Yes the JG 26 Top Guns, by Caldwell.
Your pics above first could be 5966, the second IS 5819 upgraded to E-7 standard and repainted.
Galland's Bf 109s
- Thread starter Njaco
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yes the JG 26 Top Guns, by Caldwell.
Your pics above first could be 5966, the second IS 5819 upgraded to E-7 standard and repainted.
B-17engineer
Colonel
Flaviosil
Airman
Here two new photos from the book "Adolf Galland - Ein Fliegerleben in Krieg und Frieden" by W. Held.
I suspect this plane was Galland's E-4 5398 with 29 kill marks on the rudder, few days before he received the new E-4/N 5819. What do you think?
Flavio
Attachments
BikerBabe
Senior Master Sergeant
Alright guys, here's the files which as far as I can see hasn't been shown here, that I've got stored - there's no particular order in this.
In other words: Welcome to chaos!
In other words: Welcome to chaos!
Attachments
-
1-Bf-109E-JG26.3-(+I-$Adolf-Galland-France-Aug-1940-02.jpg -
00015held.jpg -
2239249466_9f3f752015_o.jpg -
260183601664.JPG -
260183603495.JPG -
AG_fly_006t&c.jpg -
AG_fly_005t&c.jpg -
AG_fly_004t&c.jpg -
AG_fly_003t&c.jpg -
AG_fly_002t&c.jpg -
galland6_gr.jpg -
Baker_004.jpg -
Baker_003.jpg -
AG_fly_008t&c.jpg -
AG_fly_007t&c.jpg -
gallandsme109ay3.jpg -
Messerschmitt Bf-109F JG26 (-+- $Adolf Galland Audembert, France Dec 5, 1941 02_jpg.jpg -
Messerschmitt Bf-109F JG26 (-+- $Adolf Galland Audembert, France Dec 5, 1941 03_jpg.jpg
Some quick observations..... It is NOT 5819, the Schlageter badge is different AND it doesn't have the Mickey Mouse obviously!
The small triangle stencil below the filler panel is not present on 5819 which has a circular stencil.
5966 does have the triangle stencil, but close examination of the Schlageter badge also reveals it is slightly different to the above image.
The TIP of the command 'Bar' extends beyond the just visible vertical panel line, on both 5819 and 5966 the tip stops at the panel line!
It appears to have a high camo demarcation line above the Kommodore Chevron with little or no mottle, the sun light makes it difficult to tell. The 'Dark' patches below the cockpit are shadows not camo.
The high camo would tend to indicate an earlier aircraft to 5819 and 5966,5966 has Dark camo extending down and beneath the Chevron and bar, so it is quite probable/ possible that it is 5398.
The second picture just doesn't provide any concrete details to check due to the angle of the sun but it certainly appears to be the same aircraft. The crew chief? Is certainly dressed the same!
Interesting series of profiles Maria...will review them later...
Flaviosil
Airman
Alright guys, here's the files which as far as I can see hasn't been shown here, that I've got stored - there's no particular order in this.
In other words: Welcome to chaos!
Great photos and profiles Maria, thank you for sharing.
The two photos with "Kopierschutz" show the same a/c in the same time: it is 5819 in April 1941 after conversion to E-7.
Flavio
- Thread starter
- #47
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Flaviosil
Airman
The third picture seems to be a new one to me Flavio...Nice!
and yes both the first 2 are definitely 5966..there are a couple more in this series...
and yes both the first 2 are definitely 5966..there are a couple more in this series...
Flaviosil
Airman
The third picture seems to be a new one to me Flavio...Nice!
and yes both the first 2 are definitely 5966..there are a couple more in this series...
Please Wayne may you share them with us?
Thank you
Flavio
- Thread starter
- #52
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
interesting how it appears the undercowl has been painted differently between the two or is that just the poor B/W photo?
Flaviosil
Airman
What seems a different color in the cowling (on the first photo) is instead only the shadow of the blade.
Flavio
Yes there is some shadow that darkens the side, also the angle of the sun makes the rest look a bit darker..
