Showing posts with label Luftwaffe on Sicily. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Luftwaffe on Sicily. Show all posts

Friday, 21 November 2025

new Airfix Bf 109 G-5/G-6 Superkit - a chat with designer Matt and researcher Clint from Airfix


It possibly won't have escaped your attention that iconic British model brand Airfix is releasing a 1:24 scale Bf 109 G-5/6 which promises to become the centre-piece of many Luftwaffe model collections. There certainly seems to be a tremendous 'buzz' around this kit - it was undoubtedly the 'star' of the show at the recent Scale Model World 2025 (Telford, England). Fresh from discussing the model with literally hundreds of excited modellers, Airfix Bf 109 G-6 'Superkit' designer Matt Whiting (MW) and Airfix researcher Clint Mitchell (CM) answered a few slightly more  'technical' queries on the new kit from the Luftwaffe blog. My thanks to Clint and Matt for talking to the Luftwaffe blog and to Rob Brown, John M. and Del Davis for insights and help with this post!

Hello Matt, hi Clint! Thank you for agreeing to chat with the 'Luftwaffe blog'. Firstly, could you please introduce yourselves for Luftwaffe blog readers?

(MW) " Sure. I'm Matt. I joined the Airfix team as a designer in 2009. I have recently moved up to the role of Development Manager and look after a small team of talented people who create all the 3D designs, 2D artwork and conduct the research that makes all the new products happen. Before switching roles, I was pleased to be able to complete this flagship "Superkit" design. I've enjoyed working on many varied projects throughout my time as a designer. I love getting involved in researching and understanding the engineering behind the full-size aircraft and vehicles we produce in miniature. Although the 1:24th Bf 109 G-6 is the last kit I've worked on as a designer, it is certainly the one I am most proud of..."

(CM) "  I'm Clint. I joined Airfix as researcher around July 2024. I had already been involved with choosing the schemes, designing and creating the layouts/decals for the German WW2 and some Allied types since May 2023.."

Matt, as the designer can you tell us about the decision-making process that went into creating the G-6 in 24th scale? For example, why a Gustav and not a Friedrich or even an updated Emil?

(MW) "..The 1/24th Spitfire Mk.IXc was and continues to be very popular, so we wanted to create a new Superkit that sat nicely alongside that in the range. As with the Spitfire (new Mk.IXc vs. Mk.I original), we did not want to replace directly the vintage classic Bf109E kit and we decided to offer something new to the Airfix range. We did in fact discuss at length whether the new kit should be an F or a G! Originally we were intending to engineer the kit so both versions could be released from the same base tooling. However, this was quickly dismissed as being unfeasible due to the many detail changes between the marks. Although the F had not been kitted before at 1:24, we felt that the G offered a greater scope for easily producing new sub-variants in the future that look quite different to the original kit, maximising the tooling investment. The F is more limited in that regard, despite having some fantastic schemes relating to famous ace pilots.."

Which airframe was "Lidared" (scanned)? There aren’t many Gustavs in Europe, although the Tikkakoski museum has one, I believe? No Finnish decal option though?

(CM) " Well, Black 6 at Cosford was scanned, and the guys also made a trip to Finland to scan the G-6 airframe you mentioned at the Finnish Air Force Museum. Matt then cross-referenced both data sets to ensure our CAD was dimensionally accurate. We also had a detailed scan of a DB605 engine. The Finns have a rather problematic national marking prominently displayed on their aircraft. Although they changed their national markings somewhat later. So we may see some post-1944 Finnish markings options on our 109 in the future as a thank you to the Finnish Air Force Museum, who allowed us access to the airframe.."

So Matt, how does the designer work? Do you break down the CAD model first or start with a certain number of tools (cost) and ‘fill up’ the space on each tool? I ask that because the parts count (405) is similar to the parts count on the Mk IX. Or is that just because they are both single-engine fighters, so parts break-down is similar?

(MW) "..The similar parts count was a coincidence, they are quite different models. Although they are both single-engined fighters, the Bf109G has its main armament in the nose rather than inside the wings, and the cockpits are constructed in a very different way. The tooling breakdown and the size of the moulds required are decided after the design work is finished. The design is driven by what we want the model to be, rather than a plan of how the tooling will work. The Spitfire and Bf109 both have seven individual tools, which gives enough space to group the parts together, which avoids having to jump between several frames at once. We also have to think about how to accommodate parts with slide-actions as they have to be at the edge of the frame, and identifying what parts are needed for each kit release so they do not end up on the wrong frames..."

The spinner looks to be a rather complicated multi-part assembly, and the oil cooler appears to  integrate into the fuselage in what I'd call a 'non-standard' way - for a model kit. Can you explain these particular design choices?

(MW) " The spinner needed to be split into multiple parts due to the subtle “teardrop” shape of the cut-outs for each propeller blade. The cutouts on the 1:1 spinner taper toward the spinner backplate. If we moulded the spinner as one part, it would be impossible to capture the shape of the cutouts correctly the shape would create an undercut in the mould. It also allowed us to include more surface detail on the spinner without it getting “smeared” near the base of the spinner.

Regarding the oil cooler, at the start of the project we wanted to be able to pose the oil cooler in the open position as there are some interesting details on the bottom of the DB605A engine - such as the injection pump and propeller pitch drive - that contrast strongly with the Merlin on the Spitfire. As a result, this area had to be separated from the fuselage rather than moulded integrally. This posed some engineering challenges on the model, as on the real Bf109G, all the engine cowling and exhaust shroud is supported solely by the engine itself. With the oil cooler housing separated, it meant that the parts could be moulded in a different direction to the fuselage halves. To help capture the shape, external and internal details with less distortion, the parts are angled at 45 degrees in the mould. This also allows some of the part join lines to be placed where the join lines on the full-size oil cooler are..."

Can you tell me about the G-5 builds that are possible from the kit? Difficult to tell from the sprue shots, but is the solid rear canopy wall for the pressurised cockpit in the box?

(CM) "Yes, the pressurised rear bulkhead is included as a clear part in the kit (see images below), with the associated over-pressure valves and even masks for the small triangular windows. The optional compressor is also included as part of the engine build specific to our Scheme E option (G-5 ). Although from the available photography there is no way of knowing for sure, and it is unlikely that the G-5, WNr.27119 (Scheme E) still had the pressurisation apparatus while on charge with 9./JG54. The parts are included, however, should the modeller wish to replicate a factory standard G-5 in another livery."





Talking of finishes, can you explain the markings choices, artwork and decal design? This is your area of expertise, Clint?

