15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Greetings gents!

On 15.8.40 Erpr.Gr.210 flew to attack Marlsham-Heath airfield.
For this mission, there were no fighter escort. After attack, when Erpr.Gr.210 turned back, Hurricanes of 1 Sqdn and 17 Sqdn were scrambled. Following combat, 3 Hurricanes of 1 Sqdn were shot down and 1 Hurricane from 17 Sqdn crash landed. Erpr.Gr.210 itself had 1 Bf110C-6 damaged in combat.

Question is: were those RAF fighters shot down by Erpr.Gr.210 pilots?

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Hi,

both squadrons were too late. They fought most likely with ZG26 and JG51.

Robert

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Thx Robert.

I just want to try to find out last 2 claims (of 12) of Erpr.Gr.210 wich are unknown for me.

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Both Squadrons were too late to prevent the bombing of Martlesham Heath, but were not too late to intercept Erprobungsgruppe 210 AFTER the raid. Can you tell me your source for the likely involvement of ZG 26 and JG 51?

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

What is your source for this damaged Bf 110 following the Martlesham Heath attack being a 'C-6'?

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

And can you tell me what losses were suffered by Erp.Gr.210 in this likely engagement?
Look at claims reported e.g. by III./ZG26, I,II./JG51. They were detailed to fly fighter sweeps in attack areas of KG2, KG3 and Erp.Gr.210 and III./ZG26 was most likely flying direct escort for one of those units.

Regards

Robert

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Of course John, I overlooked it! Lt. Beudel flew his usual "Dora", wich was damaged. He flew C-6 on his next and last mission.

Both claims of 6./JG51 (Priller, Haase) fits good with RAF losses at that time and area, south from Martleshem-Heath to Clacton.

III./ZG26's claim fits also, as it was over Harwich area at the same time.

Claims on RAF side - 1Sqdn - 1 "Ju88" damaged (probably Beudel's Bf110), and 2 Bf109 destroyed. 32 Sqdn (not 17th, as I previously thought) - 1 Bf109 destroyed.

So, all those RAF fighters were not downed by Erpr.Gr.210...

THX friends!

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

One Bf 110 damaged (Lt. Erich Beudel). All attacking aircraft of Erpr. Gr. 210 returned to Calais-Marck.

Sorry, Robert, 'most likely' cuts no ice with me at all. Do you have a source for direct escort to Erpr. Gr. 210 for the Martlesham Heath raid? Fighter sweeps in attack areas could mean hundreds of square miles quite easily, and then multiplied by the third dimensions of many thousands of feet...

I ask all of this, not to demolish any point you make, but rather to know of the exact source, because those Erpr. Gr. 210 crew that I interviewed, all said that that raid was conducted without escort, and the 3. Staffel Bf 109s waded into the Hurricanes that managed to get at the formation following the attack (interview with Hintze, in particular).

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

And here we see why delving into claims is such a hazardous past-time. ZG 26 were serial overclaimers. And one of the No.1 Sqdn claims was ficticious. After contacting the pilot he told me so, and how his combat report was put together by the IO. He asked me never to make his name and the details public, and that's how it remains.

Take extreme care with claims, peoples!

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Hi,

this is my opinion. I know that III./ZG26 and II./ZG26 were airborne at this time and in rule twin-engined fighters were deployed rather on direct escort, whilst single-engined were detailed to fly mostly fighter sweeps (around this time). Of course I have no hard evidence that they were supporting Epr.Gr.210 - I think that the latter acted individually.
III./ZG26 became engaged with fighters - it could be also that one of its Bf110s was claimed by 1 Sqn.
And I don`t not know that Bf110 of Beudel was damaged by flak or fighter or it was just technical failure.

Warm Regards

Robert

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Which losses fit well with claims by Priller and Haase?

TIA

Rob Romero

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

1 & 32 Sqdn losses were:

1. Hurricane Р3047 (1Sqdn). Pilot slightly wounded, and rescued from water by trawler.
2. Hurricane R4075 (1Sqdn). Harwich. P/O D.O.M.Browne Listed as missing. (Last seen in combat with enemy fighters over North Sea)
3. Hurricane Р3043 (1Sqdn). Harwich. Sgt M.M.Shanahan Listed as missing. (Last seen in combat with enemy fighters over North Sea)
4. Hurricane N2459 (32Sqdn). Pilot burned, bailed out into water and rescued by torpedo boat.


Obstlt. Johann Schalk, Stab III./ZG 26, Hurricane, Harwich, 16.08
Oblt. Josef Priller: 11, 6./JG 51, Hurricane, 1 km. E. Clacton 16.15
Fw. Arthur Haase: 4, 6./JG 51, Hurricane, östlich Clacton, 16.15
Ofw. Fritz Beeck: 3, 6./JG 51, Spitfire, engl. küste, -(??? no time and location)

John:
If there were no direct escort for Erpr.Gr.210, so it could be 3./Erpr.Gr.210, wich "Me109's" jumped on intercepting fighters from above, and inflicted mentioned losses.

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

John are you indicating that the IO [Intelligence Officer?] or the pilot faked No. 1 Sq. Claim -if it was the IO what would the motivation be???

TIA

Rob Romero

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Hi,
What do I read on volksbund.de.!!!
Lt. Erich Beudel, born 18.01.1917 Vienna, KIA 15.08.1940. Burried: Cannock Chase 1/7/239
Frans.A

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Frans:

Lt. Beudel was killed on next (evening) combat mission on that day, famous Croydon raid.

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

No further comment on this one, Rob. All I will say is that ALL 3./Erpr. Gr. 210 Bf 109 E-4/Bs got back to Calais-Marck.

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Following the Martlesham Heath raid, Beudel's Bf 110 D was unfit for a further mission that day, so he flew one of the unit's Bf 110 C-6s for the Croydon raid.

The information you posted above is well-known. Photos exist of his crashed Bf 110 C-6, S9+TH, following the raid on Croydon, and I have a photo of his grave in the Soldatenfriedhof in Cannock Chase.

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Hi,
What do I read on Volksbund.de!!!!!!
Lt. Erich Beudel, Born 18.01.1917 Vienna.
KIA 15.08.1940 Kenley (UK)
Burried: Cannock Chase 1/7/239
Frans.A

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Hi,

Sorry that I repeated my message.

Frans.A

Re: 15.8.40 Marlsham-Heath Erpr.Gr.210 vs 1 & 17 Sqdn question
 

Frans,

Read my post #17. The reference to Kenley in the Volksbund records relates to the intended target (Kenley airfield), which Erprobungsgruppe 210 missed, and hit Croydon instead.