Mossie nf vs He 219 nf

Erich · 01-03-2007, 11:08 AM

the A-7 was never operational of the Uhu. Also the G-7b of the Ju 88 never existed. only I./NJG 1 had the UHU on ops and I have the docs to prove it, also a book will be coming out shortly thought there are twangs right now for NJGr 10.

My own work on Mossie hunters will show why the Uhu was rejected with only 12 Mossies claimed by the Uhu in NJG 1.

go back and check the archivs of these forums and you will find my responses over the years.

the Uhu was not favoured and produced in a number of test pieces with overarms. NJG 1 pulled the heavy forward 30mm's off and kept the 4 forward 2cm's as standard in most cases and this according to I./NJG 1 log books

abhiginimav · 01-03-2007, 11:56 AM

Cheddar Cheese, if u read this then jus wanted to say....I LOVE THE MOSSIE! it looks great and was a hell of a beast. Im not saying that cuz im british, becasue i think that the Halifax bomber looks UGLAY! im saying that cuz the Mossie was plain beautiful!!

lesofprimus · 01-03-2007, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abhiginimav

Indian Air Force + Royal Air force -The Best airforces in the world

That was seriously like the gayest signature ever put up here dude....

And completely inaccurate to boot....

As far as the topic goes, I have come to the same conclusions as Erich concerning the Uhu.... It was not well recieved by the majority of pilots....

And for the record, those little "stats" u posted up there from the internet dont mean squat... Most of the internet garbage is recycled misinformation, and most of the time, completely wrong...

And besides the point, stats dont prove the better aircraft, the pilot does...

lesofprimus · 01-03-2007, 06:47 PM

Alot of Ands huh??

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-04-2007, 04:18 AM

Gotta go with Erich and Les on this.

As for Ju-88 or Uhu, Id take a Ju-88 anyday.

Guchi · 01-04-2007, 03:40 PM

lesofprimus, you and Erich keep saying that the uhu was not well recieved by the pilots, and I have no contention with that. All I'd like to know is that how do you know? (i.e. where have you read / heard / seen it). I truly like to know, just for my own education. Because in what I've read, It says taht the uhu was liked by those who flew it although they did have initial trepidition as it was a new weapon with quite a few novelties...

Erich · 01-04-2007, 04:33 PM

will be revealed in the NJGr 10 war diaries when published and also if NJG3 veteran accts become available. I'd personally like to know with the latest A-5's and A-7's sitting on the fields why was the Ju 88G-6 preferred and the Uhu allowed to sit collecting dust and the looks of Allied escort fighters on strafing runs.

One RK winner in III./NJG 1 and I will have to confirm that or II./NJG 1 took an A-0 and flew it several missions making 2 kills but still went back to the Bf 110G-4 and some flights on the Ju 88G-6.

the lack of another pair of eyes in the cockpit was crucial during 1945, besides no rear gunner and yes it was strategic in case of Allied night fighters. Any type of deterent in 45 was necessary.......... an important case in point was the several instances of cockpit canopy failure on the ejection of pilots during emergencies, the poor crewmen were blown through the glass and killed. Also the attitude that the crew sat too far forward of the engine props, another nasty case of bail out and hopeful you wouldn't be chopped up......

dang haven't I said all this before in earlier threads ? hopefully the I./NJG 1 war diary will all come available and then the fluidness of the accts by the crews from their mouths will be understood once and for all, an none of this B.S. on the internet making the Uhu the king of German craft at night

Udet · 01-04-2007, 04:42 PM

Before becoming a member, also i was used to read the He 219 "Uhu" made a fearsome night fighter. I can find comments in that direction in about every account i have had the chance of reading.

But that is one the reasons i enjoy discussing and reading here; after Erich, is that i learned further about the Uhu and its potential.

We know the kind of source Erich is, so i am grateful i learned from someone like him that the "generally accepted" accounts regarding the performance of the Uhu are flat wrong. Thanks mate!

Denniss · 01-04-2007, 05:01 PM

Why was the A-7 not operational ? It is thought to be in production from 12/1944 onwards.
How many A-5 have really been built except from prototypes ?

Erich · 01-04-2007, 05:11 PM

A-5's and A-7's were committed to I./NJG 1 but did not fly on ops but left on the fields. A-0's and A-2's especially are listed in loss reports up through wars end in spring of 45. why not A-5 or A-7's ?

this thing is getting stretched to the limits

Udet · 01-05-2007, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lesofprimus

That was seriously like the gayest signature ever put up here dude....

And completely inaccurate to boot....

As far as the topic goes, I have come to the same conclusions as Erich concerning the Uhu.... It was not well recieved by the majority of pilots....

And for the record, those little "stats" u posted up there from the internet dont mean squat... Most of the internet garbage is recycled misinformation, and most of the time, completely wrong...

And besides the point, stats dont prove the better aircraft, the pilot does...

Very nicely put Primus!!!

Denniss · 01-05-2007, 10:16 PM

What was the problem with A-7s ?
Too heavy or engine reliability problems ?
It sounds somewhat strange they did not use the newer version with more powerful DB 603E engines. Or was the extra power not needed in case of a different mission profile? Maybe the DB 603AA was enough (as installed in A-2 and maybe retrofitted to A-0)