Heinkel He 119

[Rickshaw]

The Heinkel He119 was a very advanced project for its day. It embodied many advanced concepts, such as surface evaporation cooling, coupled engines, a very clean airframe and an excellent turn of speed. The Japanese were also very interested in building a version of it. Does anybody have any more information on it? Such as its proprosed Japanese designation?

 

[Bodmas]

Try:
Tony Wood & Bill Gunston (1977; 3rd impression, 1979)
Hitler's Luftwaffe
Salamander Books, UK
[ISBN 0-86101-005-1]

(p. 187)
Where it states that the V7 & V8 prototypes were sold to Japan. I have no clues as to whether or not there was a specific Japanese model designaion or indigenously designed version planned

 

[lark]

The Heinkel He-119 principle was used by Yokosuka
in their RY1 Keiun (end 1944)

 

[Justo Miranda]

Keiun drawings here

 

[Justo Miranda]

Keiun fossil page Post-1

 

[Justo Miranda]

Keiun fossil page Post-2

 

[Justo Miranda]

Keiun fossil page Post-3

 

[blackkite]

I can't find any more information for imported two He119s in Japanese site.
The JAA Aviation Heritage Archive was established in 2004, but perhaps all information for He119 were burned out followed by Japanese Imperial Navy's order.

http://www.aero.or.jp/english.html

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Daimler-Benz+DB+606

 

[lkanai]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8754

 

[Stargazer]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8754

and?

 

[Merv_P]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8754

and?

I'd assume that lkanai is speculating that the ideas from the He119 may have travelled further than this discussion has covered so far. It seems a fair point to make; they are similar, unusual, designs.

 

[Justo Miranda]

P-75 drawings here

 

[Stargazer]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8754

and?

I'd assume that lkanai is speculating that the ideas from the He119 may have travelled further than this discussion has covered so far. It seems a fair point to make; they are similar, unusual, designs.

Well, we all know where the XP-75 stemmed from; nothing to do with either the Heinkel He-119 nor the Yokosuka R2Y Keiun. Some vague ressemblance in canopy aesthetics doe not make for any link between a Japanese reconnaissance aircraft project with origins in an experimental German and an US fighter made of parts from a collection of existing mass-produced aircraft.

 

[Retrofit]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8754

and?

I'd assume that lkanai is speculating that the ideas from the He119 may have travelled further than this discussion has covered so far. It seems a fair point to make; they are similar, unusual, designs.

Well, we all know where the XP-75 stemmed from; nothing to do with either the Heinkel He-119 nor the Yokosuka R2Y Keiun. Some vague ressemblance in canopy aesthetics doe not make for any link between a Japanese reconnaissance aircraft project with origins in an experimental German and an US fighter made of parts from a collection of existing mass-produced aircraft.

NO, we don't ALL know... ;D
Ikanai, thanks for the link.

Cheers,

 

[Stargazer]

Still, posting a link on the XP-75 in an Heinkel He-119 thread on the basis of a vague aesthetic ressemblance is meaningless.
Especially when there are XP-75 threads on the same site.

 

[Merv_P]

Well, we all know where the XP-75 stemmed from; nothing to do with either the Heinkel He-119 nor the Yokosuka R2Y Keiun. Some vague ressemblance in canopy aesthetics doe not make for any link between a Japanese reconnaissance aircraft project with origins in an experimental German and an US fighter made of parts from a collection of existing mass-produced aircraft.

I didn't know either; are there specific threads here which give the background?

Not very encouraging for a new poster, all of this.

 

[Retrofit]

My first post and I'm not certain if it's ok to paste a URL here but the WW2 Fisher P-75 project in the US looks an awful lot like this aircraft.

Indeed, the low wing-setting and the propulsion system selected (rear-mounted engine driving a front propeller via a long transmission shaft) lead to quite similar results. The same can be said about the Piaggio P-119 with its rear-mounted radial!!! engine, dated 1943.
On the contrary, the Koolhoven FK-55, with its shoulder-mounted wing, looks radicaly different, but the first studies were conducted before 1937 (The mock-up was presented at the Paris Air Show 1936).

