Fw 189 & Bv 141

[fergal69]

How about the little thought about aircraft that were used on the Eastern Front.

 

The FW189 - It was a stronger aircraft than it looked & survived ramming attacks by Soviet fighters. With the FW189C prototype, with a different crew cockit that was fitted, you can have a ground attack aircraft.

 

The BV141 - Whilst the German Air Ministries preference was for the FW189, I quite like this aircraft & it would be an interesting to fly.

 

 

[fergal69]

Managed to upload some images of the two planes.

 

 

 

FW189

 

 

 

 

BV141

 

Edited September 22, 2013 by fergal69

[AndyJWest]

The BV141 would be a good test for FM modelling...

[fergal69]

Some votes comming in, but only one comment - would have thought there may be a few more, good or bad 

[Dakpilot]

FW 189 = no problem, large production run, more than 800, used by numerous air-forces in many theaters, but only after other important or glaring omissions have been filled  

 

BV141 = No interest in what-if/prottypes A/C with little hard documented flight data however interesting they may be    when every operational A/C has been modeled then by all means go for it 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

All for the Fw 189 but the BV 141 is such an ugly odd ball aircraft that hardly played any roll.

[Avimimus]

Four defensive guns, a glass house, and neat handling produced by a very broad wingspan - the FW-189 would add a unique experience to the game.

[Alesia]

Both are pretty unique so It's hard to pick between one or the other.  One has a large wing span with guns and an almost full around glass cockpit and the other has an offset cockpit which is highly unusual.  So, why not both?

[LLv44_Mprhead]

Of BV141, I kind of like it, but if it's true that under 30 were manufactured and those were all pre-series planes with only some of them tested in eastern front, then maybe not.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

I would stick to those aircraft in regular service, and not get into the what ifs, that at most where in testing stages. As there are more than

plenty which where in Stalingrad in service, still missing.

Ask for the BV141 and you might as well ask for the Me 264 as it was being tested in 1942 too.

Edited October 4, 2013 by Lord_Haw-Haw

[fergal69]

I would stick to those aircraft in regular service, and not get into the what ifs, that at most where in testing stages. As there are more than

plenty which where in Stalingrad in service, still missing.

Ask for the BV141 and you might as well ask for the Me 264 as it was being tested in 1942 too.

 

How about the He-LIII-B LERCHE that appears in IL-2? - despite that being a concept aircraft it was still modelled as a flyable aircraft & didn't seem to generate much conversation on the forums.

 

ME264 - not heard of that one - will go looking on Google later for that.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

How about the He-LIII-B LERCHE that appears in IL-2? - despite that being a concept aircraft it was still modelled as a flyable aircraft & didn't seem to generate much conversation on the forums.

 

ME264 - not heard of that one - will go looking on Google later for that.

The Lerche was only used when 1946 freshly came out, afterwards that aircraft or better said UFO was never seen again.

The Me 264 is a biggy!

 

Date Test Pilot Airfield Results December 23, 1942 Karl Baur Augsburg After extensive taxiing trials, the Me 264 made its maiden flight. The duration of this first flight was 22 minutes, and for safety reasons the landing gear was left down. On landing, the airframe was damaged in the area of the flap mounts when the aircraft rolled over the end of the runway due to the failure of the brake system. January 20, 1943 Karl Baur Augsburg The second test flight was made. Karl Baur complained that the forces on the controls were too high, about the poor placement of the instruments and of exhaust fumes penetrating into the cockpit. January 22, 1943 Karl Baur Augsburg The Me 264 was transferred to Lechfeld. January -  

February, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld On the fifth test flight, the underside of the fuselage was damaged when it accidentally contacted the ground. Also, the hydraulic system of the landing gear failed, making it impossible to retract the gear. February, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld Baur reported some problems with the inner flaps and a defective nose wheel. Despite some changes to the control surfaces, the forces against them were still too high and the changes had displaced the center of gravity. The nose wheel problems were fixed, and now the retraction functioned properly. Also, some minor defects were found in the electrical cables of the intercom system. February, 1943 Gerhard Caroli Lechfeld Caroli also found that the forces against the control surfaces were still too high, especially at high speed. Small defects were still present in the radio system and landing gear. February, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld During two flights by Baur, a speed of 600 km/h (373 mph) was reached. The faulty trimming and controls revealed that an eventual change in the entire control system would be inevitably needed. Flights with two or three engines were found to be satisfactory, but in flights with the automatic controls it was found that the servos were too low powered to control such a heavy aircraft. March 2, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld Stability tests were continued. March 4, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld A test of the polare system was cut short when after 15 minutes of flying time, the third engine began to smoke and had to be cut out. At this time, 11 test flights had been made totaling 12 hours flight time. March 23, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld After the faulty engine was changed, the critical altitude tests were made. Several other test flights were made this day, mainly to check the longitudinal stability. Also, the first measures to improve the rudder effect was made. March 23, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld During landing, the left oleo leg broke, which was probably not fully locked down, causing some damage. March 23 -   

May 21, 1943   Lechfeld During repairs, a new steering column, a reinforced wing skin, a modified nosewheel drive and a complete radio were added. Also, a new emergency tail  skid was  added, a changed tailplane and four new Jumo 211J engines were installed. May 22 -  

June 5, 1943 Karl Baur Lechfeld Continued high forces against the ailerons and rudder surfaces were found. Six flights were made totaling 12 hour 16 minutes. June 2, 1943 Flight Capt. Wendel Lechfeld Serious problems arose when the nosewheel jammed during retraction. June 10, 1943 FBM Böttcher Lechfeld Reported that the cockpit excessively heated up in the summer sun. August 11, 1943   Lechfeld The Me 264 V1 was taken out of service, and re-equipped with BMW 801 twin row radial engines. March 18, 1944   Lechfeld The Me 264 V1 was slightly damaged in an air raid, and was quickly repaired. April 14, 1944   Lechfeld During the first test roll with the new engines, the brake shoes tore off. April 16, 1944   Lechfeld The Me 264 V1 was transferred to Memmingen. April, 1944   Memmingen During the 38th test flight, the emergency skid was torn out after a rough landing. When the rudders were fitted with balances, the excessive vibrations almost ceased. late April, 1944 FBM Scheibe Lechfeld Scheibe, from the Rechlin Trial Establishment, complained about the canopy reflections during his test flight. He also indicated that the excessive airframe vibrations were the number one problem to fix.  late April, 1944 Colonel Barsewich Memmingen Barsewich, from the Chief Reconnaissance Department, judged the Me 264 V1 too slow for combat missions, even though the aircraft was about 10% faster than with the Jumo 211J engines. early May, 1944 Lt. Colonel Knemeyer Memmingen After an uneventful flight, Knemeyer was completely enthusiastic about the Me 264, in his opinion all problems could be overcome in the further testing and refinement of the aircraft. April 17 - 

May 17, 1944 Karl Baur Memmingen Flight testing was performed for tailplane flutter and the emergency tail skid. The rear of the plane was found to be too heavy. April 26 - 

May 3, 1944 Captain Nebel Memmingen Three test flights were made by Capt. Nebel of the Rechlin Test Establishment to finally redress the tail vibrations. To avoid building an entire new tail, balance weights were added to get the vibration problems under control. Since the problem was not solved, a larger tail plane seemed inevitable. June 5, 1944 Karl Baur Memmingen More stability tests were made, with a small improvement. However, the flights were complicated by the continuous problems with the Patin system. June 6, 1944 Karl Baur Memmingen Extreme rudder fluttering was found in the 380 - 450 km/h (236 - 280 mph) range. Also criticized were the too soft automatic controls, which had to be adjusted again.  June 26, 1944 Karl Patin Memmingen A climb flight with combat performances was prematurely cut short when the fuel pressure of both inner engines fell to zero. After checking the fuel pumps, several defects were found. Also, the failure of the Patin, radio and electrical systems caused intensive repairs. July 18, 1944   Memmingen The Me 264 (RE+EN, work number 264000001) was damaged during an air raid. The extent of the damages was too severe for the damage to be repaired.

[fergal69]

Interesting reading about the ME264. Book I have on aircraft of the Luftwafe doesn't mention that aircraft at all. Seems it was more of a lemon than the HE177.

 

The cockpit looks very B29ish.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

Interesting reading about the ME264. Book I have on aircraft of the Luftwafe doesn't mention that aircraft at all. Seems it was more of a lemon than the HE177.

