He-219 ”Uhu”s found at the end of the war

[INM@RLM]

In response to post #27 (only because the point has been introduced to this thread)

Ron Ferguson did indeed table on p.38 of his latest that EHFWien delivered fifteen He 219 A-2s with the Werk-Nummern of 420319 to 333, as well as five D-1s assigned WNr. 420371 to 375.

However both statements are unsafe, since WNr. 420325 was actually delivered as a standard He 219 D-1. This is clear from the wording on page 4 of the FIU Report (No.53 dated 8th Aug 1945 produced by Number 1 Field Intelligence Unit (Austria) and found in the UK NA within AIR 23/6369)
“Among the documentary evidence found were two files concerning the manufacturing history of two He 219’s, numbers 430325 and 430326, for which the internal works numbers were 113 and 114. Apart from showing the many defects discovered at the inspection, these files show that No. 113 had Jumo 213 engines and methanol/water injection, and was fitted with FuG 220. Number 114 had DB603AA engines, but also many troubles.” There is nothing here to indicate that 430325 was anything other than a standard series production machine fitted with Jumo 213Es and so by definition a He 219 D-1.
(Ron quotes these same words on p.86 but then manages to confuse this aircraft numbered 430325 with A-2 WNr. 420323 independently documented as the He 219 V41 Versuchsträger für Jumo 213 E in the V-Muster Industrie Lieferplan sheet dated 02-Jan-45 [see FD 61/46 at IWM Duxford which was also seen by Ron as noted on p.92 in note 2].) One has to ask then how likely would it be that the manufacturing file for an individual aircraft found at Schwechat by the FIU would make no mention whatsoever that this airframe had been selected as a Versuchsmaschine, when all other references to He 219 V-Muster examples were carefully documented throughout this FIU report?

The other points that somehow got overlooked here were that:
1. Lieferplan 227/1 of 15-Dec-44 showed that EHFWien had delivered a total of just 11 He 219 A-2 by the close of 30-Nov-44 with no more to follow. (See BA-MA RL 3/1045.)
2. This total of just 11 A-2 from Wien-Schwechat is supported precisely by the monthly quantities of neubau aircraft deliveries (in this period this report series was titled Beiträge zur Beschaffungsmeldung). (See RLM 1435 for the relevant months on US NARA Microfilm T177-42)
The detailed split of EHFW A-2 deliveries given there is:
Sep-44 = 5
Oct-44 = 3
Nov-44 = 3
Total = 11
3. Separately, the eleven individual EHFW He 219 A-2 identities along with at least two of the D-1s have each been independently corroborated subsequently.

In conclusion then, it is clear that EHFWien deliveries of neither of these two sub-types were assigned Werk-Nummern running in a single complete consecutive sequence.

[David E. Brown]

Thanks for the corrections and clarifications Gents.

David

[richdlc]

Originally Posted by INM@RLM

In response to post #27 (only because the point has been introduced to this thread)

Ron Ferguson did indeed table on p.38 of his latest that EHFWien delivered fifteen He 219 A-2s with the Werk-Nummern of 420319 to 333, as well as five D-1s assigned WNr. 420371 to 375.

However both statements are unsafe, since WNr. 420325 was actually delivered as a standard He 219 D-1. This is clear from the wording on page 4 of the FIU Report (No.53 dated 8th Aug 1945 produced by Number 1 Field Intelligence Unit (Austria) and found in the UK NA within AIR 23/6369)
“Among the documentary evidence found were two files concerning the manufacturing history of two He 219’s, numbers 430325 and 430326, for which the internal works numbers were 113 and 114. Apart from showing the many defects discovered at the inspection, these files show that No. 113 had Jumo 213 engines and methanol/water injection, and was fitted with FuG 220. Number 114 had DB603AA engines, but also many troubles.” There is nothing here to indicate that 430325 was anything other than a standard series production machine fitted with Jumo 213Es and so by definition a He 219 D-1.
(Ron quotes these same words on p.86 but then manages to confuse this aircraft numbered 430325 with A-2 WNr. 420323 independently documented as the He 219 V41 Versuchsträger für Jumo 213 E in the V-Muster Industrie Lieferplan sheet dated 02-Jan-45 [see FD 61/46 at IWM Duxford which was also seen by Ron as noted on p.92 in note 2].) One has to ask then how likely would it be that the manufacturing file for an individual aircraft found at Schwechat by the FIU would make no mention whatsoever that this airframe had been selected as a Versuchsmaschine, when all other references to He 219 V-Muster examples were carefully documented throughout this FIU report?

