Colourized photo of Me 262 WNr. 113368 at Innsbruck-Hötting

[Karoband]

Hi Franck,

There is definitely something there. To my eye, it is a "white 15" with some extraneous white for some reason. Its position is lower than that of JV44 white numerals whose tops match that of the balkenkreuz. Perhaps an ex-JG 7 aircraft from München-Riem?

Jim

[edwest2]

Some color archive footage which I hope will be useful:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_WOSjnDVps

[Dan O'Connell]

To the best of my knowledge, it is a completely NEW Me 262 which has never been reported. Congratulations and well done Franck!

[ouidjat]

Thank you. You are welcome.

[Karl]

Hi Jim,

Ofw Rudolf Nielinger of JV44 wrote in his Flugbuch, that he transferred Me262 "White 15" on 28. April 45 from Munich-Riem to Salzburg-Maxglan.
This confirms that the Me262 in the background of the Innsbruck-photo is not "White 15" but rather "White 13" of JV44, as Franck suggests.

KR Karl

[Karoband]

Hi Karl,

If that's the case, then I have to agree with Matolion that the "13" looks weird.

Jim

[David E. Brown]

Gents,

Back in 1998 I studied the well-known “München-Riem Me 262 Listing” of 26 April 1945 and based on available information determined there were twelve instances where incorrect Werknummern were transcribed in the document. These Werknummern all fell outside the known series listings but when corrected fit into the various series without duplicating a pre-existing number:

Listed versus Correct – Affinity
112712 = 111712 – DHL for conversion
112714 = 111714 – DLH for conversion
113704 = 111704 – JV 44
113712 = 111712 – JV 44
113714 = 111714 – JV 44
111369 = 112369 or 113369 – DLH for conversion
113722 = 111722 – JV 44
113723 = 111723 – JV 44
130983 = 130083 – recycled aircraft Memmingen-Industrie
500389 = 500489 – DLH for conversion
501707 = 500707 – JV 44
510513 = 500513 – JV 44

Note that two aircraft appear twice; once in the JV 44 column and again in the DLH column, i.e. 111712 (112712 & 113712) and 111714 (112714 & 113714).

In Dan O’Connell’s 2005 opus, “113369” is listed as “Me 262 A: Found under camouflage by US forces at Innsbruck Austria. (afo)” In his book there is no listing for “112369” that is a legitimate Werknummer.

Additionally, the camouflage pattern and mottling around the engine nacelles fits well with 113xxx series machines.

Therefore, with this photograph confirming the location and the machine’s Werknummer partially visible – 11(2/3)36(8/9) – I believe the available information supports the assignment of WNr.113369 to this Me 262.

Cheers,

David

[Karoband]

Hello David,

To the best of my knowledge the original transcription of the JV44 inventory on 26 April 1945 can be found in David E. Brown, etal., Me 262 KG(J) and KG units in Czech Territory, (JaPo, 2010), p. 64, and also Messerschmitt Me 262 Production & Arado Ar 234 Final Operations, (JaPo, 2012), p. 48.

To make so many mistakes, it is likely that the transcriber was doing his best to make out numerals from a blurred copy, and it would be unwise to assume that all his errors were limited only to those involving werknummern that fell outside of the known series listings. Therefore, I would suggest that the transcriber could have mistaken a blurred '8' for a '5'; when he wrote '113365'.

In Dan O'Connell's opus, "113368" is listed as "Me 262 A-1a. Found at Innsbruck-Hötting, Austria, by US troops. Possibly delivered to JV44. [afo]" "[afo]" is also the same source of information for his entry on "113369": "J. Richard Smith and Eddie Creek, correspondence September 2000."

From Smith & Creek, Me 262 Volume 4, (Classic, 2000), p. 737 and O'Connell, p. 219 for Wednesday, 2 May 1945: "A total of 22 Me 262s from JV44 were flown to Innsbruck but seven crashed on landing …" This suggests that fifteen intact Me 262s should have been found at Hötting.

Best regards,

Jim

[David E. Brown]

Hi Jim,

We will never know exactly how the list was created – transferred from existing paperwork, visual inspection, verbal reporting, a combination of these? Regardless, a number of obvious errors can be identified and as such I concede the possibility for transcription errors for legitimate Werknummern. However, I find it most interesting that 10 of the 12 were errors in the Werknummerserien (first three digits) and only two in the remainder. Indeed, for the former nine of the ten were with the third digit. Something was going on. But what? Given the times it was sort of like re-arranging deck chairs on the RMS “Titanic”.

So, on the balance of probabilities and the information available, I lean more towards my original interpretation of 113369 and what is observed in the photo. Until such time a new photo is discovered of course!

Regarding Smith and Creek’s original source for information on 113368 and 113369 at Innsbruck, it is a mystery. We know one of them was there via the photograph, and possibly both. Perhaps Dan can enlighten us if a document was referenced in the correspondence.

With respect to the Me 262 seen under its tail, I agree that the number is a “13” and believe this was the replacement aircraft for Steinhoff’s “White 13” in which he crashed on 18 April. Though at a distance, the placement of the “13” on this machine is a bit haphazard and does not match the position of numbers observed on known JV 44 machines applied in late March – early April.

Best,

David

[Karoband]

Hi David,

I have given the enlargement of the werknummer a long hard look and despite the outer curves I see that the inner space matches the inner space of the six. So you flip a "6" upside down and you get a "9". I must concede that is "what is observed in the photo"! Good eye!

Jim