Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

I am trying to sort out source conflicts over one of the Ju 88 losses of KG30 on 15 August 1940. They are:

Parry - 2017 - BoB Combat Archive - Vol. 4 p. 491
13.10-14.00 hrs - Combat C - Flamborough Head - 8/KG30 - Ju88A - Fell into the North Sea. Bo: Uffz Joachim Resin, Bf: Fw Alfred Schuman and Bs: Uffz Werner Jünnemann all missing.

Balss - 2018 - Luftwaffe Losses & Claims - Vol. 3 p. 253
8./KG 30 - OP - Dänemark
Take off Aalborg-West - Aalborg-West airfield - Forced landing due damaged by enemy fighter
Ju 88 C-2 - 75% damage
P Fw. Siegfried Matschke WIA, B Uftz. Joachim Resin WIA, Bf Fw. Alfred Schumann WIA, Bs Uftz. Werner Jünnemann WIA

The names of the crew members are the same, but Parry lists them as killed, while Balss shows then as WIA. Balss also lists the aircraft as a Ju 88C-2, with 75% damage, while Parry identifies it as a Ju 88A, which was lost. I know from earlier posts on the forum that there is some confusion over the inclusion of Ju 88Cs in the loss listings for this date. Can anyone clarify the above?

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Hi Peter
I record these men as WIA on the basis that I could not find them in WASt or Volksbund records of fatalities and one of them at least was still serving with the Staffel when he was KIA in 1942 so cannot have been KIA 1940.

Siegfried Matschke (53555/10)
Oberfeldwebel FF
born 4 Jan 1915
at Berlin
serving 8./K. G. 30
Killed 9 Nov 1942
near Algiers

regards Peter

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Thanks Peter,

Your WIA records makes sense, but doesn't resolve the Ju 88A vs Ju 88C issue. Any thoughts on that?

Peter

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Sorry no, I am at least as confused as most folk on that day. I am inclined to believe Balss as he was right on the crew.

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

All the ZSt/KG 30 Cs had moved in June-July 1940 to NJG. This has been explained before. They had a crew of 3 in any case

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Interesting thread

Is there any evidence that III./KG 30 really used any Ju 88 C at all?
I know about the Zerstörerstaffel KG 30 which operated the type, but III./KG 30?
Looking back, already in 1969 Mason in his Battle over Britain claimed that both I. and III./KG 30 losses
that day were Ju 88 C while II./KG 30 lost A-5s (one I./KG 30 loss was also an A-5!).
This is repeated in After the Battle 'Battle of Britain now and then' (1980 edition).
What bother me with that is why should two Gruppen of KG 30 be equipped with a heavy fighter version
and sent on a bombing mission to Britain?

Wasn't the C-model also a three-seater? If so, how come it carried four individuals?

To come to terms with the losses of KG 30 that day, I think one needs to look at the complete picture.

If you Peter (Black 6) have the losses for that day, please fill in those three crews we still have as missing
after falling into the North Sea that day.

B Rgds
Stig

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

GQM dated 18th -Aug -1940 page 2 shows on the 15th the loss of 2 C's to I/KG30 with III/KG 30 losing 4 more plus a further 2 damaged . There are change notes to some of these but I could not make out the pencilled in dates . At this time the GQM only shows Officer losses and no werk nummers to check ,

Regards
Brian Bines

Does Michael Balss' Loss and Claims for August 1940 clarify anything ?

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Hi Stig
I will pull together what I have and get it loaded up, here is one for 7/KG30

Fw. (FF) Bernhard Gutow (62756/41) born 22 Oct 1914 at Slade Parchim
Uffz (Bombsch) Kurt Meier (62756/106) born 6 Oct 1919 at Schmidtsdorf Breslau
Gefr (Bordsch) Karl Grzeschiok (62756/10) born 24 Sep 1920 at Glauchau
plus one - I have this name in old German script but I cant read it and so havent found him.

more to follow, I'm having some IT issues.

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

I have the regularly mentioned JU-88's of 7/KG30 with crews

Riede, Hartwich, Panhuysen, Ulbrich
and
Bachmann, Evers, Henneske, Walther.