The other points that somehow got overlooked here were that:
1. Lieferplan 227/1 of 15-Dec-44 showed that EHFWien had delivered a total of just 11 He 219 A-2 by the close of 30-Nov-44 with no more to follow. (See BA-MA RL 3/1045.)
2. This total of just 11 A-2 from Wien-Schwechat is supported precisely by the monthly quantities of neubau aircraft deliveries (in this period this report series was titled Beiträge zur Beschaffungsmeldung). (See RLM 1435 for the relevant months on US NARA Microfilm T177-42)
The detailed split of EHFW A-2 deliveries given there is:
Sep-44 = 5
Oct-44 = 3
Nov-44 = 3
Total = 11
3. Separately, the eleven individual EHFW He 219 A-2 identities along with at least two of the D-1s have each been independently corroborated subsequently.

In conclusion then, it is clear that EHFWien deliveries of neither of these two sub-types were assigned Werk-Nummern running in a single complete consecutive sequence.

thanks and noted

[INM@RLM]

Most welcome.

[he219research]

INM@RLM: Indeed, thank you for this information!

So, just to be clear (as much as is possible, that is...): 420323 was actually V41 and serving as the testbed for the Jumo 213E powered D-1, while 420325 was a standard production D-1.

In Ferguson's latest book he writes (on p56) that "the He 219 V41 entered front-line service in February 1945 and was lost in combat the following month."

On p86 & p167 he further writes that the V41 entered front-line combat operations on the night of 21-22 February 1945. Marked G9+BL and assigned to 3./NJG1 it was flown by the Staffelkapitän Oblt. Heinz Oloff & Fw. Helmut Fischer.

And, finally, on p171-172 he writes that V41 was shot down on the night of 20-21 March 1945.

All this above thus actually refer to 420323, correct?

In addition, there are other references of 420372 being flown on 28 January 1945 by Einflieger Gleuwits & Bordfunker Schöfoel.

Regarding the production of the He 219 D-1, this would give us someting like the below:

420323 V41, marked G9+BL ("prototype" D-1)
420325 standard D-1 (confirmed produced by FIU Report No.53)
420371 standard D-1 (most likely produced as its W-Nr. precede 420372)
420372 standard D-1 (most likely produced according to the reference above of being flown on 28 January 1945)
420373 standard D-1 (possibly produced)
420374 standard D-1 (possibly produced)
420375 standard D-1 (possibly NOT produced)

The above assume the total figure of six D-1 produced is correct.

[he219research]

And, in addition to the previous post, regarding the 11 (of 15 planned) A-2 from Schwechat, this would be the below:

420319
420320 (marked G9+xx, damaged 27 January 1944 at Ludwigslust)
420321
420322 (marked G9+NK, shot down 4 December 1944 @ Ostbevern (near Loddenheide/Telgte))

420324 (marked G9+xx, damaged on landing 6 February 1945 near Münster/Handorf)

420326 (confirmed produced by FIU Report No.53)
420327
420328 (marked G9+OL, craschlanded 19 April 1945 @ Westerland/Sylt)
420329 (marked G9+BH, crashed 5 January 1945 @ Diepholz)
420330
420331 (marked G9+DB, found @ Westerland/Sylt)
420332 not produced
420333 not produced

Does this match up with your data?

[INM@RLM]

Some thoughts on the puzzles posted in #35 & #36:

YES - 420323 was actually the V41 and served as the testbed for the Jumo 213E-powered He 219; trials that resulted in the procurement from EHFW of a small series production batch of just five D-1 examples.

YES - 420325 was a standard production D-1 (the first such example since WNr. 420 324 is a confirmed A-2 identity - see Ron (2020) Loss Table p.188 06-Feb-45).

