Informations about Bf 109 E WNr.1259 ?

[Falcon]

Originally Posted by ouidjat

2.(H)/14 can't see other possibility.

Oh yes. The style matches with that Emils...

http://www.me109.info/display.php?a=e&fid=632
http://www.me109.info/display.php?a=e&fid=108

[ChrisS]

Yep 2.(H)14, I have 6 other desert emils with this style marking and each has it's WNr under the cockpit (all the others are illegible). Also several Bf-109F's.

[John Beaman]

Here's what the records say. No E-9. Seems a short time for an 80% to come back into service. Maybe a mis-ID?

Bf109E-7, 1259, MARSEILLE, Ofhr. Hans-Joachim I./ 3.//JG 27, gelbe13 + (?),
20-Apr-41, Notlandung due to engine damage., X.Fl.Korps/Afrika, Gen.Qu.6.Abt. (mfm #3)-Vol.4; Prien, et al, Die Jagdfliegerverbände, V, p.374; Prien/Rodeike/Stemmer, Stab & I./JG 27, p.540; Scutts, Bf 109 Aces of NA & the Med, p.28
bei Cahela, 80%


Bf 109E-7, 1259, n.n., JGr.West,14-May-43, Notlandung due to engine trouble., Lfl.3/, FR, Gen.Qu.6.Abt. (mfm #10)-Vol.17, Pauillac, 60%

[ouidjat]

Originally Posted by John Beaman

... Seems a short time for an 80% to come back into service...

What do you mean John? Between when and when? Can you detail your thoughts please?

Regards, Franck.

[John Beaman]

Franck,

what I mean is that for an 80% damaged airframe, I am surprised it was not written off. But if that damage estimate is correct, then there must have been extensive damage to the airframe, not just landing gear etc. I would guess that a major rebuild might have been in order, not just repairs by a depot, some where. It was in the second loss in a training unit, which means it was flying in less than two years. so that time frame seems a short time for such extensive repairs, but since I know little about wartime German aircraft repair proceedures, perhaps I am wrong.

[ouidjat]

John,

me either ... But less than two years left time enough I think.
Talking about short time frame I thought you're refering about the time left between Marseille's accident and that David's picture we can suppose taken in 1942.

Even though we have "seen" shorter times with same damage elsewhere ...

We can suppose she got the WNr. Under canopy when in major repair shop.

Regards, Franck.

PS: But whatever, there is something wrong in that 80%.

[Stig Jarlevik]

David

How fixed is the WNr 1259? It is not possible to verify on the photo you have sent. Do you have a better copy?

It seems awkward to say the least to have the aircraft damaged 80% with JG 27 and be back in service with 2.(H)./14 in 1942. 80% damage was basically only small spare parts use only. Possibly the 80% is faulty....

Cheers
Stig

[ouidjat]

Salut Stig,

This photo came exactly as David did put it in thread; don't expect more. (Good to notice that it's very rare David keeping one photo with such "antifuchs")

As for 80%:
I think this is John problem - mine and yours too - especialy in 1941/1942. It was just good for spare parts.
But, as this photo do suggest, the damage were big enough to send the craft in major repair shop (hence the WNr. under canopy).

I really think - until getting one accident's picture - it's not very important to focus on this 80%.

The main concern is: An E-7? An E-9? An E-9 definitely not. MG tube is clearly visible pointing off left wing.
1259 wasn't an E-1/E-8/E-9. But an E-3/E-7 though it is displaying (in 1942) an early style canopy and an uncomplete head armor rest.

That's all - I think - we can say about it.
Last, as usual I can, I'm able to, "speculate" a little bit more about it!!

Cheers, Franck.

[Merlin]

What a long story for a misread number!

The correct Werknummer of this Bf 109E-7trop is 1299, it was lost as black “11” by 4.(H)/12 on 6.Jun.42 when Lt. Fritz Hülle (POW) made a forced landing after being damaged by AA near Acroma.

[Falcon]

Its possible that the first photo was in higher resolution and I have reduced it to 800 pixels.
I have check my files, but I don't was able to find it. My upload to my website was on the 22. Nov 2004. And I have found other photos of this plane... damn small... but it looks like Merlins guess of WNr. 1299 can be correct. And the other informations matches perfectly, or?

But look...

Edit: But, the left photo show an other 109, its the later canopy. But also missing wing guns...