He 111 from KGr. 100 - 14 August 1940

[RT]

6N+NP, which date pls ??? Probably considerably later no ??

Rémi

[Larry Hickey]

RT,

I don't know the date for 6N+NP. That's one of the things we're trying to determine. It doesn't have a "Blitz" camouflage scheme (black areas) so presumably it's from the July-September, 1940 period. That's yet to be proven, however.

[Chris Goss]

P would indicate II Gruppe which did not exist in KGr 100 until the following year

[Larry Hickey]

Chris,

My mistake, I think that it is 6N+NH.

[Henofred]

Hello,

Here is the picture in Roba's book...

Caption: An He 111 "Wiking" lying on a beach probably near Vannes. However, we are not able to date this incident.

The camera angle shows the coast in the background, which is possible if the picture is taken on the beach near Mousterlin.
Best regards,
Frederic

[Larry Hickey]

Frederic,

Thanx for posting this. It look like the same a/c I earlier posted with the "C." Based upon what I can see of the code, I think that this is 6N+CB of the Gruppenstab. The 4th letter looks far more like a "B" than the "A" as reported in the "Ultra" intercept concerning a 6N+CA on 14 August 1940. If it is 6N+CB, the color of the letter "C" would be medium green, which is consistent with the appearance of both photos. This FL may not relate to the Ultra intercept, but the crash of 6N+DH doesn't fit either. I think now we're looking for info on 6N+DH, 6N+NH and 6N+CB, all probably during the BoB. None of these have black camouflage overpainting consistent with "The Blitz." The problem is we have only one known beach landing (on 14.08.40) for the unit, and the reported coding in the Ultra intercept doesn't match any of them.

[Nick Beale]

Sorry Larry, there are multiple references to 6N+CA between August and November 1940, 6N+AA and 6N+BA too, so it rather looks like the Stab used 6N+_A, rules or no rules.

[Larry Hickey]

Nick,

Point taken. This wouldn't be the first time that LW markings didn't conform to the norm. Thanx for noting this. So the plane on the beach could well be 6N+CA down on 14 August 1940. The dark area where the "A" is could be an overpaint area for a previous letter that has been painted out, a frequent occurrence. If this is 6N+CA and it FL on the beach on 14.08.40, there is another problem in that Chris has a photo of the beach wreckage of 6N+DH that has a handwritten caption for the location of "Hourtin," which is the same area where 6N+CA is supposed to have FL. Could two KGr100 He111Hs FL on the beach in the same area--seems quite unlikely.

At least we're moving forward here. See my new post about another unidentified probable 6N+DH He111 crash that has stumped me for years.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Larry Hickey

Frederic,

We carry this incident in the EoE LW Loss DB as:

"14 August 1940: 1./KGr.100 Heinkel He111H-3 (5252). Belly-landed on beach at Hourtin, north-west of Bordeaux, on return from night attack on Dunlop Works at Birmingham, cause not stated. Crew unhurt. Aircraft 6N+CH 100% write-off."

Bear in mind that (AFAIK) that KGr. 100 lost only one aircraft on the night of 13/14 August and this was 6N+CA. It was reported by a signals unit that an He 111 had made a forced landing between Bénodet and Pointe de Mousterlin. Since its radio equipment was removed and taken to Vannes, this was pretty certainly the KGr. 100 machine. Check a map and you'll see that the stated location is nowhere near Hourtin or Bordeaux.

However, on 15/16 August there were multiple losses, one of which (an H-3) crashed "near Bordeaux" (or "south of Bordeaux" in another report) without harm to the crew but neither its markings or Werk Nummer were stated. This location is reasonably consistent with Hourtin (on the coast NW of Bordeaux).

[Larry Hickey]

Nick,

Thanx for your comments. According to the EoE LW Loss reports, we have this listing for 13 August:

"13 August 1940: Stab KGr.100 Heinkel He111H-1. Forced-landed at Quimper during operational sortie, cause not stated. Crew unhurt. Aircraft 40% damaged but repairable."

I note that Quimper on my "google maps" is only about 10 - 15 kms N of Bénodet. This could well equate to the 6N+CA incident.

The beach crash of 6N+DH, which broke in two and clearly wasn't repairable, could be the reported Hourtin crash on the 14th. Hourtin and Bordeaux are at least in the same general area of France, about 50 km apart, with Hourtin being as you say, NW of Bordeaux and close to the coast. I have no idea what a KGr100 a/c would have been doing in the Bourdeaux area, well away from targets in England. That puppy must have been really lost.

"14 August 1940: 1./KGr.100 Heinkel He111H-3 (5252). Belly-landed on beach at Hourtin, north-west of Bordeaux, on return from night attack on Dunlop Works at Birmingham, cause not stated. Crew unhurt. Aircraft 6N+CH 100% write-off. (Source is listed as Ultra)"

I think it likely that our EoE listing of the Hourtin incident as 6N+CH results in confusion between these two incidents.

If we can make these two fit the reported losses, this could account for the beach landings/crashes of 6N+CA between Bénodet and Pointe de Mousterlin, and 6N+DH, near Hourtin, leaving only the separate incident of 6N+NH to settle. This was almost certainly a entirely separate forced landing on a date not related to the activity on 13-14 August.

In another TOCH post, it looks like I've been able to locate another outstanding KGr100 crash, a 6N+DL, in France in late December of 1940, leaving the photos of 6N+NH the only photographed KGr100 He111 incident that I have during the 1939-40 period left to resolve.

I need to run this all by Peter Cornwell, but it looks like we've made significant progress here.