Hs 123 remains in production

[kfbr392]

Why the Hs 123 was so great:

from Höfling, Rudolf - Flugzeug Profile 42 - Henschel Hs 123, p.11

[BDV]

It was worse at the job than the Hs123B, as the CR42 was a fighter.

My point.

[kfbr392]

abstract, in English:

The secret of the Hs 123 popularity with its crews was its
- sturdy, robust fuselage with great insensitivity to gunfire
- almost complete lack of hydraulic and electrical controls (who often doom other aircraft when damaged in flight)
- technically mature engine
- excellent flying characteristics
- extraordinary maneuverability
- ability to be fully aerobatic even when fully loaded at 2350kg
- ability to outturn enemy fighters at low airspeeds
- ease of maintainability
- reliability under the extreme conditions of the Russian winter

[stg 44]

It was worse at the job than the Hs123B, as the CR42 was a fighter.

My point.

If CAS biplanes are to be used, and the german factories have shifted to newer designs, what's wrong with the CR.42, which Italians can mass produce?

Other than it being Italian?

It was worse at the job than the Hs123B, as the CR42 was a fighter.

Not really, you're point was that an Italian fighter biplane could do the job a dedicated dive bomber could. It could not, nor was it robust for the CAS role. Yes you could strap a couple of smaller bombs to it, but it couldn't take nearly the same load.

IMHO even if the jigs were already dismantled the HS123C warranted making new ones instead of the HS129.

[BDV]

It could not, nor was it robust for the CAS role. Yes you could strap a couple of smaller bombs to it, but it couldn't take nearly the same load.

The plane CR.42 was designed for maneuvering/acrobatics and was described by an opponent as "immensely strong".

Using the fighter version straight up as a dive bomber would have been suboptimal but I suspect that with minimal modifications (increased pilot protection and a radio) it would have performed very close to the Hs123.

Unfortunately, better was the enemy of good; a recurring theme in Axis failure.

[kfbr392]

the HS123C warranted making new ones instead of the HS129.

One should have produced both Henschels. Both were good.
The Hs 129B had some advantages over the Hs 123 (visibility, heavy cannon armament along centerline for anti tank work, redundant engines).
The Hs 129B was well liked by its operators and was effective and efficient. Production was capped at 40 per month because that was all the French engine manufacturer could supply. But 40 tankbusters per month is fine.

Hs 123 production could have quite easily been ramped up to 250 per month (or more), though.

[kfbr392]

Another potential benefit of high Hs 123C production figures in this ATL:
Germany can supply its Axis partners with lots of them!

The Hs 123 was rugged, reliable and low maintenance. It had little hydraulics, electrical systems and moving parts.
Also, it could not have been overly expensive to build.
This makes it an ideal aircraft for foreign operators a good distance away from the spare parts supply chain.
Training for pilots and ground crew would have been simpler than for any other type, making it ideal for export!

In OTL, the Ju 87 was supplied to Bulgaria, Kroatia, Hungary, Italy, Romania and Slovakia.
The Hs 129B was supplied to Hungary and Romania.
In this ATL, about 700-1400 Hs 123C (10%-20% of total production) would be sold/ supplied to the above countries, plus Finland, beginning in 1941.

It would have been the best "bang for the buck". The Axis partners would have had a a capable combat aircraft to give to their available pilots, munitions could have been delivered on target efficiently.
Losses and attrition would have been low, sortie generation rate high, servicability also high.

The good qualities of the Hs 123 would possibly have caused some of these nations to pick up production and spare parts production in their own country.
(I am thinking for example of Romania canceling the IAR 80 in 1941 and instead producing Hs 123.)

[stg 44]

the HS123C warranted making new ones instead of the HS129.

One should have produced both Henschels. Both were good.
The Hs 129B had some advantages over the Hs 123 (visibility, heavy cannon armament along centerline for anti tank work, redundant engines).
The Hs 129B was well liked by its operators and was effective and efficient. Production was capped at 40 per month because that was all the French engine manufacturer could supply. But 40 tankbusters per month is fine.

Hs 123 production could have quite easily been ramped up to 250 per month (or more), though.

The Hs129 was crap. Its engines weren't armored and that meant it was frequently brought down by rifle fire and based on the sources I've read it was only really used over German lines from 1943 onward due to vulnerability to enemy fighters. It was underpowered, cramped, had no room to grow, didn't have the ability to operate in the tough eastern conditions that the Hs123 could, and was very slow.

[T. A. Gardner]

The Hs 129 was build the way it was because Henschel was limited by the available engines to choose from and RLM requirements. Thus, it had to be a twin engine design to get the power needed and for reliability reasons in its intended role. The initial use of the Argus 410 engine with just 465 hp proved horribly underpowered. The demand for heavy armor on the aircraft only exacerbated that.

Henschel wanted to redesign the plane almost entirely as the Henschel P/76 making it larger and giving it substantially more power. The RLM refused and suggested the Gnome Rhone 14M, a French engine that was available in numbers and not being used, be substituted on the existing airframe.

