Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces

Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the German Luftwaffe and the Air Forces of its Allies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 3rd February 2015, 13:09
Laurent Rizzotti Laurent Rizzotti is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,892
Laurent Rizzotti is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Some victors of the above losses:

26 June 1943: 1st Lt. John A. Urban, 346th FS, 350th FG claimed a Ju 88 in Algiers area

8 July 1943: 1st Lt. Robert E. Armstrong, Jr., 4th FS, 52nd FG claimed a photo-recon Ju 88 west of Bizerte. Hit b yreturn fire, bailed out and ended in the same hospital than a German survivor, Lt Hermann "Schmick" (noted Lt Henry Schmidt in Charles' post above)
(description in the book "Spitfires and Yellow Tail Mustangs", p 52)

22 August 1943: 4U+DH was shot down by Flt Lt Ken Debenham of 249 Sqn
(book "Spitfires over Sicily", pages 196-197)

27 August 1943: 4U+1H was shot down by Flg Off Ken MacBain RCAF of 249 Sqn
(book "Spitfires over Sicily", pages 200)

8 November 1943: I have no claim by P-38 units, the only USAAF claim in MTO this day was by 1st Lt. Clarence F Musgrave of 65th FS, 57th FG who claimed a Ju 88 shot down off Pescara, Italy between 14h35 and 15h35. This unit was flying P-40s and preparing to convert to P-47.

26 November 1943: Sqn Ldr Peter Lawrence Parrott, CO of 43 Sqn RAF claimed a shared Ju 88 shot down off Capua.
(Osprey Aviation Elite Units 9)

22 December 1943: two French Spitfires of GC II/7 "Nice", flown by Lt Prunget and adjudant Haberkorn shot down around noon a Ju 88 in the sea, 50 km WSW of Ajaccio, Corsica.
(book "Pilotes français sur l'Afrique du Nord et la Corse", pages 344-345)
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 3rd February 2015, 13:24
edNorth edNorth is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,115
edNorth is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Here is good overview of Ju 88 T-1´s assigned to this unit.

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/aufkl/b1ag123.html
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 3rd February 2015, 15:51
Larry deZeng Larry deZeng is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,524
Larry deZeng will become famous soon enoughLarry deZeng will become famous soon enough
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Edward North wrote in part:
Quote:
"15-30 June 1943: the Staffel too delivery of 6 Ju 88 T-2, which was a new, significantly faster high altitude version of the Ju 88 that was specifically outfitted with aerial camera installations."

Well. Not Ju 88 T-2, version was Ju 88 T-1 (BMW 801 engines replacing Jumo 211 J). These were conversions from Ju 88 D-1 Recce. Ju 88 D-1 already was Photo recce airplane, and major production version since summer 1941, so statement is false (pointless), only BMW 801 versions were faster at altitude. Yet were relatively easily caught by RAF Spitfires. In my opinion these were too late, and relatively few were converted.

For example. 430614 mentioned in list in previous post (really 0880430614) was the 7th conversion - the "T/7", not A-4, that is false.
(Source: Modification lists)
The offending error in my "15-30 June 1943" entry came from Allied intelligence documents, probably an interrogation report. In reading through these over the past 30+ years, it was quite clear that in mid-1943 many, but certainly not all, Allied intelligence personnel were lacking the autoritative detail needed to differentiate between the Ju 88 S and T designations and got them mixed up, that is until the technical intelligence people straightened things out. It is also true that captured German air crew gave their interrogators misleading information that led to erroneous conclusions.

L.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 4th February 2015, 12:22
edNorth edNorth is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,115
edNorth is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Humm.... it seems some are still not gettin this right. My name is NOT Edward, never has had that name, you can look up my profile here at TOCH! for true name. BTW, I belive it´s an offence call a person by wrong fictitious name...

My humble apologies for your 70+ year old data. My sincere hope is that (uncorrected) it will not find its way into any future "Recce Units" book.

However offending errors seem be elsewhere also. Nothing personal.

Reason I say so is (year 2007 Midland / Ian Allan publishing) book "Bomber Units of the Luftwaffe 1933-1945" (authors Henry L. de Zeng IV and Douglas Stankey, with Eddie Creek) has very many erros in indentification of the various Ju 88 types, apparently due lack of knowing how to differentiate them. I had this book as an Christmas gift from an friend of mine, but was seriously thinking of throwing it away - as trash (soory the pun) - it is fit for recycling, but I wanted contact the authors first. Who ever wrote them very errerous photo captions in that book should be sentenced to walk the plank (if people know what that was done in the old days) - it is very similar errors as "recently seen commented on in book revues here elsewhere at TOCH! where an Medcalf authored Ju 88 books was discussed" (!)

