Stab StG1, 25.07.1940

[srob48]

Stab StG1.
Dornier Do17M (3620). Reconnaissance sortie to England, shot down by RAF Spitfires and crashed at East Fleet Farm, Fleet, Dorset, 11.15am. Uffz. Kurt Lingenbrink killed. Fw. E. Grossmann and Fw. B. Erdmann captured. Aircraft A5+EA a write-off.

Anyone know first names and crew positions for this one?

Kind regards, Steve

[Melvin Brownless]

From Nigel Parker's Luftwaffe Crash Archive the following;
Pilot; Berhard Erdmann
Obs: Erich Grossmann
Kurt Lingenbrink ?

Regards,

Melvin

www.aircrewremembrancesociety.co.uk

[srob48]

Thank you Melvin.

[John Vasco]

Buy the book...

Oh, you don't set any store by information in books...

[srob48]

Dear John Vasco,
Thank you for your unhelpful reply. I have already bought your books "Bombsights over England" and "Zestörer" and for your information I have a very extensive collection of Luftwaffe books covering the period 1st June 1940 to 1st June 1941.

You tell me to buy the book.... but you don't even say what book? As my question is about a Dornier Do17M of Stab StG1, I don't think I will find the answer in your books about the Messerschmitt Bf110.

Quote "Oh, you don't set any store by information in books..." Is that comment really necessary or somehow funny?

[Chris Goss]

John means Luftwaffe Crash Archive-there are now 9 volumes detailing crashes in and around UK up to 31 Dec 42 (so far)

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by srob48

Dear John Vasco,
Thank you for your unhelpful reply. I have already bought your books "Bombsights over England" and "Zestörer" and for your information I have a very extensive collection of Luftwaffe books covering the period 1st June 1940 to 1st June 1941.

You tell me to buy the book.... but you don't even say what book? As my question is about a Dornier Do17M of Stab StG1, I don't think I will find the answer in your books about the Messerschmitt Bf110.

Quote "Oh, you don't set any store by information in books..." Is that comment really necessary or somehow funny?

"...Is that comment really necessary..." Yes. Seeing as you denigrated information in books, what the hell do you expect? This is in your signature: "All my information comes from the Luftwaffe Loss Records kept on microfilm at the Imperial War Museum in London. Wast in Berlin, and the VDK. All official sources." Coupled with an earlier comment about information in books, pretty conclusive I would say...

And how about you actually read Melvin Brownless's post further up. For ease of reference, here's what it says: "...From Nigel Parker's Luftwaffe Crash Archive the following..." Look them up on the internet.

And finally, I did not say you would find the answer in any of my Messerschmitt 110 books. It is disingenuous to infer or suggest otherwise.

Read posts properly...

[John Beaman]

Alright guys, no flame wars or Ill shut the thread down.

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by John Beaman

Alright guys, no flame wars or Ill shut the thread down.

I don't know whether you have read the other relevant thread, John, so I cannot comment on that matter.

In defence of myself in this thread ( I note you say 'guys' so I presume your post is directed at me, among other(s)), this is what I posted in a previous thread by srob48 titled 8./ZG26, 09.07.1940:
"It might be useful if you quote your source(s) when you post such as you have done in your first post in this thread. If you do that, then the knowledgeable on here may be able to provide better replies for you." Quite innocuous as far as I am concerned. Simply wanting to know from where he drew his information from, in order to provide better assistance.
The above post by me prompted this reply from srob48:
"To John and everyone else that mentions quoting sources.
All my information comes from the Luftwaffe Loss Records kept on microfilm at the Imperial War Museum in London. Wast in Berlin, and the VDK. All official sources. I do not tend to use books as most contain errors. If you wish me to repeat this message on every new thread I will, but it will get a bit boring."

So he doesn't tend to use books. Fine.

I replied with (after providing a couple of examples of where 'official' records were 100% incorrect):
"So I would respectfully suggest that you do not dismiss information in books, as oftentimes that information is far more up-to-date and correct...

THAT is why I suggested you quote your sources for the specific information you request in threads on here. There are many on here who have accessed over the decades the records you mention, and garnered a hell of a lot more information from private sources to supplement those official records. If it's 'boring' for you to quote your sources, then you may find that that will result in less assistance than you may otherwise receive..." The reason for this is to simply point out when official records are incorrect.

Nick Beale then weighed in with this relevant point:
!To reinforce what others have said, sometimes books are more reliable because authors have done more work, taking into account the limitations of the source material rather than taking things at face value. Wartime sources are invaluable, not infallible. The Luftwaffe was hopeless at spelling personal names and non-German place names, for a start. Take Ofw. Kuno Dollenmayer/Dollenmeyer/Dollenmaier — all spellings in primary sources, so how do you decide which is right? Or Oblt. Theodor Spies/Spiess of 5.(F)/123 … Or (from the IWM records) "Grumone" in Italy — on maps it's Cremona, so do you believe the German records?"

Now, back to this thread. When Melvin Brownless posted: "From Nigel Parker's Luftwaffe Crash Archive the following", I simply thought it rather ironic that srob48 said that he did not tend to use books as most contain errors, yet here was Melvin quoting the correct information from a book. Ironic, surely, John?
I then said 'buy the book' (because it has excellent information in it, drawing from decades of recent research that supplements and correct the errors in the official records). And when I posted this it was an ironic comment also: "Oh, you don't set any store by information in books..."
This prompted srob48 to say: "Thank you for your unhelpful reply." Missed the irony 100% there, srob.
And then to pile irony upon irony, he goes on to say:
"I have already bought your books "Bombsights over England" and "Zestörer" and for your information I have a very extensive collection of Luftwaffe books covering the period 1st June 1940 to 1st June 1941." Now after saying that he did not tend to use books, he points out that he has an extensive collection of books... Is that not somewhat ironic?

To me, everything is light-hearted, full of ironic twists. To srob,who is trying to garner additional information, perhaps not.

That's all John. Nothing more complicated than that.