Trying to confirm forced-landing of He111 of 9./KG4, 5J+KT, in Norway during spring of 1940--probably at Fornebu

[Larry Hickey]

Hello,

I have good photos of either side of a crash-landed He111 on what looks like an airfield in Norway, pine or fir forest, strong perimeter fence, low hills in the background on one side. Substantial houses just beyond perimeter fence in one direction, and wreckage of a Ju52 visible in the other direction. The a/c made a good forced landing and carries the codes 5J+KT. There is a W.Nr. on the fin, but it isn't readable in my images.

I think that this must be: "April 24, 1940: 9./KG4 Heinkel He111P-2. Crash-landed at Oslo-Fornebu following engine failure. No crew casualties. Aircraft 70% damaged - write-off."

The only hesitancy I have in accepting this as 5J+KT is the 70% loss, as it doesn't appear that badly damaged. If this is the above incident, does anyone have any crew information or W.Nr. for this a/c? I plan to use this as one of our EoE color profiles if I can confirm more info about this incident.

I'd post a photo, but no more room for it in my photo post file for this board.

Who can help?

Regards,

[John Fredrik]

Hi Larry.

If you send me a copy of the pictures I could get them out here on the forum for you,I still have some "space" left.
I also have some Fornebu photos soo maybe I can confirm that this is the right airfield.

[flyvrak]

There is also a picture of this aircraft here:
http://www.festningsverk.no/fornebu_2.htm

Scroll down to the last picture.

[Larry Hickey]

John Fredrik & Kjell,

The last photo at the excellent website posted above is one of two photos I have of this a/c. This confirms the first part of the question. I accept that this is Fornebu AF Oslo Norway. Knowing that, the April 24th incident remains a possibility, but the images of 5J+JT look to me to be a better candidate for a 70% write off. As stated above, 5J+KT doesn't look to me to be 70% damaged. 5J+JT does. It looks to me like 5J+JT collided with another aircraft on the runway above, perhaps while swerving to try and avoid it, and careened over the side of the very steep embankment alongside the runway, taking this much smaller a/c with it. Does the 4th photo down show a dead body under the He111 wing, with the wing of a much smaller a/c underneath? If this involved a collision with another a/c and a fatality, this might help us date this incident as there may be an NVM on the casualty. Almost certainly another aircraft, which might appear on the Luft QM loss list, was involved in this incident. Another clue which might help us date this.

The 5th photo down shows 5J+HP of 6./KG4. I have several images of this on its nose with the rear fuselage sticking into the air with the tail sheared off. Looks like it made a very hard landing which broke the tail off. I'd also like to date this one as well. The same with the 6th photo of white or yellow "D," obviously being broken up for salvage. This could be 5J+DM, 5J+DP, 5J+DR or 5J+DP, or it could be an He111 of KG26. We need to locate other photos of this aircraft before it was broken up for salvage.

The next photo down appears to me to be 1H+CN or 1H+GN of KG26. Does the Norwegian caption say that this is a Vaernes rather than Fornebu? Who has any information on this one? This may carry the II./KG26 insignia on the forward fuselage under the cockpit. This one does not appear to be badly damaged.

Does anyone have any further info on any of these? Dates? Crews? etc. More photos that would provide further evidence of markings.

Regards,

[robert]

Perhaps this 5J+KT is the another a/c of 9./KG4 that was damaged by Skuas of no.803 Sqn on 24.4.40 and returned with wounded wireless opeator?

Robert

[Larry Hickey]

Robert,

Its a good theory. After thinking further about it, this collision of 5K+JT with another aircraft is probably going to be the key to solving this mystery, and assigning the a/c codes to the two different a/c. There must be a record of the other aircraft lost in the collision in the records somewhere.

Regards,

[John Fredrik]

The next photo down appears to me to be 1H+CN or 1H+GN of KG26. Does the Norwegian caption say that this is a Vaernes rather than Fornebu? Who has any information on this one? This may carry the II./KG26 insignia on the forward fuselage under the cockpit. This one does not appear to be badly damaged.

Does anyone have any further info on any of these? Dates? Crews? etc. More photos that would provide further evidence of markings.

Hi!
I am pretty shure this is Vaernes and not Fornebu, more pictures found here. Not good enough to see the markings unfortunately.

I have 1H+ CN down on Vaernes 22.05.1940, 80% damage.

Could not be 80% damage on this one?

http://krigsbilder.net/coppermine/di..._display_media

http://krigsbilder.net/coppermine/di..._display_media

John Fredrik

[Larry Hickey]

John Fredrik,

I don't see any He111s on the coppermine website. Were you referring to the terrain, or are there other photos of this He111? The bombers there are Ju88s. It certainly looks like it could be Vaernes. Our EoE Luft Loss DB lists a loss at Vaernes AF that day as: "May 22, 1940: II./KG26 Heinkel He111H-3. Crash-landed at Trondheim-Vaernes, circumstances not recorded. No crew casualties. Aircraft 45% damaged but repairable."

If this is the same as your loss, this could well be the a/c in the photo. We need additional photos of the a/c code to confirm this, among other info.

Regards,

[John Fredrik]

Larry!

A bit embarrased here..see now that this is a JU88 and not a H111...(can I forgive my self seeing so wrong?).

But I agree that the terrain is more likely to be Vaernes than Fornebu.

I have the same loss info but 80% damage and not 45% that you have.
45% is more likely to be correct I think regarding to the pictures of the accident.

Have sent a email to a friend that have some pictures from Vaernes, maybe he got any that can help us.

John Fredrik

[Andreas Brekken]

Hi.

With regards to the 4th photo, I do not believe this to be a body, but what we see is part of a tire lying flat on the ground with some canvas draped over it.

The wing section from the smaller aircraft has a pitot tube sticking out, and I think this is from a Fi 156, as it is so small compared to the He 111? What other aircraft would have such a slim and straight wing?

Regards,
Andreas B