(CM) "..Before I joined Airfix in the role of researcher, I had already been asked to undertake the research into the liveries and produce the decals/layouts for this new Bf109G kit. As you know my 'specialist' interest is the WWII Luftwaffe. Some markings choices had already been settled on, but I felt that they were a little clichéd and lacked available reference material for a kit at this scale. When I came onboard at Airfix, I decided to have a re-think as to which liveries would be best to include on the decal sheet in the first release. I knew that I wanted to choose schemes that could demonstrate how different factories treated the maintenance stencilling. Both in terms of application and wording, positioning, etc. Overall, I’m quite happy with the results and, all in all, there was only one thing that was not entirely obvious from the available photography of the US marked option of WNr.15270. Some of the other captured Bf109Gs used by the US forces in Sicily and the Med had their white rear fuselage theatre bands overpainted in red along with the other prominent German national insignia. However, it is difficult to see whether the same was done on WNr.15270 or whether the Americans simply washed off the white paint, revealing the underlying factory mottling. However, it is entirely up to the modeller to decide which way they wish to present this area of the aircraft..."

Below; WNr 15270 'yellow 14' was an Erla machine produced in March 1943 in Leipzig and finished in this factory's typical mid-1943 'saw-tooth' splinter pattern. It was abandoned by the Germans when JG 53 evacuated the airfield at Comiso, Sicily ahead of the Allied 'Operation Husky' to re-take the island in July 1943. It was 're-painted' in 57th FG 'colors' on Sicily. After the Americans lost interest in the machine, the RAF decided to ship it to England where it arrived crated during February 1944.








There have been one or two comments from modellers online who won’t touch Luftwaffe subjects, so presumably this was one reason for ‘Yellow 14’ from 6./JG 53, which also subsequently appeared in RAF roundels. But was WNr.15270 actually VX101?

(CM) " I like to tell a story with the decal schemes as I think it helps to bring the aircraft to life for the modeller. Hence why I try to fit detailed research notes on the scheme layouts that offer some of the aircraft’s history or other little-known facts. If they survived long enough, most airframes would go through a few different markings and sometimes camouflage changes depending on their unique circumstances. It is something I tried with our 2025 Me410A-3 Airfix 'Club' kit, and it seemed to go down well. It also allows us to include additional schemes, but with minimal additional decals. For example, on the new G-6 kit, we only needed to supply one full set of factory maintenance stencils, three sets of national markings, and we had three very different and quite striking schemes for the modeller to choose from. We covered something for everyone in schemes A, B, and C, and then two additional sets of German markings for the Luftwaffe purists with schemes D and E (alongside the A scheme)... I am conscious, having spoken to modellers at shows, that there are some who, for personal reasons, will, as you say, never model a Luftwaffe aircraft. That also plays a small role in the scheme choices, or rather, it adds more merit to offering captured aircraft options.

Only two G-6 airframes are known to have been flown by the RAF. Other than VX101, TP814 (WNr.412951) had a tall tail unit and was not captured until after VX101 had been written off in May 1944. So, realistically, WNr.15270 could only have been VX101. However, there is some physical evidence to be seen in the available photography of both WNr.15270 and VX101, which points to the aircraft as likely being one and the same. As on the F-series and earlier G-series versions, the first Erla and Messerschmitt built G-5/6 blocks did not have the oval access panel on the rear port fuselage (you will have to fill this oval access panel on the kit for Schemes A, B, and C!). Photos of VX101 in service with the RAF also show that it did not have this oval access panel. So, this proves VX101 was an aircraft from one of the first batches of the G-6, as per WNr.15270…"





Why doesn’t Airfix include swastikas in the decal options?

(CM) "...One of our largest distributors will categorically not allow swastikas or any veiled representation of them whatsoever on the products they sell. Therefore, for us to include the symbol on products in other parts of the world, we would need two different boxings of the same product. The cost of this is simply not viable, given that aftermarket options will likely be readily available to those who wish to include this symbol on their kits. We also have to take into consideration that the generational sensibilities towards the swastika as a symbol have changed dramatically over the last couple of decades. Whilst my generation and those before it are mostly comfortable and understand the significance of the symbol being displayed in a purely historical context, more recent generations are very much against the display of the symbol in any way shape or form. Seeing as our products are available in many high street stores, from a marketing standpoint, we have to be sensible about how we want our products to be perceived by not just the traditional modelling community, but also the wider public. So, kudos to the modellers who want to use the symbol on their builds and to the after-market guys who supply them, but, as a company, it saves us a whole heap of hassle not including them in our products…" 

Can you talk about the box top artwork? I saw one comment that said the background looked like Cherbourg, France?

(CM) " I must admit that I am not particularly well versed in the topical features of the coastline around Cherbourg, so Antonis Karidis, the artist of this box art, would have to confirm.  The 'brief' we gave Antonis asked him to depict a scene with our Scheme A aircraft intercepting 99th Bomb Group B-17F’s participating in the bombing raid on Gerbini airfield, Sicily, on 5th July 1943. In fact, it is possible that WNr.15270 took some (unreported) minor damage during this raid that necessitated its stay and subsequent abandonment at the main repair facilities at Comiso Aerodrome. It is a great-looking box art, but sometimes it can be difficult for the artists to source the ideal angle and view of a precise location without digitally painting the background or building it in 3D from scratch. Knowing something of how 3D aviation artists obtain the backgrounds to their scenes, I am certainly not surprised that other areas might have been chosen to masquerade as the intended region if that was the case here! To be fair, 99% of the viewers would not know the difference. The eagle-eyed might also spot one or two of the escorting 243 Squadron Spitfire Mk.Vc/trop, in a non-standard ‘Malta blue’ scheme."





The engine is a large part of the kit and looks fantastic. I’d like one for the first model..but not necessarily for the second and third builds?

(CM) "There are two different build options of the engine assembly in the instructions. One highly detailed engine build for kits displayed with the cowling panels in the open position, and another simpler build with fewer parts for a closed cowling option. This is simply because the thickness of the plastic at 1:24th scale would make it impossible to close the cowlings around an accurately scaled full DB605 engine..."



 

Obviously, you have designed the kit so that other versions can be created in the future and it is evident from what’s in the box that there are plenty of possibilities here, especially the G-14? There’s even a Morane antenna in the box I can see. Does the parts break-down allow the modeller to go in the other ‘direction’, ie G-2 by adding a tall mast and spoked wheels for example?

