[David E. Brown]

Hello Harold,

Regarding your comments, I believe that in circumstances such as these, we are dealing with probabilities versus certainties.

In some instances, documentary evidence can confirm without a doubt the unit / pilot identities, etc. This is generally the situation during the early and middle war periods where these documents exist. During the last year, and indeed months of the war, the probability of documents existing, and indeed being generated, decreased. Adherence to regulations also showed a commensurate decline.

What the researcher is left with are fragments of official documents and unit histories, photographs, wreck fragments and narratives from the people who were there. As Jerry will confirm through his many years of interactions with pilots of all nations, these cannot be trusted implicitly, but are nonetheless extremely valuable sources of information. They can provide the keys to explaining other observations and can in many cases by verified through other sources and data. The key is to weigh the probabilities of occurrence / existence against realities, both perceived (as in orders from higher comments), and actual (those of the people actually living and dealing with the extant situations). As stresses and chaos went up, organization went down and thus probabilities of exceptions to the rules increased.

A particular example directly relevant to this discussion is worthy on note.

Luftwaffe bomber units, and to a lesser extent the Stuka units, are well known for their strict adherence to markings rules and regulations for such things as unit codes, individual aircraft letters, crests and insignia, bands on spinners and so forth, all having varying colour combinations reflecting specific staffeln and gruppen. There were variations between the respective geschwaders, but these were not great. Now, let’s consider the bomber units that converted to fighters, by this I mean those that were being converted to the Me 262 for use in the fighter role: Kampfgeschwader (Jagd) 6, 27 and 54.

Sometime in mid-March 1945, their aircraft began to appear with multicoloured tail bands that mimicked those used by the Jagdgeschwadern whose use was officially promulgated a month earlier. While no official document exists stated which units wore which bands, photographic and narrative evidence confirms that the units had checkered tailbands: KG 6 = red & black, KG 27 = green & white, and KG 54 = blue and white. While in almost all cases the photographs are black and white, unit crests will confirm the unit identification, and comparative analysis of the bands against known colours (e.g., maintenance markings, other aircraft, etc.) will confirm colours.

OK, so where is this leading? Simply this. These units, but particularly III./KG(J) 54 showed variability not just in the colour layout in the checkerbands, but in the shape and dimensions of the bands themselves. Indeed, I have documented four (4) different styles unit bands seen on the Bf 109s (1) and Me 262s (3) of just the III. Gruppe. Two styles are seen in I./KG(J) 54 planes, and two styles for the aircraft of III./KG(J) 6 (which, by the way, did NOT wear III. gruppe horizontal bars). This from bomber units that rigidly and slavishly followed markings conventions and protocols for almost six years, but events and the desperate late-war conditions drove them to expediency and thus introduced unorthodox makings styles. But note that the colours were always right, it was just the positions (and proportions / dimensions) that changed.

That a fighter unit would do the same under the same circumstances was inevitable. Yellow / red or red / yellow, it didn’t make a difference as long as the right colours were there. Indeed, I believe that when one studies the famous RV markings order, even if colours on bands were reversed, that colour COMBINATION was the important thing. That is why there bands with single, double and triple stripes. While the style was prescribed, the system was set up such that it was the COLOUR COMBINATION that mattered. Even when mistakes in heirarchy and order were made, the combination stayed the same. Always.

Another point. The location where these aircraft were found can also offer supporting evidence. Aircraft found at former bases of departed units have a good probability of having been associated with that unit. Its a starting point, but a good one. Other evidence can either support this or not. Documentray evidence is out there that I./JG 11 did transfer aircraft to I./JG 301. We don't know which ones, but that they did do so. I am certain when Jerry publishes his JG 301 opus that much of this information will be provided in this regard that will assist in identifying various aircraft.

Again, we are dealing with probabilities, not absolutes. The wise researcher recognises this and accepts that in many cases that this is as good as it gets. There exist other explanations for the identity of this or that, but their probabilities would be much lower or not mack any sense. While something could exist based on one piece of evidence, others would discount or eliminate that probability.


So, based on the available narrative, photographic, documentary and other evidence, I concur with Jerry, Erich and Steve that the probability is very high, not absolute, not without a doubt, but very high that Blue 9 with the reversed yellow and red tailband was an aircraft with 4./I./JG 301.

Cheers,

David