Unknown photo He 219 DV+DA W.Nr. 190105

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

Since many of you find NVM far more reliable than the GQM lists

Not arguing the point here. In 1944 they are THE source, due lack of comparable GQM reports, other periods both the GQM and NVM have errors - but as I am aware of, no real statistical survey has been performed on these documents accuracy. Am I right, NVM never have errors corrected but GQM have. -Ed

[Marcel Hogenhuis]

Hello Stig

You are not the only one which is confused about the 210905 data and the 'jojo' like movements of this bird.

This confusion is caused by the Heinkel Archives in which two reports survived, referring to the same incident with 210905 in Wiesbaden Erbenheim:
- the first report (of 28 July 1944) refers to 210905, being an aircraft of the I./NJG 1 and even adding the Verbandskennzeichen G9+EK while their
- second report (of 31 July 1944) refers to the incident on 28 July, but now saying that the He219 belonged to the NJGr.10.

This second report has not been written as a correction to the 1th report but I think we should take it as a correction: this would be in line with the transfer from production to the NJGr.10 and so far I haven't been able to discover whether a He219 of the I./NJG 1 was flying operations in the direction of Wiesbaden.

That 210905 finally moved to the I./NJG 1 is not strange, I have several transfers of He219's from I./NJG 1 to Ekdo.Rechlin or II./NJG 1 as well.

Summaring it all: it is sometimes easier to rule out certain options (like the non existing 290105) than to present the truth what it correct. We struggle on...

Best regards, Marcel

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks Marcel

Well, not sure which foot I should rest on in this case.
Nice to see I am not the only one who is confused.... But I agree with your conclusion that the two dates refer to the same incident on 28 July.

Checking Michael Balss' two books, this incident is only mentioned in his first one, as WNr 290105, which we know is wrong!
Since Balss does not mention Höller in any of his books, I can only assume he has found the WNr outside his list, possibly or probably from the GQM lists, since if he had found the NVM he would at least have hesitated what to write.

What we now have are two aircraft with basically the same background and damage history.

190205 G9+DK 4./NJG 1 dam 4 June 1944 (no further records) BTW was it common that when aircraft were transferred between units, they kept their old unit codes? In this case G9+DK is a 2./NJG 1 code.
210905 G9+EK? 2./NJGr 10 dam 28 July 1944 (why would an aircraft delivered to 2./NJGr 10 from the outset be painted with a NJG 1 unit code?)

The question arises on what background information the two 'bodies' GQM and NVM based their statements on, and why they differ in this case.
If we move back to the two damage reports (4 June and 28 July) are they mentioned anywhere else beside the Heinkel documents you have, such as GQM? If yes, what WNrs are used and how grave was the actual damage in %? If no GQM reports are available, are there other sources available?

If the damage was rather small, my logic would have it that both aircraft should be brought back on line with the units they already served with. Whatever really happened, my logic of course means very little anyway

If I put out a hypothetical question here.
What would a clerk writing the NVM have done if he received the report that WNr 290105 had been destroyed? Since most individual on TOCH prefers the NVM I presume the clerk had to check all details received such as names, circumstances and presumably also aircraft details? Depending on how far such checks went is it possible he may have received the wrong info and made a mistake?

To me it is far easier to make a mistake and write 290105 instead of 190205 than having 210905 and write it as 290105. If you try it on a typewriter (not computer) you will see what I mean.

Cheers
Stig

[he219research]

To further confuse matters...

Wasn't WNr 210905 shot down together with WNr 190128 during that training flight on 9/9´44?
In my records, I have 210905 listed as being shot down 9/9´44 at approx. 17:55 by P-51 Mustangs from 353rd FG, during a training flight to Rheine. Three fatalities: Ofw. Heinz Jadatz, Uffz. Alfred Schindler and Uffz. Heinrich Wennholz.

Just a few minutes later, at approx. 17:58, I have WNr 190128 listed as "crashed on landing" at Hopsten airbase (after presumably the same attack by US fighters).
Were both these He210A-0s indeed shot down during the same flight?

[Stig Jarlevik]

Yes He219research

That is correct and neither that date, action, individuals etc are in doubt.
What we are interested in is which aircraft WNr 290105 actually was.

Was it 210905 (as the NVM states) or 190105 (which Gerhard so wisely suggested)?

Cheers
Stig

[Marcel Hogenhuis]

Dear all,

Stig:
I have checked the sometimes quite difficult to read handwritten KTB of the I./NJG 1 and a diary of a Bordfunker from the 2./NJG 1. Now it gets interesting: the I./NJG 1 brought 14 aircraft in the air, 5 aircraft could not proceed with their mission because of technical malfunctions (one of these He219's was flown by this Bordfunker and his pilot), the majority of the He219's landed in 'Raum Wiesbaden' (!)
This makes it more credible that the incident at Wiesbaden-Erbenheim was indeed related to a He219 from the I./NJG 1. Now I must try to find documentary evidence when 210905 was transferred from the first operator NJGr.10 to the I./NJG 1...

He219research:
Your info is not in doubt, the purpose of the flight ("training") is unlogical: for which training purpose would they stuff 3 men (in 210905) and 4 men (in 190128) ? The NVM gives away the real purpose of these flights > both Heinkels were on a transfer flight from Münster-Handorf to Hopsten ("Überführung") for a temporary posting there. In such cases it was practice to take the first mechanic with them in the rear fuselage which had an emergency seat ('Notsitz') for such occasions.

Best regards, Marcel

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks Marcel

Hope you can clinch this one...

Cheers
Stig

[Marcel Hogenhuis]

Hello Stig,

Sometimes one can have too much information but in this case it helps us to find the answers:

On an inventory of He219's from NJGr.10 in Finow 210905 is listed there. 210905 was slightly damaged on 28 July 1944 but 31 July 1944 'Einsatzklar'

The He219 which belly landed on Wiesbaden-Erbenheim airfield was actually 190178 and flown by Maj. Karlewski. This combat flight and landing on Erbenheim is recorded in his Flugbuch.

Best regards, Marcel

[he219research]

Thank you all for good information and an excellent discussion!

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks Marcel

I know what you mean

Also thanks for updating WNr 190128 into 190178.
May I ask from where WNr 190128 originates? Reason I ask is if NVM actually lists that loss as 190128? If it does then it would show that NVM is not always foolproof.....

Cheers
Stig