ME 109g-6 u4 arnaments?

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

These are not showing kits, but permanent factory conversions...

My only point was to offer one case (unusual in my experience) where /R designations where recorded in a strength return. The other units I was looking at then, in the same files, didn't do that.

[Kurfürst]

Oh, I see. You mean the other recce units ..?

[George Hopp]

My only point was to offer one case (unusual in my experience) where /R designations where recorded in a strength return. The other units I was looking at then, in the same files, didn't do that.

Thank you very much for giving them, Nick. I found the listing to be really interesting, informative, and ever so slightly confusing.

Thank you again,
George

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Oh, I see. You mean the other recce units ..?

No, Italian-based units in general. This was research for Air War italy 1944-45. The data for the JG 77 Gruppen in Italy didn't go into such detail, for example.

[Kurfürst]

Oh, thank you, now it's clear. So the /-designations are definietely recorded ina sloppy manner in cases, I just checked ww2.dk for JG 77, whch I believe records different type of reports from the units to higher levels - those ones definietely note conversions of the subtypes (ie. /U2, /U4).
http://ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg77.htm

It seems to be sloppy administration accross the board, since for example when I tried to check Knoke's unit for /AS aircraft, none were showing up the date Knoke gives them. But they were there, he clearly notes they were from the factory, the date, there's even pictures of his superior's ride, clearly a G-5/AS... yet the records at ww2.dk only show Neufertigung G-5s ...

Thanks, Nick.

[RalphZimmer]

Dear all,
Very interesting discussion!


I recall reading the following designations somewhere – it might be from a G-6/U4 manual I read some years ago in the then „Außenstelle des militärgeschichtlichen Forschungsamtes“ at Potsdam:
- G-6/U4: (MK108 in the engine)
- G-6/U5(IIRC): (U4+ 2 MK108 in gondolas)
There was a mention that the use of MG151 gondola weapons was forbidden. Unfortunately I am not at home to check my notices.

In my opinion Kurfürsts comments concerning Rüstsätze/Rüstzustände/Umrüst-Bausätze are correct – there would be no sense in changing the designation of an aircraft without lasting changes in its structure.

Therefore the different possible “Rüstsätze“ are not used in its designation as they where interchangeable in the field. Instead they are mentioned in the type´s manual, e.g in the manual for the G-6/U4 the possible Rüstsätze R3 (fuel tank) etc. were listed.

Thus I think there were (at least) three different types of variants/subvariants:
1) “Rüstsatz” (sing., plural: “Rüstsätze”: field-conversion-kits.
These were not mentioned in the aircrafts designation as the necessary plumbing/wiring was installed at the factory.

In each manual I saw the possible “Rüstsätze“ for the special subtype are listed (IIRC in Part 0).


2) “Rüstzustand” (sing., plural: “Rüstzustände”): actual equipment situation, which where installed not at unit at level. These required extensive changes which were not possible at unit level. The designation of the subtype was changed too. Examples are the recce variants G-4/R3 and G-6/R3 with two drop tanks under the wings.
As the Rüstzustand is part of the types designation, it is mentioned in the title of the corresponding manual.



3) “Umrüst-Bausatz” (sing., plural: “Umrüst-Bausätze”) (perhaps factory conversion kits?), which were not changeable at unit level, too.
As the Umrüst-Bausatz is part of the types designation, it is mentioned in the title of the corresponding manual.


The differences between “Rüstzustände and Umrüst-Bausätze are not perfectly clear to me, as both were carried out at the factory.
Perhaps the difference lies in the timing of the conversion, as the german “Umrüst-Bausatz” implies? In this case the conversion of an airframe to a “Rüstzustand” was carried out while under production, while an Umrüst-Bausatz was fitted afterwards?

Another designation that puzzles me is the “/R1” as in G-6/R1. These are sometimes mentioned in loss lists from Prien et al and were recorded at units in North Africa around 1942/43. I never heard of a Rüstzustand 1 but neither thought, that adding the Rüstsatz 1 (ETC) would alter the types designation, too. Perhaps also a habit of a technical officer or his clerk? Is there anybody to solve this?

Greetings from Essen
Ralph Zimmer

[ArtieBob]

Forgive me if I am a bit confused about some aspects of this discussion, as Bf 109s are not my special interest and thus have not been reading some of the posts as carefully as I might. But, perhaps the following might be of interest:

As an example, here are designations of Bf 109s from the August 1943 Messerschmitt A.G. Monatsbericht:
G-2
G-2/R 1
G-2/R 2
G-3
G-4
G-4/U 7
Ga-4
G-5
G-6
G-6/R 3
G-6/U 4
G-8
The C-Amts reports generally used the same format, but usually also included a Verwendungszreck column with codes as: J, J Hö, A, AHöRei, ABöRei, etc. The only time I remember Roman numerals appearing in the C-Amts reports were associated with Kehl III and IV modifications.

Best Regards,

Artie Bob

[Juha]

Thanks Kurfürst and Ralph for your excellent messages.
My understanding is same. In fact I was a bit bitter when I noticed from IIRC Prien & Rodike the difference between Rüstsatz and Rüstzustand and the fact that R something was only used in connection with latter. Reason was that I had to abandon the easy 109G-6/R6 designation, to which I still lapse sometimes, and began to use 109G-6 mit Rüstsatz VI, what a pity. Reason: years ago I was fascinated by the different opinions some Finnish aces had on 109G-6 mit Rüstsatz VI

And yes, Kurfürst, You remembered right, F-4/R1 was the designation of F-4 with possibility to use gunpods.

Juha

[Harold Lake]

TO ARTIE BOB:
It was a surprise to see your mention of a G-4/U7 from Messerschmitt's August 1943 Monthly Report. Is this a typo? I didn't think Bf 109 "U-numbers" went beyond U6. If you are certain this is not a typo, does the report give any clue as to what this item was?
Hal

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by RalphZimmer

Another designation that puzzles me is the “/R1” as in G-6/R1. These are sometimes mentioned in loss lists from Prien et al and were recorded at units in North Africa around 1942/43. I never heard of a Rüstzustand 1 but neither thought, that adding the Rüstsatz 1 (ETC) would alter the types designation, too. Perhaps also a habit of a technical officer or his clerk? Is there anybody to solve this?

Greetings from Essen
Ralph Zimmer

Messerschmitt AG's compilation report identifies the G-6/R1 as JaboRei, Long Range Fighter-Bomber with 2x300 liter droptanks, and, as in the case of G-1/R1, and 500 kg (yes, 500kg) bomb under the fuselage. G-4/R1 of similiar flavour is also mentioned.

That surprises me quite a bit to find records of G-6/R1 from operational areas, I always though there were only a couple of G-1/R1s around, and those primarly as testbeds only. But then again, I have not seen any detailed production summaries from 1943.

Interesting find, Ralph. The 109's history never cease to amaze me. There's always something new about it...