He 111 permanent external hardpoint prevents full internal load

[MAJ_stug41]

Hello all, just started playing this, great game.

 

I was wondering why I could not load more than half the internal bay and was disappointed to find that the left external hardpoint is permanent. This hardpoint is over the left bomb door. It would be nice to be able to carry say 8 250kg bombs instead of 4 250's and a single external 500kg, or whatever other variation could be achieved.

 

Why is this limitation in place?

[LukeFF]

The H-6 was designed only to carry a max internal load of 4 x SC 250 bombs, as the lefthand side was permanently fitted for fuel and oil tanks. 

[MAJ_stug41]

The H-6 was designed only to carry a max internal load of 4 x SC 250 bombs, as the lefthand side was permanently fitted for fuel and oil tanks. 

Huh, never heard of that before. I can't find any documentation of this. Considering the enormous wings, half the bomb bay seems like quite a negligible addition for quite a compromise.

edit -

 

This image seems to have oxygen tanks and other things in that space and is supposedly a H3.

 

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e0/fe/15/e0fe15fd524574ab54fbe15d22e9fd3d.jpg

Edited November 14, 2016 by stug41

[Finkeren]

Even the Wikipedia article on the He 111 covers this. One of the bomb bays were blocked by the permanent installment od a PVC 1006 rack (later ETC 2000) from the H-4 onwards.

[Riderocket]

the H-16 in Kuban has 2 bomb bays 

 

 

[LukeFF]

Huh, never heard of that before. I can't find any documentation of this. Considering the enormous wings, half the bomb bay seems like quite a negligible addition for quite a compromise.

edit -

 

This image seems to have oxygen tanks and other things in that space and is supposedly a H3.

 

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e0/fe/15/e0fe15fd524574ab54fbe15d22e9fd3d.jpg

 

 

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Huh, never heard of that before. I can't find any documentation of this. Considering the enormous wings, half the bomb bay seems like quite a negligible addition for quite a compromise.

edit -

 

This image seems to have oxygen tanks and other things in that space and is supposedly a H3.

 

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e0/fe/15/e0fe15fd524574ab54fbe15d22e9fd3d.jpg

 

Just choose your truth: 

 

[Monostripezebra]

 

H6_abwurfwaffe.jpg

 

That bit does not say anything about how permanent the installment was.. it just names the mod-kit type of category "Rüstsatz". In Luftwaffe terminology, a "Rüstsatz" is a field mod kit.. send to allready deployed units (as opposed to the factory fitted "Umrüst Bausatz" type kits). During the war, these categories of terminology had their boundaries a bit twisted, as many "Rüstsätze" became factory fitted... but overall the term would kind of point more a field removable item.

[MAJ_stug41]

Ya, none of these descriptions prohibit the full use of the bomb bay unless a modification is fitted. Nobody is forced to use a modification. Interesting that thry developed optional internal additional fuel tanks though.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Nice that we sorted out people's doubts about this fuel tank vs bomb bay issue. It is clearly possible to replace the H6 factory fuselage extra fuel tank for a classic bomb load configuration.

 

 

 

 

Now lets move on and focus on 13mm Turrets, Torpedos and MG Zs everywhere for the H16     

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[Dutchvdm]

The DL-131 would be nice. They where not standard on the H-16, but where fitted on them in late 1943. 

 

What i do not understand are the engines used for the He-111. In Il-2 we have the same engines as the Ju-88 and 87 use. Most sources mention the use of the F versions of the jumo 211 engine. Not the J.

 

Grt M

Edited November 15, 2016 by I./ZG1_Martijnvdm

[Gunsmith86]

Could some of the experts in this threat explain why the second bomb bay is never mentioned in the manual for the H-6 while it is mentioned in all manuals for HE111 P versions, and in the manuals for HE111 H1-H5 and also in all manuals for HE111 H11 and later? The only time its not mentioned and explained in detail is in all manuals for the HE111 H6 in all other versions the second bomb bay is listed as loadout. So what is your explaination why they removed this information in the H6 manual?

