Ju 290A-4, W.Nr. 165

[RolandF]

That´s really interesting. One sees how easy a "0" can be lost - many of us will have experienced this with the new European SEPA banking system. Especially on Ju 290s there are photographs of two-digit WNrn painted on the completely camouflaged fuselage on the port side beneath the cockpit.
And not to forget the peculiar application of 6-digit WNrn on the tailfins of the Ar 234. The first three digits written small (thus obvoiously the "unimportant" part) and the last three digits with large numbers - obvioulsly the "important" digits.

Regards

Roland

[Peter Achs]

@ednorth
Interesting mix of truth and assumptions.

What I mean is this kind of designation of Junkers airplanes with the "0" in front.
Ju 252: 0252000001 for the first Ju 252
Ju 288: 0288000014 for the 14th Ju 288 etc.

But what is more important: How fast does an airplane fly? How many bombs it can carry? Or a "0" more or less on the plate?

Regards
Peter

[edNorth]

@PeterAchs

No, its defenately who shot down who. Only ask them thousands of Luftwaffe fighter fans (and hundreds of authors will likely support that opinion too).
Or them in that are still fighting The War and insist its their victors rights to write that dreadful (English style) "JU-88" like none other existed.

Regards
Ed

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Ed,

Thank you for presenting a very enlightening commentary on the Werknummer system. You mention that the 6-digit secret code system for Werknummern went into effect in April 1943. If Ju 290 A-4, W.Nr. 165 was produced after this, would it have still had the 10-digit W.Nr. or something else and, if so, what would it have been and did Junkers adopt it?

Regards,
Richard

[edNorth]

"The RLM standardized on the 6-digit W.Nr., which implies that the 9-digit W.Nr. is an internal Junkers number, not an official RLM approved W.Nr."

Here I think I will say the question is wrong. It was 10-digit number (290 011 0165) that was the full W.Nr. and the number Junkers and RLM used. "Short hand version" (0165) was safe to use as so few had been built and not conflicting with others.
So, Yes, this aircraft still carried older number.

Other (part) plate, belived from AirMin57, shows that fuselage component (90.143) was made in October 1942, before introduction of "Secret code system", and note here: it has history back to Ju 90, despite having "Serie" 22900301 on it too.

Regards
Ed

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by RolandF

And not to forget the peculiar application of 6-digit WNrn on the tailfins of the Ar 234. The first three digits written small (thus obvoiously the "unimportant" part) and the last three digits with large numbers - obvioulsly the "important" digits.

Regards

Roland

Well, Peter Achs asked for something from ULTRA and here I can oblige. I have a number of instances where individual Ar 234s are referred to by the final three figures only. This was sometimes done with other types when a list was being given: they would state the first aircraft as a six-digit number and then, if the others were in the same series (say 110 ...), they would give just their final three digits.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Ed,

Thank you for the follow-up on W.Nr. 290 011 0165. So, what you are saying is that, at least for the Ju 290, Junkers stuck with its previous W.Nr. numbering and did not convert to the 6-digit version when the new W.Nr. requirements were issued in Apr. 1943.

Regards,
Richard

[Marcel Hogenhuis]

Dear all,

I am not in a position to give comments about the Ju252 nor Ju352, though very interesting but to understand when/why and how the old numbering of Werkenummer changed to the 6-digit Werkenummer and - later - to the last 3 digits of that 6-digit number is most interesting.

At the end of WW-2 several He219's were found on airfields with a 3-digit number, I remember Lech, Eder/Cheb and a few others. Combined with info from flight logs, it seems to me that these 3-digit numbers were indeed referring to the (former) 6-digit Werkenummer.

Love to hear/read more about this subject, perhaps other specific aircraft experts can join this thread with their expertise?

All the best, Marcel

[edNorth]

Richard,
Yes and No. Hard for me to explain, and research on this is not over.
Some apparently did but I think Ju 290 A series did "not change".
I at least use longer version in my research.
Other views on this are welcome.

Many Junkers aircraft ranges produced from April 1943 onwards got the "new" six digit numbers, only this (it appears) the Ju 290 (0110xxx) and Ju 88 D-1 (0430xxx) retained the older style, likely there were more, but it appears - according the evedence I already have - that 0430xxx changed to just "430xxx", as D-1 production was over in just two-three months time, so why bother change it?

Other Junkers ranges, like Ju 88 C-6 changed from "0360xxx" to new "750xxx" (and "720xxx") series. In case of Ju 188 E-1/F-1 this changed from "188/100xx" (five digit) to "188/260xxx" & "280xxx" (six digit). Previous Ju 88´s had usually used four digit numbers (like 088/0001).
Only Ju 88 B V series had used longer version (long before October 1941).

I have not found evidence of there was any 0188/xxxxxx serials. RAF source state serial as 188/xxxxx (five digit) on one wreck. Known Ju 188 dataplates all say only six digits.

Serials, as W.Nr. did not always equal c/n. (or s/n.) as used then or today. Many British and US manufacturers had (have) independant c/n or s/n apart from RAF or USAAC/USAAF/BuAer etc. serials.

But as in case of Ju 88 series, components from many factories came togeather in one airplane, so better have unified serial systems for such.

Maybe also its better talk only of the number of serial digits coming after the type designator. My conclution (as of this moment) be that aircraft already built retained their old serial, whatever long, only these built / delivered after April 1943 got "new secret code serials" (six digits). The secret code serials dataplates contained the three digit lower case (ammunition code), not old factory address that was eazily found and bombed.

Regards
Ed