Talk:Henschel Hs 129

Designation Series
Why is the Bücker 131 in the designation sequence list? As far as I know it has no connection to the Henschel factory. Uhu219 21:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a Luftwaffe designation sequence, not a company designation. You'll see such sequence listings in almost every other military aircraft article here. --Denniss 01:36, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Hs 123
"Although armed with generally unsuitable aircraft such as the Hs 123" That is not what can be found in the article about the Hs 123! "In their intended (dive-bombing) role, the Hs 123s proved to be somewhat of a failure, hampered by their small bomb capacity and short range. Instead, the Hs 123s based in Seville were used for ground support, a role in which their range was not such a detriment, and where the ability to accurately place munitions was more important than carrying a large load. The combat evaluation of the Hs 123 demonstrated a remarkable resiliency in close-support missions, proving able to absorb a great deal of punishment including direct hits on the airframe and engine. The Nationalists in Spain were suitably impressed with the Hs 123 under battle conditions, purchasing the entire evaluation flight and ordering an additional 11 aircraft from Germany. The Spanish Hs 123s were known as "Angelito" (dear angel or little angel), and at least one Hs 123 was in service with the Ejército del Aire (Spanish Air Force) after 1945." and "The greatest tribute to the Hs 123 usefulness came in January 1943 when Generaloberst Wolfram von Richthofen, then commander-in-chief of Luftflotte 4, asked whether production of the Hs 123 could be restarted because the Hs 123 performed well in a theater where mud, snow, rain and ice took a heavy toll on the serviceability of more advanced aircraft. However, the Henschel factory had already dismantled all tools and jigs in 1940"Dirk P Broer (talk) 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Numbers produced
The article lists number of aircraft built as 865. Dénes Bernád has "Henschel produced at least 1160, but possibly as many as 1267 Hs120's in all variants"

I propose that the number built to be listed as 865-1160. If there is a strong consensus, the number can range to 1267.67.166.155.113 (talk) 17:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Nickname
It´s nick wasn´t "Panzerknacker", it was "Buechsenoeffner" - "can opener". --212.23.103.23 (talk) 13:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The German wikipedia states as nickname also "Buechsenoeffner". Since nicknames weren't official, did it happen that hardware had multiple nicknames in circulation? thestor (talk) 04:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "Panzerknacker" (Tank buster) was the Ju 87-G, i.e. the Stukas retrofitted with 37mm cannons. The Hs 129 was the "Büchsenöffner" (Tin can opener) 46.22.17.154 (talk) 18:01, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Counter-rotating engines
If Henschel actually designed the Hs-129 to have engines that turned opposite to each other (which certainly seems to be the case from photos of the -129 that I've seen), making the right engine turn clockwise as seen from the cockpit and the left engine counter-clockwise would hardly have solved an airplane's torque problems. First of all, unlike a single, a multi-engine airplane has no torque swing on takeoff. Its torque problems arise during single-engine operation, if one engine fails, and this problem is exacerbated if the downward-moving prop blades on the good engine are outboard rather than inboard. So Henschel configured the Hs-129 to have more dangerous single-engine torque no matter which engine failed. A conventional piston twin is easier to handle single-engine if the good engine happens to be the one with its downward-swinging blades -inboard- of the engine--typically the left engine on U. S. twins. (It has to do with the length of the moment arm between the aircraft centerline and the prop blade producing the most thrust--which, in a twin operating on one engine in the necessarily nose-up/high-AoA configuration of an airplane trying to fly on half power is the downward-moving blade.) I'm a multi-engine-rated commercial-licensed pilot and have thousands of hours flying dozens of types of piston- and jet-engine twins.173.62.11.8 (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC) The wiki page for DH Hornet says that it had engines rotating in opposite senses, and that it had delightful characteristics with no torque swing. If this Henschel page is wrong, so is the Hornet page Dean1954 (talk) 14:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, the props did turn the "wrong way", as they did on many contemporary twins including the P-38. In the case of the P-38 at least, it was found in testing that this led to better gunnery. I'm not sure why that might be, but as the Counter-rotating propellers article notes, it was not uncommon. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:06, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Henschel Hs 129. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160517081256/http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/b/Bordwaffen/Bordkanonen/BordkanoneBK75/bordkanone75.html to http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/b/Bordwaffen/Bordkanonen/BordkanoneBK75/bordkanone75.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Hs 129 ordnance
Excerpts below taken from manuals and books in case someone wants to rewrite from scratch the ordnance carried by the Hs 129:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.39.202.215 (talk) 06:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I've removed the links - they are copyrighted and linking to them is not allowed.Nigel Ish (talk) 06:35, 8 February 2018 (UTC)