(CM) "..The Morane antenna was essential for our chosen Scheme D. Photographs of other aircraft in the same production block show that they were fitted with the antenna. All I can add to this without giving too much away is that we have designed and tooled the parts to enable us to go forwards and backwards through the Bf109G versions for future releases.."

The Erla hood is an interesting option. Presumably since this was retrofitted to a lot of short-tailed Gustavs, especially during early summer 1944. Hence the JG 3 machine in the box?

(CM) "..In this instance, the decision to include both canopy styles meant that we only needed one common clear tool for the initial and future releases. It also meant that we only required one separate masking sheet design, which could be used for the applicable parts in the current and all future releases. Something that some might have missed from the initial press release is that the kit comes with a masking sheet, which includes all the external glazing panels and some other helpful masks for wheel hubs, etc. There are also scheme-specific masks for spinner spirals and fuselage crosses on the same sheet. The reason for the fuselage cross masks is explained on the individual scheme layout pages attached. At the time the included masking sheet was designed, it was the largest size that our supplier could cut, and it was a bit of a squeeze to fit all the essential masks on the sheet. Unfortunately, some cuts had to be omitted, namely the internal canopy masks. However, we decided to produce a smaller generic G-series masking sheet, which can be purchased separately. This standalone masking sheet product includes the non-scheme specific masks, like glazing panels and wheel hubs, etc, but also the internal canopy masks. Which at 1:24th scale, some modellers might appreciate using..."

Speaking for lots of Luftwaffe enthusiasts here, but I would ideally have wanted to see a tall tail and long tail wheel in the box. I guess you can’t have everything though. Were these considered as they must surely be easy additions? Since they are not in the box currently, we know more or less what’s coming later on?

(CM)  " The scope of the G-6 and its extended period of operational use meant we had a multitude of options that we could include. Most modellers who track how Airfix as a company plans and tools its releases will know that we try to get a few unique releases from our initial R&D and tooling investment. Instead of releasing every part option in the box of the initial release, we will concentrate on a particular period or part of an aircraft’s use, for example, the earlier G-5/6 in this release. This way we are able to retain other part options to cover the different periods of the aircraft’s operational use in subsequent releases..."

Is there not a risk that after-market companies will produce all these ‘options’ before Airfix gets the chance to ‘re-release’? How does Airfix assess the role of these? Or do they stimulate more kit purchases?

(CM) "..There is always that risk, but we know that as soon as we release a kit there is an army of individuals in the after-market scene who are going to be beavering away in the weeks following, making products that will enhance our kit with all manner of options and extras. Even if we produced the most accurate and all-encompassing kit ever to exist of a particular aircraft there would still be after-market products produced for that kit. They are just creative people, with their own hobby/cottage industry that is part and parcel of the modelling scene. One example where they help the kit is the production of a certain aforementioned symbol. Plus, for every after-market product that is sold, you can guarantee that at least one of our kits was purchased by the after-market company and at least one more kit will eventually be purchased by each modeller who buys an after-market product..."

Apparently, pre-orders have accounted for the first two shipments (according to Jadlam). This is obviously going to be a big seller worldwide..

(CM) "..We certainly hope that is going to be the case, and the overwhelmingly positive responses at Telford seem to suggest so. Regarding available stock, all I will say is get your pre-orders in. In our mailing today we've announced that pre-orders will start shipping some time next week. In the meantime, thanks for your support and allowing us to respond to some of the questions and queries that modellers are asking! " 

That's all from Matt and Clint - thank you guys for taking the time to chat. The scheme layouts designed and researched by Clint and shown here are a Luftwaffe blog exclusive courtesy of Airfix ahead of the first kits going out to customers. A big thank you to everyone at Airfix involved in the development of the Gustav 'Superkit'. It looks amazing and certain to be a huge success for Airfix!

Below;  Scheme E from the kit, a III./JG 54 G-5 from the turn of the year 1943-44 when this Gruppe was operating in the 'defence of the Reich'. The original factory finish has been over-sprayed in 76 light blue for operations at altitude and the unit have added their dark blue (Humbrol 25 is a perfect match) Reichsverteidigung fuselage band with the yellow III.Gruppe bar superimposed. With yellow spinner and rudder, 9 Staffel 'devil's head' on the cowl and Gruppe emblem below the cockpit this is another very colourful machine..


 Scheme 'D' is 'white 10' WNr. 166224, a Messerschmitt-built machine with Erla 'clear vision' canopy (sometimes still incorrectly referred to as the 'Galland' hood). Another aircraft found abandoned by the Americans, this time in France following the D-day landings. Note the large rudder marking is an 'internal' Messerschmitt production number. This aircraft was flown by II./JG 3. Note the kit also features the two different stencil schemes for Erla and Messerschmitt production.


Scheme 'B' shows 'Yellow 14' after its 'repaint' by the 57th FG who briefly used it as a 'hack' on Sicily during the summer of 1943 - minus armament.  If you are prepared to hunt for them there are more images of this machine on the 57th FG web pages 





Monday, 18 November 2024

Eugen Gremelsbacher, Bildberichter Fallschirmjäger A.O.K (formerly XI. Flieger.Korps), Heinkel 'Zwilling' and Gotha Go 242 transfer flight from France to Sicily

 



To bolster their forces preparing to defend the Allied landings in Sicily, the Germans organised an ‘air bridge’ to bring in reinforcements. On 17 July 1943, 16 Gotha Go-242 gliders from Luftlandegeschwader 2 (with the heavy equipment of the 1st parachute division: 1.Fallschirm-Jäger.Division) departed the huge airfield at Istres in southern France for Italy, landing at Torre di Faro (Sicily) between 20 and 27 July 1943 after a stop in Naples. The photo-report in ECPA-D file 11FLG F 1396/7 by PK photographer Eugen Gremelsbacher depicts a Heinkel He-111 ‘Zwilling’ tug on the transfer flight between France (Istres) and Italy (Naples-Pomigliano). Each Heinkel towed two Gotha Go-242 gliders and carried the heavy equipment (eg 2cm Flak 38) of 1. Fallschirm-Jäger-Division.

Below; He 111 Z coded 'DG+DX' taxying in after landing in Naples. Note three of the five engines already shut down.




The reporter on board the Heinkel followed the progress of the mission from the empty starboard cockpit of the Zwilling and photographed the crew: bombardier, radio-navigator, pilot and co-pilot. As the transfer mission drew to a close, the aircraft flew over Vesuvius before landing on the runway at Naples-Pomigliano airfield. The port of Naples is not far from the airfield, and the reporter took a shot of the docks, cranes and a medieval tower. In the shade of the Naples airfield buildings, paratroopers from the 1 Fallschirm-Jäger-Division were photographed recovering after the trip. The glider pilots had to destroy the Gotha Go-242s in Sicily.






 

Eugen Gremelsbacher was an Uffz. and photographic reporter for the Fallschirmjäger A.O.K (formerly XI. Flieger Korps). He was born on 13 March 1911 in Elbing (Westpreußen) and died on 08 March 1944 on the Eastern Front (see report reference FALLAOK F2024 for his grave) after being wounded the previous day. He is buried in Perwomaisk cemetery, grave N°24, row 8 (source Bundesarchiv). He filed photo reports from France (Orange, Istres) and Italy (Naples, Torre di Faro in Sicily, Livourno region in Tuscany). 

Tuesday, 10 October 2023

JG 77 in Italy, September/October 1943 and the Macchi C 205 in JG 77 service - were there any aces ?

 


On 3 September 1943, the soldiers of the British XIII Corps mounted amphibious landings on the Italian 'boot' and 'invaded' the Italian mainland. Calabria was only lightly defended and Reggio airfield was quickly captured. This first landing in continental Europe took place in a country seemingly still allied with the Reich. But, since Mussolini's removal from power the new Italian government had been secretly negotiating with the Allies to change sides. The German High Command was not fooled by the friendly protestations of Marshal Badoglio, the new strongman of the Italian regime and were preparing to take control of the country in the event of an Italian U-turn. The location where the Duce was being held had already been identified and plans were being made for his release. This occurred on 12 September - Skorzeny's Gran Sasso 'coup de main'. On this same afternoon of 3 September I./JG 77 and IV./JG 3 intercepted an unescorted formation of B-24s over the sea near the Tremiti islands. Eight bombers were claimed by I./JG 77 (only three were confirmed). Eight B-24s were claimed by JG 3. Nine Liberators from the 98th BG were reported lost over Italy, most likely victims of these clashes.

On 6 September, Uffz Willi Wiemer's 'yellow 4' ( 3./ JG 77) was shot down by a P-38 of the 14th FG escorting Liberators. 7./JG 77 (in Sardinia) also suffered the loss of Lt. Hans Rund, whose G-6 'white 7' exploded in flight. Ofw Eduard Isken who had carried out a test flight in this machine shortly beforehand suspected sabotage. On the 7th, I/JG 77 suffered two serious injuries in a battle with P-38s escorting B-17s. Oblt Gerhard Strasen, Staffelkapitän of 3./JG 77 was shot down in 'yellow 10'. He reported;

"..Our unit was scattered around Foggia and it was from there that we were airborne to intercept the Viermots and their P-38 escorts. On that day, I was acting Kommandeur as Burkhardt was unavailable. In combat with P-38s north of Naples, a bullet went through my leg and I had to parachute out. On the ground, an Army Feldwebel loaded me into a vehicle and took me to a hospital. I was then transferred by medical train to Stuttgart where an amputation was planned. I was categorically opposed to this and was able to save my leg. I was granted a long period of convalescence, during which I got married. I rejoined JG 77 around May 1944 when the unit was fighting in northern Italy..."

In addition to Strasen, another wounded pilot from 3./JG 77 had to bail out, Lt Werner Behrendt. To replace Strasen, Lt Ernst-Wilhelm Reinert left II./JG 77 and became Staffelführer of 3./JG 77.

On 8 September, I./JG 77 and IV./JG 3 carried out their usual missions (reconnaissance and Alarmstart 'scrambles'). In the late afternoon a large fleet was spotted near Naples. But  at 5.00 pm, the Italian surrender was announced by the allied radio, surprising both Italians and to a lesser extent, the Germans. The Italian royal family, still near Rome, had to flee. Many Italian officers did not know what to choose: loyalty to their government or to the German ally. Generalfeldmarschall Albert Kesselring quickly gave the order to neutralise the former ally - Unternehmen 'Achse'. Everywhere, German soldiers disarmed Italian units, which often fell apart and huge amounts of matériel was captured. An Italian naval battlegroup was already at sea - according to some to counter the Allied landings then about to take place at Salerno - but with the news of the 'volte-face', now attempting to make for Malta to surrender to the British. Attacked in the waters of the Gulf of Asinara by 'Fritz X' guided missile carrying Do 217s of KG 100 on 9 September, the Roma, one of the most powerful warships then at sea in the Mediterranean, was struck, split in two and sunk. More than 1,250 men perished.

The US Fifth Army landed at Salerno on 9 September in another huge amphibious operation. I./JG 77 and IV./JG 3 toting Werfer rocket grenade launchers flew strafing sorties over the Salerno landing zones - Fw. Horst Schlick of 1./JG 77 was hit by flak and managed to bail out, coming down unharmed near a main road into Naples. Elsewhere most of III./JG 77 flew out of Sardinia and landed on the Corsican airfield of Ghisonaccia. The Germans immediately disarmed the Italian troops present on this air base and took possession of weapons and equipment. Three days later, the men of "Ubben’s travelling circus" transferred to Casabianda still in Corsica. From there, the Bf 109s flew escort sorties for the ships and transport aircraft (Me 323 and Ju 52 Transporter) evacuating the German troops to the Italian mainland.

On 25 September the G-6 Gustavs of III./JG 77 were in Pise-Metato while using the airfield of Fiano to protect the industrial sector of Bologna. Uffz Karl-Heinz Böttner flew little during this period because he was sent to the Erholungsheim (relaxation and care centre) in Bad Wiessee following malaria attacks. Also there at the same time was his Kapitän Emil Omert who was recuperating following his injury sustained in Sicily.

On 20 October, III./JG 77 recorded a total of thirty-two Bf 109 G-6 fighters on strength. Returning to Metato, Uffz Böttner took part in various interceptions of American bombers pounding German positions in northern Italy. On 23 October, around Rome, the rudder of his G-6 was seriously damaged by defensive fire from B-17 Fortresses, but the young pilot was able to return to his aerodrome without too much trouble. (photo below) III./JG 77 was sent to Romania a short while later, I./JG 4 returning from this theatre to take their place in Italy.

