Following my research on weapons I came across this.
First source:
From this book:
Second source:
From this book:
Third source:
From this book:
Fourth source:
From this book:
Ticket :
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/nzAhSAxPD456
I have included 4 secondary sources from 4 different books.
I think the WT team will be able to make this change now.
the original report is for the MG 151/15, not MG FF, and is based on primary sources. The secondary sources seem erroneous in this regard
Are the 4 sources wrong then?
I find it difficult.
It could always be that they are all based on one another.
The primary documents make no mention of the MG FF after 1936
And in 1939, 15 MG 151 were delivered for the 0-series models, the only model apart from the V-series prototypes. An 1-series was planned, but they were scrapped at around 10% completion
Now I got more confused.
Because this channel is famous for doing extensive research before releasing its videos. And it also talks about a MG/FF
I found another source stating that it was MG/FF.
With this, there are already 5 sources.
From this book:
If all of your primary and 2ndary sources state it is meant to be MG/FF’s in the nose then it’s meant to be MG/FF’s besides that you really should just be making a report of this. Not just a thread however to give credit where its due :Good Job :D
Can you help me with this?
I’m Brazilian, and English is not my native language.
Well thats the issue, the secondary sources ALL say MG FF, but the primary sources say MG 151
It clearly wasnt an MG 17 though, that I agree on
Well is it possible there were 2 He-100D-1’s? Ones that used the MG FF and ones that used the MG-151s? since there is a possibility. It would also explain why secondary sources are all saying MG FF’s and primaries are saying MG-151’s.
the “D-1” never existed at all. There was only the V- designated prototypes and the 0-Serie preproduction models.
From my reading the preproduction models were all equipped with MG 151
On the other hand, the Japanese documents in the original report do make mention of an Oerlikon motor cannon, this likely being the MG FF
I assume that the Japanese export aircraft were equipped with MG FF as the MG 151 was still only in preproduction, and this was then used in the secondary literature for the German models as well
I see…I’m going to keep a grain of salt. Since i wouldn’t know.
Sources:
https://www.amazon.com/Warplanes-Third-Reich-William-Green/dp/0883656663
https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Luftwaffe-Pictorial-Technical-Encyclopedia/dp/B000WAOUBI
https://www.amazon.com/German-aircraft-Second-World-War/dp/0851778364
Several prototype He 100 V series aircraft were sold to the Soviet Union, but according to Soviet documents, these did not have cannons installed in their noses. The Japanese Navy purchased pre-production models of the He 100 D-0 and MG 151 and conducted comparison tests with the Mitsubishi A6M2 to consider license production as interceptors for anti-bomber missions. The agreement was that the He 100 D-0 would be shipped from Germany to Japan first, and the MG 151 would be shipped later. It was called the Heinkel AXHe1 Model 100 High-Speed Fighter in Japan.
Dogfight
If both pilots are passive, the large speed difference means the battle remains undecided. If both are aggressive, the A6M2 wins. If the target is flying at speeds over 500 km/h, the He 100 D-0, with a top speed of 650 km/h, has the advantage. The He 100 D-0 is an interceptor designed for anti-bomber missions. In a dogfight with the A6M2, it cannot escape unless it has a speed difference of over 45 km/h. Sacrificing turn performance for a slight speed advantage is worthless.
Flight stability
The He 100 D-0 stalls abruptly, has overly sensitive elevators, heavy rudders, and lacks pitch balance at high speeds, making it feel dangerous to fly. This aircraft feels incomplete even as an anti-bomber interceptor. The A6M2 has no issues with stability in handling.
Performance Comparison of A6M2 and He 100 D-0 (Report dated February 14, 1941)
Aireview’s German Military Aircraft The Second World War. Compiled by Aviation Information. Publisher: Kantosha. 1965. pp.71-72
Zero Fighter: A Brief History of Japanese Naval Aviation, Revised Edition. by Jiro Horikoshi and Masatake Okumiya. 1954. pp. 136-137
Japanese Military Aircraft Three-View Drawings Collection [Vol. 2] (Navy Aircraft Edition). by Shiro Ogihara and Minoru Akimoto. 1962. p. 162
https://www.jacar.archives.go.jp/das/meta-en/A10113471500
“The matter of the decoration of German ‘Heinkel’ aircraft company’s chief test pilot ‘Gerhard Nitschke’.” 1943. The Government of the Empire of Japan
Ernest Udet also said something similar about the He-100
seems a good idead to give it a 20mm and move it up
Well, to this day I don’t know why Gaijin didn’t add the 20mm MG FF cannon to the Heinkel He 100, since the three fighters were tested with the 20mm MG FF cannon, they were the prototypes He 100 V-7, He 100 V-9 and Pre-production which is also in the game.
The Heinkel He 100 also has one of the best performances among the game’s early fighters. Gaijin, by putting in decent armament, could even compete at Tier 3 in BR 4.0. If you compare its performance with the BFs, it can even outperform some early Tier 3 BFs. But for that, Gaijin will have to actually put in its test armament, which was its 20mm MG FF cannon, the same one used on the He-112 B-0.
It sounds crazy, but it’s not. The Heinkel He 100 has excellent performance and is being wasted in the game. The Heinkel He 100 at Tier 1 is one of the best fighters.
