View Single Post
  #26  
Old 4th February 2015, 17:01
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is online now
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 5,797
Nick Beale has a spectacular aura aboutNick Beale has a spectacular aura aboutNick Beale has a spectacular aura about
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Right, everyone calm down or this thread closes.

"I belive it´s an offence call a person by wrong fictitious name..."

No "ed", it's a simple and readily understandable mistake as I'm sure you are perfectly well aware. "Ed" is one of the most common shortened forms of "Edward" in English, the language of this forum. I’m sure that you would not thank me for pointing out your errors in the use of English because it is my first language but not yours; in the same spirit you could learn to accept that others may not know quite as much about the Ju 88 as you do.

It must also have occurred to you that the primary purpose of the book you mention was not the taxonomy of aircraft sub-types. It's a shame that you place so little value on the information contained in the main text, but that must remain a matter for you.

"70+ year old data"

The only data we have about the war is 70+ years old, that's when it happened. Archaeology aside, all we have gained since are new interpretations of that data. Anyone acquainted with wartime sources will be aware that they are frequently contradictory or of dubious reliability. Captured crews not only misled interrogators about what sub-type they were flying, it seems evident that many simply didn't know (or even care, perhaps). Since we are talking about Ju 88s, here are some for you:
  • A wreck at Istres with 2629 painted on the fin and 301532 painted in yellow on the exhaust shroud. So what was its correct Werk Nummer?
  • W.Nr. 822924 at Valence, recorded by those who examined the wreck as an A-4 trop. but reported by its unit as being an A-17. So whom should one believe?

You say, quite reasonably, that the Ju 88 T was a conversion and “relatively easily caught by RAF Spitfires” but conversely its bomber equivalent, the S model, was sometimes classed separately in German reports, e.g. this (71 year-old) one about aircraft breaking off an attack on Bristol: “three Ju 188, four Ju 88, one Ju 88 S and one Me 410.” Or this, from Fliegerdivision 2’s Operations Officer in August 1944: “1.(F)/33 will provide as battle reconnaissance aircraft Ju 88 S” (bearing in mind that the Staffel had available not only this type but Ju 88s with Jumo 211, Ju 188s with Jumo 213 and BMW 801 and Me 410 A-3).
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Reply With Quote