 

[Pelzig]

For sure, definitely not encouraging. Instead of some guidance, it was more of a ripping.

The common denominator between all of the aircraft mentioned in this thread is the fact they use a fuselage buried engine(s) driving a nose mounted propeller(s) via an extension shaft.

The Japanese purchased the two He 119 aircraft (V7 and V8) but their interest in it was primarily for the powerplant and potential for speed and range. Studies of the He 119 resulted in the Y-40 that evolved into the Kūgishō R2Y1 Keiun.

If anything the Messerschmitt Me 509 was nearly a direct contemporary to the R2Y1 but there has been no link to the Japanese despite the Japanese attempting to obtain the Me 309 in 1943, of which the Me 509 was a more radical variant.

Well, we all know where the XP-75 stemmed from; nothing to do with either the Heinkel He-119 nor the Yokosuka R2Y Keiun. Some vague ressemblance in canopy aesthetics doe not make for any link between a Japanese reconnaissance aircraft project with origins in an experimental German and an US fighter made of parts from a collection of existing mass-produced aircraft.

I didn't know either; are there specific threads here which give the background?

Not very encouraging for a new poster, all of this.

 

[smurf]

Always be polite, especially to new users, even if they ask questions you find irritating. Nobody was born an expert.

It's in the rules.
On a different Forum, where I'm now a moderator, folk were very patient with me when I started posting.

 

[Stargazer]

Always be polite, especially to new users, even if they ask questions you find irritating. Nobody was born an expert.

It's in the rules.
On a different Forum, where I'm now a moderator, folk were very patient with me when I started posting.

Then there should be also a rule to discourage linking anything with everything on the mere ground that it "looks like". They were many projects of the same era with a vague ressemblance to the Yokosuka R2Y (such as Focke-Wulf's Jäger und Jadgbomber mit Jumo 222C/D or Arsenal VB-10, to name just two) and that were totally unrelated.

 

[smurf]

Stargazer, persistent aren't you? Others have pointed out that the P-75 resemblance is possibly a little deeper than mere aesthetic similarity in the canopy, and the post has generated one or two more useful comments.
I'll simply say that to have rules against any and every departure from ideal behaviour that a newcomer might make produces a very large rule book. Some rules are more important than others. One which encourages newcomers is in my view one to uphold, and an apology would have been better than attempted justification.
If you wish to add to the rules, try this:
Before posting criticism, consider: "Is it kind? Is it true? Is it necessary?"

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Its not polite to be overly critical of new posters.

Moderators can move posts or split topics where needed. I'm not enough of an expert in propeller era stuff to judge in this forum section often, but the other moderators here have left it alone. If you feel a post bothers you for whatever reason, you can report it to a moderator for action with your reasoning and it will be considered for action.

 

[Stargazer]

Stargazer, persistent aren't you? Others have pointed out that the P-75 resemblance is possibly a little deeper than mere aesthetic similarity in the canopy, and the post has generated one or two more useful comments.
I'll simply say that to have rules against any and every departure from ideal behaviour that a newcomer might make produces a very large rule book. Some rules are more important than others. One which encourages newcomers is in my view one to uphold, and an apology would have been better than attempted justification.
If you wish to add to the rules, try this:
Before posting criticism, consider: "Is it kind? Is it true? Is it necessary?"

Certainely persistent that no, there is no link whatsoever between the XP-75 and the Yokosuka R2Y, apart from a vague aesthetic similarity and I will not apologise for making it clear. You may try and invent one, but it will still go against facts.

 

[smurf]

It ain't what you say, it's the way that you say it
lets call the whole thing off.

 

[lark]

The main goal of this forum and this department
is to collect interesting information and to share it with others
in a friendly way.

Endless discussions about pro's and con's of a viewpoint
are useless.

Thus let's stay to the point , Unbuilt Projects.