 

The cockpit looks very B29ish.

Yes there are simularities to the B-29. My interest in it is that it was stationed in Memmingen where also the KG51 was stationed, and after the war JABO G 34

which I served in during the eighties.

[LukeFF]

How about the He-LIII-B LERCHE that appears in IL-2? - despite that being a concept aircraft it was still modelled as a flyable aircraft & didn't seem to generate much conversation on the forums.

 

   

 

Oh, yes it did.

[Avimimus]

...and the annoying thing - they used a Hs-132 mock-up for the cockpit! Why not actually give us a Hs-132 - which would've seen service on the Eastern Front? A much better choice for 1946.

 

Anyone know how much ammunition the 20mm equipped versions of the Fw-189 carried?

[fergal69]

   

 

Oh, yes it did.

 

Must have missed them - will have to go searching to see what was said

[Szatanshow]

I rather want to see Blohm & Voss Bv 141 simple because there are to few Blohm & Voss planes in flying games and Blohm & Voss designs was interesting

[LukeFF]

13 planes that never saw operational use? Yeah, I'll pass on that one.

[352nd_Wheels]

FW189

I like the looks of the FW189 better than the BV141.

 

 

Wheels
 

[FlatSpinMan]

I liked adding the 189 to missions in the old IL2. It was always harder to attack than you'd think, too.

The B&V looks fun but given that we don't even have a Ju52 on the cards yet, the B&V is waaaaaaay down my list.

The Dev team is small and the amount of work for a plane seems to be so huge that we have to focus on core aircraft, IMHO.

[Flyingpencil]

About 2 dozen of Bv-141 A and B models built, the cockpit was basis for FW-189 cockpit (pratically identical in layout), it is a worty aircraft to build.

 

To think that no sim has ever modeleted the 141, make it very, very unique!

[LukeFF]

The Bv 141 is a pointless aircraft, as it saw zero combat. 

[Juri_JS]

We don't need the BV-141, but the Fw-189 was an important aircraft during the battle of Stalingrad. A small number were based at Pitomnik inside the Stalingrad pocket. They were used for reconnaissance and artillery spotting. It would be great to have a flyable Fw-189, but if the team doesn't have the necessary time, it should at least be available as AI aircraft for reconnaissance escort and intercept missions.

[=LD=Hethwill]

No less than 13 units were using the 189 at the timeframe covered by BoS. Numbers of serviceable ones also make it worth to be present.

 

The 141 ? Interesting enough can only find reference to one Bv model - 138 - i imagine black sea given it is a boat plane -  during BoS timeframe

 

As Flat put it, getting realistic enough, voted on Fw189 alone.

Edited November 28, 2013 by =LD=Hethwill_Khan

[Bf-110]

I always fancied the FW-189.A shame it was completely overshadowed by his FW brother,the FW-190.

[fergal69]

Bump to bring this to the forefront to see what any newcommers to the sim think

[ruby_monkey]

I would love to have at least the FW-189 - especially now that the Field/Air Marshal roles are on the cards and will make reconnaissance sorties a part of the MP gameplay.

Edited May 7, 2017 by ruby_monkey

[Monostripezebra]

the FW-189 is a pretty typical and important aircraft for the eastern front..

 

 

 

btw: 3 of of the BV141 survived the war...

[ZachariasX]

If introduced in the sim, the BV141 would come at the expense of another aircraft that could have been made instead. Most likely a more significat one.

 

Besides, it must be great fun to make an aircraft that only existed as a couple of prototypes and that has almost zero documentation compared to other types...

 

If it came "for free", then it would be fun. (We could also have more different types of cranes if they came for free, why not?) But it won't. Unless we add a Rechlin map, there's no real missions for the crate.

[XQ_Lothar29]

Foe me, first priority is Fw189. no problem pay for two aicraft

[Lusekofte]

 

 

If introduced in the sim, the BV141 would come at the expense of another aircraft that could have been made instead. Most likely a more significant one.

 

Is there a polite way to ask not to use this argument? I understand your point, but significant  is highly a subjective point of view. All request should be legit to put. The developers knows perfectly what planes they should go for. But for me these two are "significant" I follow this sim and buy premium releases , but if they stop making packs containing planes like A 20 and HS 129 , I will not buy . For me it is time this sim stands on its own two feet, I buy what interest me. And I expect you do the same. Not all are interested in absolute all versions of 109 and Spitfires. But I understand that others do.

