[ArtieBob]

IIRC, there were 200 sets of long wings built to convert A-1s. It is almost certain that the designations were changed on some of the A-1s following the Umbau process. In the 2xxx series the lowest W.Nr. A-5 I have seen reported was 2005. It is also possible that the subtype change could have be made during repairs as W.Nr. 2055 appears as an A-1 when damaged 40% on 20.10.40 and as an A-5 when damaged 30% on 8.8.41.

The lowest 2xxx W.Nr.I have seen from the loss list is 2005. However, the earliest Ju 88 losses reported did not include W.Nr., so this would not seem to be a valid reason to assume the W.Nr. did not begin with 2001. I do have detailed reports from some of the other Ju 88 assembly points and their sequences began with X001, 2, 3, etc. The Monatsmeldung shows neubau A-1s(171-the last delivered in March 41), A-5s(169-the last delivered in November 41),and A-6s (130-beginning January 41, the last delivered in October 41). So, it appears that this group ended up around W.Nr. 2470. I have no listings in the 2480s and the 2490 listings are a bit suspect (no dates in 1941, so possibly these are 142xxx aircraft, a very common error in listings. This leads me to believe that the Brandeburg A-4 W.Nr. sequence began at 2500 and this gap in sequencing seems to be present in the output of other assembly locations when they went from A-5, A-6 production to A-4s.

This has ended up being a lot longer than intended, however, it may illustrate some of the problems encountered when trying to reverse engineer something as straightforward as W.Nr. sequencing. I have at least 5 sets of primary documents that were used when doing this analysis. Very rarely do they agree exactly. So in closing, just because a piece of paper tells you something, it just as if the words were spoken, they may or may not be true or even if true in the general sense, not exactly correct.

Best regards,

Artie Bob