Book Review (with corrections and expansions) of Jan Forsgren: Messerschmitt Bf 108 Taifun (Mushroom Yellow Series No. 6132)

[Stig Jarlevik]

Lennart

I guess not everything is done by logic, not then and certainly not now....

FalkeEins

Can you direct me to the review of the HS 123 book as well, please?

Cheers
Stig

[newcomer]

Hi to all,

does anybody know list of WNr for Royal Yugoslav AF Me-108?

kind regards

Newcomer

[INM@RLM]

It’s taken a while but the Entwicklungsprogramm referred to by Lennart has now been run to ground. It’s in BA-MA archive file reference RL 3 1448 with Flugzeugentwicklungsprogramm, 1. Oktober 1936.
The entries in this file on Blätter 15 & 16 confirm that the three-seater Bf 108 B-0 Nullserie were designated as Versuchsmaschinen V1 to V7 and assigned W.Nr. 871 to 877, with three different types of engine required to be fitted. However, the V-Nummern are not assigned sequentially.
· (Programm Row 219) The Bf 108 B-0 V1 and V2 were W.Nr. 871 & 873 respectively: these were to be fitted with the 250 hp Hirth HM 8U.
· (Row 220) The V3 to V6 were: W.Nr. 872 & 874 to 876; all to be fitted with the 160 hp Siemen Sh 14a.
· (Row 221) The V7 was W.Nr. 877 and the sole example to be fitted with the 240 hp Argus As 10 III.
Thus, exactly as pointed out by Lennart, the Bf 108 B Versuchsmaschinen are nestled between the Werk-Nummern for the Bf 110 V1 to V3 and the Bf 109 V4 to V9, and are numbered after the first Bf 108 B production block. (We already know that Mtt back-filled some of the gaps left in their Manufacturer's W.Nr. sequence from the W.Nrn. that were assigned to the Me 209. Those seem to have been first allocated as the final four of a block of 50 assigned to the cancelled order for 50 x Ju 87s from BFW.)
According to this programme the first six Bf 108 B-0 had been completed in Nov-35, but for the Argus-engined V7 this did not happen until Aug-36.


The comparison with the competing four-seater Klemm Kl 36 B is instructive:
· (Row 222) Kl 36 B V1 to V4 (W.Nr. 1016/7, 1019 & 1031) with the 250 hp Hirth HM 8U.
· (Row 223) Kl 36 B V5 to V7 (W.Nr. 1014/5 & 1018) with the 160 hp Siemen Sh 14a.
No mention of an Argus-powered Kl 36 B. (Perhaps it was simply not feasible to fit an As 10 into a Kl 36 B?)

So the gentlemen of the RLM were not trying to make Messerschmitt’s life any more difficult than anyone else’s, although that was what I had first thought. They simply wanted to test out in the most practical fashion the engine options in both competing types.
In this competition the Bf 108 started with the handicap that it was a three-seater whereas the Kl 36 was a four-seater. However, the decisive advantage that the Bf 108 had over the Kl 36 was probably not its lightweight all-metal monocoque construction, but rather that the Bf 108 could be fitted with and perform most satisfactorily with one of the great standard engines selected by the RLM for the Luftwaffe (and also fitted through more than a decade in the Ar 66, Go 145, Fw 58, Ar 76, Fw 56 & Fi 156). Thus the Flugzeugentwicklungsprogramm, 1. Oktober 1936 already notes against the rows for the Bf 108 V1 to V6 “Werden auf As 10 C III umgenbaut nach d.Entwicklungsmuster lfd.Nr, 221 W.-Nr. 877, and against the rows for the Kl 36 B “Serie wird nicht beschafft.”.


So the initial reconstruction I posted of the early blocks for Bf 108 W.Nrn. that read:
38 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 830 to 867, delivered 1935/7)
7 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 871 to 877, delivered 1937).
6 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 987 to 992, delivered 1937)
now becomes:
43 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 823 to 865, delivered 1936/7)
7 x Bf 108 B-0 (Bf 109 V1 to V7, W.Nr. 871 to 877, delivered 1935/6)
2 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 908 & 909, delivered 1937, both identities known)
6 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 987 to 992, delivered 1936/7) – This last looks like an initial batch made up exclusively of privat (commercial) sales. Certainly the first example went to Brazil and the last to Australia.
Thus the final iteration of 45 Bf 109 B-Serie for the first order as built, comprised W.Nr. 823 to 865 (43) & W.Nr. 908 to 909 (2). The initial placement of this order for 37 aircraft was presumably assigned W.Nr. 823 to 859.
The above addresses Lennart’s boxes 1, 4 & 5.