[Dutchvdm]

Is there a polite way to ask not to use this argument? I understand your point, but significant  is highly a subjective point of view. All request should be legit to put. The developers knows perfectly what planes they should go for. But for me these two are "significant" I follow this sim and buy premium releases , but if they stop making packs containing planes like A 20 and HS 129 , I will not buy . For me it is time this sim stands on its own two feet, I buy what interest me. And I expect you do the same. Not all are interested in absolute all versions of 109 and Spitfires. But I understand that others do.

 

The A-20 and maybe even the Hs-129 are pretty mainstream, and the Bv-141 has no place in a sim where one fly's front-line aircraft. The 189 would be a nice choice if they implement mechanics for it (Both MP and SP). 

 

A Bv-141 would be perfect for a studysim like DCS. But useless for a historical scenario. And if someone would ask me to choice between the 141 and let's say a Ju-87B2 and a Bf-110F2, i would go for the last two.

 

Grt M

[ZachariasX]

Is there a polite way to ask not to use this argument? I understand your point, but significant  is highly a subjective point of view. All request should be legit to put. The developers knows perfectly what planes they should go for. But for me these two are "significant" I follow this sim and buy premium releases , but if they stop making packs containing planes like A 20 and HS 129 , I will not buy . For me it is time this sim stands on its own two feet, I buy what interest me. And I expect you do the same. Not all are interested in absolute all versions of 109 and Spitfires. But I understand that others do.

Didn't mean to offent. "significant" was not refering to other han my personal opinion. Other than that, I tried just to put the argument around, saying, "which plane would you give up for the 141".

 

Done properly, all those planes cool in their own ways. So, I leave it at that. I hope that's ok.

[Arsenal53]

It would be intersesting to have the FW-189, introducing a new mission type: recce and artillery guidance.

BV-141 is a prototype never put in service.

Edited May 25, 2017 by Arsenal53

[Necrobaron]

I've been around for a while but just recently really started delving into this current gen of the IL-2 series and am pretty surprised the FW-189 still has not made an appearance after 4+ years. I know priorities have to be made, but I certainly think the -189 and other support aircraft should eventually be included, even as AI-only. If nothing else they serve as nice window-dressing and help flesh out missions and such. I am also shocked the venerable Fi-156 Storch is nowhere to be seen though I am happy to see the Li-2 and Po-2 are in the works at least. I love that the Hs-129 has recently been added (and flyable!) and would love to see the Hs-123 and/or -126 included too. The latter two weren't in the original IL-2 either which always puzzled me then as well.

 

I voted to include the BV-141 but do agree that if it were ever included, it should waaaaay down on the priority list. Very interesting plane but a footnote compared to some of other more notable and important craft.

[Pail]

 I'd think the FW- 189 would be a very good seller even without developing new mechanics like artillery spotting or photo reconnaissance....as a priority.

 

They could come at a later point and be applicable to other aircraft as well or be done as part of a 'Premium Collector Package' for this aircraft which adds reconnaissance roles for other appropriate planes.

 

From a consumer pov it sounds terribly expensive though....so probably an awful idea.

Edited January 12, 2018 by Pail

[Heliopause]

[Roast]

Blohm & Voss BV 138 Seedrache (Sea Dragon) aka Der Fliegende Holzschuh (the flying clog)

 

armed with 20mm MG151 in the nose turret and one in the hull tail, or starters

 

 

Primarily used around Norway and in the Baltic, but also in the Black Sea

 

Here seen at Sebastopol

 

[Royal_Flight]

With a heavy heart I said no to the Bv 141 bit now I feel bad and have to explain. I'd actually far rather have it in-game than th Fw 189 which, while interesting, is far less so than the asymmetrical flying nonsense that Blom und Voss designed.

But as the Fw 189 actually saw use, I'd rather have it included than to start pushing in rare or prototype aircraft that didn't play a role in the war.

 

As others have said, having a recon/spotter adds so much depth that it's almost essential, and is certainly more needed than more standard fighters or the like.

As the Fw 189 was a reasonably common sight over the Eastern Front then it gets my vote.