The detachment of III./JG 77 in Pisa was also implicated by the Italian 'change-of-sides' on 8 September. Lt. Wolfgang Ernst, Stk of 9./JG 77 remembered;

" I was with a few pilots at Pisa airfield at the time. Our Schwarm was carrying out combined manoeuvres with the Italian navy. We flew over the ships all day long, and we were often invited dine in the evening in full dress. The food was excellent and the wine plentiful. It was all very pleasant. On the morning of the 9th, following the Italian U-turn, I decided to join the Gruppe now in Corsica. We took off and flew over the Italian fleet as it set sail to surrender to the Allies. We strafed some ships, which saddened us: only the day before we had been friends. Later we shot down a small Italian liaison plane over the mainland -flying due south, it was deserting towards the territory held by the Anglo-Saxons..."

Meanwhile II./JG 77 was put to work to disarm their former allies. A transfer to northern Italy had been planned since mid-August.  Overtaken by events the Gruppe had already given up its Gustavs.  Small groups of ground personnel were sent all over Italy to take control of the airfields; as for the pilots, they ferried the captured machines to northern Italy. It was at this point that the decision was taken to re-equip II./JG 77 with some of the captured Italian Macchi Veltro fighters. 


Technicians from the Gruppe were sent to Varese to study the Macchi Veltro. Equipped with a Daimler Benz DB 605 engine, this aircraft seemed adaptable to German standards as mechanic Karl Holland reported;

"..The engines, Daimler-Benz 601s built under licence, posed no major problems. The work of the mechanics was even easier because the amount of room reserved for the engine, auxiliary fittings, oil and coolant circuits was larger than on the Bf 109. As far as armament was concerned, the usual MGs were used, as well as heavy machine guns of a calibre close to 12 mm. No cannon. The pilots found the Macchis lighter but slower than the Bf 109s..."

The C.205 was used briefly by II./JG 77 from late September 1943 to the end of the year before the Gruppe reverted back to the Bf 109 G-6. The war diary of the Stab/JG 77 commented on 21.Nov. 1943 ;

" The machine is fast, and flies well, but has a tendency to lose speed in a sharp curve, and it is easy to get into a spin. Another aspect is the Italian radio. Despite transmitting clearly, the pilots can barely understand what is being said. Finally, refueling and reloading ammunition is very complicated, so restoring operational readiness takes a long time..."

The Kommodore's memories are more categoric; 

 "My JG 77 rarely used captured aircraft, apart from the Mc-205 flown by II./JG 77. It was a vicious machine that easily got into a spin which could be very difficult to get out of. It was used in combat and there were a few victories. (Maj. Johannes Steinhoff, Geschwaderstab JG 77).

Were there any German Macchi aces ? A reply to this question (answer/research) by Georg Morrison

" You may be thinking of Oblt. Joachim Deicke, who led the 6./JG 77. His aircraft, "gelbe 1" was a Macchi C.205, WNr.92212. BUT, none of his 18 claims (over 661 missions) were made using a Macchi. Three pilots had died in crashes, usually "pilot error." Uffz. Rudolf Funke was shot down on 1 December 1943 by a P-38 (C.205 "gelbe 4", WNr.92218), but was safe. Another C.205 was damaged in this combat. The last loss of 1943 was on Christmas Eve, engine fire on WNr.92224.

 Another potential candidate for JG 77 ace on the Macchi could have been Lt. Franz Hrdlicka, who led 5./JG 77. He made his 37th claim on 9.November 1943, which was likely in a C.205 - he posed for a photo, seated on the cockpit edge of a dark-finished example..". 

Recommended reading ;

The Luftwaffe in Italy 1943-45 published by Lela Presse, 98 page A-4 softback, some 200 photos/artworks. Only 13 euros. Available from the avions-bateaux.com website. Eight-page PDF extract here



Thursday, 9 April 2020

Studying the Luftwaffe through prisoner interrogation reports (1)



A good friend of  ' FalkeEins - the Luftwaffe blog ' has kindly transferred many archival POW reports which make fascinating reading. No apologies for taking my cue from the equally fascinating TOCH thread "Studying the Luftwaffe through POW interrogation reports "....

The 'problem' with POW interrogation reports is obviously one of 'reliability' - note the 'Preamble ' to the report on page 1 below ;  " all three prisoners arrived with elaborate cock-and-bull stories ". On page 2 there are dubious statements;  referring to the formation of I./JG 4 the report notes that "..it is of interest that all these 'old hands' from JG 77 had at some  time or other served sentences for some military offence" ..or even  " Hptm Hahn had over 900 operational flights to his credit.."

The report featured here chiefly concerns the interrogation of Bf 109 pilots from I./JG 4. During early 1944, I./JG 4 was based in Littorio, southern Italy and operated principally over Monte Cassino and Nettuno during this period. Clashes with Allied fighters were frequent and deadly. During the month I./JG 4 lost seven pilots KIA including Kommandeur Hahn on January 22. Although he managed to bail out he struck the airframe and was unable to deploy his parachute. Hahn was replaced by Hptm. Walter Hoeckner and the unit moved to Frabrica di Roma. February 1944 was no better. Twenty victory claims - including three P-51s on February 8 - for seven pilots KIA and two taken prisoner.

On February 6  I./JG 4 carried out at least two escort missions from Fabrica for SG 4 Fw 190s in the Nettuno region. The first started at 09:20 hours. After completing the escort, the mission turned into a ‘free hunt’ which, it appears, was without incident. The aircraft landed at 10:15 hours. The second mission was, on the contrary, far more eventful. The formation (comprising of at least two Schwärme from 2. and 3. Staffeln) took off at 11:05 hours under the leadership of Hptm. Manfred Spenner. Uffz. Edmund Beuth (decorated with the Iron Cross 1st Class) led the Schwarm from 2. Staffel in his 'black 7'. After escorting the Fw 190s to their objective in the Nettuno area, Hptm. Spenner led his men on a strafing attack in the area of the bay. Shortly afterwards the pilots encountered a ‘Dragonfly’ and Spenner added his 9th 'victory' to his scoreboard. However, flying at low altitude, the aircraft were dangerously exposed to anti-aircraft fire. The Bf 109 G-6s of Uffz. Kurt Leopold ('yellow 2')and Uffz. Edmund Beuth were riddled with shrapnel. Leopold related his story to author Erik Mombeeck; 