[Yogiflight]

Seems like the H6 was the longrange version of the Heinkel, like the 'Dackelbauch'- Version was for the Bf110.

[Gunsmith86]

Thats one reason the other is that most new weapons needed more place than the bomb bay had and they were often heavier than 250kg so one bomb bay and one larger mounting for heavier weapons and greater range was better at that time. The range was needed over england and russia were they would often fly more than one mission before they would refule the aircraft.

[Gunsmith86]

If you want more options for the HE111 H6 you should ask for the BSB 700, smokebombs, AB bomb containers and suppliebombs

Edited November 15, 2016 by Gunsmith86

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Could some of the experts in this threat explain why the second bomb bay is never mentioned in the manual for the H-6 while it is mentioned in all manuals for HE111 P versions, and in the manuals for HE111 H1-H5 and also in all manuals for HE111 H11 and later? The only time its not mentioned and explained in detail is in all manuals for the HE111 H6 in all other versions the second bomb bay is listed as loadout. So what is your explaination why they removed this information in the H6 manual?

 

It is simple and you don´t need an expert, just some reasoning capacity to see the obvious: not in the manual does not mean impossible. 

 

They designed the H6 to be a torpedo bomber, that´s why the extra tank for extra range in the sea.

But what actually happened was the H6 also being delivered to regular bomber units and getting that fuel tank removed for extra bomb payload because some bomber squads were not in a ship strike or long range strategic bombing scenario. Just tactical targets missions like in Russia, or any other place where bigger payloads were more important than range.

 

Not bothering going through all the bureaucracy to change a current plane's manual to modify a default factory configuration to meet front line needs was not necessary. Especially if you only needed three guys and a screwdriver to solve the issue. It was simple like that. 

 

 

Primarily H6 should means just two torpedos  and lots of fuel, but it wasn´t just like that. That is why every version of the 111 has bomb bays mods on manual and H6 doesn´t. 

 

They correct later 111 versions manuals to have all possible configurations available and official.

Just another example of how front line reality was beyond manual makers mind sitting in a office back in Berlin. 

 

 

 

If you want more options for the HE111 H6 you should ask for the BSB 700, smokebombs, AB bomb containers and suppliebombs

That would be nice !!

 

It is on my list along with torpedos for the H6. But not now, just when we come back to Europe or Africa after Pacific.

 

Right now when talking about 111 is just about turrets, turrrets, turrets, torpedos, torpedos, torpedos, Zs, Zs and Zs   

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[PapaFlo]

OK, I think Gielow is right about the removable internal fuel tank.

I just checked my source #1 on HE 111 - HEINKEL He 111 An Illustrated History by Robert Foryth (amazon link) - and found this little passage about the H-6 Version:

 

(page 179)

 

Having a extended internal loadout would be fine, especially because we really seldom need full fuel-loads on the existing maps.

 

Flo

Edited November 15, 2016 by papaflo

[LukeFF]

It is simple and you don´t need an expert, just some reasoning capacity to see the obvious: not in the manual does not mean impossible.

 

If it was so simple as you say ("three guys and a screwdriver"), then showing some documented proof (i.e., wartime records, crewmember anecdotes) of frontline units equipped with H-6s actually modifying their planes to increase the bomb load should not be a problem. Posting modern-day museum photos (of a Spanish CASA plane, no less) and an excerpt from an English-language book (i.e., a secondary resource) does not satisfy the burden of proof. 

Edited November 15, 2016 by LukeFF

[Gunsmith86]

1) The He 111 H6 was never designed to be a torpedobomber in fact Hitler ordered to stop production of all aircraft torpedos on 28.11.1939 because he beliefed them to be not effective after some test earlier showed very poor performance.

2) It would have been a waste of time to produce the HE 111 H6 as torpedobomber because the torpedos available at that time could only be droped at max. 210 Km/h at a hight of just 20-35m which is to slow for the HE 111 H6

3) You can well remove the tank inside with screwdriver but you cant build in the bomb bay without the fixed points and  mechanically operated parts that are missing on the airframe.