You next listed all the places where Ron associated the He 219 V41 with WNr. 420325, and then where he went on further to link these to the entry into service of He 219 A-2 G9+BL with 3./NJG 1 during Feb-45, plus its subsequent loss on the night of 20/1-Mar-45. The reported WNr. of that lost machine was 190014 and apparently it was identified as the V14.

All of that cat's cradle constructed by Ron hangs on deriving a link between the V14 as the V41, and since the loss was reported as an A-2 then it has to be the loss of the V41 Versuchsträger converted to a D-series configuration from an A-2.

This picture definitely needs a critical re-examination and I'm sure Marcel will be doing this. Until then I'd suggest the jury remains out.

I have not seen the document recording the March'45 loss as yet but, absent that, my own thoughts are running along these lines:

• The V14 association with this loss could be no more than a misread or embroidery of an annotation that this aircraft had been fitted with a FuG 220 using the Streuwelle VI frequency band.
• Looking at the number of A-2s delivered by each of Wien and Rostock, the probability is greatly in favour of this A-2 having carried a Rostock Werk-Nummer beginning with 290. So could the reported 190 have actually been a mis-read/mis-type of what was actually 290? In short there is in my personal view a considerably greater probability that what was reported as A-2 190014 had actually been in the flesh EHFR He 219 A-2 WNr. 290014. That is one digit different to what was reported, not six digits different.
• WNr. 420323 was listed as a He 219 V-Muster located at Wien on 02-Feb-45. In the Bemerkungen column of this document there is only the statement 'Versuchsträger für Jumo 213 E'. There is no indication here that it is going anywhere else. Indeed, in this manually amended document it is the only one of the eight He 219s listed that is not marked as "z.Zt. abgestellt". So, whilst it's not impossible that it was issued to a front-line Staffel in Feb-45, there is absolutely nothing here to indicate that this was intended to happen, or was even being considered. Quite the opposite in fact because its the only He 219 V-Muster example still being kept active as a He 219 trials machine.
• In sum then, I personally am wholly unconvinced that it was the V41 that was assigned to 3./NJG1 in Feb'45 and lost in Mar'45. To me the odds are definitely weighted in favour of this aircraft more probably being A-2 WNr. 290014.

To your "The above assume the total figure of six D-1 produced is correct."
To be very precise only five series production D-1 were ever planned and built/delivered. This sub-type was only first documented in LP 227/1, issued 15-Dec-44, where all five were shown to be delivered AFTER 30-Nov-1944. Planned D-1 deliveries were all in Dec-44 from EHFW; actual deliveries were four in December and one in Jan-45.
Hence there was no sixth D-1; the only other D-related example was the V41 Versuchsträger used to trial the Jumo 213E installation and converted from a He 219 A-2. However, the V41 was reported and counted as an A-2 delivery.

To your "regarding the 11 (of 15 planned) A-2 from Schwechat".
My apologies for being picky, but there never ever were 15 A-2 planned from Schwechat. Planned A-2 quantities from Schwechat were just these:
LP 226/1 (15-May-44) First mention of the A-2 sub-type in a formal production plan = Total 54, first 4 in July'44 and last 30 in Sep'44
LP 226/2 (15-Jul-44) Now no mention of any A-2 from EHFW; all to come from EHFR mostly with the DB 603 Aa but later the DB 603 E was to be substituted.
So the reality of what happened at EHFW with the A-2 bore almost no resemblance to what had been planned. Rather people were now making it up as they went along, grabbing whatever was available in terms of resources and sub-assemblies already built (or mostly built) and using those to the best effect still possible.

Forgive me please if I don't go into the matter of individual A-2 and D-1 identities. Marcel has worked long and hard on this and we should wait to see what he has to say. It has no direct relevance anyway to the very commendable task of listing out all He 219 examples still surviving at war's end.

[he219research]

Thank you again for your elaboration - I find your theory about 290014 most interesting!
I also fully respect the massive effort put in by Marcel, Rich, et al regarding these matters, and I am eagerly awating the release of their work. Hopefully the publication date won't be too far away now, and there can be a continued discussion after that.

