Bf109 Neubau 1/44 to 3/45

[ArtieBob]

I was off teaching today, but here are replies in sequence:



General:

There are two sources for this data, C-AMT Monatsmeldung and the Gen .Qu.(6 Abt.III C) Flugzeugverteilung for various months from Jan 44 to Mar 45. The data as far as I can tell represents neubau Flugzeug accepted by the Luftwaffe (which would mean after flight test acceptance by BAL).



There is an error in positioning for two rows. The Mttr G 14AS row should total 1270 and the Erla G 14 AS row should total 107.



The bold numbers represent data that was not specific as to location. In some cases this seems pretty clear as no plant other than WNF built G 8 /R5s. Others are possibly split between more than one location. The overall subtype totals should not change.



G.Hopp- You are correct on the positioning of two rows (see above), my mistake when trying o reformat so I could post the table as an attachment here.



Rasmussen- As I noted (see above), two rows were mispositioned, but only two, so the numbers from my data show 107 Erla G 14AS produced, as the bold numbers indicate, the split by plant could be off for Dec 44 , Feb and Mar 45. I had to make a choice of how to present the data, this was my compromise.

Rasmussen- “ I guess the documents are to "old" and wrong or incomplete in many parts”. Hell no! The sources were chronologically correct, from RLM sections that had to do with production and distribution and more definitive than any other overall documentation I have seen! My sources are now identified, where did you get your information?



Olve Dybvig- please note that my table agrees with the data at SIG Norway for Jan-Mar 44 (the only months of the Monatsmeldung that are posted at that site).



Dénes- This being Luftwaffe data, it does not include aircraft directly accepted by Hungary, also, as clearly stated, does not include production prior to Jan 1944 or after Mar 45.



Kurfurst-I frankly don’t care what the Japo 109K book says, where did they get their information? Other than my typo errors incorrectly positioning two lines of data, I have simply tabulated data from two primary sources. I have cross checked these sources against other primary sources and so far, the correlation is very good.



This was sort of a test to see what sort of response presenting some data from primary sources would elicit from the board. I am not going to say a lot more other than when dealing with primary data, one needs to be very careful what you are really looking at. I also believe that in looking at Luftwaffe production data, you must recognize the difference between Neubau, Umbau and Reparatuer. Also prototypes and in some instances null series apparently are not included in totals. Finally, there are a number of reasons some of the numbers may be off, if you can’t figure out how small variances could occur for yourself, then I’m not going to waste my time helping you. The table was a project done during free time when I couldn’t be doing much else, I really don’t give a __ about Bf 109s.



Best regards,



Artie Bob

[Rasmussen]

Originally Posted by ArtieBob

I was off teaching today, but here are replies in sequence:



There is an error in positioning for two rows. The Mttr G 14AS row should total 1270 and the Erla G 14 AS row should total 107.



Rasmussen- As I noted (see above), two rows were mispositioned, but only two, so the numbers from my data show 107 Erla G 14AS produced, as the bold numbers indicate, the split by plant could be off for Dec 44 , Feb and Mar 45. I had to make a choice of how to present the data, this was my compromise.

Rasmussen- “ I guess the documents are to "old" and wrong or incomplete in many parts”. Hell no! The sources were chronologically correct, from RLM sections that had to do with production and distribution and more definitive than any other overall documentation I have seen! My sources are now identified, where did you get your information?

Hello Artie Bob,

my sources are the original monthly calculation reports from Erla to the "Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe" in Berlin W8, Leipziger Str.7, from 01/44 - 04/45. So the line of G-14/AS was the following: August - 28, September - 95, October - 9, November - 3. This number is crosschecked for example by the original "Lieferung Bf 109 nach Plan 227 laut Besprechung mit F2 am 4.12.44 u.6.12.44" from 6.12.44 where in the column "Lieferung bis 30.11.44" is written "135". So the point can be that the RLM taked over 107 a/c but Erla delivered for sure 135 a/c.

And regarding the K's the statements of your documents are "old" for sure - source: "secret information number 86" from 25.January 1944 regarding "RLM Lieferplan 225/1 vom 1.12.43, Besprechung der Arbeitsgruppe 109 am 21.1. in Regensburg". The same with the G-5/R2 - source: "Programm vom 19.7.44" from 25.7.44 with the addition "(diese Fz werden bei Erla Antwerpen auf G-5/R-2 umgerüstet. AS-Motoren werden aus Serienbeständen von Werk I entnommen.)" A lot of this G-5/R2/AS were found in Antwerpen on September 03 (or 04?),1944, W.Nr.'s are known. So the text "scheduled not built" cannot be right.

Best wishes
Rasmussen

[Dénes Bernád]

Hello Artie Bob,

My reply - and I believe others' too - was not directed against you, by any means. It merely added new information/corrections, and thus updated your list drawn from primary sources.

Perhaps, I should have included a thank-you for your kind effort to post primary material here. The fact that I forgot to do it is solely due to the fast pace we are all living, which often means cutting corners.

On a positive side, your post generated a lively debate on a concrete issue, which is more than welcome here. Eventually, we all will hopefully learn from this thread.

Thank you, again, for your time and effort. I certainly hope more similar posts will follow.

[veltro]

Originally Posted by ArtieBob

There is an error in positioning for two rows. The Mttr G 14AS row should total 1270 and the Erla G 14 AS row should total 107.

Please forgive me both for intervening this late into this very interesting thread (great thanks to ArtieBob for sharing his valuable info) and also to appear numb, absolutely worse than Ruy (no offense intended, pal )...

My only question is that, while I understand perfectly about the row on Mtt G-14/AS to be shifted above, I don't see any other line ending with the total value of "107", so where are such data?

Further, to avoid misunderstandings and to help numb people like me, could Artie modify and correct his own table (no need to make a new post, suffice only to replace the file to be downloaded) according to his statements above?

Sorry to ask, but I would really prefer the author to compile his own corrections*, instead of a "do it yourself" job...

Thanks again for the data and the informative discussion.

* also, a footnote about K-2s being G-14s instead would be useful to avoid misunderstandings, especially if this list will start to circulate in the net...IMHO

[Ruy Horta]

Veltro,

Must admit that I had the same question, since somehow shifting the row didn't solve the problem.

Artie,

If you have used Excel or another format, please attach the original file-type, that way you will be certain that we will see what you intended us to see.

This continuous to be a learning experience for all of us, so I hope you won't feel offended by my comments!!

[ArtieBob]

Sorry, I was in a hospital Tue/Wed and have been out of the loop. Comments are absolutely pertinent, I have already corrected the table. Since I was technologically challenged in posting the original attachment, can someone confirm whether I can replace the original attachment with the corrected table (which is to me the best solution and the errors will no be floating around the ether) or will I have to add it as a new entry? If the latter is the case, once posted, could the moderator delete the original attachment?


Best regards,

Artie Bob

[Ruy Horta]

First Artie, I really hope all is well with you and your loved ones.

As for the file.

Easiest way would be for you to delete the original attachement and post the corrected file.

If my help is needed, just holler.

[ArtieBob]

Third try,

This copy of the attachment has all the typo errors corrected that I could find, the first has already been mentioned the data did not line up with the correct heading for the G 14 AS Mttr., etc. I also found one missing piece of data for Erla G-6s in Jul 44. Hopefully, this will be all the corrections. Not to excuse my typos, but this was extracted from 70 pages of data with about 20,000 fields. It all begins to run together after a while.

Best regards,

Artie Bob

[veltro]

Now it makes a lot more sense to me! Thanks Artie for taking the time to post the corrected version and let me wish all the best to you, in case your hospital stay isn't connected with your job...