22 Aug 44 P-47 near Tours sur Marne (nr Athis)

[rob van den nieuwendijk]

Hello Chris, Larry and all others,

Interesting thread -

My source is a German combat report stating that ground crew member Obergefreiter Dorn of Stabskompanie II./JG 3 claimed a Thunderbolt on 22 Aug 44 at 14.20 hours "4km ostwärts des Feldflugplatzes Tours sur Marne". On this day Mustangs and Thunderbolts attacked this airfield at 14.15 hours - at the very same time when "unsere Gruppe " (II./JG 3) was taking off.

II./JG 3 was operating from Nogent le Roi from 27 July 44 - 10 Aug 44
From Athis from 10 Aug 44 - 21 Aug 44.

Interesting is that sources also state that II./JG 3 left Athis on 21 Aug 44. And that on 20 Aug 44 III./JG 76 arrived at Athis to replace II./JG 3 (Prien, Stemmer, II./JG 3, page 359). Part of ground crew had to stay at Athis in order to look after the aircraft of III./JG 76; obviously a small Kommando of pilots of II./JG 3 was attached to III./JG 76.

Might Athis, Tours sur Marne and d'Epernay-Plivot all be the very same airfield..?

Ultra stated on 13 Aug 44:
II./JG 3 on A/F 139A (Plivot); this provides confirmation that II./JG 3 is to remain in France and not transferring to Reich to rest and refit as envisaged. For a/c of II./JG 27 being taken over by II./JG 3.

Best regards,
Rob

[Larry deZeng]

Some additional information on Plivot:

Épernay-Plivot (FR) (a.k.a. Athis) (49 00 25 N – 04 05 10 E) )
General: landing ground in NE France 28 km S of Reims, 10.5 km ESE of Épernay and 1.2 km SE of the village of Plivot.
History: a French Air Force landing ground since at least 1939. Used by the RAF in 1939-40. Believed to have been used by Luftwaffe Bf 109s and by a short-range tactical reconnaissance unit during the advance through France in June 1940. No subsequent development by the Germans after the Armistice until Spring 1944. Surface and Dimensions: grass surface measuring 915 x 732 meters (1000 x 800 yards). No runways. Fuel and Ammunition: had underground fuel tanks on the N and SW sides of the landing area. Infrastructure: no hangers, workshops or other buildings of any sort (May 43). The nearest rail connection was in the village of Oiry 5 km NW of the landing ground. Dispersal: no organized dispersal areas and the landing area was surrounded by open cultivated fields. Defenses: none (12 May 44).
Remarks:
3 Oct 43: Allied reconnaissance reported Épernay-Plivot to be permanently obstructed by trenches and in addition to being trenched, the landing area was further obstructed by rough plowing.
19 Apr 44: Allied reconnaissance and agents reported Épernay-Plivot had filled in the trenches and leveling work was underway to add a 320 meter (350 yard) extension off the SW corner to give the landing area a NE/SW take-off and landing run of 1510 meters (1650 yards); due to the construction, the landing ground is currently unserviceable.
12 May 44: Allied reconnaissance reported continuing work on the extension and the installation of perimeter lighting. Landing ground now serviceable.
Operational Units: Stab/JG 53 (Jun 40).
Station Commands: none identified.
Lw. Station Units (on the landing ground or close by on various dates – not complete): Frontreparaturbetrieb GL Épernay (1944); schw.Flak-Abt. 278 (Eisb.) (Aug 44).
[Sources: AFHRA A5259 p.1608 (14 Aug 43 updated to 12 May 44 and A5260 pp.1991-94); chronologies; BA-MA; NARA; PRO/NA; web site ww2.dk]

I wonder if Athis might have been a satellite of Plivot? Again, there is no mention of Tours-sur-Marne or Athis in this extremely comprehensive Allied airfields documentation. Very strange.

L.

[hautemarnechris]

Everybody - thanks again.

Sorry not to have responded sooner -just back from France.

Like Larry my feeling is that Tours-sur-marne/Athis/Plivot were one and the same. However, just to confuse matters further Ultra reported on T274 (can't remember exact date) as follows:

"To ABIOC ((JG 3)) for ABUNO (( (ROMAN) 11 JG)) 3 on 10/8:- airfield ATHIS 20km East of Epernay between river and Railway. Square U175. Serviceable for landing.

NOTE: (1) source believes from JG 27 (2) on 9/8 Jagdkorps 2 ordered ROMAN II Jg 3 to be withdrawn to the reich for rest and refit.

Fair indication JG 27 on 10th informed J3 for 2nd Gruppe that airfield ATHIS 20km east of Epernay between river and railway was servicable for landing."

However, ATHIS lies closer than 20km to the east of Eperany; it's also south of both the river and the railway - but only just. But VRAUX lies 20km east of Epernay and according to the people who run the musuem at VRAUX "it seems that some BF 109 GS of JG 3 , based at Tours / Marne , also used Vraux , this time during June / July / August 1944." VRAUX and ATHIS are a short distance and equidistant from Tours-sur-Marne.

The wikipedia entry for ATHIS airfield says that modern Plivot was built a short distance from the original ATHIS airfield - it's claimed that all that's left of the original ATHIS airfield is a triangular concrete section which was the intersection of the two runways at ATHIS. Using Google street view one can indeed see what looks like a concrete section in the fields to the south west of ATHIS.

I think the only way to settle this is to visit the area and speak to local people. My guess is that they were all one and the same place. But I'm a bit concerned about the very detailed allied description of Plivot which Larry gives. I intended to visit PLIVOT and ATHIS last week but got side-tracked. I shall be in the area again in early September and will make a visit to try to settle this matter.

Fortunately for me, the key issue is whether JG 3 was "exterminated" by an RAF attack on an airfield close to TOURS-sur-Marne - whether the airfield was VRAUX, ATHIS or PLIVOT doesn't really matter.

I haven't seen any evidence that II/JG 3 suffered serious losses whilst on the ground when staioned in the Chalons area. And I don't think the RAF operated there. Therefore, I believe the agent's report was at best a gross exaggeration but more likely he was claiming the credit for what was a routine attack by the USAAF where a JG 3 gruppe (probably II/Jg3)suffered some losses but nothing like the catastrophic losses the agent portrayed in his report.

Thanks again for sharing your ideas and scholarship - it's most appreciated.

[Larry deZeng]

Excellent report, Chris! I, for one, will be looking forward to your findings after your on-site investigative inspection. It should prove very interesting and I hope you are able to find some old timers who still have some recollections of August 1944.

Larry