 

[Bodmas]

Dudes, please!
I'm a new poster on this Forum also
and have been pleasantly pleased by how patiently and politely i have been treated by the other contributers. IMHO [IMHO, Opinions are never Humble.That aside...] the XP 75 looks nothing like the He 119 :-\. I have suggested elsewhwere that - indeed - germany and Japan collaborated upon aviation projects; but, to me, the connection between the XP 75 and He 119 seems very strained. Let's not allow this Forum to descend into petty-minded, personal attacks, please. As Lark said above, stick to the point...

 

[Skybolt]

And, as Lark said, that's it.

 

[Stargazer]

Here is a beautiful 3-view arrangement of the He 119 V7 from RAF Flying Review, February 1961:

 

[Cy-27]

A couple of more views of Heinkel He.119 variants:


He.119 V4 - "Rekordflugzeug" - Record attempt aircraft. On 22 November 1937 this aircraft covered Hamburg-Stolp-Hamburg in record time for a 1,000 km distance at an average speed of 504.988 km/h, without a payload.

He.119 V5 - "Schneller Seeaufklärer" - Fast Maritime Reconnaissance and Spotter variant. Maximum speed of 570 km/h at a height of 4,500 m.

Source:
Heinkel - Chronik in typenblätter Der Firma Heinkel-Flugzeugbau
(Heinkel AG Reprint) Aviatic Verlag 1989 ISBN: 3-925505-08-3

 

[dogsbody]

A wet one.

Chris

 

[toura]

hi DOGSBODY
some other

 

[toura]

The cockpit
I don't remenber where I've found this !!!

 

[Pioneer]

Here is a beautiful 3-view arrangement of the He 119 V7 from RAF Flying Review, February 1961:

Yes Stargazer, this is a beautiful 3-view drawing of the 'then' advanced He 119 design!
I've never seen the armed arrangement configuration before - aka the dorsal gun.

Thanks for sharing

Regards
Pioneer

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Enjoy.
V1～V3 : Prototype, V3 : Seaplane, V4 : World speed record breaker, V5～V6 : Reconnaissance type (He 119A), V5 : seaplane, V7～V8 : Bomber type(He 119B, sold to Japan and lost by accident)

 

[blackkite]

Hi! I confuse which was the seaplane V3 or V5?
There is a opinion that record flight aircraft was V1 not V4.
http://www.sekaimon.com/i321048795093
Ther is a opinion supported by German Heinkel expert Volker Koos, that only 4 He-119 were made.
If so, I think that V1 : Record breaker, V2=V7(shipped to Japan), V3=V5(seaplane), V4=V6=V8(shipped to Japan).
Japan received different wing shape He-119s?
http://oldmachinepress.wordpress.com/2012/12/05/heinkel-he-119/

And from wikipedia,
The Heinkel He 519 was a high speed German single-seater bomber designed in 1944 by Heinkel.[1] Based on the Heinkel He 119, a private venture by Heinkel to test radical ideas by the Günter brothers, the He 519 was designed to use the 24-cylinder Daimler-Benz DB 613, but the aircraft remained a concept and was abandoned at the end of the war.

 

[blackkite]

Following pictures shows He-119 V1 and V4. Radiator shape of V1 and V4 are obviously different.
But wing shape of V4 is obviously semi-elliptical not straight. Something strange.
So called record breaker V4 was V1 with modified radiator?
Source : Military Aircraft In Detail Heinkel He110 RECORD BREAKER Erwin Hood. MIDLAND ISBN 978-1-85780-260-3

 

[WJPearce]

Hello blackkite,

I wrote the article (on Old Machine Press) you referred to two posts above. I am not an expert, but I will outline my thoughts on the He 119 identities. I think this is an issue were someone like William Green got it wrong the first time and it has been repeated again and again. But, I could easily be wrong too.

V1 had elliptical wings (leading edge) and what appears to be a landing light in the left wing. The exhaust ports seemed to be angled with each one higher on the fuselage than the one preceding it. The fuselage has no windows or top hatch for the radio operator.

