JV 44: help with translation

[Nick Beale]

Could somebody with better German than me clarify the following sentence?

Von JV 44 wurden keine Bild-Me 262 übernommen.

I'm Ok as far as "No photographic Me 262s were taken over …" but does "von JV 44" in this context mean "from JV 44" or "by JV 44"? Context suggests "by" but I'd like to be sure.

Thanks.

[strahljaeger]

Yes Nick, you are right!
"by" is correct.
The unit JV 44 did not take over "Bild" recon Me262 aircraft.

Regards

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by strahljaeger

Yes Nick, you are right!
"by" is correct.
The unit JV 44 did not take over "Bild" recon Me262 aircraft.

Regards

Thanks. I know that they didn't take those machines over but I did wonder whether someone had given an order to do so. There were lots of things ordered at that stage of the war that came too late to take effect.

[edwest2]

Nick,

A brief comment if I may. Would the British have done differently if in the same situation?

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by edwest2

Nick,

A brief comment if I may. Would the British have done differently if in the same situation?

I doubt if anyone would, so made no suggestion that they might have. The longer I spend on the late war documentation, the more the picture is of German commanders trying to run up a down escalator. They planned and replanned with each passing day but events continually outpaced them.

[David E. Brown]

Nick,

From “The Koller War Diary” entry for 26 April 1945 (p.50-51):

General Schultz reported: “Luftwaffenkommando West has dissolved the remaining Close-range Reconnaissance Staffel equipped with the Me 262 (NAG 6) and sent the aircraft to Jagdverband 44 (fighter unit)”. (They must be absolutely crazy; those people had no sense whatsoever. The high command could not give up its only eyes. The aircraft and their crews would have to be reassembled immediately for reconnaissance purposes.)

Reference: Smith, J.R. (ed), 1990; The Koller War Diary. Monogram Aviation Publications, Sturbridge, 104p.

Koller later goes on about JV 44 reporting 95 Me 262s at München-Riem (p.51). He was aghast that so many machines were there and the fact that JV 44 had only enough resources and personnel to deal with 20, and, that JG 7 was begging for more aircraft. He states that he tried to find out who permitted this to happen – Kammler, Kammhuber, Saur – and determined to send 70 machines to JG 7 and getting his Quartermaster to make it happen. One suspects that the JV 44 document referred to was the well-known 26 April 1945 listing of all Me 262s to be found at München-Riem.

But regarding your initial question, it would appear that the dissolution order came from someone in Luftwaffenkommando West as reported by Schultz.

Best,

David

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by David E. Brown

Nick,

From “The Koller War Diary” entry for 26 April 1945 (p.50-51):

General Schultz reported: “Luftwaffenkommando West has dissolved the remaining Close-range Reconnaissance Staffel equipped with the Me 262 (NAG 6) and sent the aircraft to Jagdverband 44 (fighter unit)” …

Best,

David

Hi David,

It's possible that even Koller was confused! There were TWO Me 262-equipped recon units, 2./NAG 6 and 1./NAG 1. Gen. der Aufklärungsflieger did propose disbanding the latter on 21 April but it was still flying three days later, ending the war in Höhn, apparently without aircraft. There was another row between competing authorities about disbanding KG 51, which actually did happen but was revoked after a couple of days and the unit was moved to Prague. Not only that but there was an exchange about who had ordered the disbandment of 1./NAG 13, which was due to convert to the Me 262 as well as one about who had disbanded III./EJG 2 (which actually does seem to have happened, since JV 44 took on all its pilots).