A factory fresh Me 109G-G14AS

[Cpt_Farrel]

Marc: while I aggree with you when it comes to the rear part of the fuselage, I still think that the forward part, in front of the wings, must have had the color taken all the way around. Maybe the lower part of the rear section was left in natural metal though, which also would look very dark given the conditions you describe... I'm updating my profile templates now and I hope that I can present some profiles soon, showing my ideas.

[Marc-André Haldimann]

Cpt Farrel: OK, ready any time to see your point!

cheers

Marc

[Kuba Plewka]

Roland, your information is excellent, but as far as I recognise - Amberg, Vilseck etc was connected to Mtt. Regensburg production and our G-10/R6 was n Erla-Leipzig built one.
Was there at Vilseck a repair or conversion centre? Did they repair a G-10 or a 109 at all?

That aircraft is preety clean, no exhaust staining, no oli leaks.
Perhaps it was a well maintained one?
When you look to the Bedienungsvorschrift – Fl Bf 109 G-6 part “Reinigen des Flugzeuges” (operating instruction) you may see that cleaning its surfaces is necessary for looking for damages and cracks. Maybe our G-10 was in really good condition, not as filthy as others were?

[Marc-André Haldimann]

Dear Kuba,

Maybe it is a G-14/AS, after all :-)

As for maintenance issue at this stage of war, one would doubt such an exceptionnal effort; besides, this plane has no unit markings; IMHO, I would not bet it did ever fly...

Cheers

Marc

[Kuba Plewka]

Marc, this would be an extremally difficult to proof.
You see, the oil tank is bigger, the cooler is shallow and no chin bulges. The panel under the windscreen is square and the crosses on fuselage are smaller.
The mainwheel are bigger and the tailwheel is lower.
The camouflage is characteristic too to those to be surely G-10 from 151/152 bathes.

The G-14/AS built by Erla I know of were just preety different in both shape and presence.

With the maintance - I do have a look for a large collection of photos from Neubiberg. Those Gustavs are so different in apperance, some are filthy, some are almost clean.
The same with more photos of abandoned / damaged ones from german abandoned airfields.

I'll go with a G-10/R6 rather well maintained or well cleaned after all.

[Marc-André Haldimann]

Kuba,

- Agreed for the low tailwheel, shallow cooler, bigger oil tank, flat panel Erla-style.
- Unsure about bigger mainwheel, no wing bulges to be seen.

I wonder if you could post a pic (or a link to) from an Erla produced 109G-14/AS, and one from Mtt Vilseck?

As for clean versus filthy, well, everything is possible. But the lack of unit markings is a fact pointing to a brand new plane, isn'it?

Cheers

Marc

[Kuba Plewka]

Originally Posted by Marc-André Haldimann

Kuba,

I wonder if you could post a pic (or a link to) from an Erla produced 109G-14/AS, and one from Mtt Vilseck?

Well, see the "Rita" red 2 of a 2./JG 300 (mistaken as G-10, I did it too) and see a "Peterle" black 13 of a 14./JG 4.
Those are preety well known ones, you'll find those pictures in Mr. Prien / Rodeike book for example.

The lack of unit markings does not proof a fabric new one. I'd rather say this is a consequence of chaos, rubbish and a lack of time.
Or as well this one G-10 was photographed on hand-over airfield?

[Kuba Plewka]

....and for those from Vilseck - some K-4's and I think G-10 from 130xxx block will be OK

cheers!
Kuba

[Marc-André Haldimann]

OK, thanks for the pointers, I'll check them.

Hand-over field, excellent suggestion!

cheers

Marc

[Mermet]

Originally Posted by S Sheflin

Greetings all,

Its camouflage is still somewhat of a mystery, however. In my color shot its looks very, very dark indeed (in fact, I thought it was black?).
Steve Sheflin

Hello all,

I know this color photograph. I think the black rendering of the camouflage (probably in 81/83 and 82 colors) is mainly due to the underexposure of the shot taken slightly against the sun...

Cheers,
Jicehem