ME 109g-6 u4 arnaments?

[yogybär]

... you cannot see find it in any OOB, because
1) A Rüstsatz is not integral part of th eplane, so it will never show up in these lists.
2) I guess:
- none used 20mm-gunpods when he had a MK108. The MK was just enough for anything .
- the MK108-gunpods were not produced en masse because there was anyway already a shortage in ammo for the propeller-weapons.

[henchman]

Is this a G6/U4 with mk 108?
http://www.heinzknokewebsite.com/My-Site/The_planes.htm
Also check out this link att the bottom om page ,Knokes u4 with the pods is shown. Also a he describes firing rockets with his U4 into allied bomber formations

[veltro]

Seriously, how can you determine from a photograph if the Bf 109 shown was an U4...? IMHO, if the Werke Nummer is not known with certainty (and confirmed visually), it is impossible to estabilish the presence of the 30mm hub cannon.

[henchman]

I cant but the picture said it was. And as for the second link Knoke describes himself his new aircraft with the 30 mm cannon. And he describes firing werfers. And the picture is described as showing him in his U4.

Check out the link for yourself
http://www.heinzknokewebsite.com/My-Site/Victory_12.htm

[veltro]

Sorry, but I have learned to do not trust photograph captions, which often relies on third hand info. Call me a doubter but, unless I am able to verify a Werke Nummer on the photo or know very well the subject, any "U4" identification based only on hearsay has little value to me... IMHO, of course.

[henchman]

So then you dont think that any of the U4 were equipped with the R6? But the real question is its designation for me. Would it just be a plain U4 in the records.

[veltro]

Originally Posted by henchman

So then you dont think that any of the U4 were equipped with the R6?

I didn't say that. I only noticed that it is not possible to determine the presence of the 30mm hub cannon from a photograph.

Originally Posted by henchman

But the real question is its designation for me. Would it just be a plain U4 in the records.

Whereas I have often seen "G-6/U4" designations in OOBs, I think it is quite improbable to find any of the Rüstsatzen reported in such documents... after all, do you expect the presence of the R3 (ventral 300l drop tank) to be reported on paper? As yogybär/Jörg already said, the very nature of the Rüstsatze was an on/off modification, which was not meant to be fixed. So, IMHO, it is unlikely that someone bothered to report that presence on papers, unless on a general basis of availability.

[henchman]

Tx that was the answer i was searching for.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by veltro

Whereas I have often seen "G-6/U4" designations in OOBs, I think it is quite improbable to find any of the Rüstsatzen reported in such documents... after all, do you expect the presence of the R3 (ventral 300l drop tank) to be reported on paper? As yogybär/Jörg already said, the very nature of the Rüstsatze was an on/off modification, which was not meant to be fixed. So, IMHO, it is unlikely that someone bothered to report that presence on papers, unless on a general basis of availability.

Your memories of our 1989 Freiburg trip have faded a little! My notes from RL2 III/881 on the strength of NAG 11 in June, July & August 1944 include Bf 109 G-8/R5, G-6/U2/R3 and Bf 109 G-5/U2/R2. However, all the unit's other aircraft are recorded more conventionally as G-6, G-6/U3, G-8/U3, G-5/U2.

In RL2 III/882 (Aug-Dec 1944) NAG 11 records BF 109 G-6 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/R-2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-5/R2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-8/R5 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/U3 MW 50 and Bf 109 G-6/U2/R2.

None of the other units we were looking at gave that much detail. JG 77 recorded a lot of Bf 109 G-6 and Bf 109 G-6/U4 but no Rüstsatz numbers.

[veltro]

I stand corrected, Nick! Memory isn't the same as it used to be and on the other hand you too confirm that NAG 11 was quite an exception among the dozens of units and hundreds of documents we examined...