NJG 100?

[CJE]

Hi there!
Some of you may know this BA photograph of a Ju 88C-6 definitely taken in Russia. I already saw it in a couple of books captionned as NJG 100.
But... on blowing up the photograph, the code is NOT "W7" but rather looks like "H or R3"or "H or R5".
Any light to shed?
Thanks in advance and have a nice week-end.

Chris

PS - Sorry the thumbnail is small and the original photograph slightly blurred.

[gogh]

firts impression N9

[CJE]

Why not?
But which unit bore this code?

[Andy Mitchell]

N9 = http://www.wiki.luftwaffedata.co.uk/wiki/index.php/N9

H3 = http://www.wiki.luftwaffedata.co.uk/wiki/index.php/H3

[CJE]

Thank you Andy.

[Kari Lumppio]

Salut!

"Your" Ju 88 is from 1./NJG 100 but the following may have some relevance as the Staffel was formed from 12./NJG 5 August 1943.

For some reason 4./NJG 100 which was based at Tallinn, Estonia used codes beginning with C9(+_M) from at least early February 1944 to March 23th when first W7- code is recorded in Finnish logs. It is obvious that the Ju 88s themselves remain the same - the same a/c individual alfabets + staffel letter keep recurring. Just the unit code changes.

One of my hypotheses is that these "C9" Ju 88s (to 4./NJG 100 and perhaps 1./100 too?) came from IV/NJG 5 which had 16 Ju 88C-6s at the end of July 1943 but none in the beginning of September. For some reason data for August 1943 is missing at Michael holm's site ( http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/njagd/bivnjg5.html ).

It seems 1./NJG 100 starts August 1943 with 12 Ju 88 C-6 while 4./NJG 100 is formed not until December 1943. I have not been able to come up with any logical reason or path for the C9-coded Ju 88s to end within 4./NJG 100. For 1./NJG 100 the logical path would be both shorter and clearer.

Situation may have been the same with III/NJG 6 which used the C9 for a short period after being formed from II/NJG 5. Perhaps there were no paint shops around NJG 5 bases, eh?

Cheers,
Kari

[CJE]

It sure has legs.

Merci beaucoup.

Chris