Fw 190 D-9 WNr. 211251 or 210251

[Franek Grabowski]

Those aircraft were not flown by naval aviation, but rather used at an evaluation centre.

[PhilippeDM]

Thanks Franek for this info, it suites my further research. And like used, part of the answers were just under my nose. In the same Modeller's Eye I found the pictures I was looking for: just the same, but uncropped as those in the JaPo book (both references mentionned in my previous input).

Strange however: the WNr mentionned in the Modelle's Eye book is 210185.

In the WNr list of JaPo's volume 1, both planes are mentionned to be part of the Soviet AF Scientific Research Institute (see also http://www.airpages.ru/cgi-bin/epg.p...40&page=fw190d)

This leaves me with another problem: I have now 3 WNrs possible for those pictures: WNr. 211251 - the most improbable
WNr. 210251 and WNr. 210185.

Is there someone who can clarify this situation???

[Seaplanes]

The Werk-Nummer series beginning with 21 was assigned to a batch of FW 190D-9 produced by Focke-Wulf, Sorau (Factory code: ncc). Deliveries began in September 1944 with Werk-Nummern running from 21 0001 to about 21 0299, 21 0901 to about 21 1150, from about 21 1901 to about 21 1940 and finally from about 21 2120 to about 21 2156.

Gerhard Fieseler Werke only delivered D-9 aircraft with Werk-Nummern beginning with 60.

The first two digits in the six digit Werk-Nummer series identified the factory and type of aircraft built. The remaining four digits was the actual Werk-Nummer.

[PhilippeDM]

Seaplanes,

I completely agree with your list of WNr in the 21 NCC actory range, This still leaves me with the primary question: which plane is shown in JaPo's book. They mention 211251, which does not fit your list.
The pictures of Modeller's Eye refer to 210185. So which plane was photographed in detail in the "Soviet AF Scientific Research Institute"? WNr 210185 or 210251??

WNr. 21 1251 mentionned is JaPo is thus definitely a type mismatch...

[Keizer Cali]

Dear Philippe,

Thank you for pointing out this anomaly, which is a typographic error. Indeed, as far as we know, no W.Nr. 211251 has existed. I will ensure that an erratum is posted on the JaPo web site, and also included in the overall list of errata in Vol. III.

While I do not have all my references at hand, the photographs on page 467 of Part II that you refer to are in all likelihood of W.Nr. 210185 as tested at the Soviet Air Forces Scientific Research Institute - please compare them with the second picture of W.Nr. 210251 on page 71 of the "Modeler's Eye 4". The differences between the paint scheme on the engine section and the application of the date on the starboard side of the radiator cowling of both aircraft are minimal, but sufficiently different to conclude that we are looking at two different aircraft.

You mention that W.Nr. 210251 may have been a JG 6 aircraft, but that is highly doubtful. As far as can be verified, JG 6 received its first D-9 on 20 January 1945 at FW Sorau, the majority stemming from the W.Nr. 2111xx batch, plus deliveries from the series W.Nr. 2119xx and 212xxx. Only a limited number of the Geschwader's D-9s came from WFG, MME and GFW, and in most cases these were repaired aircraft. In addition, W.Nr. 210251 does not show any traces of previous ownership, such as a spiral on the spinner or a II. Gruppe bar.

Exactly why W.Nr. 210185 and 210251 were captured at Marienburg remains controversial, since their production date would presuppose a delivery to a frontline unit some time in January 1945 - we have always felt that they were actually repaired aircraft, which would also explain e.g., their bulged canopies.

That said, you will undoubtedly want to hear about the next volumes of the Fw 190D-9 camouflage & markings books.
The passing of Eric has come as a complete and terrible shock to me, in the first place because Eric and I were very close friends, but also because we had made good progress in the preparation of Volume III. The only “positive” thing that I can say is that I will definitely continue the work that we started, utilising all the material that we have gathered. I will be travelling to his home town in Normandy in December, and assist his wife Pascale in clearing and organising his entire archive – that is what Eric wished to happen to his material and I will respect that unconditionally, so that the research can go on, and hopefully his memory and spirit will allow me to bring our project to a good end. I know that Eric would have done exactly the same thing for me, and continuing the work will be a way of paying tribute to him, both as a friend and a dedicated researcher.

I regret that I cannot be more precise at this moment. It will only be near the end of this year – when having had the time to analyse Eric’s archive – that I will be able to realistically re-schedule the edition of Volume III. Once that is done, I can again look into the very initial plan that we had for a possible Volume IV and a similar project on the He 162.

I hope this clarifies your questions, but do not hesitate to refer back to me for further information.

Marc