Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Hello good fellows,
7285 lost on 25/10/1941 while in Stab I./JG53, flown by von Werra. 100%

7285 was flown by Hackler, Heinrich 'Hein'. Obfw. III./JG77 mid March 1942 as described in JFV9/I page 321.
Any explanation?
Thanks for your comments.
Franck.

Re: Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Hi


here are the2 losses the first crashed in the sea,the second in Libya, both from NVM, a question is which one is the error?
25.10.1941 2./JG 53 Bf 109 F-4/Z 7285

Vor Katwijk Holland Absturz in See infolge Motorschaden. Bruch 100 %. 2.9.1942 10.(Jabo)/JG 27 Bf 109 F-4 7285
9 weiße Bei Nel Machrassee Libyen Notlandung infolge Erdabwehr. Bruch 100 %. body,div,table,thead,tbody,tfoot,tr,th,td,p { font-family:"Helv"; font-size:x-small }a.comment-indicator:hover + comment { background:#ffd; position:absolute; display:block; border:1px solid black; padding:0.5em; }a.comment-indicator { background:red; display:inline-block; border:1px solid black; width:0.5em; height:0.5em; }comment { display:none; }

Re: Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Sorry I "cut and pasted" but didn't come out good, first crash ends with 100% the next stats with the date

Re: Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Thanks Tony,
Effectively, JG27 too. I didn't check 1942 :)
Normally the photo published in JFV 9/I should be readable; I mean the original.
Correction:
JG27 loss is wrong. It's 7258 and "Grüne 9"
Thanks anyway for the pointer.

Re: Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Looking at the photo with a magnifier I agree, so Prien should have got it right.
However the digits looks like 7232 to me, but its easy so see that the digit 3 can be an original 8
while the digit 2 that I see is harder to transform into a 5.

Cheers
Stig

Re: Bf 109 F-4 WNr.7285
 

Ah yes, the famous "Weisse 11" flown by Fisher. captured in GB :)


I read 7232 too.
More funny I have a lost list (Michael Balss) where 7232 was accidented 20% while in 7./JG77 in September 1941, 9th. where JFV gives 7332. Not only our friend Balss but another list where I can find "аэ. Дебрецен" and "20%. Аварийная посадка (неб.)" ! (sic)


This said, I personally think that looking at Hackler's machine pictures it looks like it has been repaired and patch-painted ...
This explaining that.