V2 had the same elliptical wings (leading edge) with a landing light in the left wing. The exhaust ports seemed to be straight (but it is hard to tell). The fuselage definitely does have windows and a top hatch for the radio operator.

V3 has (big floats and also) a wing with a straight leading edge and no landing light. The exhaust ports definitely seem to be straight. Like V2, the fuselage definitely does have windows and a top hatch for the radio operator.

D-AUTE, the record plane many believe is V4, has what appears to be elliptical wings (leading edge) with a landing light in the left wing (just like V1 and V2, but not like V3). The exhaust ports seemed to be angled with each one higher on the fuselage than the once proceeding it (just like V1 and possibly V2, but not like V3). The fuselage has no windows or top hatch for the radio operator (just like V1, but not like V2 or V3).

It would seem that D-AUTE possess all the characteristics of V1 (except radiator). It does not possess many of the characteristics (wing, exhaust, radio operator) of V3. It is generally accepted that V4 flew before V3, but can this account for all the V1 similarities and V3 dissimilarities?

And now consider the timeframe. V1 flew in June 1937. Could V1 go through flight testing, V2 and V4 be built with a new radiator, radio operator station, a new wing for V4, V4 be flight tested and made ready for the first record run all by late November? All that in about five months time seems a little tight, especially when you consider that the He 119 was built in secret and only reveled to the authorizes after V1 was flying.

To me, given the time frame and the similarities V1 had with D-AUTE, it seems more likely and makes more sense for V1 to be D-AUTE (the record plane). V1 having five months to go through flight testing and get a new radiator installed seems much more reasonable than two other unique He 119s being built and tested in the same time frame.

But like I said in my article, given the secrecy under which the He 119 was built, the propaganda subterfuge surrounding the record flights, and the destruction of German documents during World War II, the exact aircraft identities as well as the number built may never be definitively known.

Here is what Volker Koos says (from http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,21627.msg342718.html#msg342718)

Quote
In the Flugzeug-Entwicklungsprogramm (FEP, i.e. aircraft development program) of the RLM (1.7.1936) for this reason the He 119 V-1 and V-2 are listed as fast bombers. But it is already said, that this Heinkel aircraft would not be ordered in greater numbers. The FEP of 1.10.1936 gives some more details. Here the He 119 V-1 (Wnr. (c/n) 2402), V-2 (2403) and V-4 (2405) are planned as fast bomber prototypes and the V-3 and V-5 (2404 and 2406) are listed as prototypes for the world flight. At that time also a pre-series of seven fast bombers was planned. Already in January 1937 the number of He 119 prototypes was reduced to three, that should be used for engine-trials. The FEP of 1.4.1937 omitted the idea of the world flight. Only the He 119 SV-1, SV-2 and SV-3 (Wnr. 2402, 2403 and 2405) are listed as engine-testbeds. Later the c/ns were fitted to the row, so that the V-3 became the 2404. (SV means Sonder-Versuch, i.e. a V-machine für special tests).

also,
Quote
After the first flight in June 1937 and the above mentioned record-flight in November, the He 119 V-1 was again prepared for a record-flight, because the first record was beated on December 10 by an Italian Breda 88. During the second record-flight attempt on December 16, 1937 the He 119 SV-1 (Wnr. 2402, D-AUTE) crashed in Travemünde. The accident was caused by a failure in the tank switching. Nitschke suffered hard injuries, Dieterle only a little bit. (In the literature it is always said and copied again and again, that the record machine D-AUTE was the V-4, but that is total nonsense, because at that time only the V-1 was built and flown.)