“..I was flying on Spenner's left flank when the left hand side of my engine was hit by numerous impacts -anti-aircraft fire! I left the formation and banked into a curve, seeking to put distance between myself and the Nettuno sector quickly. I skimmed the tree tops at nearly 750 kph. Seeing a clear space in the Marais Pontins, I nursed the aircraft down for a belly landing. My aircraft careened as far as a large hole, which brutally brought it to a stand. The nose of the aircraft dug in and for a moment I thought it would turn over. Thankfully it settled on its belly and stopped. I clambered out of the cockpit and looked at the hits that had torn into the metal some 50 cms from the cockpit. I considered myself lucky to have survived unhurt! I quickly moved away from the crash site. After about 50 metres two shots rang out behind me. The bullets whistled over my head. Two warning shots! I flung myself full length on the ground and remained motionless. I slowly turned over onto my back to remove my yellow life jacket. Then I crawled towards a bush where I could hide. However I felt a weapon in my back. I became a prisoner of the Americans... "

" Detailed interrogation report on the two Me 109 fighter pilots and Fw 190 fighter-bomber pilot shot down on the ANZIO front on 6th and 7th Feb. resp " ;



Bottom paragraph below;

 " ..In JG 4 discretion is considered the better part of valour where encounters with Spitfires are concerned., particularly as the Bf 109 G-6 pilots are aware that not only are their opponents superior in number, but possess the better aircraft. Engagements with Spitfires are therefore avoided when possible.. "


Tuesday, 26 February 2019

Bundesarchiv Photo report series #4 II./JG 27 Trapani, Sicily, June 1943



PK photographer Büschgens was on Sicily during May 1943 and took a nice series of images featuring the men and machines of II./JG 27. The 'official' caption reads; " Nordafrika, Tunesien.- Leutnant Hans Lewes mit Schwimmweste bekleidet vor einem Jagdflugzeug Messerschmitt Me 109 mit Tropenfilter stehend.."

Above; Lt. Hans Lewes of 5./JG 27 seen on the field at Trapani during May 1943. Good view of the sand filter and the white wing-tip and spinner on what was probably a G-4 minus Gondelkanonen. A drop tank is fitted. Lewes was KIA in 'Black 1' on 10 June crashing 25 km south of Marsala most likely as a result of damage in combat. 10 June was a day of peak Allied air activity over Pantelleria with 1350 machines over the island including 650 Viermots..and a 'black' day in the history of II./JG 27. The Gruppe put up 12 Bf 109s and in the face of overwhelming Allied numerical superiority no fewer than nine pilots were shot down and killed. II./JG 27 was withdrawn to the southern Italian mainland from 20 June after these heavy losses..

Below; maintenance Instandsetzung on a G-6 Trop. "Red 1" in Trapani during May 1943. Just visible part of the Sonnenschirm fitting below the windshield.

More from this series in the II./JG 27 Gruppe history from Messrs. Prien/Stemmer/Rodeike. See also JfV 11/I - caption info from the accounts in these works..


Overlooking Trapani and background to this Gondelwaffen-equipped Gustav is Monte Erice which is where the Gefechtsstand of the JaFü Sizilien was located..this is 'Yellow 6'. Note the WerkNr. 16 600 has been chalked onto the prop blade (left) just below the technician's head..







Above; "Red 1" - just visible below the cockpit is the 5.Staffel emblem. Below; "Yellow 8" of 6.Staffel, a G-4 Trop. Note the white wing-tips and fuselage band..


Wednesday, 29 August 2018

notes on the 'cult of the fighter ace'; the example of JG 53 - by Jochen Prien

Doyen of Jagdwaffe unit histories Jochen Prien took the trouble to respond to a recent blog post on the 'cult of the fighter ace' in the Luftwaffe. The following is reproduced here with Jochen's permission.

" ..I have read your latest post dealing with the Luftwaffe’s policy of 'acedom' and over-claiming. This is of course an intricate topic that cannot possibly be dealt with in-depth in the blog format.Yet there are several statements that I would strongly object to. I have dealt with this in the unit history of JG 1/11, Vol. 1, p 621 pp, which still stands to this day. There are actually two issues – one is the Luftwaffe’s policy to elevate successful pilots to leading positions in the fighter units, making the number of claims the most important factor, and the other the question of the accuracy of the number of claims and the phenomenon of over-claiming. Both topics are of course related to each other. I can only touch the various aspects here in a very short way as a comprehensive comment would result in a book of its own.

The phenomenon of over-claiming is inevitable given the particular circumstances of aerial battles; it is less pronounced when the number of a/c involved in aerial combat is small, but it will be substantial when great numbers of a/c are involved in combat. This is clearly born out by the claims made by the Luftwaffe Sturmgruppen over the Reich in 1944, when the claims filed – and confirmed - far exceeded the actual US losses.  However the majority of the claims were made in good faith – when a Gruppe of 30 or more Fw 190s opened fire on a B-17 or B-24 box simultaneously and the pilots saw comparatively large numbers of bombers explode or go down in flames it was only natural that many or most of the pilots thought that they had actually downed one of the bombers. This obviously resulted in substantial - albeit unintentional - over-claiming. There was a time – way back in the sixties/seventies of the last century – when the general attitude in German Luftwaffe history publications, fueled by experts like Toliver / Constable and the like, had it that the German system of claims verification and confirmation was perfect and the claims confirmed proven beyond doubt, whereas the USAAF and the RAF claims were confirmed independent of facts and vastly exaggerated, this being epitomized by the truly ridiculous 185 claims made by the RAF on 15 September 1940 and the constantly vastly inflated claims by the US bomber units. You can see this nonsense even today in some publications.

In fact Luftwaffe fighter claims were always prone to over-claiming. This was not pronounced during the Phoney War and the Western Campaign, but it was very much the case during the Battle of Britain when the fighting took place mostly over enemy territory or over the sea where the Claims Commission could not touch and count the wrecks. This applied in particular to the ZG claims but also to those of several fighter units. In 1941 and 1942 the claims made by JG 2 were greatly exaggerated with a high proportion of them made over the sea. If you want to tackle the issue of over-claiming you will find that this was not a phenomenon to be found in a consistent form in the fighter units; to the contrary the issue has to be addressed individually for every single unit. There were JGs that were prone to allow over-claiming whereas others tried to be as correct as possible with the claims they filed. Notorious over-claimers were for instance JGs 2 and 5 as well as all Sturmgruppen.

In your blog post you portray JG 53 as a unit with particularly high numbers of claims in the 1941 Campaign in the East. However the numbers of claims made by the Gruppen of this Geschwader between 22 June and 30 September 1941 do not stand out in any way compared with those of the other JGs deployed in the East – those claims in said period were as follows;

I./JG 3 – 273, II./JG 3 – 411, III./JG 3 – 367
I./JG 51 – 252, II./JG 51 – 321, III./JG 51 – 308, IV./JG 51 – 468
II./JG 52 – 248, III./JG 52 – 216
I./JG 54 – 212, II./JG 54 – 395, III./JG 54 – 223
II./JG 77 – 211 and III./JG 77 – 374..