4) the pictures you show are from the Casa 2.111 the spanish copie of the HE 111 H-16 which we all now could carry the second bomb bay so no wonder that they can remove the tank easy because its documented well in the manual of the HE111 H16

5) The only planes that were able to use torpedos earlier than september 1941 was the HE 59 and HE 115 both designed to be used as torpedobomber. Hitler changed his decision later after HE 115 torpedobomber destroyed 124000 t of allied shipping until the end of 1940 therby useing up nearly all avialable torpedos so when 3/KG26 stared to train as torpedoflyers they had only 6 torpedos left and when they got their first HE 111 H5 and H6 airplanes and were told to attack ships they reported that they could not do that because the airframe has to be modified to be able to use the improved F5b torpedos the only type they could drop from there HE 111 at 250 Km/h max speed whitout destroying them on impact with the water. To modify them they had to fly them back to germany were they were altered to be useable as torpedobomber. So if the HE 111 H6 was like you claim designed to be used as a torpedobomber in the first place whould it not be at least be necessary to build it from the start so that you just have to change parts to use it as torpedobomber?

 

 

When you write things please check if what you write is true or ask people who know more about it before posting.

 

[Dakpilot]

How do you arm/set drop patterns for the bombs in the internal bays of H6 I imagine there would be a lot of electrical work to be done (if that is the case) unless the 'fuel tank bay' was permanently wired from the factory, also if this was the case (fuel tank removal ) did each aircraft have a set of extra hardware for carrying and dropping bombs ?

 

This does not seem to be such a straightforward (three men and a screwdriver) 'field mod' as some are suggesting

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

It seems we got the police thought control in formation again taking turns on its coordinated attacks.

 

 

 

If it was so simple as you say ("three guys and a screwdriver"), then showing some documented proof (i.e., wartime records, crewmember anecdotes) of frontline units equipped with H-6s actually modifying their planes to increase the bomb load should not be a problem. Posting modern-day museum photos (of a Spanish CASA plane, no less) and an excerpt from an English-language book (i.e., a secondary resource) does not satisfy the burden of proof.

The your wrong book, my right book argument again. Two different wrong books so far.

Everyone here on this forum knows you got no credibility because you will defend the game no matter what because your friendship with Jason. I defend the game trying to making it better.

I just used that picture because it was in color and internal bomb bay never changed from 250kg or 50kg bombs configuration.


You lost this 111 dispute.
 

1) The He 111 H6 was never designed to be a torpedobomber in fact Hitler ordered to stop production of all aircraft torpedos on 28.11.1939 because he beliefed them to be not effective after some test earlier showed very poor performance.
2) It would have been a waste of time to produce the HE 111 H6 as torpedobomber because the torpedos available at that time could only be droped at max. 210 Km/h at a hight of just 20-35m which is to slow for the HE 111 H6
3) You can well remove the tank inside with screwdriver but you cant build in the bomb bay without the fixed points and mechanically operated parts that are missing on the airframe.
4) the pictures you show are from the Casa 2.111 the spanish copie of the HE 111 H-16 which we all now could carry the second bomb bay so no wonder that they can remove the tank easy because its documented well in the manual of the HE111 H16
5) The only planes that were able to use torpedos earlier than september 1941 was the HE 59 and HE 115 both designed to be used as torpedobomber. Hitler changed his decision later after HE 115 torpedobomber destroyed 124000 t of allied shipping until the end of 1940 therby useing up nearly all avialable torpedos so when 3/KG26 stared to train as torpedoflyers they had only 6 torpedos left and when they got their first HE 111 H5 and H6 airplanes and were told to attack ships they reported that they could not do that because the airframe has to be modified to be able to use the improved F5b torpedos the only type they could drop from there HE 111 at 250 Km/h max speed whitout destroying them on impact with the water. To modify them they had to fly them back to germany were they were altered to be useable as torpedobomber. So if the HE 111 H6 was like you claim designed to be used as a torpedobomber in the first place whould it not be at least be necessary to build it from the start so that you just have to change parts to use it as torpedobomber?


When you write things please check if what you write is true or ask people who know more about it before posting.