The size of the Hs 129 was dictated by the available engine power meaning it had to be a small aircraft. On the whole, it was a poor design brought on by the Luftwaffe's requirements rather than because the designers did a poor job.

On the other hand, the Hs 123 was really only viable in a low threat environment, something that frequently existed on the Eastern Front but nowhere else. Had the Hs 123 been used in North Africa, Italy or NW Europe it would have been a death trap for its pilot, except possibly as a harassment aircraft flying at night... Hardly a role worth a major production effort.

[kfbr392]

ah, out come the Hs 129 haters...
guys, lets disuss that in a different thread.

this one is on additional Hs 123.

[BDV]

On the other hand, the Hs 123 was really only viable in a low threat environment, something that frequently existed on the Eastern Front but nowhere else. Had the Hs 123 been used in North Africa, Italy or NW Europe it would have been a death trap for its pilot, except possibly as a harassment aircraft flying at night...

Like the CR.42s in German hands were used on the Italian front. Whether it's "worth the effort" is a different question.

[stg 44]

On the other hand, the Hs 123 was really only viable in a low threat environment, something that frequently existed on the Eastern Front but nowhere else. Had the Hs 123 been used in North Africa, Italy or NW Europe it would have been a death trap for its pilot, except possibly as a harassment aircraft flying at night...

Considering that the Eastern Front is by far the most resource intensive and the demands for CAS enormous and forced planes not designed for that role into that role, that alone justifies making at least 60 per month. Its a cheap and proven design with huge utility in the East so would have been a far better investment than what was put into the Hs129 IOTL while costing less per unit.

[kfbr392]

the Hs 123 was really only viable in a low threat environment, something that frequently existed on the Eastern Front but nowhere else. Had the Hs 123 been used in North Africa, Italy or NW Europe it would have been a death trap for its pilot

Clearly, in a high threat environment, a Staffel of Hs 123 should be accompanied by a Schwarm of Bf 109 in order to aid the Henschels in making their escape.
But apparently the extreme aerobatic maneuverability and slow speed of the Hs 123 tended to frustrate fighter attacks.
That is also stated in the book I referenced yesterday.

Likewise, read the Wikipedia article on the Fw 189 - it was able to outturn and out-slow fighters.
And the Hs 123 turned better than the Fw 189 and was slower than it ...


(for what its worth, I just flew a Hs 123A-1 against 3 Ace Spitfire Vb in the flight sim IL2 1946 m4.12.2 HSFX 7.0.3. Same result there - the fighters cannot follow and overshoot)

[kfbr392]

Considering that the Eastern Front is by far the most resource intensive and the demands for CAS enormous and forced planes not designed for that role into that role, that alone justifies making at least 60 per month. Its a cheap and proven design with huge utility in the East so would have been a far better investment than what was put into the Hs129 IOTL while costing less per unit.

Yes!

[T. A. Gardner]

Clearly, in a high threat environment, a Staffel of Hs 123 should be accompanied by a Schwarm of Bf 109 in order to aid the Henschels in making their escape.

That's a tall order for the Luftwaffe. Now you are adding another mission for their fighters to have to carry out when they are already over stretched.

But apparently the extreme aerobatic maneuverability and slow speed of the Hs 123 tended to frustrate fighter attacks.
That is also stated in the book I referenced yesterday.

That assumes that their only opposition is enemy aircraft. I'd say by late 1942 US and UK anti-aircraft assets are such that the Hs 123 would be facing a serious problem with automatic AA fire. Low and slow is a death sentence to an aircraft facing lots of AA fire. By mid 1943 most US divisions would be deploying 64 + light and medium AA guns in an AA battalion. Many vehicles have a .50 machinegun mounted for AA fire on top of that. The British aren't far behind in that numbers game.
It would be nothing like facing the Soviets where AA fire is limited and most frontline units have few AA guns available.
That doesn't even include the Allies simply showing up over the Hs 123's airfield and shooting the hell out of it with 30 to 50 fighter bombers.
In the West, the Hs 123 would be as useful as a CR 42... that is to say... not very useful, and nearly useless.

Likewise, read the Wikipedia article on the Fw 189 - it was able to outturn and out-slow fighters.
And the Hs 123 turned better than the Fw 189 and was slower than it ...

Same argument. Neither was ever tried out against Allied AAA or used offensively as ground attack machines in the West.

(for what its worth, I just flew a Hs 123A-1 against 3 Ace Spitfire Vb in the flight sim IL2 1946 m4.12.2 HSFX 7.0.3. Same result there - the fighters cannot follow and overshoot)

It isn't worth much. I have a wooden nickel you can have as a reward...

If the game will let you, try flying it against 6 M15 SPAA systems or say 4 40mm bofors and 4 double 20mm Polsten mounted on Crusader chassis. My money is it gets shot to pieces in nothing flat and its puny two 7.9mm machineguns and the few small bombs carried that have no real means of accurate delivery do nothing to stop that process.

All one has to do is look at maps of US army's deployment in Europe or elsewhere of AAA to know flying over Allied territory is a high risk endeavor. I have maps showing the US Third Army's AA deployment in the ETO. An Hs 123 would be flying into a literal hornet's nest of AA guns.