Stig, I do not get your sayin this be strange. I do not care if my answer agrees with previously published info or not, and had certainly not thought any of what others had written before.
This was began with blank sheet, fact finding for myself only, you can call it search or research (your pick) and I was only trying help, answer what I think I could answer. Do I always have to proof all I write?
One error was in my earlier post, it was intended to be that Grundke flew 39 out of 45 (really this should be
confirmed built) - in effect I have
some info on 45 a/c, but four/five I have no info of, as of now.
Those I know nothing of are CH+JJ, KT+VA, KT+VB and KT+VF. GQM reported ´0011 and ´0017 could be in either, in earlier or second bach, but I have info on 100011 and 100017 in second bach, so if ´0011 was
not in earlier batch, then I have no info on five, but as I have other separate info on (´0017) CH+JQ that number is considered confirmed. Of course this is not final, only what I have now. Info comes along and I add this as it surfaces. This will not be doctoral thesis, so no time limit.
but I think strongly about 50 were (intended) built. Ok?
But note. Earlier batch could have more digit in their serials, five digits are confirmed, with the relavant Stkz, but I am not saying which.
Stkz. blocks were CH+JA to CH+JT (20), and KT+VA to KT+VZ, and SM+XA to SM+XD (30): Two damaged in GQM reports concern 0011 80% and 0017 35%, I have not checked dam % or dates, or figure out if it can be found out easily which batch they really belonged to. I simply do not have the data to compare those with.
Its been years since I did update this type, maybe there is more but its yet unprocessed, and I have not extracted all relevant flight dates from the Grundke logbook. Maybe I should.
This reference states 43 at Fritzlar, 7 by Letov (50).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_352
Regards
Ed