Regarding box 6, most likely J-BACC was the first singleton example bought for assessment by Manchuria and was also from this 987 to 992 batch. I would love to see the source reference for this sighting, however, in my judgement it will not have been for W.Nr. 993.
The reason is that W.Nr. block 993 to 997 was assigned to the 5 x Bf 109 A Null-Serie of the third batch. [Radinger & Schick: Me 109 A/E table p.34 where they are simply described as A-Serie]. A duplicate assignment of just this specific W.Nr. would not be impossible in principle – Manchuria is after all a long way from Germany. But J-BACC was apparently registered in Aug-36, and for this assignment to be made so close in time to the other imj wholly rules this out – subject, of course, to seeing incontrovertible evidence of this duplicate assignment. (Smiley face)


On two others of Lennart’s other points I can now also respond.
Box 7: Lennart is correct. 11-July 1938 marked the change of company name at Mtt-Augsburg. In Ebert’s Willy Messerschmitt, Schiffer edition p.194 is a photograph of a share certificate endorsed with the name change on this date.
Box 10: Yes, HB-EKO subsequently became Swiss Air Force serial A-208, but it was delivered as HB-EKO and photographed prior to delivery as HB-EKO by Messerschmitt’s production test pilot at Regensburg. Go look at the photo in Schmoll that I mentioned originally, or in the English version at Schmoll’s Nest of Eagles p.17.
Ironically, the shot in Schmoll is taken from an angle that leaves the top of the last letter hidden. It could in fact be either a U or an O. However, Schmoll had access to Trenkle’s logbook and this is indisputably a 1939 delivery from Regensburg, whilst W.Nr. 1129 was indisputably a 1937 delivery from Augsburg. Indeed W.Nr. 1129, delivered Dec-37, was the example flown by Otto Brindlinger on a tour across the Americas, starting in Rio de Janiero and ending in New York. [Tincopa+Rivas: Axis Aircraft in Latin America, table p.355] From Stig’s post it then seems to have ended up in Switzerland, presumably sold as slightly used. Thank you for that pointer, Stig.)
[The detailed register entry for HB-EKU, W.Nr. 1129, in Golden Years at http://www.airhistory.org.uk/gy/reg_HB-.html
confirms what Stig wrote, identifying W.Nr. 1129 as “HB-EKU A-216(HB) HB-HOM A-216(HB)” first registered on 25.05.39 to Max Fiedler /Zurich.
There is no listing in Golden Years for HB-EKO.
Agreed, HB-EKU has nothing to do with HB-EKO, W.Nr. 2064 apart from them both ending up in Switzerland.]


The Swiss impressed at least one civil example of the Bf 108 and along with those purchased for the air force, all of the HB-xxx civil registrations were replaced by serial numbers in the range A-2xx starting at A-201. It would be good to have an input from a specialist on the Swiss Air Force as to exactly when these changes happened. Were the HB- codes for the 1939 deliveries from Regensburg production only used as delivery codes? Or were the A-2xx assignments only made subsequently during wartime when the aircraft were camouflaged? (The second is my working hypothesis for the present.)


Lennart, thank you for your always valuable contributions. I will go dust up and recheck my sources for the D-Kennz. assignments to early Bf 108s.

[INM@RLM]

Originally Posted by INM@RLM

Regarding box 6, most likely J-BACC was the first singleton example bought for assessment by Manchuria and was also from this 987 to 992 batch. I would love to see the source reference for this sighting, however, in my judgement it will not have been for W.Nr. 993.
The reason is that W.Nr. block 993 to 997 was assigned to the 5 x Bf 109 A Null-Serie of the third batch. [Radinger & Schick: Me 109 A/E table p.34 where they are simply described as A-Serie]. A duplicate assignment of just this specific W.Nr. would not be impossible in principle – Manchuria is after all a long way from Germany. But J-BACC was apparently registered in Aug-36, and for this assignment to be made so close in time to the other imj wholly rules this out – subject, of course, to seeing incontrovertible evidence of this duplicate assignment. (Smiley face)

What I wrote here is incorrect. I've checked the source that Lennart gave me for W.Nr. 993 as J-BACC - Japan not Manchuria for this example (p.111 of the Arawasi J-BIRD voume of the Japanese civil register) and rechecked my reconstruction of the Bf 109 A-series based on Radinger & Schick.


