Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

As an "information management process" specialist, it seems to me that the inclusion of the WNr in the loss report is a classical exemple of a process well designed for low activity, but not being able to sustain the
real workload, until more information is included in the system.

In this case, when the WNr was not reported, a given unit will report for example "three Bf 109 E damaged 10% in landing", then ten days later will send a message saying "increase one Bf 109 from 10% to 20%", and then the office will receive the same message the same day... Does it mean a second Bf 109 should be increased to 20%, or it is a repeat of the first message ? Either the clerk will spend time trying to solve his question (so generating more messages in both ways, and possible confusion) or he will try to solve it himself by choosing one of the options, and so possibly make a mistake. With the WNr included, corrections and additions are easier to manage (the fact that the WNr may be wrong, and was in many cases, being another matter).

With low level of loss during the first months of war, such cases were rare and could be managed manually. But with the losses mounting in May 1940 with the campaign in France, Belgium and Netherlands, it certainly became more problematic. 10 May 1940 was one of the worst days for the war fro the Luftwaffe in number of lost aircraft, and even if much of them were Ju 52s, there was still a lot of paperwork involved, especially as in this case many crew were missing for some days and then back, aircraft having landed on beaches and fields and declared missing may be repaired and so, and so....

While the introduction of the WNr was during the Battle of Britain, the reason could be in my humble opinion the losses suffered in May-June 1940. To modify a bureaucratic process is neither easy nor quick, and so if the new instructions were given in September, I suppose the thinking behind it was started some weeks or months before.

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Hi, Laurent.

I believe you can be right, and will be looking for information leading up to the implementation in September 1940.

Regards,
Andreas B

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Andreas. Thanks for info. I for one is quite interested in the assignments of (new) Ju 88´s from the Luftpark´s prior to this period (August 39 to August 40). I belive some Luftpark documents survive but have not had the oppritunity to look at these. I do have partial index of RL documents but word "Luftpark" in the .pdf file produces no results. Any have list of other Luftparks not mentioned in this thread?

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Hello Ed!

The Luftparks are under RL 25 in Freiburg and the findbook is only available there.

Regards

Dirk

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Thank you Dirk. I know about the RL 25/75 - 82 Feldluftpark 5(III) ones. Any available for period 02.43 to 07.43 regarding transfers to "Luftflotte 4 Öst". Need find out dates/locations/assignments regarding Ju88D-1/trop 430650 NP+MK (in Romania/Ukraine area or Luftparks "servicing" that area).

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Ed, I checked in Freiburg some of the Luftpark files (Jüterbog, Paderborn, Pori)
but there is nothing, what you are looking for.
Maybe in RL 24 are many reports from Lzgr. and there can something be found.
Dirk

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

The summer 1940 Ultras include some messages allocating specific aircraft to a unit or to a Luftflotte Reserve.

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

The summer 1940 Ultras include some messages allocating specific aircraft to a unit or to a Luftflotte Reserve.


Summer 1940 ??? How they are labelled ?? hw5...

Rémi

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Files HW5/1 - HW5/6 cover the period from 6 February – 2 December 1940.

Re: new research - readiness state, losses and logistics
 

Hi Andreas,

In Gen.Qu.6.Abt returns from early October 1940 was added after damage percentage a note (Er.), which means "Ersatz notwendig, d.h. Flugzeug kann mit Truppenmitteln nicht wieder hergestellt werden" (replacement necessary, because the aircraft cannot be repaired by the unit). This is occasionally used, if percentage was below 60 % (for higher figures all losses were to be replaced with new aircraft anyway). Could this change in reporting be connected to the letter you are refering to?

Matti