He111 WNr4531 or 4581, mot.No 17541 3/4.Apr.1944

[Stig Jarlevik]

Originally Posted by INM@RLM

LOL
For Stig:
"Volker Koos claims the H-16 batch only went to WNr 8556 (WNr 8456 - 8556)" the answer is nothing in the way of individual identities. So Volker could be absolutely right.
This is a Griehl block, hence my inclusion of the word seemingly.

Thanks
I think Griehl did some guesswork on his own when lacking proof. If I have a choice I usually
go with Volker's conclusions.
Cheers
Stig

[INM@RLM]

Re. your #11. Yes, Volker is definitely the safer bet, Stig. (I hadn't looked at this piece in years.) However - going a little off-piste - I have a bunch of He 111 H identities immediately before this Volker block. Those start at 8356, and there are enough to reconstruct the full Stkz. sequences up to around 8437 with some credibility. These place the sub-type change from H-11 to H-16 that Volker has put at 8456, rather earlier at around 8412. (More data will resolve that, I'm sure.)

I'm curious though as to the source where you found the 8456-8555 block of H-16s. In his ADL digital article (heinkel-he-111-serienbau-bis-1945-luftwaffe-bomber), all that Volker has to say on the H-16 is: "Ab Dezember 1942 begann die Auslieferung der He 111 H-16, die im Dezember des Folgejahres endete. Die Zahl der gelieferten Maschinen lag in der Größenordnung von etwa 1100 bis 1200 Stück. Die Werknummern gehörten in die Blöcke 8156-8355 und weitere sechsstellige Nummern mit den Anfangsziffern 160, 161 und 162."
That is, he appears to directly contradict what he wrote on the H-11 in the paragraph just before. ("Deren Werknummern lagen in den Blöcken 7955-8155, 8356-8455.")
Curious, but none of us are quite perfect yet. However, when and where did he correct this please?

[Stig Jarlevik]

I send you a PM since by now this thread has changed to be about Ju 88s

Cheers
Stig

[INM@RLM]

Many thanks, Stig. I have though to add a PS to my post #12.
The identification of WNr. 8433 as a He 111 H-16 comes from the text of War Prizes.220 & photos Midland, plus LwCamo&Markg PhotoArchive#1.74.
The difference between the H-11 and the H-16 was that the whole bomb load of the H-16 was carried internally, whereas on the H-11 the whole load was carried on external racks. The Lynn Ware photo of 8433 at Freeman Field clearly shows an array of external bomb racks fitted underneath the centre section of this aircraft.
Ergo, the books are in error and this aircraft was actually a He 111 H-11. That points to 8456 as the correct point at which H-16 production commenced.

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Merlin,

Originally Posted by Merlin

...
A-4 WNr. 144531 07.07.42 15% damage and repaired afterwards at Kiew

The only remaining possibility is WNr. 144531.

07.07.43.
Yes, I also assumed it above.

Originally Posted by Merlin

The unit was most probably 5.(F)/122 from Mitau.

It is known that at the beginning of 1943 even FW189s were used as bombers in the Caucasus. But for the Germans it was a desperate time of the Stalingrad airlift.

But could 5.(F)/122 have been used for group night raids in April 1944? Maybe No144531 remained in KG3?

Best regards,
Andrey

[Merlin]

Andrey,

during april 1944 the Ju 88 elements of KG 3 were based at Terespol and Biala Podlaska in Poland, that was too fare away from Luga. The only possibilities were 5.(F)/122 and Wekusta 1 from Mitau. The 3.(F)/Nacht at Riga did not operate the Ju 88 and those Ju 88 elements around KG 102 at Riga performed only training flights for torpedo dropping.

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Merlin,

To me, a KG3 (or other bomber unit) raid using a forward airfield seems more likely than raid of 8 recce Ju88. But I don't know much about this period except for the Lfl4 area. Are there any logbooks of KG3 or 5.(F)/122 crew members survived that might clarify the situation?

Best regards,
Andrey

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Andrey Kuznetsov

But could 5.(F)/122 have been used for group night raids in April 1944?

Best regards,
Andrey

Would their aircraft have had bomb sights?

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Nick,

As recce planes often combined recce missions with bombing, they had to have sights. I found myself thinking that I had never thought about it.

Best regards,
Andrey

[Kari Lumppio]

Hi!

It is seldom I can be of help, but this seems to be case now.

Luftflotte 1 Luftlagemeldungen for early 1944 survive among the Heeresgruppe Nord material up to 29 April 1944 in form way.

Could find my digiphoto copy (of the microfilms) and from there:

Luftlagemeldung 4./5.4.44 (nachts)

"Nachteinsatz der Kampfflugzeuge: 8
4 Flgzge. Eisenbahnkämpfung, Angriff auf Bahnhof Luga, 2 Brände (Öl)
4 " Eisenbahnkämpfung Strecke Leningrad-Tschudowo-Bologoje, 20 Wagen nichtet (Öl oder Benzin) 2 mittlere Explozionen mit Brand."

No reported losses, no "Nachmeldung" for the night 4./5.4 in later reports.

I would say 14.(Eis)/KG 55.


Edit
I looked through whole April. The only He 111 loss recorded in the Meldungen is for night 10./11.4.44.

Interestingly for 3.4.44 (tags) there is recorded one Me 110 loss. Would WNr 4531 make any sense with that?

Cheers,
Kari