one of these preproduction aircraft downed five British "Lancaster" bombers. Over the next 10 days, 20 RAF bombers were shot down, including six of the extremely fast "Mosquitoes" (which commonly hit speeds near 650 kph/400 mph)." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>tt,

Just because it says Smithsonian, don't believe all it says.

Yes and that 219 was flown by a NF experten, Obstlt Streib. A check of claims for that night will show it was 1 Lanc and 4 Hallies he shot down. He crashed on landing after the mission.

@ 1:05 &gt; Hallifax &gt; 14km SE of Roermond
@ 1:20 &gt; Halifax &gt; 2km SW of Rheinberg
@ 1:55 &gt; Halifax &gt; 3km N of Mook
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">@ 2:16 &gt; Lancaster &gt; 05 Ost S/KN-2.6</span>
@ 2:22 &gt; Halifax &gt; 05 Ost S/KN-6.3

There was 9 Lancs, 11 Hallies, 7 Whimpeys and 1 Stirling claimed that night.

A Mossie claim list compiled by Hilber of the Heinkel company has 10 Mossies out of 133 claims for the time period June '43 to Nov '44.

I went though Tony Wood's LW claim list till the end of July and could not find any Mossie claims, though 1 was damaged.

Note I said a <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">NF 30</span>, not a bomber version of the Mossie

p1ngu666
10-25-2005, 09:59 PM
iirec it was either 13 or 17 mossies that hte he219 shot down. but then the same number was shot down by mossie night fighters http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

think the ju88 is the best german night fighter to see quantity production.

books and magazines seem to quote the highest specs/performance for it, but ive not really read much about german night fighters, pretty much everything i have read is from the english side (mossie and bombers of all types)

fantumfan2003
10-26-2005, 02:12 AM
google and yoohoo are second to the experten on these forums....

uglyohyeah
10-26-2005, 03:10 AM
I think the 219 had been designed to take jet engines when they were available. Interesting aircraft.

Waldo.Pepper
10-26-2005, 07:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by uglyohyeah:
I think the 219 had been designed to take jet engines when they were available. Interesting aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes perhaps.

One flew with a jet engine slung beneath it. It was even encountered while flying during the night by an RAF pilot.

fantumfan2003
10-26-2005, 10:02 AM
Here is very comprehensive link on the He-219, even has a diagram with description of the cockpit...

http://www.jg53-pikas.de/Uhu_eng.htm

Wow...Some data to get started with a flyable He-219

KGr.HH-Sunburst
10-27-2005, 06:15 AM
Better or not, its for 100% a bad @ss looking plane, the He129 and Me410 are the coolest looking twin engine fighters ive seen IMO

keep your mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Akwar
10-27-2005, 09:30 AM
Modeling any one of these night fighters is completely worthless unless the Radar avionics/Operator position are modeled as well.

goshikisen
10-27-2005, 07:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Akwar:
Modeling any one of these night fighters is completely worthless unless the Radar avionics/Operator position are modeled as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Similar problem with the Lancaster... it flew the lion's share of its missions at night and FB isn't that great at portraying heavy bombers or night fighting.

Don't get me wrong... the Lancaster and Uhu are interesting aircraft but they aren't ideal for inclusion in FB/AEP/PF. Typhoon, Mossie, Spitfire XIV... much more suited for the IL2 series.

johann63
10-29-2005, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Akwar:
Modeling any one of these night fighters is completely worthless unless the Radar avionics/Operator position are modeled as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Worthless? Really.
Sorry you feel that way. I would still enjoy flying this against a mossie in the daytime. I know this may be bohemian and inacurate but it is still a game last time a checked.

Feathered_IV
10-30-2005, 02:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ive never heard of it until now </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif


Try this too:

http://aircraftwalkaround.hobbyvista.com/he219/he219.htm

major_setback
10-30-2005, 05:38 AM
From a thread in the General Discussion forum:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5791071273

http://www.hranitels.ru/cpg/albums/userpics/10015/He-219%20-%2002.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
10-31-2005, 03:54 AM
Wait for the AI gunners on the bombers to pick the simmers off at night. The Whining and Pulling of Teeth.