and:
Quote
The number of the built machines is not exactly known.The RLM gave the export permission after the procurement was rejected. But at Heinkel they tried further to build a bomber on the base of the He 119. The sixth of such projects became the He 119 SV-4. It was planned with the DB 610 (two connected DB 605), a four-bladed airscrew of 4,2 m Diameter, a 3 man-crew (one in a cabin behind the engine) and two 7,9-mm-guns MG 81 and further two 13-mm-guns MG 131 in the cockpit. A further MG 81 was operated by the gunner (third crew-member). The bomb-load of up to 600 kg and another tank of 600 liters ware placed in the fuselage. The planform of the wings was like that of the SV-3 straight not elliptical. The He 119 SV-4 was first flown in May 1940. After seeing the He 119 in Rostock-Marienehe on 1.12.1938 the Japanes Navy ordered two machines. These were delivered in 1941 by ship. Heinkels chief pilot Gerhard Nitschke also travelled to Japan for demonstration of the He 119 and He 100. Both He 119s crashed at landing after short-time testing in Japan. On the base of the He 119 the Japaneses developed the R2Y1 "Keiun" in the flight technical arsenal of the Navy in Yokosuka. Construction leader was Shiro Otsuki. The two He 119s delivered to Japan were with great probabiliy the SV-2 and SV-4. In Japanese Literature the engine of both machines is said to be the DB 606. So it could have been, that the SV-4 never had the projected DB 610. (But in Japan often the older and often false German literature is copied too.)

 

[blackkite]

Wow great WJPearce! Many thanks for sharing us such a detail and precious information. We were waiting for your post.

 

[DanF]

@WJPearce,

I saw your Old Machine Press post and was impressed. I have an interest in the He-119 based on its historical significance and the impact it had on subsequent Heinkel designs: Coupled DB engines, engines mounted to forward face of main wing spar without a firewall, evaporative cooling, and several other features. I have come to the same conclusion that Heinkel's use of "Versuchs" numbers and production figures are suspicious, and I think the company had a policy of rebuilding early airframes and then assigning them new V numbers and Stammkennzeichen codes from further down the list of possible assigned codes for the type, making it look like greater numbers were built than actually were. For instance, I suspect the He-100 that Udet flew to a closed course record was actually the V-1 after being rebuilt with a larger vertical stabilizer and other changes.

The reason for my post is to inquire whether you have encounterd any photos of the supposed He-119 "V4" or any other land based He-119 with the re-designed straight taper wing. I cannot find even one. As you have correctly noted, there are many photos described as showing the V-4, but they all have the "early" wing. the V-3 float plane clearly has the later wing. My suspicion here is that only three He-119s may have been built with V1 and V2 ultimately going to Japan. That would explain why there are no photos of any He-119 sitting around Heinkel factory airfields. There is a famous aerial photo of the Rostock facility showing an He-170, several He-115, several He-100, He-111 and even what appears to be an He-177 prototype, as well as a flock of sheep. It seems odd to me there was no He-119 in the shot.

 

[WJPearce]

Hello DanF,

Thank you for the kind words. Like you, I have never seen a photo of a land based He 119 with the redesigned wing. Therefore, I can not say with certainty that I have ever seen a photo of V4. As I mentioned, the photos of D-AUTE always look like an original wing and other characteristics.

I think your suspicion that there were only three prototypes is possible. It could also explain the V1 vs V4 confusion; perhaps they were the same aircraft.

(Sorry of this gets a little crazy here…)
If D-AUTE is indeed V1 (as I believe) and if there was no V4 (as you believe) and if two He 119s were shipped to Japan (and not just one), then D-AUTE would have been rebuilt after the crash. D-AUTE’s wings took most of the damage during the crash landing. I suppose the V1 (D-AUTE) could have been rebuilt with the redesigned wing and then either called V4 by Heinkel or mistakenly called V4 by everyone else. This could also explain why many believe V4 flew the record flights. If V4 is the rebuilt V1 (D-AUTE), then technically V-4 did make the record flights, albeit before it was known as V4.

It is all very confusing. It has always bothered me that there are no photos of a supposed V4 that clearly show the redesigned wing. Maybe someday the truth will be known. At least we are not calling it the He 606 or He 111U.

Regards,