The first block of Bf 108s delivered to satisfy commercial sales did indeed comprise seven aircraft, assigned W.Nr. 987 to 993 (with three of these confirmed by individual identity now), and the last of these Werk-Nummern was in fact never allocated to any Bf 109 A at any time. Me culpa. With my apologies.


The total for all Bf 108s built for Germany increases by one to 892.

[INM@RLM]

A Footnote on the Bf 108s purchased for Manchukuo.
Forsgren wrote that six were received in 1937 and thirteen in 1938 (p.89). Serials included M-58 & M-65 and W.Nr. 1662 & 1668. (No links given between the two types of data.)
The 1938 total is fully supported by the J-BIRD listing. Page 307 documents the thirteen arrivals in 1938, all registered on 01-Jul-38, with registrations M-51 to M-62 both inclusive plus M-65. If my Japanese is up to snuff, at least ten of these had seen significant prior service. Three already had between 100 and 200 hours on the airframe and a further four between 40 and 100 hours each. No Werk-Nummern are listed for any of these 1938 arrivals. Photographs of M-55 & M-58 are included in J-BIRD, each in a pale overall finish. (Each photo is approx 4 cm x 8 cm.)

There is no mention in J-BIRD of the six 1937 arrivals. However, between M-36 and M-50 there is only a gap in the M-registrations for this period. Doubtless these six earlier Bf 108s will account for part of this interval.

[Sergio Luis dos Santos]

6 x Bf 108 B-1 (W.Nr. 987 to 992, delivered 1936/7) – This last looks like an initial batch made up exclusively of privat (commercial) sales. Certainly the first example went to Brazil and the last to Australia.

Yes, W.Nr. 987 was bought by Varig in 1935 arriving by ship in 1936. Was officialy registered at RAB on 26/06/1936. It got extensive damage in a crash on 24/11/1936. It was returned to Messerschmitt but do not know what happened to the plane after that.

[INM@RLM]

Thank you for that additional snippet, Sergio. I have the Tincopa+Rivas Hikoki title but coverage of W.Nr. 987, PP-VAJ is very thin. Just "While Condor was expanding its routes, in 1936 Varig purchased a Messerschmitt Bf 108 Taifun (PP-VAJ) for training and light transport, but it was lost in an accident on 24 November." (p.81-II)

The entry in the appendix table on p.355 of this book gives delivery as 26/9/36 (your date is three months earlier) and that it was apparently registered as type Bf 108G.
I'd be most grateful for any additional light you can throw on those two differences. (Maybe you are able to confirm the earlier delivery date from a contemporary documentary source?)

[Sergio Luis dos Santos]

Originally Posted by INM@RLM

Thank you for that additional snippet, Sergio. I have the Tincopa+Rivas Hikoki title but coverage of W.Nr. 987, PP-VAJ is very thin. Just "While Condor was expanding its routes, in 1936 Varig purchased a Messerschmitt Bf 108 Taifun (PP-VAJ) for training and light transport, but it was lost in an accident on 24 November." (p.81-II)

The entry in the appendix table on p.355 of this book gives delivery as 26/9/36 (your date is three months earlier) and that it was apparently registered as type Bf 108G.
I'd be most grateful for any additional light you can throw on those two differences. (Maybe you are able to confirm the earlier delivery date from a contemporary documentary source?)

My mistake! Sorry. Yes, September is the correct month not June as I wrote before... Becoming and "old eagle" is not easy... It happens several times!

The date 26/09/1936 is not for delivering but when the plane is officialy registered on RAB or Registro Aeronáutico Brasileiro (Brazilian Aeronautics Register). It was not rare planes being registered days or even months after being doing flights in Brasil. Same for sold or damaged planes being removed from RAB months or years after the event day... There are a few planes that were not registered but thanks for some photos or documents we can track them.
Commander Carlos Ruhl wrote the plane had a trouble with the fuel pump and the manual pump did not helped so the engine stoped and an emergency landing was done. He and a passanger had light wounds.
SOC from RAB 25/01/1937. My files shows it registered as a B-0.

[INM@RLM]

Sergio, many thanks indeed for the check, the correction and the expansion. Most helpful and very much appreciated.