A list of these errors can be submitted for first part of of that said book. I have really not read more of it...

Regards
Ed
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 4th February 2015, 15:18
Larry deZeng Larry deZeng is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,524
Larry deZeng will become famous soon enoughLarry deZeng will become famous soon enough
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Quote:
Originally Posted by edNorth View Post
Humm.... it seems some are still not gettin this right. My name is NOT Edward, never has had that name, you can look up my profile here at TOCH! for true name. BTW, I belive it´s an offence call a person by wrong fictitious name...

My humble apologies for your 70+ year old data. My sincere hope is that (uncorrected) it will not find its way into any future "Recce Units" book.

However offending errors seem be elsewhere also. Nothing personal.

Reason I say so is (year 2007 Midland / Ian Allan publishing) book "Bomber Units of the Luftwaffe 1933-1945" (authors Henry L. de Zeng IV and Douglas Stankey, with Eddie Creek) has very many erros in indentification of the various Ju 88 types, apparently due lack of knowing how to differentiate them. I had this book as an Christmas gift from an friend of mine, but was seriously thinking of throwing it away - as trash (soory the pun) - it is fit for recycling, but I wanted contact the authors first. Who ever wrote them very errerous photo captions in that book should be sentenced to walk the plank (if people know what that was done in the old days) - it is very similar errors as "recently seen commented on in book revues here elsewhere at TOCH! where an Medcalf authored Ju 88 books was discussed" (!)

A list of these errors can be submitted for first part of of that said book. I have really not read more of it...

Regards
Ed
Thank you very much for your petty little personal attack, EdNorth! It made my day. I've been a regular here on TOCH! using several different screen names since 2001 and I believe this is the worst one I've seen.

Now let's see if I've got this right. No one should ever dare author anything on the Luftwaffe unless it's first vetted by you, the know-all, see-all of all things about Luftwaffe aircraft, before it is published? I think you will find some disgreement here if that is the lesson buried in you rude, nasty rant. There is no, absolutely no excuse for the personal comments you wove into your criticism of my books, especially after I addressed your original post about the "T-2" version in an honest and forthright manner.

MODERATORS: please address this slanderous attack before it turns into "flamer".

L.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 4th February 2015, 18:01
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 5,473
Nick Beale will become famous soon enoughNick Beale will become famous soon enough
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Right, everyone calm down or this thread closes.

"I belive it´s an offence call a person by wrong fictitious name..."

No "ed", it's a simple and readily understandable mistake as I'm sure you are perfectly well aware. "Ed" is one of the most common shortened forms of "Edward" in English, the language of this forum. I’m sure that you would not thank me for pointing out your errors in the use of English because it is my first language but not yours; in the same spirit you could learn to accept that others may not know quite as much about the Ju 88 as you do.

It must also have occurred to you that the primary purpose of the book you mention was not the taxonomy of aircraft sub-types. It's a shame that you place so little value on the information contained in the main text, but that must remain a matter for you.

"70+ year old data"

The only data we have about the war is 70+ years old, that's when it happened. Archaeology aside, all we have gained since are new interpretations of that data. Anyone acquainted with wartime sources will be aware that they are frequently contradictory or of dubious reliability. Captured crews not only misled interrogators about what sub-type they were flying, it seems evident that many simply didn't know (or even care, perhaps). Since we are talking about Ju 88s, here are some for you:
  • A wreck at Istres with 2629 painted on the fin and 301532 painted in yellow on the exhaust shroud. So what was its correct Werk Nummer?
  • W.Nr. 822924 at Valence, recorded by those who examined the wreck as an A-4 trop. but reported by its unit as being an A-17. So whom should one believe?