Therefore it is simply not the case that the achievements of III./JG 53 have "become legendary" or that the claims made by III./JG 53 were the result of "a benevolent attitude of the higher echelons" nor was JG 53 the home of a particular bunch of "daredevils". The statement that HGr. Mitte had "abdicated its authority to adjudicate in the claims confirmation process" is wholly inaccurate as the Army Command organisation HGr. Mitte had nothing to do with the confirmation of Luftwaffe fighter claims. This was exclusively a Luftwaffe issue. By the same token there is little 'hard' evidence for the various general allegations that over-claiming was enhanced by the Luftwaffe hierarchy and propaganda services and to which false claims this should apply. As for the actual losses of the Russian Air Force – I have yet to see anything like a comprehensive presentation based on complete official documents that would reflect the true losses incurred in the fight against the Luftwaffe. I therefore refrain from commenting on this issue. However I can see no basis at all for reducing the claims of the Luftwaffe fighters to anything like 20 %. You can see from my publications – in particular Vol. 10 and 13 – that I explicitly point at the discrepancies between Luftwaffe claims and allied losses where possible; both in the aerial battles over the Reich and in France the Luftwaffe constantly over-claimed. Another question is to what extent over-claiming was made intentionally. There can be no dobt that this happened, as is evidenced by the often quoted Experten-Schwarm of 4./JG 27. There were certainly many other examples, a wide field....

...A few more remarks concerning JG 53 as they relate to your blog post: Herbert Kaminski was not shot down in aerial combat on 24 July 1942 but was severely injured in a landing accident owing to engine failure; he was by the way a Gruppenkommandeur not appointed by virtue of the number of his claims – 5 by the time he became GrKdr. of I./JG 53 – but for other exploits. This was not uncommon in JG 53 – for instance Lt. Alfred Hammer from 6./JG 53 was awarded the EK I without a single claim in the summer of 1942 only because of his successful escort sorties for air transport units to and from North Africa. (see below) Günther von Maltzahn made it a point that the successful execution of a task was more important than filing a claim for an e/ac shot down. I./JG 53 was quite active over Stalingrad in August and September 1942. The three pilots mentioned in your blog post – Peissert, Hagedorn and Zellot – all met their death in the fighting over Stalingrad in early September 1942 and not at some later point in time in the East. As for the claims made by I./JG 53 in Russia in the summer of 1942 – one thing would be to reliably name the true number of Russian losses to compare them with German claims, which so far has not been achieved, and the other would be to prove and show tangible facts that the German verification system was sloppy and eager to produce 'heroes' for the Propaganda. None of this has been presented so far, instead there is only the unfounded assertion that as little as 20 % of German claims were justified to come near the actual results. The magnanimous comment that the claims made must not necessarily have been the result of wilful falsification doesn’t make it any better – why over-claim on a 5 : 1 ratio in good faith ? To conclude - an opinion piece certainly, but I would respectfully suggest that you refrain from this sort of omniscient loud-speaker comment made from the safe distance of over 75 years and based on sources that are still far from complete...."

Jochen Prien



Alfred Hammer was born in Karlsruhe on 3 July 1921 and after gaining his Abitur joined the Luftwaffe, completing officer and pilot training at LKS 4 in Fürstenfeldbruck. After Jagdfliegerschule Werneuchen he was posted as Oberfähnrich to the Ergänzungsgruppe JG 53 in La Rochelle, France. In November 1941, Lt. Hammer moved with II./JG 53 to the Mediterranean theatre and subsequently flew some 280 sorties from Comiso, Sicily. On 14 May 1942, Hammer crash-landed his damaged Bf 109 F-4 (W.Nr. 7553) at Comiso following aerial combat over Malta with RAF Spitfires. Hammer recorded his first victory on 25 October during his 271st combat mission, claiming a Spitfire over Malta. Following several months off the flight roster with jaundice, Hammer recorded his second victory during operations over Tunisia on 4 March 1943, claiming 2/Lt Harry Gasaway's 82nd FG P-38 shot down on his 299th combat mission. During the final evacuation of Tunisia, Hammer flew out four of JG 53's ground crew in his Bf 109. On 10 July 1943, now operating from bases in Sicily, Hammer shot down a Spitfire for his sixth victory. However, he then suffered engine failure in his Bf 109 G-6 (W.Nr. 183 98) “White 14 + -“ and made a forced landing southwest of Gerbini. Leutnant Hammer was appointed Staffelkapitän of 6./JG 53 on 28 July 1943. On 20 August, II. and III./JG 53 were scrambled to intercept a formation of four-engine bombers with a strong fighter escort raiding Capua in Italy. In the subsequent combat, 14 USAAF P-38 twin-engine fighters were claimed by JG 53 pilots, including one by Hammer for his seventh victory. From Italy, where he had acquired the nickname 'Martello' (Italian for 'hammer'), 'Alfredo' moved to Vienna-Seyring and was promoted to Oberleutnant operating in the Reichsverteidigung. On 7 January 1944 II./JG 53 were scrambled to counter a large formation of bombers raiding Vienna.




At an altitude of 8,000m they intercepted 20 to 25 P-38 Lightnings. In the ensuing combat, which drifted south and ended at low-level over northern Yugoslavia, II./JG 53 claimed 15 P-38s shot down, including one by Hammer as his 10th victory. On 24 February, Hammer was wounded by defensive fire from USAAF four-engine bombers raiding the Steyr works at Linz. He was forced to land at Linz due to blood loss from his wounds and was hospitalised at Wels. Hammer was again wounded on 13 June 1944, operating over the Invasion front, in aerial combat with USAAF B-24 four-engine bombers and their P-51 fighter escort near Vannes in France. He baled out near Gail.
In late 1944 Hammer was promoted to Hauptmann and was appointed Gruppenkommandeur of IV./JG 53 based at Echterdingen. He led the unit until the end of the war, flying his last sortie on 20 April 1945, for a total of 463 sorties and 26 confirmed victories. He was decorated with the Frontflugspange in Gold, the Ehrenpokal and the Deutsches Kreuz in Gold. Postwar he returned to Karlsruhe and trained as a teacher and administrator, entering local government as a civil servant in 1957 (Landesbildstelle Baden in Karlsruhe). He retired in 1984 and passed away on 23 December 1997.