Although made in larger numbers and used far more than Do-335, the He-219 requires radar and night vision restrictions on AI pilots and AI gunners. This is overlooked (for now) because He-219, like the Do-335, is a Cult aircraft among western flight simmers. He-219 requires a dedicated strategic interception simulation, and so will be much more like Silent Hunter 3 than a Dogfight game.

The pdf file below has some good stuff on F-94s and F3D SkyNights against MiGs in the night sky over Korea, protecting B-29 night raiids...

Development of Night Air Operations 1941-1952, USAF ~&gt; http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/numbered_studies/467678.pdf

Waldo.Pepper
10-31-2005, 09:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Development of Night Air Operations 1941-1952, USAF ~&gt; http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/numbered_studies/467678.pdf </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good overwiew read LEXX thanks.

darkhorizon11
10-31-2005, 11:58 PM
I agree with Lexx's comments nightfighting in WWII was a totally different ballgame. Not the turn and burn boom and zoom stuff on the servers today.

But if 1C could realistically add this into the game this would be amazing. Not only for immersion reasons, but simply because this is the only WWII front/theme that hasn't even been attempted yet, AFAIK.

LEXX_Luthor
11-01-2005, 08:35 AM
SkyChimp found those pdf files. I (choke) forgot to mention that.

horizon:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But if 1C could realistically add this into the game...etc, etc... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wait for the late-night AI bomber gunners to pick off the Happy simmers. Radar is not coming to FB/PF but should be in BoB And Beyond.

StrikeFighters now has a (very nice) 3rd Panty He-219 with radar (and Lancaster/Mossie) and so would probably represent the closest thing available for RAF vs LW night ops. I don't know if StrikeFighters campaign system can support 3rd Party strategic bombing campaigns. Individual missions can be made with the 3rd Party Mission Editor.

darkhorizon11
11-01-2005, 11:28 AM
I meant BoB actually I forgot to write it in... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I know Oleg already said this would be impossible for PF, which is part of the reason why the P-61 was dropped.

LEXX_Luthor
11-01-2005, 02:06 PM
I forgot about Chimp, so don't beat yourself up about forgetting Bob. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ground radar will be in BoB, but I doubt air radar will be (its 1940). However, I would bet Oleg knows the potential for adding air radar to later Theaters in BoB And Beyond.

Aaron_GT
11-01-2005, 02:41 PM
Tiger Talon,

The original match up being mentioned was the He-219 versus the NF.30. An engagement in April 1943 isn't relevant to that as the NF.30 prototype didn't fly for another 11 months, with first NF.30 deliveries in (from memory) July 1944.

p1ngu666
11-01-2005, 10:18 PM
luthor, early radar really wasnt that good..

Waldo.Pepper
11-01-2005, 11:04 PM
I think that the early radars, by our standards were extremely primitive. The CH set that guarded Britain could not give elevation information at all, and were not effective against targets above 20000 feet (during the Battle of Britain phase of WW2). Also once the German planes passed them, they were useless and in order to track a raid once it passed the Observer Corps was all that was available.

However, by the standards of the time even the most primitive Radar, was breathtakingly welcome, successful and effective, expecially when the operator was well trained and experienced. The imponderable squiggles, to our eyes, on the cathode ray tube provided all the information one could want to make an effective interception.

The radar operator for Peter Spoden (a well known German Night Fighter pilot) was skilled enough to be able to distinguish the real bombers from the window using the equipment that they had available. The method he used was quite simple and seems straightforward. The target bomber moves, the window in comparison did not, and he could tell which was which.

Got a little video clip to share as well. I have been saving this one for a special occasion. It depicts a typical AI by a NF Mosquito. (Incidentally it is the same Radar that was in the P-61 Black Widow).

http://rapidshare.de/files/7076329/Mosquito_AI_Radar_in_action.avi.html

LEXX_Luthor
11-02-2005, 12:59 AM
pingu666 has a good point. Early radar simming won't be like F-16 or F-18 SuperFighter ops, but will be more time consuming in finding, tracking, and hitting targets, and such a sim will be more like Silent Hunter III which is a strategic interception sim using unguided missiles (torpedoes).

