Legion Condor aircraft photo 5 - 13

[edwest2]

https://www.ebay.de/itm/115506593274...Bk9SR4igpdbeYA

[edwest2]

https://www.ebay.de/itm/363969336474...Bk9SR4bI2aThYA

[Maciej Góralczyk]

Originally Posted by Buckeye30

Andy. These are the recorded numbers for 109s, looks like 45 was a B, 46 was a C.....


http://equinoxe.dk/SCWaircraft/bf109.html



A few years ago Michael Payne (sadly no longer with us) wrote that 6-42 to 6-56 were B-2s to make up losses in 1./2. Staffeln in Dec. 1937 but that was some time ago and more research done since.
Regards
Nick

The above cited site is outdated.
Both 6-45 and 6-46 were Bf 109 Bs. I've never seen Bf 109 B-2 term used in any official German documents (although interestingly, there exist at least one document with the Bf 109 B-1 term used).

The full breakdown:
Bf 109 V6 - crashed upon the first take-off attempt and written off
6-1 - Bf 109 V4
6-2 - Bf 109 V3
6-3 to 6-16 - Bf 109 As (note that the surviving examples were upgraded to the B standard in the course of service)
6-17 to 6-58 - Bf 109 Bs
6-59 to 6-86 + 6-95 to 6-98 - likely all Bf 109 D-1s, there is no hard evidence on the Bf 109 C-1 variant being delivered to Spain
6-87 to 6-94 (all in this batch are E-3s) + 6-99 to 6-131 - Bf 109 Es, mostly E-3s but including at least 7 E-1s.

[AndyMa]

Maciej,
Thanks for this new breakdown.
Am I correct to say that 6-3 was Bf109V6?
I also had a note that 6-107 was a Bf109E-4. It sounds like this is wrong?
Andy

[Stig Jarlevik]

Latest data I have is taken from Johnston's book German Eagles in Spanish Skies and since a photo
appeared almost immediately showing 6-95 as not being an E-model it of course was a bad start
for the book.

However I would be interested to know Maciej what your sources are for 6-96 to 6-98 being D-models?
The photo I have seen of the crashed 6-98 makes it impossible for me to ID that one, one way or the other....

Also Johnston only lists the Es up to 6-130. What is the evidence for 6-131?

I have also seen a photo of an E which very much looks like 6-136. It is a bad one, but any comments?

Cheers
Stig

[Maciej Góralczyk]

Originally Posted by AndyMa

Maciej,
Thanks for this new breakdown.
Am I correct to say that 6-3 was Bf109V6?
I also had a note that 6-107 was a Bf109E-4. It sounds like this is wrong?
Andy

V6 was delivered together with the other two prototypes and didn't survive enough long to receive a callsign.
6-107 was an E-3, I'm afraid it was too early for any E-4s to reach Spain.

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

Latest data I have is taken from Johnston's book German Eagles in Spanish Skies and since a photo
appeared almost immediately showing 6-95 as not being an E-model it of course was a bad start
for the book.

However I would be interested to know Maciej what your sources are for 6-96 to 6-98 being D-models?
The photo I have seen of the crashed 6-98 makes it impossible for me to ID that one, one way or the other....

Also Johnston only lists the Es up to 6-130. What is the evidence for 6-131?

I have also seen a photo of an E which very much looks like 6-136. It is a bad one, but any comments?

Cheers
Stig

The photo proving that 6-95 wasn't an Emil was known long before Johnson's book has been published: in 2005 Quiron Ediciones published a book entitled "Las Unidades y el Material del Ejercito del Aire: Durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial" where it appeared on p.31 (I mean this photo:
https://me109.info/display.php?a=e&l=en&fid=6369). In May 2022 yet another photo of 6-95 surfaced, showing the engine exchange:
https://me109.info/display.php?a=e&l=en&fid=20017

Now onto the remaining ones:
6-96 - a photo of an aircraft grouping including 6-96 appeared on Evilbay in 2016: https://abload.de/img/s-l20001ldex3.jpg
The prop looks clearly two-blade.

6-97 - a photo of an aircraft grouping including 6-97 appeared on Evilbay in 2017: https://abload.de/img/s-l1600wgcc6.jpg
The original now belongs to me.

6-98 - look closely at this photo: https://me109.info/display.php?a=e&l=en&fid=4134
and note the position of the oxygen and power-supply sockets on the fuselage - it's distinctive for the Bf 109 C/D variants (the Emil had them closer to each other, both located between frame 2 & 3).
Furthermore, in 2016 this photo was sold on Evilbay:
https://abload.de/img/post-1-0-80210900-138pbfk6.jpg
the view on 6-98 is partially obscured by the 6-32, but we see enough to easily ID it as an Jumo-engined machine.

Aside from the above issue and one or two bad IDs of Emil variants in photo captions, Johnson's book is the only (almost) up-to-date source on the Legion Condor's Bf 109s, for me it brought a lot of interesting information and observations. If you're looking for a few further details on the Emils in LC, you might wish to check my article published a few years ago in Eduard Info e-magazine: https://www.eduard.com/out/media/Inf...-2019-07en.pdf
or its slightly updated version published in Aero Journal No.82 (note: I have nothing to do with the profiles that illustrate it).

Last but not least, the 6-131 - I'm aware of 3 photos:
a) two taken when it served with the Legion Condor were published in:
- Jagdwaffe Vol.1 Sect.2. The Spanish Civil War, p.182
- Jet & Prop Foto-Archiv Band 01, p.74
b) a post-SCW photo is available online:
http://www.aviationcorner.net/show_p....asp?id=341688
although there exists another version of this picture where at least 12 Bf 109s can be made out in the row - sadly, I don't know its original source.

Cheers
Maciej

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks a lot Maciej

Very much appreciated. What is your thoughts about these "odd" Bf 109 D coming along in the
middle of the supply of the E version?

Could they possibly have been phased out aircraft already in Spain, and rebuilt somewhere?

Nice article by the way. Saved it!!

Cheers
Stig

[AndyMa]

Maciej,
Thanks also from me for answering my questions.
Yes indeed, an interesting article!
Andy

[Maciej Góralczyk]

Thank you gents.
As for the odd Bf 109 Ds, I guess there was a need for a quick re-supply before the launch of the final offensive on Catalonia whilst there were simply not enough Emils available at that time given that their production had just started.

[Stig Jarlevik]

Yes, I suppose that is the most plausible explanation Maciej

Cheers
Stig