|
Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the German Luftwaffe and the Air Forces of its Allies. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Quote:
I think Griehl did some guesswork on his own when lacking proof. If I have a choice I usually go with Volker's conclusions. Cheers Stig |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Re. your #11. Yes, Volker is definitely the safer bet, Stig. (I hadn't looked at this piece in years.) However - going a little off-piste - I have a bunch of He 111 H identities immediately before this Volker block. Those start at 8356, and there are enough to reconstruct the full Stkz. sequences up to around 8437 with some credibility. These place the sub-type change from H-11 to H-16 that Volker has put at 8456, rather earlier at around 8412. (More data will resolve that, I'm sure.)
I'm curious though as to the source where you found the 8456-8555 block of H-16s. In his ADL digital article (heinkel-he-111-serienbau-bis-1945-luftwaffe-bomber), all that Volker has to say on the H-16 is: "Ab Dezember 1942 begann die Auslieferung der He 111 H-16, die im Dezember des Folgejahres endete. Die Zahl der gelieferten Maschinen lag in der Größenordnung von etwa 1100 bis 1200 Stück. Die Werknummern gehörten in die Blöcke 8156-8355 und weitere sechsstellige Nummern mit den Anfangsziffern 160, 161 und 162." That is, he appears to directly contradict what he wrote on the H-11 in the paragraph just before. ("Deren Werknummern lagen in den Blöcken 7955-8155, 8356-8455.") Curious, but none of us are quite perfect yet. However, when and where did he correct this please? Last edited by INM@RLM; 4th August 2023 at 15:45. Reason: Typo 9437 changed to 8437 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
I send you a PM since by now this thread has changed to be about Ju 88s
Cheers Stig |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Many thanks, Stig. I have though to add a PS to my post #12.
The identification of WNr. 8433 as a He 111 H-16 comes from the text of War Prizes.220 & photos Midland, plus LwCamo&Markg PhotoArchive#1.74. The difference between the H-11 and the H-16 was that the whole bomb load of the H-16 was carried internally, whereas on the H-11 the whole load was carried on external racks. The Lynn Ware photo of 8433 at Freeman Field clearly shows an array of external bomb racks fitted underneath the centre section of this aircraft. Ergo, the books are in error and this aircraft was actually a He 111 H-11. That points to 8456 as the correct point at which H-16 production commenced. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Hello Merlin,
Quote:
Yes, I also assumed it above. It is known that at the beginning of 1943 even FW189s were used as bombers in the Caucasus. But for the Germans it was a desperate time of the Stalingrad airlift. But could 5.(F)/122 have been used for group night raids in April 1944? Maybe No144531 remained in KG3? Best regards, Andrey Last edited by Andrey Kuznetsov; 4th August 2023 at 22:58. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Andrey,
during april 1944 the Ju 88 elements of KG 3 were based at Terespol and Biala Podlaska in Poland, that was too fare away from Luga. The only possibilities were 5.(F)/122 and Wekusta 1 from Mitau. The 3.(F)/Nacht at Riga did not operate the Ju 88 and those Ju 88 elements around KG 102 at Riga performed only training flights for torpedo dropping.
__________________
Best regards Gerhard Stemmer |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Hello Merlin,
To me, a KG3 (or other bomber unit) raid using a forward airfield seems more likely than raid of 8 recce Ju88. But I don't know much about this period except for the Lfl4 area. Are there any logbooks of KG3 or 5.(F)/122 crew members survived that might clarify the situation? Best regards, Andrey |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Would their aircraft have had bomb sights?
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Hello Nick,
As recce planes often combined recce missions with bombing, they had to have sights. I found myself thinking that I had never thought about it. Best regards, Andrey |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Re: He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944
Hi!
It is seldom I can be of help, but this seems to be case now. Luftflotte 1 Luftlagemeldungen for early 1944 survive among the Heeresgruppe Nord material up to 29 April 1944 in form way. Could find my digiphoto copy (of the microfilms) and from there: Luftlagemeldung 4./5.4.44 (nachts) "Nachteinsatz der Kampfflugzeuge: 8 4 Flgzge. Eisenbahnkämpfung, Angriff auf Bahnhof Luga, 2 Brände (Öl) 4 " Eisenbahnkämpfung Strecke Leningrad-Tschudowo-Bologoje, 20 Wagen nichtet (Öl oder Benzin) 2 mittlere Explozionen mit Brand." No reported losses, no "Nachmeldung" for the night 4./5.4 in later reports. I would say 14.(Eis)/KG 55. Edit I looked through whole April. The only He 111 loss recorded in the Meldungen is for night 10./11.4.44. Interestingly for 3.4.44 (tags) there is recorded one Me 110 loss. Would WNr 4531 make any sense with that? Cheers, Kari |