he-111 bombload and replacement

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: 10 May 2004, 16:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#16

Post by Ome_Joop » 17 Apr 2009, 08:35

I don't know but i do know the Ju-88 and He-111 both served as torpedo bombers already.
Image

http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4537

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#17

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 17 Apr 2009, 08:56

both the he-111 and ju-88 served as a torpedo yes they did. the he-111H-6 was the torpedo variant carrying two torpedoes underneath the fuselage. obviously the he-111 was not to be used againgst capital ships! that would be suicide for a heinkel. the faster and lighter ju-88 was more suited to that role. the he-111 torpedo bomber was for attacking merchant ships and convoys not battleships. and i think that the do-217 wouldve been an excellent replacement for the heinkel. in fact, i glanced at the wikipedia article about it for about 1 minute and a bomber that was previously unknown to me was suddenly my favourite luftwaffe aircraft. bigger bombload than the he-111 and way faster, that is rather amazing. shame it didnt have a time of glory.


User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#18

Post by bf109 emil » 17 Apr 2009, 09:15

I know the Ju-88 had a variety of roles from medium bomber to dive bomber, etc. but even though there might have been a varient or a He111 torpedo bomber, i have never heard of a ship being sunk or attacked by this aircraft...as convoys in the Atlantic where beyond the He111 range and ships in the med had either an escort or fighter cover while sailing, leaving the North sea with the majority of convoys having a carrier escort or capital ships...IMHO it would have been slaughtered as a torpedo bomber

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#19

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 17 Apr 2009, 10:06

actually the he-111 was used as a coastal patrol bomber as well along with the fw-200. and the ju-88 torpedo bomber was used againgst the battle fleet supporting operation torch.

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#20

Post by bf109 emil » 17 Apr 2009, 10:10

kriegsmarine221 wrote:actually the he-111 was used as a coastal patrol bomber as well along with the fw-200. and the ju-88 torpedo bomber was used againgst the battle fleet supporting operation torch.
this i can see and understand of the He111 bombing ships from altitude, thank you

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: 10 May 2004, 16:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#21

Post by Ome_Joop » 17 Apr 2009, 10:12

Just a simple google search.
Battle of the Atlantic
The spring of 1941 saw the majority of Luftwaffe Bomber units withdrawn from the west in order to prepare for the intended invasion of Russia. The sole He.III formations remaining on the Atlantic coastline being I & III/KG26 in Norway, (II/KG26 having been transferred to Greece in May 1941), who was the Luftwaffe’s acknowledged experts in anti-shipping operations, and III/KG40 based in France. These had now been re-equipped with the He.111H-6 fitted out with attachments to carry two torpedoes.

Perhaps the most successful operation carried out by the Heinkels occurred on the 4th of July 1942 when, in a joint U-boat/Luftwaffe operation, Arctic convoy PQ17, carrying vital war supplies to Russia, was almost destroyed. With the U-boats drawing away the escorting warships the undefended merchantmen were easy targets for waves of Ju88A level bombers and the He111H-6 Torpedo bombers of 1/KG26 flying from Bardufoss and Banak in Northern Norway. When the final count was made the convoy had lost 23 ships sunk out of the 33 vessels that had sailed from Ireland on the 27 June. This together with the equally destructive assault on Convoy PQ18 would result in all further Russian convoys being postponed until after the Allied landings in North Africa in November.
http://militarypower.wikidot.com/heinkel-he-111

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: 10 May 2004, 16:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#22

Post by Ome_Joop » 17 Apr 2009, 10:31

obviously the he-111 was not to be used againgst capital ships! that would be suicide for a heinkel.
Why?
The german F5B (aerial) torpedo had a max range of 6000 meters (at slow speed 24kts) and max range of 2000 meters (at 40kts).

That would give the Heinkel enough distance to evade most defensife fire.
Japanese G4M1 Betty's surely sunk the Repulse and Prince of Wales why those were surely more vunerable compared to the He-111?