You say, quite reasonably, that the Ju 88 T was a conversion and “relatively easily caught by RAF Spitfires” but conversely its bomber equivalent, the S model, was sometimes classed separately in German reports, e.g. this (71 year-old) one about aircraft breaking off an attack on Bristol: “three Ju 188, four Ju 88, one Ju 88 S and one Me 410.” Or this, from Fliegerdivision 2’s Operations Officer in August 1944: “1.(F)/33 will provide as battle reconnaissance aircraft Ju 88 S” (bearing in mind that the Staffel had available not only this type but Ju 88s with Jumo 211, Ju 188s with Jumo 213 and BMW 801 and Me 410 A-3).
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 4th February 2015, 23:51
edNorth edNorth is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,115
edNorth is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Yes, my first language is not English, but I am not saying other (including Mr. Beale and Mr. deZeng) are bad writing writers, perhaps that should be left for the native professional revuers, or none at all, but there has been some previous problems here at TOCH! in this regard, in that doors have been slammed (prematurely) and the matters not discussed properly or thrugh the whole process.

Some of the problem might be that "the subject" (Luftwaffe and the Germans) lost, but the Victors (the Allied) still controlling the discussion. It does not matter how I write it. Are men trying avoid the discussion, on their works or their research, or others. In general.

As most regular readers here, some ask and ask and ask, whilst others give and give and give. I think I´ve given enough, rightly or wrongly, but on the average satisfactory, I also think, altho opinions may differ, but that is normal and expected, now prefer (some) quality before quantity. I was expecting honest academic answer, not accusations.

Please do not slam on the messanger. The messinger is NOT to be blamed for beeing the carrier. Good writers in our age of fast internet and mass media, are an endangered species. I very much prefer Arthur Conan Doyle or similar writers, over bread and butter writers like Mr. Green. Yes, I like detective stories! And I like proper research. Simple. Nothing other.

1. Mr. deZeng blamed his sources, but did not explain.
2. Mr. Beale did explain his some while back, if I remember correctly.

Yes, guilty, I have done my own primary research on Ju 88´s and not relied on others do that for me. Therefore I dare talk or tip on this. I am not trying be selling anthing to anyone and I am not going publish all till all is basically fully ready and then can be discussed in full. And I go further "in basic" respects than before has been done. But I may need much more help. The task is awesome and financially very strained.

I prefer mr. deZeng should not class this as personal attack. Far from it. Rather focus on as try to mention taboo issues in book publishing - where quality seems be sacrificed, and professionalism is no longer valiued.

In my opinion this thred can go on unhindered.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 4th February 2015, 23:52
edNorth edNorth is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,115
edNorth is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

"W.Nr. 822924 at Valence, recorded by those who examined the wreck as an A-4 trop. but reported by its unit as being an A-17. So whom should one believe?"

Not very complex answer. W.Nr. 822924 TI+BD was standard late production A-4 from Siebel Halle assembly. Many know what the Ju 88 A-17´s were used for, but some do not. It was type Ju 88 A-4 adapted (converted) in late 1943 for carrying of certain type of torpedoes, in attacking shipping, yet not same version as A-4 Torp (alias Ju 88 A-4 LT) - but I am not shure if Mr. Beale realy meant "A-4 trop" (tropicalized) or "A-4 torp" (Torpedo Bomber), so this answer is given two fold.

Well, the A-17 was the torpedo bomber version, made up of A-4 airframes. Else it was not an A-17. So you now decide which to belive. Take the Torpedo gear out, then you have the original version.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 5th February 2015, 02:14
Andreas Brekken's Avatar
Andreas Brekken Andreas Brekken is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Aurskog, Norway
Posts: 1,493
Andreas Brekken is on a distinguished road
Re: 1./(F)123 Losses 1943

Hi.

I have details of 22 losses recorded for the 1.(F)/123 during 1943.

If you are interested I can post a list of links for the records here.

Regards,
Andreas B
__________________
Ahhh... but I have seen the holy grail! And it is painted RLM 76 all over with a large Mickey Mouse on the side, there is a familiar pilot in front of it and it has an Erla Haube!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 5th February 2015, 04:20
John Beaman John Beaman is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
Posts: 2,152
John Beaman is an unknown quantity at this point
Warning

OK, everyone be calm and keep to the subject, If not, I will usurp my fellow moderator, Nick, and close this thread. Personal attacks have no place on this site.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
JG 54 losses on 29 December 1943 Laurent Rizzotti Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 2 8th December 2012 15:38
JG 54 losses on (or around) 10 August 1943 Laurent Rizzotti Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 6 5th September 2012 19:56
Three Losses from 1 December 1943 dahiot daniel Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 4 26th August 2012 11:23
Ju88 losses 1943 Med/Hs126 losses Yuoslavia 1944 Brian Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 16 1st June 2009 16:09
Soviet air force losses 1941-1945 Six Nifty .50s Allied and Soviet Air Forces 12 15th May 2005 18:57


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net