It is only your opinion. All books says it was designed to be used as a torpedo bomber. Keep working hard moderating the forum, maybe you can get a tester position as reward later.

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

How do you arm/set drop patterns for the bombs in the internal bays of H6 I imagine there would be a lot of electrical work to be done (if that is the case) unless the 'fuel tank bay' was permanently wired from the factory, also if this was the case (fuel tank removal ) did each aircraft have a set of extra hardware for carrying and dropping bombs ?

 

This does not seem to be such a straightforward (three men and a screwdriver) 'field mod' as some are suggesting

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Three man, a screw driver and an electric socket. German engineering !!!

 

This kind of comment really makes me laugh. It only can come from someone that never been close to a real airplane before and knows nothing about maintenance and ergonomics. 

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[Gunsmith86]

Well Gielow i didn´t write this for you i wrote it for all the other people here in the forum so they can build there owne view about what was possible and what was not.

 

Some books they find proberbly usefull for that:

 

1) Friedrich Lauck: Der Lufttorpedo 1915-1945

2) HE 111 manuals you can buy them here: http://www.luftfahrt-archiv-hafner.de/

or here: http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/web/new%20site/frames2/Dokumente.htm

 

3) https://www.amazon.com/Heinkel-He-111-Illustrated-History/dp/190653747X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479237182&sr=8-1&keywords=HE+111

4) William Green: Warplanes of the third Reich        page: 297

Edited November 15, 2016 by Gunsmith86

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

My list is bigger: 

 

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Heinkel+111

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[PapaFlo]

3) https://www.amazon.c...keywords=HE 111

 

That's the book I mentioned earlier.

 

Here is another part from the same book (page 181)

 

Flo

Edited November 15, 2016 by papaflo

[Dakpilot]

Three man, a screw driver and an electric socket. German engineering !!!

 

This kind of comment really makes me laugh. It only can come from someone that never been close to a real airplane before and knows nothing about maintenance and ergonomics. 

 

Actually I have helped rebuild, flown and operated a few 4 engine and 2 engine WWII aircraft and a number of engines amongst more modern machinery..

 

Never a German engineered one though, so I bow to your better knowledge   I did not come across an 'electric socket',  I have sometimes used a screwdriver though, not usually when removing fuel tanks, which is usually a royal pain in the behind, even easily removed ferry tanks

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Actually I have helped rebuild, flown and operated a few 4 engine and 2 engine WWII aircraft and a number of engines amongst more modern machinery..

 

Never a German engineered one though, so I bow to your better knowledge   I did not come across an 'electric socket',  I have sometimes used a screwdriver though, not usually when removing fuel tanks, which is usually a royal pain in the behind, even easily removed ferry tanks

 

Cheers Dakpilot

WOW !!!

 

What a resume !!!!!! Everyone is amazed !!!!!!  

 

The old trick of the profissional experience.  It is just like saying I worked on a Spitfire and thus I know everything about 109s. Just like comparing apples and oranges.

 

Any 111 ???

 

No.

 

Cheers Gielow

That's the book I mentioned earlier.

 

Here is another part from the same book (page 181)

 

Flo

 

III./KG26  the famous 111 torpedo bomber squad.

 

 

Waiting for Luke, Dakpilot, Gunsmith apologies.

Edited November 15, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Gielow

[Gunsmith86]

You can apologise later

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LukeFF]

You can apologise later

 

And, that's a wrap, folks.

 

Thank you, Gunsmith, for posting all of those excerpts.

[Gambit21]

I'd give you about 30 up-votes if I could Gunsmith.

Thanks

[PapaFlo]

Thank you Gunsmith for all the info!

But I'm still a little confused.

 

Let's try to sum it up: the internal fuel tank on the port side could be removed, but it was not very common, right?

So both parties have their points and we can have tea and crumpets together.

 

For me, I'm fine with the H6 we have in BOS/BOM. The Heinkel is still my favorite bomber in this sim. Giving it an extra load would be cool but not necessary.

I'm looking forward to the H16 Version - not only because of second bomb bay, but also because of the new defense weaponry and, of course, because of the different cockpit layout.

