I./LG 1 or V./LG 1

[Larry Hickey]

Hello,

I thought that I'd put in my two cents worth here. I've done a lot of work on I.(S)/LG1-V.(Z)/LG1 and have scans of Ludwig von Eimannsberger's entire photo collection, including many not in his book, plus others from that unit. It is clear to me that the old pre-war coding, eg L1+?11. was changed just before the war, probably about 8.39. All the photos taken during the Polish Campaign show the changed over coding for I.(S)/LG1, eg L1+?H. A good example is the aircraft of Herbert Schob, L1+IH, which was photographed in early Sept., 1939. The exact date of the name change to V.(Z)/LG1 isn't clear, but right about the end of the Polish Campaign--very late September or the beginning of October, 1939, appears about right to me. I don't think that Ludwig is exactly clear on this either, as I've asked him. V.(Z)/LG1 did not change from the I Gruppe code numbers (B, H, K, L), thereafter, and paperwork I've seen from the unit still carried the old designation for some time. This makes the date for the change in the designation a little fuzzy, but 1.10.39, seems to be about right.

Regards,


Hope this helps.

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by Evgeny Velichko

I just was wonder - if they used L1+?11 code with I Gruppe, why with V Gruppe did they changed it to L1+?H line, not to L1+?X line for example.
I can only guess that the change to a four letter/number fuselage code occurred when the unit was I./LG 1, and the unit simply did not change the Staffel letter upon redesignation to V./LG 1.


P.S. The same miracle we can see with Me210 of III./ZG 1. Me210A-1, W.Nr. 2251, 2N+DD of Ltn. Fritz Stehle, wearing III./ZG 1 code of (III Gruppe), and in same time II./ZG 26 emblem (II Gruppe) is clearly visible on engine cowl.
Yes, I know that photograph. I can only guess that this was an aircraft that was passed from II./ZG 26 to III./ZG 1, and the old emblem remained on the engine cowling. There is a photograph in my Classic book, volume 2, of a 110 with the Erpr. Gr. 210 emblem on the nose AND the Sharksmouth of II./ZG 76 there also. In the same volume, photos of recce 110s of 2./Auf. Gr. 14 with the emblem of 2./Auf. Gr. 123 on the nose.


Also, do You remember that photo I sent You long ago? Bf110F (or G), code (small)s9+LS. But its impossible...
Now that photo still confuses me 100%...

See my replies above in bold.

[Evgeny Velichko]

THX Larry, very informative. I was not right than

Originally Posted by John Vasco

Yes, I know that photograph. I can only guess that this was an aircraft that was passed from II./ZG 26 to III./ZG 1, and the old emblem remained on the engine cowling.

II./ZG 26 is formed from III./ZG 1, so I beleive emblem was applied to aircraft before code was changed. Seems for me that to paint emblem is faster than change code on both sides of fuselage...

Originally Posted by John Vasco

There is a photograph in my Classic book, volume 2, of a 110 with the Erpr. Gr. 210 emblem on the nose AND the Sharksmouth of II./ZG 76 there also.

Yes, You told about it some time ago. And II./ZG 26 aircrafts, carrying III./ZG 26 "Ladybird" emblem during Balkan Operation 1941.

About s9+LS - very strange, it has gunner canopy in "G" style but rudder in "early" style, and engine cowling and spinners are "F" or "G" model... Also, strange fuselage band on the tail... Its pity that W.N.r. is unseen

[Marius]

...but 1.10.39, seems to be about right.

Yeah, it seems so only, but it isn`t right.
Why not believe some original documents? Are they realy falsified as some people say?

Marius

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by Marius

...but 1.10.39, seems to be about right.

Yeah, it seems so only, but it isn`t right.
Why not believe some original documents? Are they realy falsified as some people say?

Marius

Marius,
Not falsified, simply incorrect on occasions. An example: Ludwig Spreitzer of 3./Erpr. Gr. 210 crashed to his death on 16th July 1940. Because someone in Lw HQ was not aware of the existence of Erpr. Gr. 210, they placed the loss under JG 21 (I presume that took the nearest unit number, and thought it was simply a typo at unit level). See Mason's 'Battle Over Britain, first edition, page 173.

And the Quartermaster's returns are littered with mis-spellings of crew names and sometimes incorrect dates...

[Marius]

John,

 And the Quartermaster's returns are littered with mis-spellings of crew names and sometimes incorrect dates...

Yes, that`s true. But, as you say, these are errors or incorrections etc. But some people realy mean "falsifications".

[RT]

Hello Marius,

What is in your head Falsification, who made them to fool who ??

Rémi

[Marius]

Hi Remi,
I`ll give you an example:
you will find a loss in a war diary of a German bombing unit - 4 crew members died in a He 111, shot down by a fighter attack. This loss is confirmed by another documents, by the WaSt also.
But there are some people believing German documentation is falsified. They say for example, in fact 6 aircraft were shot down with (maybe) more crew members killed. Conclusion: 1 lost He 111 is documented, another 5 "were just hidden" by the Germans. (??!!)

[Chris Goss]

Gentlemen: You will always get those who persist in the Luftwaffe coverup stories-look at the shooting down of Leslie Howard by V/KG 40 on 1 Jun 43. Luftwaffe records are clear as to what happened but I (and they) have been accused by all sorts of all sorts in respect of there was a cover up. Then the following day, a Sunderland was shot down in a running battle with the same German unit-many of the Sunderland crew were (justifiably) decorated as they shot down at least 4 Ju 88s; German records say 2 aircraft returned slightly damaged and logbooks of those who participated make no mention of losses (even though they did on other occasions!)

[Andy Saunders]

Originally Posted by Marius

Hi Remi,
I`ll give you an example:
you will find a loss in a war diary of a German bombing unit - 4 crew members died in a He 111, shot down by a fighter attack. This loss is confirmed by another documents, by the WaSt also.
But there are some people believing German documentation is falsified. They say for example, in fact 6 aircraft were shot down with (maybe) more crew members killed. Conclusion: 1 lost He 111 is documented, another 5 "were just hidden" by the Germans. (??!!)

"Hidden" from whom? From themselves? I am puzzled as to why, for example, German Quartermaster loss returns would have been falsified as some suggest or to what purpose. Errors and ommissions: yes. Covering up their own losses within internal Lw or RLM returns: no.