Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hello everybody,

I've started building an Me 262 model, and I'd love to do it of this newly discovered machine! However, I'm wondering whether to put on bomb racks. According to Jean Yves Lorant in an article featured in the FalkEins blog, this is an Me 262 A-2a armed with two cannons. This variant was typically deployed as a fighter bomber.

But From the photo, is it possible to determine whether there are bomb racks? I'm also curious as to how we can know that this is an A-2a. Only one sticker containing armament loading instructions is seen under the cannon bay. A-2a machines often had only one sticker on either side of the canon bay, whereas fighters typically had two on either side, but this practice was not consistently implemented. Could the presence of only one armament loading sticker explain how he arrived at the conclusion that this is an A-2a? It looks like the upper cannon ports might have been faired over, but perhaps its impossible to tell from the photo. He, of course, is an expert and examined the photo up close so he must have seen lots of details.

So, what do you think. Should I put on those bomb racks? :)

Here's the article. http://falkeeins.blogspot.com/…/new-...o-me-262-b3al…

Best regards,

Jon

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hello,
Your link to falkeeins.blogspot.com is missing: ( Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.)


Well, you know your me 262 is a fake. The white lightning painted is add by a software. Normaly the shape have to follow the curve of the nose but this lightning is straight ahead.


Best regards.
Lumabe.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

try here: http://falkeeins.blogspot.com/search/label/Me%20262

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

A question extensively debated in this thread, earlier in the year.

As for a KG(J) 54 having bomb racks — nothing's impossible but they operated in the fighter role and wouldn't have needed them.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hm...a lot of people have expressed that it's fake. Are you sure that the shape of the lightning bolt doesn't follow the curve of the nose? I actually find it hard to tell from the photo. Also, while I respect your opinion and would like to be open-minded about this, I'm just curious whether you read the arguments of Jean Yves Lorant in favor of the photo's authenticity. He is an expert in aircraft photography from that period and he has examined the original photo carefully. I take your point, but what do you think about the arguments for the photo's authenticity in the article?

I realize this topic was discussed in an earlier thread, but I'd just like to point out that the article on the FalkEins blog was published after most of the posts on that thread, so at the time most people who posted on the thread couldn't have known about Jean Yves Lorant's examination of the photo.

Thoughts?

Best regards,
Jon

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

http://luftwaffeinprofile.se/Me%20262%20KG%2054.html
Claes Sundin's new illustration of this plane.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Wow, Micke...Thanks! You've totally made my day. :) Interestingly, it appears Claes Sundin interprets the finish as RLM 75/74 overpainted with a rather squiggly green mottle. From David Brown, I've read that variations of this attractive scheme were commonly used on many early production Me 262 A-2a's, especially in Kg 51.

The Wn.r that Claes has chosen in the profile marks this as an early production machine. That this should be an early production Sturmvogel makes sense for several reasons. For one, the presence of the early-style clear navigation light cover on the bottom trailing edge of the rudder is consistent with an early production machine. Secondly, it's noteworthy that the Me 262 whose camo is most similar to our subject is a B-1a variant coded "B3+SH" with WNr. 170075--a very similar Wn.r to that of our subject! Both this and our subject served with KG(j) 54 (though in different staffels) and feature the dashing white lightning bolt. The B-1a with Wn.r 170075 was likewise an early production machine, and so I assume it was probably painted in greys (or perhaps a transitional mix?)

I have several questions at this point. 1) Can the Wn.r be clearly seen in the original photo under careful examination? 2) Is the front engine cowling yellow or unpainted? I had assumed that it was unpainted, mostly just because yellow seems too cool for school, and intake cowlings painted in staffel colors are an extremely rare sight on Me 262s. :)

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hello Jon!
1. I don't know if Claes have seen the original photo and the W.Nr.
2. The color of the engine cowls seems to be pretty close to both the yellow A and the nose tip, IF the tip is yellow and white.
Interesting also that Cleas profile have the wings or just the engines in 81/82/76 and the fuselage in 74/75/76 with 83 over that.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Is there proof the WN is 170099?

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Excellent question. I'm assuming Claes would have consulted with someone. Perhaps he got in touch with Jean Yves Lorant? I'll send Claes an email and ask him. I've just had a look at his website.

In the article, Jean Yves Lorant mentions that parts of the WN can be seen, though it isn't completely legible. I'd love to know how much of it is actually visible. We all would!

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

[QUOTE
Interesting also that Cleas profile have the wings or just the engines in 81/82/76 and the fuselage in 74/75/76 with 83 over that.[/quote]

Yes, very interesting! Given the early production WN.r, the use of mid-war greys makes sense. While I am in love with that interpretation, I do think that the uppersurface base colors look rather dark and low-contrast. To my eyes, the tone of the squiggly mottle is somewhat darker than the base uppersurface colors, though not by much. This might suggest the use of RLM 81 (83?) and 71. Aesthetically, however, I much prefer Claes's interpretation. It's beautiful.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Maybe the pictures are going to be published very soon and Claes did prepare a profile for that ...
Who knows ;)

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

If he would tell me his interpretation of what he sees, I may be able to track down the real WN. I have a sizeable data base. Thanks Jon!

