Talk:Heinkel He 177

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Germany Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): German military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Aircraft WikiProject

Contents 1 Dive Bombing 2 England Raid 3 B29 engine reliability statement 4 Heinkel, Hitler and the bomb? 5 This could become a GA 6 4 engine

[edit] Dive Bombing

Why is dive-bombing impossible with four engines? Should be explained in the article, if true. MadMaxDog 10:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I've always wondered about that myself, but I have never found any explanation. Also, the "dive" we're talking about here is fairly shallow, similar to the Ju 88, maybe 20 degrees or so. Maury 12:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Dive bombing wasn't the reason for the coupled engines - they were planned by the Günther Brothers, the aircrafts designers to reduce drag in order to meet the demanding speed and range requirements. The dive bombing requirement - which according to Alfred Price in his International Air Power Review article was a 60 degree angle, was added laterNigel Ish (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] England Raid

When did the mentioned raid on England take place? Drutt 05:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

AFAIR during Operation Steinbock. --Denniss 11:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] B29 engine reliability statement

"leading to a history of engine failures not unlike that of the failed Manchester or that of the B-29, which had most of its defensive armament removed in order to lighten the burden on its engines and thus improve reliability.".

Thats incorrect. The B29's had their machine guns removed as a result in a change in tactics, not becuase of an attempt to reduce the strain on the engines. Once the B29's were used for night bombing, there was little need for the guns and gunners. If the bomber was going to be used for day missions, the guns were reinstalled.

[edit] Heinkel, Hitler and the bomb?

German article says

"Eine im Mai 1945 auf dem Flugplatz Prag-Kbély von den Alliierten vorgefundene, noch im Umbau befindliche He 177 erwies sich als Versuchsflugzeug für den vergrößerten Bombenschacht des geplanten, aber noch nicht fertig gestellten ersten deutschen Atombomben-Trägerflugzeugs (die entsprechende Bombe dazu kam jedoch in Deutschland bis zur Kapitulation im Gegensatz zu den USA nicht über das Planungsstadium hinaus)."

that in May 1945 at Prague-Kbély a He 177 was found which had an enlarged bomb door to test this part of the planned airplane that should carry Hitlers Bombe which was in planning stage, too. No reference provided, though. [1] -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       19:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Reference to the modified He 177 in German Aircraft of the Second World War by J R Smith and Antony L Kay, p286-287, which refers to He 177 v38 being modified by Letov with an enlarged bomb bay to carry Germany's Atomic bomb, work starting in 1942 and being supended in August 1944.Nigel Ish (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This could become a GA

Almost a B-class, but doesn't have references, could probably be a GA if inline citations were added. --Colputt 23:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 4 engine

In fact, it is a 4 engine bomber —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.177.70.123 (talk) 21:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Four engined twin prop. might be the best description . (Msrasnw (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC))

Its an aircraft powered by 4 power units (Daimler-Benz DB 601s) BUT the DBs are coupled together to form two power units driving two (2) propellers hence twin engined. Think of it this way: Lets say that both the left and right engines needed to be replaced or removed from the aircraft for maintenence. The maintenence personel get the cranes and screwdrivers (lol) and remove the left and right engines from the aircraft and place them on the ground. How many engines do you think will be on the ground: 4 engines or 2 engines? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.182.165.95 (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Trying to describe the engines as either two OR 4 is simplistic and slightly-erroneaous. According to the text itself, the "DB 606 engine" coupled 2 DB 601, and the DB 610 coupled 2 DB 605s. Thus each installation was treated as a single engine, but consisted of two coulpled engines. Were these individual engines useable in there own installations as-is? Probably not, as it seems they shared accessory components. Also, how many throttles were in the cockpit - 2 or 4? Was it possible to shut down one of the coupled engines and keep the other one running? THe text doenst say, but using one designation for both engines implies that this was probably not possible. So it all depends on how you look at it. So no one is wrong - but no one is exactly right either! It's probably best not to even try to describe this in the Lead paragraph, esp since the first paragraph in the next section explaines it all. - BillCJ (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Got rid of references to engine numbers in opening paragraph to avoid annoyance and the problems with contradiction with having "twin engined" and then "twin engines in each nacelle driving..." Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC))