Luftwaffe im Focus Special #2

[hedgehog6]

The caption for photo 50 seems to me to be inaccurate. It says this is a Ju-88T-3, but the engines look like 211s, it has a beetle-eye nose and FuG 200. Looks like an A-6/U to me. Am I right?

[Simon Schatz]

You are right, it's a A-6/U.

It seems that the right engine still has the covers of the flame dampers. Left engine doesn't have them.

Cheers, Simon

[Nick Beale]

Photo 26/page 23: there's a group of men on the left of the picture. Anyone else think that their cart might be loaded with WGr. 21 rockets?

[Jim P.]

Not to take anything away from Mr. Urbanke and his 'LW in Focus' series - most of the time he is spot on with his descriptions and he's certainly given us all many wonderful new photos - but his interpretation of those photos are not always accurate. One does what one can with the information available to them.

I know of a couple of photos that he has mislabeled. Certainly no fault to him. We see it all the time in this field. A case in point is his ID of the FW 190A-2 WNr. 5304 - he published a photo of Emil Babenz standing by the rudder of this machine sporting 9 vics (?) and suggested that it was the machine of Hptm. Seiffert, Kdr. of I./JG 26 in mid-summer 1941. However, given that I've built a db of losses that includes this period of time, just the recording of losses from published sources and no great revelation - its in Caldwell's stuff along with the GQM stuff - I can say that the first Fw190A-2 loss occurs in Dec. 41 - Walter Schneider of II./JG 26 flew into high ground on 22-Dec-41 along with 4 other of his pilots. His was the first recorded A-2 loss. There are published photos of Seiffert standing by the rudder of this machine with 20+ vics being displayed. The description of Urbanke's photo should probably be along the lines that Babenz inherited this mascine from Seiffert in the later half of May 1942.

Another photo that is - I wouldn't say mislabeled so much as misinterpretaion based on WNr. - is from LwF #5, p.8. The photo on that page is of 'white 10' from 1./JG 51' the WNr. of which Urbanke interprets as WNr. 196. However, Fw. Erwin Laskowski in his FB records that he flew on numerous occasions between Sept. 42 and Jan. 43 'white 10', WNr. 495. This would seem to be a match with the photo. I take no credit for this probable ID. This is due to the work of my good friend Russ Fahey, a name I'm sure many are familiar with in reading credits for LW titles.

[Von Alles]

Any chance that this Ju 88A-6/U could be a D-model ?

Von Alles

[hedgehog6]

It could, in theory be a "D". Some are known to have the under-nose gondola removed and the radar was a kit applicable to any A, D or H series Ju-88, but the exact combination of features is normally thought of as being typical of an A-6/U.

[panzerscheibe]

Hi hedgehog6 and Jim P.,

think you are right with your note about the Ju 88. But that's no problem for me, overall it's a fantastic magazin. I never before find a publication with photocaptions, which are so full of details.
If I'm right, they always try to correct their mistakes in the readersforum. So Jim, may be you should contact the editors if you think you have better informations.

Have fun guys
Panzerscheibe

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by hedgehog6

It could, in theory be a "D". Some are known to have the under-nose gondola removed and the radar was a kit applicable to any A, D or H series Ju-88, but the exact combination of features is normally thought of as being typical of an A-6/U.

I'm sure I read somewhere that there never was an A-6/U sub-type. Does anyone else remember seeing that?

I had an idea that the gondola on a Ju 88 was removable at unit (or maybe maintenance depot) level and so taking it off didn't necessarily create a new sub-type, it was rather an adaptation to operational requirements.

[hedgehog6]

I'm reasonably confident that the traditional view of the A-6/U derives from "Warplanes of the Third Reich". God knows how many secondary sources have repeated the description and sorting it out would require access to the original documentation. I don't have that & hadn't read the bit about there being no such thing.

I am sure however that I too have read in more than one place that the gondola was removable at a fairly low level.

Given the photo in question, I suspect that not much more can be said than that it is a Ju-88 maritime recon aircraft based on an A or D sub-type, not a T-3 as captioned.

[kormoran]

Hello,

I've ordered some older issues too the last weeks but sadly
most of them were sold out. As I understand right. Mr. Urbanke
and his staff are always willing to correct wrong informations or
they publish additions and new photos in a following issue.
For me it's a great service because lots of publications have
never been corrected. And I think that this is the best way to involve
all readers in researching work. Our hobby is living and always
actual! I want to thank Mr. Urbanke for making this great magazine
possible. Maybe he or some of his friends are members of this board
too so they can read our discussion.

Greetings to all,
Günter