VVS-Manuc
11-02-2005, 02:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by uglyohyeah:
I think the 219 had been designed to take jet engines when they were available. Interesting aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, it was never planned to equip the He 219 with jet engines

VVS-Manuc
11-02-2005, 02:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
pingu666 has a good point. Early radar simming won't be like F-16 or F-18 SuperFighter ops, but will be more time consuming in finding, tracking, and hitting targets, and such a sim will be more like Silent Hunter III which is a strategic interception sim using unguided missiles (torpedoes). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Early radar displays were only a couple of oscillating lines on a tiny display tube. The detection range was often not more than 2000 meters. I doubt that the casual online dogfight player have fun with this.

EmKen
11-02-2005, 08:51 AM
QUOTE Also once the German planes passed them, they were useless and in order to track a raid once it passed the Observer Corps was all that was available.

The reason the radar didn't work inland is explained in the article below (From "The War in the Air, edited by Gavin Lyall, an excellent book)

THE BATTLE OF BARKING CREEK

It started when an East coast radar station reported an unidentified €˜plot€ over the North Sea. A section of fighters was scrambled to investigate. The plot got bigger. A whole squadron was sent up. The plot got bigger still€"apparently waves of aircraft were sweeping in towards the Essex coast. More squadrons were scrambled. Plenty of people believed Hitler would start the war with a display of aerial frightfulness. This looked like Der Tag.
By chance, the King happened to be visiting the Bentley Priory headquarters of Fighter Command at the time. He found an impressive display of coloured plaques building up on the Ops Room map€"and a distracted host in the Commander-in-Chief, Dowding.

The Battle raged for about an hour, with the air full of fighter leaders€ pleas for further courses to steer; it stretched as far as Kent, where two Hurricanes were shot down€"by, it turned out, Spitfires. Then, as the fighters€ fuel ran low and the squadrons returned to land, the radar plot dwindled, faded out, died. No bombs seemed to have fallen; no enemy aircraft had been sighted. A hasty investigation started.
The answer was embarrassingly simple. The fixed radar aerials of that time, like any directional radio transmitter, threw out their beams simultaneously in opposite directions (i. e. North and South, East and West, as the case might be) and picked up the return signals indiscriminately. This meant that the radar screen could show two formations apparently wingtip-to-wingtip when they were actually sixty miles apart: one thirty miles in front, one thirty miles behind the aerial. To avoid the obvious dangers in this, the inland side of each aerial was electronically screened off to make the radar €˜blind€ inland (thus the RAF had to rely on visual sightings from the Royal Observer Corps and their own fighters once the enemy had crossed the coast).
And of course the electronic screening had chosen this moment to fail €"unnoticed Every build-up of €˜enemy€ aircraft over the sea had in fact been the build-up of British fighters inland; every plot in truth a counterplot. Given the nervous tension of the time, and the RAF's unfamiliarity with German aircraft, it was lucky that an hour of literally chasing each other€s tails produced only two casualties.
Yet in its own way, the Battle of Barking Creek was a famous victory. A loophole in the defensive system had been discovered€" and was promptly plugged€"without the enemy having slipped through it. Just suppose the Battle had never happened; suppose the fault had waited, say, exactly a year to reveal itself?€"until 6th September 1940.

LEXX_Luthor
11-02-2005, 12:37 PM
VVS-Manuc:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Early radar displays were only a couple of oscillating lines on a tiny display tube. The detection range was often not more than 2000 meters. <span class="ev_code_yellow">I doubt that the casual online dogfight player have fun with this</span>. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Different market, or perhaps overlapped market. It was interesting to watch our caual online dogfight players having fun with Silent Hunter III strategic interception simulation.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I have always known that a properly designed strategic bomber/intercept sim would be immersive and require full attention from the player, from night-ops 1944 RAF vs LW to 1950s and 1960s jet bomber/intercept, properly modelled with weather, night sky, ECM, radar controlled AA and SAMs, ground control communications, AI both enemy and friendly, etc... Such a sim will be like nothing seen in combat flight sims, and may be closer in spirit to Silent Hunter III than the "ace" Dogfight sims.

p1ngu666
11-02-2005, 06:43 PM
early radar often broke, reported wrongly, didnt report right etc etc, it was better than nothing, but....

plus operating the radar generaly had a person dedicated to it. or radar op/nav etc on the british. the germans prefered 3 crew or more