Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum - Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/index.php)

- Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/forumdisplay.php?f=8)

- - Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates (http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=13144)

Re: Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Good evening!

Hate to be a know-it-all, but the aircraft you are reffering to is in fact a Bf 109G-14/AS of the werke Nr block 512xxx according to JAPOs book, as there seemed to be a stock of the earlier tail assembly previously used on regular G-14s, and these were assembled as G-14/AS, however this combination was extremely rare, and I have only seen two photos of this configuration.

Best wishes!

Angantyr

Re: Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Hi,

Thanks you for your input...:)

As I mentioned, there is most likely a werk number discrepancy/date with that aircraft, and also mis-information. Also, from what I remember, there were 2 G-14's named Rita...but I am not 100% sure.

I would ask that we pleeeeeaaaaaaaaassssssssssseeeee get off this discussion of the G-14. This thread is about the reason for the second data plate, and we are getting WAY off topic.

;)

Thanks!

Mike

Re: Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Quote:

Documentary evidence that Rasmussen found proves that only about fifty G-10s produced by Erla were equipped with the DB 605 AS due to an interruption of the supply of engines, and that even didn't happen at the start of production. That three of those were among the Italian-manned Bf 109s of ANR found abandoned in Orio al Serio airfield, contributed to spread (at least to me and then) the wrong assumption that the G-10/AS did exist. It simply wasn't so. I do reckon it and corrected my assumptions once that was proved wrong.

You confuse me, Veltro. You said that about 50 G-10s were equipped with the DB 605 AS engine, which should make those aircraft G-10ASs. How then could the G-10AS not exist?

Anyway, a very interesting discussion.
George

Re: Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hopp (Post 67834)

You confuse me, Veltro. You said that about 50 G-10s were equipped with the DB 605 AS engine, which should make those aircraft G-10ASs. How then could the G-10AS not exist?

Simple, the "G-10/AS" denomination was never adopted neither officially nor in any unofficial piece of paper of the time. They were simply a few G-10s with DB 605 AS engines due to particular circumstances.

It is easy to do history in retrospect. The "G-10/AS" denomination was first used by Prien/Rodeike in an article fot the Flugzeug magazine in the late '70s (in reality identifying with it all the examples of the G-10 built by Erla in the 490xxx and 491xxx batches and devoid of the external characteristics then associated with a "real" G-10...) and was adopted since then, but was not an official or unofficial one of the Luftwaffe, so (especially considering what has been discovered since the late '90s about the details of "Erla" version of the G-10) it had better to remain well within brackets and confined to those fifty examples...

Hope this is less confusing...:)

P.S. I am attaching two pages from my last book where the topic is dealt with more details. Hope this is of further help.

http://win.150gct.it/public/veltro/ANRCM-80.jpg
http://win.150gct.it/public/veltro/ANRCM-81.jpg

Re: Me109G-10 Dual Production Plates

Quote:

It is easy to do history in retrospect. The "G-10/AS" denomination was first used by Prien/Rodeike in an article fot the Flugzeug magazine in the late '70s (in reality identifying with it all the examples of the G-10 built by Erla in the 490xxx and 491xxx batches and devoid of the external characteristics then associated with a "real" G-10...) and was adopted since then, but was not an official or unofficial one of the Luftwaffe, so (especially considering what has been discovered since the late '90s about the details of "Erla" version of the G-10) it had better to remain well within brackets and confined to those fifty examples...

Hope this is less confusing...:)

Thank you, Veltro, for taking the time to respond to my query. And thank you also for posting those two pages.

All the best,
George