Sub Hunter story.

Hi, Ed.

My point was that Ernst Heinkel did not build operational day fighters, with
the exception of the He 162 which did not officially score any victories.
Earlier attempts at fielding fighters met with failure on Ernst's part - even
the superlative He 219, which could well have been built as a day 'Zerstroyer'
was only built in small numbers as a nightfighter.

I have little doubt that this gent and his crew destroyed two German fighters -
but I can't see how they could have been Heinkels. The company built many fine
aircraft, but none that would fit into this story.

The article didn't say where this action took place. Perhaps not all
missions were over the open sea as you suggest.

If his B-24 was assigned to anti-sub patrol, it rules out its use as a
daylight, over the continent, heavy bomber (which would place it in an area
where short-range shore-based fighters could intercept it): the RN and RAF
didn't use ASW assets that way.

I repeat, I am not disparaging the crew at all - I am just pointing out that we
could probably find out the real German losses for that day and I am certain
they would either be Heinkel bombers (Coastal Command bombers shot down plenty
of Luftwaffe bombers!) or some other company's fighters. If he has a date and
mentions a location within the narrative, we can check the BAMA loss records,
or Tony Woods' online listing of German losses, to find likely candidates for
the lost a/c.

v/r
Gordon

"Gordon"
My point was that Ernst Heinkel did not build operational day fighters,
with
the exception of the He 162 which did not officially score any victories.
Earlier attempts at fielding fighters met with failure on Ernst's part -
even
the superlative He 219, which could well have been built as a day
'Zerstroyer'
was only built in small numbers as a nightfighter.

Gordon:
I don't have anymore details other than what was in the paper. I wonder
if the Heinkel that is refered to is not a fighter but a recon type. Wasn't
the He 114 (1939) a sea based recon type? Reporters are notorious for
getting things wrong! If I go to the Air Museum at 19 Wing Comox I'll ask
for more details.
Ed

Gordon:
I don't have anymore details other than what was in the paper. I wonder
if the Heinkel that is refered to is not a fighter but a recon type. Wasn't
the He 114 (1939) a sea based recon type?

Now that was a real rarity! I think its possible, but I think Walt pegged it
with his Ju 88 call. These lil biplanes weren't fast enough to catch a
properly motivated B-24.

Speaking of which... sad, this. One of my ebay photos arrived, depicting a
B-24 al fuego over the Bay of Biscay, and clearly not going to make it home.
As I have dealt with personal effects of Allied airmen washed ashore after such
events, the photo is particularly poignant. No way to determine who, where,
when, etc., but I really hope they made it out in one piece. The seas are calm
and it allows me to hope.

Reporters are notorious for
getting things wrong! If I go to the Air Museum at 19 Wing Comox I'll ask
for more details.

Much appreciated! And if I can help you track down the 'victims', let me know.

v/r
Gordon
Stormbirds.com/recon