(additional information via Jägerblatt 1/1998)





Sunday, 29 July 2018

Luftwaffe over Malta - new series from Lela Presse, Air Battles over the Baltic 1941 - Mikhail Timin




A quick appraisal of the latest in the Lela Presse Batailles Aeriennes (Air Battles) quarterly series  - part 1 of  'Luftwaffe over Malta'. Written and compiled by a friend of this blog, Pol Glineur, who has authored a number of French-language articles and monographs. As another friend of mine recently put it, it's a shame there is no English-language publisher producing similar quality magazines. Recommended at 12 euros for 96 A-4 softback pages, 180 + photos and Thierry Dekker's superb profile artwork. Don't let the French text put you off. Very colourful, beautifully laid out, maps, log-book extracts, rare photos. It seems amazing that just across the Channel you can pick up something  as good as this on a news stand. For the rest of us there's Sylvie's excellent mail order service at
www.avions-bateaux.com



Exclusive artwork presentation courtesy of Thierry Dekker.



From February 1941, 7./JG 26 under Hpt Joachim Müncheberg operated with success against Malta from bases in Sicily -despite never having a full complement of machines startklar at any one time. Following the end of the Balkans campaign III./JG 27 flew from Greece to Sicily to reinforce the units of X. Fliegerkorps assaulting Malta and more specifically, Müncheberg's Staffel. Their first sorties were flown from Gela - a field strip on Sicily's south coast - on 6 May 1941. By the end of May they had already departed Sicily for Germany and preparations for Barbarossa.

Below;  Kommandeur III./JG 27 Hptm. Max Dobislav alongside 'schwarze 5', a Bf 109 E-7 of 8./JG 27 Wnr. 5578 which has been prepared for a Jaboeinsatz against Malta loaded with a 250 kg bomb. Dobislav returned his 9th victory (Hurricane) on 15 May over Malta. Gela, Sicily, May 1941






Air Battles Over the Baltic 1941: The Air War on 22 June 1941 - The Battle for Stalin's Baltic Region

by Mikhail Timin

Distributed by Casemate the first in a new book series devoted to the Eastern Front air war is just published by Helion. "Air Battles over the Baltic 1941: The Air War on 22 June 1941 - The Battle for Stalin's Baltic Region" by Mikhail Timin in fact deals with only one day of the air battles in the East and then covers only a small sector of this huge front - but what a book! Mikhail Timin is one of the most notable Russian authors on the Eastern Front air war and his deep research is based on Soviet archival data. The author's comments in his Introduction are somewhat critical of Western authors attempts at covering the Eastern Front air war accusing " some opportunistic authors in recent years (..of publishing..) works of pseudo-research, in which disreputable attempts have been made to misrepresent the achievements of the pilots and commanders of the air forces of the Red Army... .....". Just about every book written by Western authors dealing with the opening rounds of Barbarossa ('the Great Patriotic War') has of course relied heavily on German sources and Mikhail Timin disputes some of this body of literature in his writings. While this reviewer readily admits his own shortcomings in knowledge on Russia/Red Army historiography I have to say that Timin appears to set the record straight in this impressive work. The first half of the work comprises a long introduction assessing the preparedness or otherwise of the opposing forces detailing the composition and the capabilities of both German and Soviet aviation and including biographies of commanders and formations of the Baltic special military district and Luftwaffe Air Corps as well as describing the principal opposing aircraft types. It is evident that Soviet re-equipment with modern types was proceeding apace months before the invasion. Timin moves on to cover the massive German infringements of Soviet territorial borders in the months leading up to the launch of Barbarossa. The events of 22 Jun 1941 kick off on page 209 with an account from the CO of JG 54 Trautloft and comprise a detailed reconstruction of the three major waves of air raids on Baltic airfields. Amazingly there were few significant 'air battles' on this first day of the war - the author details those Soviet bomber regiments airborne to attack German units being recalled since retaliatory actions were not initially authorised. In addition there was to be no battle for air superiority - Soviet air force strength was deliberately 'husbanded' to be concentrated against German ground and Panzer forces. Note that no German or Soviet terminology is used, aside from rank - the English 'squadrons' 'wings' 'headquarters officer' appears throughout, which may or may not be helpful. Some of the authenticity and flavour of a work like this is lost in my opinion, especially when it would be a simple matter to compile and add a glossary to the book. It is probably true too that the average reader can more easily reverse the English terms back into German than can do this back into Russian. I did find the translation just a tad clunky and long-winded in places; "headquarters section " tactical number yellow 11", "insignia denoting his victories" etc. Elsewhere the photo and artwork sections are good, the profile artworks and maps particularly so. While the photo pages (300 photos) are integrated into the main pagination, the 48-page profile artwork/maps section is paginated separately. Even so there are 'only' 448 pages in the book - not the 528 advertised in various places. There are additionally a few pages -situation and airfield maps - in the original Russian and the page reproductions from Signal magazine are from the French edition! I have to comment on the lovely thick glossy paper stock too. All in all, an outstanding addition to your WW II air war library.



Saturday, 10 March 2018

Junkers Ju 390 V-1 "GH UK", LG 2, JG 53, JG 77 Emil, Motorwechsel, Kran -daily ebay photo find #247

Junkers Ju 390 V-1 "GH+UK" vermutlich Winter 1943/44 in Merseburg, Rechlin oder Dessau.



The Junkers Ju 390 was a rare bird - only two constructed - intended to be used as a heavy transport, maritime patrol aircraft, and long-range bomber, a long-range derivative of the Ju 290. It was one of the aircraft designs submitted for the abortive Amerika Bomber project, along with the Messerschmitt Me 264, the Focke-Wulf Ta 400, and by February 1943, the Heinkel He 277. Two prototypes were created by attaching an extra pair of inner-wing segments onto the wings of basic Ju 90 and Ju 290 airframes, and adding new sections to lengthen the fuselages..

Below; Junkers Ju 290 A vermutlich im Winter 1943/44 in Merseburg, Rechlin oder Dessau.



Ju 88 C-2 of I./NJG 2 on Sicily


Me 110 E der III./ZG 26 Catania 1941/42


Latest from Michael Meyer here





More JG 53 from Marko Auer here



Above; Bf-109E-7,W.Nr.6503, Stammkennzeichen PU + CQ, 3./JG 77,Eastern Front 1942 prior to being taken on charge by JG 103. Plane crashed 31.3.1944 ,Germany. See the supercharger intake from Bf 109 T.

Well-known line-up of JG 1 He 162 at Leck here