I have another 7/KG30 crew crashed in the sea, including a fatality
Uffz (Bordfunker) Gerhard Kuhn (62756/75) born 11 Dec 1918 at Plauen/Vogeltal

and I believe that a 3/KG30 JU-88 crashed into the sea near Flamborough Head, including at least one fatality
Uffz (Bombenschütze) Heinrich Kenski (53557/27) born 29 Oct 1916 at Lindenthal, Köln

and the JU-88 complete crew of 4/KG30
Bihr, Pohl, Kursch, Neumeyer

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Thanks everyone

I agree with Chris, I cannot believe any Ju 88 C were involved in this combat.
But it still remains a puzzle why the GQM losses says so....

I am basing my thinking on the losses recorded by Parry (that is the latest data I have)

I./KG 30 lost three aircraft. The crew of two (both ending up in the North Sea) are not listed.
One crew known 3./KG 30 (von Lorentz, Kenski, Prumann and Göbel, all POW)

II./KG 30 lost one aircraft
One crew known 4./KG 30 (Bihr, Pohl, Kürsch and Neumeyer)

III./KG 30 lost four aircraft + one it seems damaged (unknown how much) when landing in Holland.
Three crew known
7./KG 30 (Bachmann, Evers, Walther all POW and Henneske killed)
7./KG 30 (Riede, Hartwich, Ulbrich and Panhuysen all MIA)
8./KG 30 (Matschke, Resin, Schumann and Jünnemann either KIA or made it back to Aalborg!)

What thus is missing are the crew of two aircraft from I./KG 30 and one crew from III./KG 30 (8.St)

There is no room for another crew from 7./KG 30 as listed by Peter (Black6) ie Gutow, Meier and Grzeschiok.
Where do they fit in? Perhaps they are in fact the "8./KG 30" crew which reportedly fell into the North Sea?

Peter
The only way I can "make room" for your 7./KG 30 member Gerhard Kuhn is to make him the fourth individual
in the crew you have in post 136

B Rgds
Stig

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Hi Stig
Kenski was definitely Vermisst according to WASt.

The WASt index cards for three men of the Gutow crew written in 1940 and 1941 all clearly state 7/KG30, some of these men have multiple cards which all give that Staffel.

Peter

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Yes Peter

I noticed that from your previous post.
The problem with Kenski is that none of the British sources mention he was killed.
Surely they must have recorded such a thing when the aircraft came down on British soil?

I have no solution to the crew you list from 7./KG 30 while the loss list (German one) simply
has none that fits, unless we switch one 8./KG 30 loss for one from 7./KG 30, which is why I made such
a suggestion in my previous post.

B Rgds
Stig

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Yes there were Ju 88 C (and nine a/c : 7 100% , plus two three crashes), but aka Ju 88 A-1/C (unlikely A-5/C but possible) meaning they /C ones had two long-range fuselage tanks and bombs were external

(Ideal for Bridlington raid from Denmark).
No "Zerstörer" losses (all Z are accounted for before and/or after), just brand new version /C, of which few existed, and clerks were not used to this, but wanted have all accurate.
There is the full explantion for Staffel descriptencys, crews passed from one staffel to another, just to fill seats and regularily thrugh all major battles (Like June 1941) this is visible - Paperwork did not keep up with losses like them mid august period was. Over my decades long perod of researching, some "newbies" (and old hands alike) make mistake of not allowing for errors, they just were!

If you try fix or explain, you are in more troble.

Ju 88s of this period came in four versions. /A (no fuselage fuel), B/ one fuselage tank, /C two tanks, /F one internal, and up to two droptanks (plus cameras)
but then no rear fuselage tank - it had the cameras. Cameras in fuselage behind rear bay were D-2s not yet built nor delivered.

Re: Discrepancies in KG30 Ju 88 Losses 15 August 1940
 

Aha Eggert

THAT explains it. Isn't Luftwaffe research intriguing, ey? :)

So we have various Ju 88 A which, depending on equipment, got different sub-designations.
So the correct way of writing should be Ju 88 A-1/A, A-1/B, A-1/C etc.

Really news to me!! All I know before was the /F.....:o

Thanks a lot!!
Cheers
Stig