Unknown? FW189 loss 23.May.1943

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello, friends!

According to the German Army observers, a FW189 fell aflame ["brennend abgestürzt"] W of Krymskaja (Kuban bridgehead) on 23.May.43 - due to AA fire, according to one of the reports.

Can't find the loss in GQM returns. Maybe in NVM?

Best regards,
Andrey

[Matti Salonen]

No FW 189 lost. Maybe misidentification of aircraft type. The following would fit quite well:
1943-05-23, 6./Schl.G 1, FW 190A-5, 1501128, 4 km westnordwestlich Krymskaja (Pl.Qu. 7523), Flakvolltreffer. Bruch 100 %.
Flugzeugführer Fw Birnbaum, Willi, +

Matti

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Thank you, Matti!

Originally Posted by Matti Salonen

Maybe misidentification of aircraft type.

Seems doubtful due to specific form of FW189.
Also, in the Krymskaja area on the same time a fall of the German fighter was also registered by the German observers

Originally Posted by Matti Salonen

The following would fit quite well:
1943-05-23, 6./Schl.G 1, FW 190A-5, 1501128, 4 km westnordwestlich Krymskaja (Pl.Qu. 7523), Flakvolltreffer. Bruch 100 %.
Flugzeugführer Fw Birnbaum, Willi, +
Matti

Probably it was the "fighter" from German report ("1 km SW Tabak Plantage" - it is ~4 km W from the center of Krymskaja). So the FW189 case remains unresolved.

Best regards,
Andrey

[Stig Jarlevik]

Andrey

I think you have too much faith in an Army observer remembering the type numbers of the Luftwaffe. He could well have seen the 190 go down and know that it was a fighter alright but still report it as a 189 since he mixed the numbers, not the type as such.
Mind you he would not make any such mistake when it came to tanks, guns etc, his home territory, but aircraft may well have been his blank spot....

Now if the same Army guy reported both the 189 and 190 in his report, well that is entirely a different matter...

Just a thought
Cheers
Stig

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Stig,

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

Andrey
I think you have too much faith in an Army observer remembering the type numbers of the Luftwaffe.

You are right in general, and maybe ground forces didn't see the difference between He111 and Do217 for example. But FW189 used as artillery spotters almost every day in close cooperation with ground forces, and almost every day was mentioned in the army/corps/division reports.
Also, due to it's twin-boom design, unique for the aircrafts widely used in the Ostfront, FW189 was well known not to German forces only but to Russian infantry also. Russian nickname for FW189 was "Rama" (window-frame).

And

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

Now if the same Army guy reported both the 189 and 190 in his report, well that is entirely a different matter...

Yes, both losses were mentioned in the same reports: "ein eigener Jäger" [probably FW190 although this one was from ground attack unit] and a FW189.

So I think in that case Germans saw the fall of the burning FW189 really.
Try to find the Russian AA claim for the FW189 on 23.5.43.

Best regards,
Andrey

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks Andrey

Well if the observer reported both losses it's another matter of course.

Generally what I am saying is not that the observer did not recognise the Fw 189 as such but that he was mixing type numbers, just like someone who is not too familiar with Luftwaffe type numbers could state Fw 109 and Bf 190. You recognise the type as such, but uncertain about the correct type number, you mix them in a field report.

If no Fw 189 losses are found I believe the observer made a mistake

Cheers
Stig

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello Stig,

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

Generally what I am saying is not that the observer did not recognise the Fw 189 as such but that he was mixing type numbers

You are right, it is possible, although FW189 was well-known type.

An argument "contra":
In division's and corps's reports were mentioned one fighter and one FW189 (i.e. "non-fighter").

Anyway, I'll try to find the evidences from the Soviet side.

About FW189 units on the AOK17 front during the May 1943:
It seems 1.(H)/21 and 7.(H)/32 were in action. "Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen" for both units don't gives any loss "durch Feindeinwirkung" for May 1943.

Maybe something other units?

Best regards,
Andrey