WNr.1988: Bf109 E-3 or E-4 ?

[Clint Mitchell]

Hi,

I have different sources that state contradicting variants for this WNr. Can anyone confirm what this Bf109E left the factory as and what it was when lost on 25/10/40.

Regards,

[Peter Cornwell]

It was an Erla-built E-4 and remained so.

[Clint Mitchell]

Peter, Thank you for your reply. Two of my secondary sources say exactly that alongside the G report which states "Me109E-4". My problem is how this aircraft is listed in the document below.

Kind regards

Clint

Attachment 8894

Edit: I did wonder whether a typo might be causing the problem but the block is listed as being Erla Built E-3 1980-2063 three more times in the 15 page document.

[Clint Mitchell]

Can this document be relied upon as containing the correct information?

[Rabe Anton]

The quiet consternation over the accuracy of the "Übersichtsliste der Änderungs-Anweisungen -
Bf 109" involving the subtype of the WNr. 1988 is well-founded; the confounded audience includes this writer.

Ostensibly, the "Übersichtliste" surely should be an impeccable source. After all, the lists were official documents created by the headquarters of the design office (Augsburg) that created the Bf 109. One would think, therefore, that such documents concerning a matter as vitally crucial as aircraft modifications would be letter-perfect. Precision and reliability should be the order of the day, nicht wahr?! Indeed, that was the writer's belief upon receiving copies of surviving examples of the "Übersichtliste" some five or six years ago.

After countless references to the "Übersichtliste" over the past few years, however, I am now convinced that surprisingly the directive indices are only mostly correct. The matter of WNr. 1988 illustrates this point. Equally perplexing are several lacunae in cited Werknummer series or runs indicated by "/". At least some of these "missing" or "ghost" aircraft were unquestionably built (there is other sound documentation for them), but the "Übersichtliste" omit them. Why? Some of the missing aircraft were doubtless part of foreign deliveries (to Switzerland and Yugoslavia, for example), but a number clearly went to the Luftwaffe.

So what is going on here? So far, the only explanation I can come up with is that of simple accounting and tracking errors. Anyone have a better or more satisfying explanation?

RA

[Clint Mitchell]

Rabe, thank you for your views on this document. Very interesting... I will be slightly cautious regarding it's content in the future.

[Rabe Anton]

You are very welcome, Clint. I wish had more to share, but like you, I am quite mystified by the anomalies within the "Übersichtliste." If you get further information or insights, please bring them to the com-munity's attention.


RA

[Alex Smart]

Hello,
Many thanks for this thread.

I for one have always wanted to know the fate of Wknr:1980 ?
What happened to her and what became of her pilot ?

From memory I recall that her rudder was used as a replacement for the damaged one on a captured Bf109.
Alex

[Clint Mitchell]

Rabe, will do and thank you all again.

Clint

[Clint Mitchell]

Hi, Charles Bavarois has rather kindly posted the following over on LEMB here. He gives details from a document he has that again mentions this WNr. and to it to being an E-3:

"Berichtigung der Rechnung Nr. 5018 vom 12. August 1940"

"Wir berechnen die Teillieferung von 33 Stück Flugzeugen Bf109E3 Werknummern 1641-1659, 1980-1993 zum Zellenpreis von je 59.000.--"

He offers a rough translation:

"we charge you for delivering 33 Bf109E3 , serials 1641-1659, 1980-1993, at 59.000 Reichsmark for each airframe ".

I'm unsure if this adds or subtracts anything to any other period documents relating to this WNr. but posted purely for interested parties.