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#23

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 17 Apr 2009, 11:32

yeah but i think it would prove trouble some to aim from 2km let alone 6km. the bombsight already installed in the plane would prove almost useless to aim at the low altitude needed to attack a ship, also the ship could be fast moving and easily detect and avoid the torpedo. unless attacking in huge swarms, trying to torpedo a ship from that distance is wasteful and futile againgst a moving target. and the sinking of the two british warships wasnt completely done by the g4m. they had aichi d1a dive bombers and zeros constantly strafing it. and prove me wrong if there was an instrument specifically designed to aim torpedos.

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: 10 May 2004, 16:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#24

Post by Ome_Joop » 17 Apr 2009, 13:22

kriegsmarine221 wrote:the sinking of the two british warships wasnt completely done by the g4m. they had aichi d1a dive bombers and zeros constantly strafing it..
No! there were no Zero's and Vals involved only Betty's and Nell's

To proove you wrong...the luftwaffe torpbombers had a Torpedokommandogerät!

Image
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147995
http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instru ... insatz.htm

Italian's used something else :
The aiming instrument was a primitive device shaped like a horseshoe with several nails sticking out of it.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/ ... adini.html

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#25

Post by Dave Bender » 17 Apr 2009, 16:22

not to sure if there would be many volunteers to make a torpedo run at low altitude
The Ju-88A and He-111H are superb torpedo bombers compared to the Stringbag. Where did the RN obtain aircrew for Swordfish torpedo bombers?

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#26

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 17 Apr 2009, 23:16

im asking the same question as well. how did the soviets find aircrews for the i-15 and i-5s and po-2s? where did the british find aircrews for the gloster gladiator? where did the italians find aircrews for the cr.42? i dont know. maybe they even volunteered or they were simply conscripted. and saying that the heinkel is better than the swordfish really depends on many factors. a

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#27

Post by bf109 emil » 17 Apr 2009, 23:39

Dave Bender wrote:
not to sure if there would be many volunteers to make a torpedo run at low altitude
The Ju-88A and He-111H are superb torpedo bombers compared to the Stringbag. Where did the RN obtain aircrew for Swordfish torpedo bombers?
the stringbags crippled the mighty Bismarck, and laid an excellent raid on the Italian port of Taranto against capital ships...how many if any capital ships did the He111H variant manage to sink? as for pilots these where trained torpedo and naval pilots...something the Kriegsmarine lacked as airfleets or planes etc. where controlled by Göring, so little if any training in Maritime use of torpedoes was taught or practiced by Luftwaffe pilots as Göring was reluctant and hesitant to allow there use by the Navy.

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#28

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 18 Apr 2009, 02:37

that shows the lack of cooperation between the kriegsmarine and the luftwaffe. hitler shouldve allowed the kriegsmarine to establish their own naval air service not just a few ar-196s. and yes the heinkel may have been a better torpedo bomber but was there any incident where it proved itself a good torpedo bomber? the swordfish is an excellent example. and so was the po-2. the po-2 was already horribly obsolete by WWII but its slow speed, manuevrability and sort of stealth(difficulty to detect) managed to make it one of the best light bombers of the war. it was so good the north koreans used in in the korean war. mustve been sort of strange to see f-86 sabres trying to shoot down a po-2.

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: 10 May 2004, 16:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#29

Post by Ome_Joop » 18 Apr 2009, 10:29

the stringbags crippled the mighty Bismarck, and laid an excellent raid on the Italian port of Taranto against capital ships...how many if any capital ships did the He111H variant manage to sink?
I don't have a clue maybe none but does that matter? I think it would be safe to say that the He-111 was capable of sinking capital ships just like any other Torp bomber.
BTW how well did the stringbag do in the channel dash?

kriegsmarine221
Member
Posts: 642
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 08:59

Re: he-111 bombload and replacement

#30

Post by kriegsmarine221 » 18 Apr 2009, 12:24

well. the channel dash was consisting of a lot of german ships. of course any group of aircraft attacking a fleet like that would face a lot of resistance. and that was what they got. 675 aircraft of spitfires, hurricanes, blenheims and various other aircraft, including the swordfish. of the few aircraft that found the fleet were 6 swordfish and all got shot down. you cannot compare a squadron of swordfish attacking a single battleship to a few aircraft attacking a battle fleet. same as you cannot compare 6 he-111s attacking a battle fleet. they would be slaughtered just as much as swordfish.

Post Reply

Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”