So, returning to the attempted summary of "Uhu"s found: with the latest additions we now have something like the below:

Schwechat (5 pcs total according to FIU Report 53)
190011 VO+BC (V11) damaged/destroyed (A/C (b) acc. to FIU Rep.53)
190068 RL+AH (V28) destroyed (A/C (e) acc. to FIU Rep.53)
190071 RL+AK (V18) destroyed (A/C (d), BL+AK acc. to FIU Rep.53)
190106 DV+DB (V31) damaged/destroyed (A/C (c) acc. to FIU Rep.53)
190193 BE+JF / G9+EK (V16, Jumo 222) destroyed (A/C (f), BF+JF V18 acc. to FIU Rep.53)

Ludwigslust (4 pcs total?)
310190 KO+HT damaged/destroyed
310202 KZ+UH destroyed
310205 KZ+UK damaged/destroyed
310214 KZ+UT destroyed

Lechfeld (3 pcs total)
190104 RL+AW ok
190176 GU+BI ok
190179 GU+BL / G9+PK ok

Westerland/Sylt (43 pcs total)
190130 GU+BF ok
211120
290117 ok
290123 G9+TH ok
290196 GI+KK
310106 KO+HA ok (AM44)
310112 KO+HG /(G9)+RH ok
310114 KO+HI ok (AM43?)
310182 KO+HL / G9+VH ok
310188 KO+HR ok
310204 KZ+UJ / G9+MH
310208 KZ+UN ok
310215 ok (AM43?)
420328 G9+OL damaged/destroyed
420331 G9+DB ok
420333
290xxx ok (black undersides)
xxxxxx (G9)+AH damaged
xxxxxx G9+PH ok
xxxxxx (G9)+HK ok
xxxxxx (G9)+TK ok
xxxxxx (G9)+LK ok

Halle
310193 KO+HW damaged
xxxxxx 1L+MK destroyed

Münster/Handorf (9 pcs total?)
211116 G9+VL destroyed
211121 G9+DL destroyed
211124
290057 CS+QD destroyed
290059 CS+QF / G9+BH damaged
290124 ok
290199 GI+KN / G9+xx destroyed
290200 GI+KO / G9+CB destroyed
xxxxxx G9+SK destroyed

Paderborn (1 pcs total)
290004 G9+DH destroyed (confirmed TI Rep.A-384)

Soltau (6 pcs total)
310185 KO+HO destroyed

Hörsching (1 pcs total)
190060 PK+QJ ok (V17)

Karup/Grove (7 pcs, possibly up to 18 pcs more in disrepair?)
210903 SP+CR / G9+LP ok (USA 8 / FE-612 / T2-612)
290060 CS+QG ok (USA 9 / FE-613 / T2-613)
290126 D5+BL ok (AM20)
290202 GI+KQ ok (USA 10 / FE-614 / T2-614)
310109 KO+HD ok (AM21)
310189 KO+HS / D5+CL ok (AM22)
310200 KZ+UF / D5+DL ok (AM23)

Kastrup (1 pcs total)
210901 B4+AA ok

Eger/Cheb (4 pcs?, possibly up to 9 pcs total?)
190121 DV+DQ damaged (V23/V32 hybrid)
190223 BE+JU destroyed
xxxxxx ‘188’

München-Riem
190069 RL+AI destroyed (V29)
190113 DV+DI destroyed ((V23))

Hildesheim
290112 damaged

Bayreuth-Bindlach
xxxxxx xx+CL damaged

Flensburg
290xxx damaged (black undersides)

Unidentified:
1 (possibly 2) found at Husum 15/5’45
190062 RL+AB found destroyed (where?)
310198 KZ+UD found destroyed (where?)
310316 found destroyed (where?)

And, last but not least: a very Happy New Year to you all!

[richdlc]

Thanks to everyone contributing to this thread. It has direct relevance to our research and I will be sure to let the other authors know about it. As for a publication date, I think we are at least a year away from having anything that can be published. At this stage we are probably looking at a multi-volume book. When you think this list is 'finished' please let me / us know.

[INM@RLM]

Keep in mind Occam's Razor.