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

...they are old colleagues from the French edition of the JG 300 opus. So yes...

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

So I sent Claes an email, and he kindly responded.

"Great to hear from a fellow enthusiast, especially one who enjoys my work.

To your question, the profile is well documented in a photo, perhaps you already have seen it on the net, however I have not access to the W.Nr. as Lorant, (the guy who bought the photo) has commissioned another artist for the publishing. The 170099 is just a qualified guess, as this machine is an early, originally gray painted Me 262.

And be sure I will publish this stunning profile in one of my planned profile books, however with the researched and correct W.Nr."

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

You're very welcome. :)

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Gentlemen,

Before the rumor becomes reality, a small correction: "The guy who bought the original photo" did not commission any artist to make a color profile of the Me 262 Anton Luise.

Claes Sundin's artwork is very nice but does not match with the real photo. Two important details are wrong and the Werk Nummer is fictive. The camouflage pattern is also an artist's view and we can not blame Claes who had only a bad eBay image as working basis and did nevertheless a great job.

The only progress compared to the first drawing is to have seen that the black letter L is the same size as the yellow A.

The photo will surely be published one of the days. Just be patient...

Regards
Jean-Yves Lorant

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Jean-Yves, would you mind saying which of the WN numbers you can read? I may be able to track it down.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hi Dan,

The Werk Nummer digits are partially lost in the camouflage and in the grain of the photographic emulsion. Keep in mind that this photo is just 6 x 9 cm, imagine the importance of grain on such a small photo. There are barely three visible digits. Sorry - your attempt will be too speculative to be historically acceptable.

All the best
Jean-Yves lorant

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

So three of the digits are visible. That's at least something. :) May we please know what they are?

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

They are visible but not legible, alas.

Regards
Jean-Yves Lorant

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Jean-Yves,

Thanks for the additional information. Though sadly illegible, the position of the werknummer on the aircraft, the size / dimensions of the digits, and distance between each digit can assist in the machine’s possible identity, or at least Werknummerserien.

As well, in the summer of 1944 KG51 received many Me262s finished in the now highly inappropriate grey 74/74 scheme (from the 170xxx and 130xxx series), and took it upon themselves to quickly alter it with an application of a dark green to better improve ground concealment.

Cheers,

David

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Thank you Jean.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Thank you everybody for your responses! So we might never know the WN.r. But... we are still free to make educated guesses. Let's remain optimistic. :) We do have the ebay photo as a reference, so we are not empty handed at all. Perhaps in the future, we'll learn more.
So for my model I would just like to ask whether in your opinions, I should paint it in the mid-war grays overpainted with a heavy green mottle. Based on David's comments this would seem very possible. Claes certainly agreed. I realize this question is tied in with the WN.r, so any interpretations are speculative. That's okay! All views are welcome.

Best regards,
Jon

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hi David,


Sorry again: it is hopeless, the photographer was too far from the plane. You just have to wait until a better picture of "Anton-Luise" tailplane appears. The vein of original and interesting photos on eBay is running out slowly, but we will still have some good surprises.
The color and size of the swastika is also a problem ... so do not trust the interpretation of Claes Sundin.


Regards
Jean-Yves Lorant

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Thank you, Jean Yves, for your comments. While, I respect your point of view and your expertise here, I believe there is absolutely no harm in a little bit of speculation. To me, and perhaps others, it is not pointless.

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hi Jon,

As long as it is understood that what follows is purely speculative, I will add my two cents.

To my eye there is a slightly darker delineated hue to the area immediately behind the white ring in the nose cone of "AL" that matches the size and shape of the larger nose colour of a KG 51 aircraft. This with the single white gun instruction rectangle suggest that "AL" was an early Me 262 A-2a that was seconded to KG(J) 54 from KG 51 for training purposes.

Below, if you log in, you will find three photos of Me 262s of 1./KG 51.

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/album....&pictureid=566

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/album....&pictureid=565

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/album....&pictureid=560

I suggest that the camouflage of "AL" is the same as that of these aircraft and point out that the lower squiggles on the visible engine nacelle are quite similar to those on the rear fuselage of "AL".

It would be interesting to know if the tail and rudder tip has a delineated area slightly darker than the rest of the tail suggesting a previous tail tip colour.

best regards,

Jim

Re: Me 262 B3+AL Question
 

Hey Jim,

Thanks for your input. You know, I think I can see that slighter darker area behind the ring now that you've pointed it out. Interesting observation! I agree that the squiggly camo is similar to those early production Me 262 A2a's from KG 51 in those pics. Your theory sounds very plausible.
It's striking that the squiggles seem thicker and heavier on the empennage, especially starting from where the letter "L" is located. Elsewhere the squiggles appear much finer. As Claes's profile indicates, it looks like there might not be any squiggles on the engine nacelle of B3+AL. But from the lighting it's hard to see the delineation of the mottling.

Thank you for your insight, and for those links.

Best regards,
Jon