USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

As I have heard from esteemed members of this forum as well as someone who has done some restoration this particular aircraft should be in JG 52 markings. It looks like the interior colors are also wrong. However, if you check the links you can at least see what they have.

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...G10signa-1.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...109G10sign.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y.../Bf109G10b.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...G10cengine.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...f109G10a-1.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...groundcrew.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...m/IMG_9309.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...9G10cannon.jpg

http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/y...ndinggeara.jpg

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Here's a bit more info.,

http://yumodelclub.tripod.com/batajn...two_me109s.htm

Regards,

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Thanks for the additional data.

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Their Me 262 is awful...it should be 501232 of KG(j)6, Yellow 5, with red and black "checkers".

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Richard Corey's article struck me as odd on 2 points; a) civilians willing to work for the Germans (another topic all together), and b) wnr 127xxx for a 109. Is that a legitimate number?

Don

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Based on the replies here and elsewhere the "accuracy" of many of the displays at the museum are in question. So are the markings on a particular aircraft more important than the fact that it shows a Bf109, etc., as it would have looked as it flew against 8th Air Force B-17s? If parts for the restoration for a given aircraft come from a number of wrecks, which markings do you use? Is the fact that the aircraft still exists in some form the more important point?

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Good questions, Chuck.

On the one hand we have the gross negligence on the part of the USAF Museum regarding authenticity when compared to the considerable lengths that NASM goes to in achieving accurate displays.

On the other hand, the alleged comments of the Dayton Museum director made in one of the recent posts here make sense, too. Let's face it: correct Bf 109 displays with the correct model number, correct color schemes, markings, Werknummern, etc., etc., etc., are only important to approximately .0000000000000001% of the population at large and about .000001% of the Museum's visitors. I'm sure those who run the place besides the director are fully aware of this. Go out and do a random street survey of 1,000 people and you will be lucky to find even one who can tell you what a WNF Bf 109 G-10 is.

So if the Museum's primary mission or business goal is not in conflict with its sloppy attention to accuracy, then it is hard to fault them from a management standpoint. I'm sure nobody at Wright-Pat is losing sleep over this issue.

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

If I was king for a day I would go for accuracy. I really believe they could accomplish both things at the same time. At the very least they should have the signs with the correct info and the aircraft should be the correct model for the markings.

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

The point isn't how many people would know the difference, it's maintaining standards of scholarship. A Bf 109 is every bit as deserving of accurate representation in a museum as a flint axe, a Roman sword or a Civil War musket.

Re: USAF Museum Bf109 G10
 

Nick,

I agree. How do they do things at the RAF Museum? Its' been years since I've been there.