JG 5 collision on 27 August 1944

[Laurent Rizzotti]

On 27 August 1944 Oblt Gerhard Beyer went missing after his Bf 109 G-2 WNr 14610 collided in the air over Saltenfjorden, Norway, with another Bf 109 of the same unit flown by an Uffz Fuchs.

Source:
“Jagdgeschwader 5 Eismeerjäger: Eine Chronik aus Dokumenten U. Berichten: 1941-1945“, by Werner Girbig. ISBN 3-87943-365-8
http://www.luftwaffe.no/SIG/Losses/tap44.html
http://www.luftwaffe.no/SIG/Losses/tap43.html

The last source indicates that Fuchs was flying the Bf 109 G-2 WNr 14090, that was a total loss (100%) and that Fuchs went missing too.

Girbig's books on the other hand identified (via the index) Uffz Fuchs as the same man as the Uffz Karl-Heinz Fuchs that was posted missing three months later, on 17 October 1944, then with 9./JG 5.

I would like to know what happened to the second aircraft and pilot (besides Beyer) in this collision. Was the pilot another man named Fuchs, who was killed, or did he survive, and in this case was the aircraft lost or not ?

The summary of Luftwaffe losses show two losses for JG 5 on 27 August 1944:
III./JG 5: one damaged without enemy action on non-operational flight
IV./JG 5: one destroyed without enemy action on non-operational flight

JG reorganized from the three-Staffel-per-Gruppe to four-Staffel-per-Gruppe in August 1944, but in this document 12./JG 5 was probably still part of IV./JG 5, and not of III./JG 5

By the way the text in Girbig's book indicates that Beyer was lost on the 28th, but all other sources gave the date as the 27th, and there was no loss for JG 5 on the 28th.

From the above, I would say that Fuchs probably survived (and his aircraft was only damaged) and was the same man that went missing in October the same year, but I would like to have confirmation of this.

Thanks in advance

PS: I checked the Volksbund database, and neither Beyer, nor any Fuchs killed on this day

[Seaplanes]

The Wast report give the following:
27.8.44 Bei Bodö über Saltenfjord Norwegen. 12./J.G.5 Oblt. Gerhard Beyer Bf 109G-2 W.Nr. 14610. Nach Rammstoss in der Luft mit Bf 109G-2 W.Nr. 14090 Flugzeugführer Fuchs, abgestürzt und seit dem vermisst.
There are no reports or indications that Fuchs aircraft was lost.

[thenelm]

My data agrees with Seaplanes - 27-Aug-44, , Bf 109G-2, 14610, Beyer, Oblt. Gerhard, , , 12., JG 5, , , VD+SJ, , 27-Aug-44, Killed due to midair collision with Bf 109G-1 WNr. 14090., Or is WNr. 14620?, Norwegen/Finnland, Valtonen, LW Pohjoinen Sivusta, p.398; SIG LW Norway, , Saltenfjord/Bodø, 100%, F,
27-Aug-44, , Bf 109G-1, 14090, Fuchs, Uffz. Karl-Heinz, , , 9., JG 5, , , NH+PV, , 27-Aug-44, Injured due to midair collision with Bf 109G-2 WNr. 14620., , Norwegen/Finnland, Valtonen, LW Pohjoinen Sivusta, p.398, , Saltenfjord, 100%, F,

[Laurent Rizzotti]

Thanks to both of you

All sources seem to agree that Beyer and Fuchs collided over Saltenfjord, the first being killed and the second surviving (wounded).

Fuchs aircraft, identified as Bf 109 G-1 14090, was lost according to Valtonen, but it seems to me that on this date the source for the WNr would be the NVM, and these do not usually have a percentage damage. So maybe the description will indicate 100% damage (for example if Fuchs bailed out over the sea or ditched), or it was the author guess given the air collision.

Does someone have a trace of WNr 14090 after 27 August 1944, that may prove it survived this day, as its pilot ?

[Tomislav Haramincic]

Just to add some more information to Bf 109G-2 WNr.14620. This plane was lost on 16.01.43 with 10./JG5

Bf 109G-2 WNr.14620 16.01.43 10./JG5 Uffz. Heinrich Schmitz (†) (FF gefunden in 07.43), Schlechtwetter - Absturz, FSA (Fallschirm fang sich am Heck), Berg Ondusfjellet (982m) Trollheimen (35km N Oppdal) - 100% ws.5+

http://ktsorens.tihlde.org/flyvrak/ondusfjellet.html

[Laurent Rizzotti]

Thanks Tomislav, this confirms the WNr of the loss of 27 August 1944

[Andreas Brekken]

Dear all!

There is no entry for Fuchs in the summary loss list for personnel on 27.8.1944, and thus it seems he did not get wounded at all.

Also, it seems that the aircraft was so slightly damaged that it did not get reported (damage below 10%).

And yes, the information from Valtonen must stem from the NVM, the only error being that he did not corroborate the information with other sources but assumed that the mention of both the pilot and aircraft details indicated that the aircraft was lost.

Regards,
Andreas B