 

And if one day it will be able to carry torpedoes I will enjoy it even more.

 

Flo

[Dutchvdm]

The H-6 version we have is fine and useful. I think the choice the devs made with it are perfectly acceptable. For the H-16 though it would be nice if we could some extra kit like the DL-131. 

 

Grt M

[Gunsmith86]

Thank you Gunsmith for all the info!

But I'm still a little confused.

 

Let's try to sum it up: the internal fuel tank on the port side could be removed, but it was not very common, right?

So both parties have their points and we can have tea and crumpets together.

 

For me, I'm fine with the H6 we have in BOS/BOM. The Heinkel is still my favorite bomber in this sim. Giving it an extra load would be cool but not necessary.

I'm looking forward to the H16 Version - not only because of second bomb bay, but also because of the new defense weaponry and, of course, because of the different cockpit layout.

 

And if one day it will be able to carry torpedoes I will enjoy it even more.

 

Flo

To sum it up the internal fueltank was not replaceable in the HE111 H6 it could only be changed if it was damaged.

 

HE111 P and H1-5 could use two bomb bays.

I will post more about this option later today

 

later HE111 H11 or higher could use two bomb bays or one bomb bay and one internal fueltank.

Will post more about that later.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

To sum it up the internal fueltank was not replaceable in the HE111 H6 it could only be changed if it was damaged.

Thx for the info so far but frankly it doesn't cover the main question, which is ''Could the additional fueltank of the H6 be exchanged for a ESAC250?''

 

I'm interested in what you can find out about it since technicly it does seem feasible (given no bigger external bombs are carried unlike what Rüstsatz B proposes).

Edited November 16, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Finkeren]

Thx for the info so far but frankly it doesn't cover the main question, which is ''Could the additional fueltank of the H6 be exchanged for a ESAC250?''

 

I'm interested in what you can find out about it since technicly it does seem feasible (given no bigger external bombs are carries unlike what Rüstsatz B proposes).

 

I'd say we shouldn't concern ourselves with what is technically possible, but only what was actually done historically, and unless someone can produce evidence, that this conversion was in fact done on more than just a couple of occasions, then I think the H6 is fine as it is.

[Gunsmith86]

Thx for the info so far but frankly it doesn't cover the main question, which is ''Could the additional fueltank of the H6 be exchanged for a ESAC250?''

 

I'm interested in what you can find out about it since technicly it does seem feasible (given no bigger external bombs are carries unlike what Rüstsatz B proposes).

No that was not possible on the H6.

I will post more about the other versions later today. I dont now the exact reasons now why they made the H6 without option for the second bomb bay but most likely the earlier H-versions could not fit a internal fueltank. If thats the case than they desided to remove one bomb bay for the H6 and add a fixed fueltank and use one hardpoint to carry the same bombload like the earlier HE 111 versions. When they later designed the next version of the HE 111 they desided to make the fueltank optional which incrased the capabilities of the HE 111

 

EDIT:

Ok the change for the second bomb bay was made with the HE 111 H4 there they removed one bomb bay for the new protected fueltank since than it was no longer possible to use the second bomb bay in all H4, H5 and H6 airplanes. HE 111 H1, H2 and H3 could fit the bomb bay but could not use the internal 835l fueltank.

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2016 by Gunsmith86

[Gunsmith86]

The next HE 111 H11 didn´t use any bomb racks internal only the internal fueltank and a bed for one pilot all bombs were outside and it had some addional equipment for the use of torpedos:

 

The HE 111 H20 has also all bombs outside and could carry inside eigther 8 Parratropers or the internal fueltank. No torpedos with the H20

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Only HE 111 H14 and H16 left which both have the option for the second bomb bay or the internal fueltank

 

 

Edited November 16, 2016 by Gunsmith86

[LukeFF]

Very good info Gunsmith, appreciate you sharing it! 

[216th_Peterla]

Quite interesting. Thanks.

[Falco_Peregrinus]

The 13mm gun turret seems really cool, never ever saw it before on a He.111.