JGr.176 27th september 1939

[robert]

Hi,


the only loss was:

27.09.39 JGr176 NN Luftkampf, Notlandung Weisskirchen 5% Bf109 D-1

The FB from 103 RAF was s/d by Gefr.Josef Scherm from JGr152.

Hope this helps.

Robert

[Peter Cornwell]

Confirming Robert's reply, I have the following:

WEDNESDAY, September 27

JGr.152 Messerschmitt Bf109D-1. Shot down by return fire during attack on No.103 Squadron Battles west of Hornbach and crashed near Bockweiler 12.30 p.m. Gefr J. Scherm killed. Aircraft a write-off.

JGr.176 Messerschmitt Bf109D-1. Forced-landed at Weisskirchen damaged in combat with Curtiss H-75As over Wolfersheim, east of Hornbach 1.25 p.m. Probably that attacked by Sgt de La Chappelle of GC II/4. Pilot unhurt. Aircraft repairable.

[Marius]

Hello,

I have analized every single Luftwaffe loss for September 1939 (for my work about Polish campaign) and wrote a huge article, which will be published in the near future. The article will disillusion many people who are seriously referring (only) to OKL loss lists for the period 1939-1940.

For the 27.9. I can tell you the following:

JGr.152, Ogefr. Scherm was shot down by Battles of 103 Sqd RAF.
JGr.176, according to OKL the Bf 109D was damaged 5%, but I think this should be 50%. The Messerschmitt was hit by Sgt de La Chapelle from GC II/4.

Furthermore 2 Bf 109D`s of JGr.176 were shot down by Sous Lt Baptizet and Adj Tesseraud from GC II/4. Uffz. Köpke and Olt. Riner (or Rinow) were killed.

Many regards,
Marius

[Peter Cornwell]

Marius,

Like many other visitors to this forum, & one who tries to make sense of such things - not purely from OKL loss returns, I was interested in your statement that RHINOW & KOEPKE both died in the action with GC II/4 on 27 September 1939.

As this contradicts, in almost every respect, accepted wisdom on the subject may I enquire as to your sources for this alternative version of events ?

Many thanks.

[Marius]

Peter,
sorry, Rhinow was slightly injured, of course. Peter or anybody else, can you confirm with a German document the date of the "collision" as 29.9. ?

The damage of 5% is much questionable, because you will not find any other 5% damage for that period. Apparently 5% damages were not reported to the OKL. Furthermore the Bf 109 force landed with hits from an enemy fighter! The 50% damage is much more likely (maybe "0" had gone lost somewhere on the way to Göring...).

Best wishes,
Marius

[Marius]

Hello again,
my first post was written (mostly) from my mind. Now I can give you a concrete source.

Chris Shores wrote in "Fledgling Eagles" (Grub Street, 1991, page 72) about the air fighting between GC II/4 and JGr.176 on the 27.9. According to this well researched source Baptizet, de la Chapelle & Tesseraud claimed 3 victories. The first as probable over Hornbach - the Bf 109D force/crash landed near Bad Homburg with 50% damage (also Chris Shores is not believing the 5% story, maybe he had a better document?). Then the French formation followed the Messerschmitts to the Lahr area, where 2 confirmed Bf 109 were claimed. Both Messerschmitts indeed went down not far from Lahr (Rhinow at Triberg & Köpke at Unterharmersbach).

I think the date conclusion made by Chris Shores is right (27.9., not the 29.9.). The area of the air combat (Lahr) agrees well with the area of both Messerschmitt losses.
I can confirm that the OKL loss list contains many such date errors (it is not an error actually but a delayed report going to the higher staff). For example we can take the 29.9. again. There is a loss of a Do 17F from 1.(F)/124 (40% damage). But this accident happened one day earlier, on the 28.9.

I hope this will help and make air fighting researching much more productive.

Best wishes,
Marius

[Peter Cornwell]

Marius,

The only source I have that reports the collision involving RHINOW & KOEPKE is the QGM Returns for 29.9.1940 compiled on 1.10 .1940.

Of course, I am aware of what Chris Shores said, & the theory that these losses occurred two days earlier in combat with GC II/4 is compelling, it may yet be shown to be true, but without some (or any) better evidence than you are able to quote it must remain just that - a seductive theory & nothing more.

I accept without question that the loss lists were compiled by human beings & therefore subject to error, but prefer not to tinker with the historical record without good reason. Of itself, a neat theory, however logical & rational, is never reason enough. But what the hey, why let facts get in the way of a good story ?