Looking for abstracts to von Rohden collection at NARS in the 1960's

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear All,

It's a slow slog going through and trying to find the correct descriptor for each of the 2 dozen von Rohden documents I have. One of the ones I worked on today (4376-1214) deals with the order setting up a special Me 262 unit under Gen. Galland. The order is dated 10.2.45 and is signed by v. Greiff.

It is but a single page, so I transcribed the text, then made an attempt to translate it:

Transcribed text:

"1.) Die durch Umgliederung der IV./JG 54 in eine Me 262 - Jagdgruppe (II./JG 7) freiwerdende 4. Staffel ist geschlossen Gen.Lt. Galland zur Aufstellung einer unter seiner Führung stehenden und dem JG 7 anzugleidernen Jagdstaffel Me 262 zur Verfügung zu stellen.

2.) Organisationsbefehl ergeht durch Gen.Qu.2.Abt."

Rough translation of text:

"1.) By order to organize IV./JG 54 into an Me 262 - Jagdgruppe (II./JG 7) released 4. Staffel is closed Gen.Lt. Galland for establishing a standing under his leadership and the JG 7 to organize Jagdstaffel Me 262 to provide.

2.) Organization order is issued by Gen.Qu.2.Abt."

I used quite a few resources to do the translation, but I'm not happy with the roughness of the first section. Yes, I can get the gist of it, but it would be nicer to have a cleaner translation to go with the document.

Anyone want to give it a try?

Regards,
Richard

[muggs_ro]

I'll give it a go although my German is a bit rusty lately, some of the wording is a bit weird in the provided text.

Adaptation :

Due to the reorganisation of IV./JG 54 in a Me 262 fighter group (II./JG 7) , the now vacant 4th squadron is reserved to Gen.Lt. Galland to create under his command a Me 262 fighter squadron which will also be affiliated to JG 7.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear muggs ro,

Thanks for giving it a go. I'm glad that you were able to confirm that it wasn't just me that had trouble with this one. Now, my take on it was that Galland was taking the 4. Staffel of IV./JG 54 and II./JG 7 to start out with for his new unit. Your interpretation may be closer to the truth.

What's the difference between 4. Staffel and IV./JG 54? If there isn't any difference, then why are they mentioned separately? Luftwaffe organization and operations are not my strong points.

Anyone else want to give it a try?

Regards,
Richard

[RodM]

Originally Posted by Larry deZeng

For those with a continuing interest in the von Rohden Collection.


“The total collection will consist of 124 reels of 35-mm..”



L.

Hi Larry,

thanks for the interesting information on the collection. As 73 rolls are at NARA, I wonder what happened to the remaining 51 rolls of the 124 roll collection?

Cheers

Rod

[Larry deZeng]

Hi Rod,

I guess that's one of the great mysteries surrounding all of the Luftwaffe documents that were sent to the U.S. after the war for use by postwar study groups and then microfilming.

All I can do is speculate because there a number of possibilities. It seems that they were last in the possession of the Army Historical Office which, after several moves, ended up in the former Munitions Building on Constitution Avenue in Washington by the mid-1970's. This office was busy writing multi-volume histories of the U.S. Army, had a large staff of historians and university professors, and had the power and authority to seize whatever World War II documents it wanted to undertake its mission. Unfortunately, not everything that passed into its hands got returned to its proper venue. For example, I know for a fact that large amounts of documentation from the war in the Pacific ended up in its hands and was then "lost". Many years later, some of this material was found at NARA stored in unrelated boxes in the Army Historical Office record group instead of having been returned to the record group where it belonged. Hence, for years no one could find these documents.

So that's my guess on where the missing reels might have ended up. As you know, researchers have often said that the main difference between the U.S. NARA and the British PRO is quantity and cataloguing. The Brits heavily purged their WWII records but know exactly where every document is, while the Americans saved every last scrap of paper and don't don't know where anything is. It appears that this is the case here.

L.

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Richard T. Eger

What's the difference between 4. Staffel and IV./JG 54? If there isn't any difference, then why are they mentioned separately? Luftwaffe organization and operations are not my strong points.

4. Staffeln was but one Staffeln of II/JG 7, but IV./JG 54 is whole 4th Group (that normally included 10., 11, and 12th Staffeln):
so this does not seem total of 4 Staffeln transformed into II/JG 7 - or was it (this designation) 4./JG 7 not used and the (all three) Staffeln of IV/JG 54 forming just 5th and 6th Staffeln/JG 7?

I can not elaborate further as I do not know exact histories of IV/JG 54 or II/JG 7 (or how this really became organized).

-Ed

[Norbert Schuchbauer]

Hi All,
in plain english it menas that IV./JG 54 (a four squadron gruppe) will be redesignated as II./JG 7 (a three squadron gruppe). The squadron that remains is to be completedly subordinated to Galland for creation of a squadron under his leadership that mirrors those Me 262 staffeln of JG 7.

Regards,
Norbert

[edNorth]

Seems IV./JG 54 was not disbanded, rather becoming IV./JG 26 later in February 45.
But yes, it was a four Staffeln Gruppe... this site helps yet again.
http://www.ww2.dk/
http://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg54.htm
(so IV./JG 54 this perhaps was only drained of suitable trainees)

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Ed and Norbert,

Thanks for your input. I've also contacted Robert Forsyth, author of JV 44, independently. One of the hinge words here is "geschlossen", a verb describing Galland's status. At this point, Galland was without portfolio or, even worse, possibly under indictment. The date of the document, as I mentioned, is 10.2.45, so I'm not exactly sure of his status at the time. The use of the word may also have been done in distain or disgust. It is hard to say.

I've attempted to reconstruct the statement to get a clearer meaning and context flow:

"1.) By order to organize IV./JG 54 into an Me 262 - Jagdgruppe (II./JG 7), 4. Staffel is released to Gen.Lt. Galland, currently without standing, to organize and establish a Jagdstaffel of Me 262's under his leadership to provide as part of JG 7."

Comments?

Regards,
Richard

[Nick Beale]

Die durch Umgliederung der IV./JG 54 in eine Me 262 - Jagdgruppe (II./JG 7) freiwerdende 4. Staffel ist geschlossen Gen.Lt. Galland zur Aufstellung einer unter seiner Führung stehenden und dem JG 7 anzugleidernen Jagdstaffel Me 262 zur Verfügung zu stellen.

"The 4. [Staffel] — freed up by the conversion of IV. [Gruppe]/JG 54 into an Me 262 Jagdgruppe (II./JG 7) — is placed, as a complete unit, at the disposal of Gen.Lt. Galland for the establishment of an Me 262 Jagdstaffel under his leadership and attached to JG 7."

I think there's an ambiguity in that "4. Staffel" doesn't mean 4./JG 54 (part of the I. Gruppe) here but rather "the fourth Staffel of the IV. Gruppe" (i.e. 16./JG 54).

The reason for that is that JG 54's Gruppen had four Staffeln each while JG 7 was set up with only three per Gruppe but with gaps in the numbering to allow for a fourth. So the JG 7 structure was:

I. Gruppe: 1., 2. and 3./JG 7
II. Gruppe: 5., 6. and 7./JG 7
III. Gruppe: 9., 10. and 11./JG 7

So Galland was to get the Staffel that was surplus in the reorganisation. As to "geschlossen" in this context, it can mean "united" or "in a body" and I take that to mean here that Galland will get all the Staffel's elements: flying, technical, signals, admin. etc. You'll often see in other reorganisations that the pieces were split up and assigned to various units.