Also It relates to the type of film used, not an expert in this field, but different films render some colours in different tones in black and white images, those first 2 shots are a good example of this, where the first shot makes the yellow lower cowl look quite dark while the other looks more appropriate in tone for the yellow colour, especially from the angle it was taken, as opposed to the first shot
There are other factors that can influence these things too, filters on the camera, developement of the film, exposure...and other things...Terry probably can explain these things much better.
Last edited:
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Yep, there are a lot of factors which can alter the tonal ranges shown in black and white (monochrome) pictures. The actual printing of the photograph, and the type of photographic paper used, is also a very important consideration; with an actual print to view, as opposed to a half-tone reproduction or electronic image, it can often be easier to interpret colours and shades.
The type of film used, and then the type of paper the subsequent negative is printed on, are the main factors which will govern tonal and colour reproduction, and this can also be affected by a 'mis-match' of printing paper. A general-purpose monochrome film, in order to give a recognisable, 'known' equal tonal rendition across the range should be what is termed Panchromatic, but, during WW2, this was not always readily available. This was more so with British photography, and quite often Orthochromatic, and even Lithographic films were used. Combine this with an available 'Grade' of photographic paper which would probably not be ideal even for the correct film, and tonal variations and effects can be quite vast.
Also, at this time, 'proper' , or 'professional' photographers would, wherever possible, use a filter on the lens to enhance the tones and the contrast of the background, particularly the sky, although this is often readily apparent (to the 'trained' eye) in many photographs.
One thing which can influence the reproduction of WW2 photographs from German sources was the use of colour film, but printed onto monochrome photographic paper in some cases, perhaps as a 'secondary' print in addition to the primary colour prints originally required. Unless a specialised paper is used, a monochrome print made from a colour negative will not only alter the tonal reproduction dramatically, but can also cause some tones in the 'neutral', or mid-tone areas, to appear lighter or darker than they actually are, depending on exposure and deveoliping times when the print(s) are made.
I'm afraid it is a very involved, and fairly complex subject to explain, even partially, and it is important to allow for the wide range of variations and possibilities when assesing prints from the era, unless definite technical details of the print are known.
The type of film used, and then the type of paper the subsequent negative is printed on, are the main factors which will govern tonal and colour reproduction, and this can also be affected by a 'mis-match' of printing paper. A general-purpose monochrome film, in order to give a recognisable, 'known' equal tonal rendition across the range should be what is termed Panchromatic, but, during WW2, this was not always readily available. This was more so with British photography, and quite often Orthochromatic, and even Lithographic films were used. Combine this with an available 'Grade' of photographic paper which would probably not be ideal even for the correct film, and tonal variations and effects can be quite vast.
Also, at this time, 'proper' , or 'professional' photographers would, wherever possible, use a filter on the lens to enhance the tones and the contrast of the background, particularly the sky, although this is often readily apparent (to the 'trained' eye) in many photographs.
One thing which can influence the reproduction of WW2 photographs from German sources was the use of colour film, but printed onto monochrome photographic paper in some cases, perhaps as a 'secondary' print in addition to the primary colour prints originally required. Unless a specialised paper is used, a monochrome print made from a colour negative will not only alter the tonal reproduction dramatically, but can also cause some tones in the 'neutral', or mid-tone areas, to appear lighter or darker than they actually are, depending on exposure and deveoliping times when the print(s) are made.
I'm afraid it is a very involved, and fairly complex subject to explain, even partially, and it is important to allow for the wide range of variations and possibilities when assesing prints from the era, unless definite technical details of the print are known.
- Thread starter
- #56
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Thanks Terry! Thats some pretty good info there. And after looking at it again, I think Flav is right - its looks like the prop shadow.
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Great pics Wayne! I suppose I'd better have a look at my copy of the book - didn't know they were in it!!
Flaviosil
Airman
Some more shots of Gallands 5966!
A wider better shot of Flavio's image above and 2 additional shots......
Source : Bf109E Vol 1 Kagero publications Jakob Plewka
Thank you very much Wayne!
I already ordered this book from Kagero, with a so great photos I don't want miss it.
I attach one more photo I suspect about 5966 (photo A): I compare it with another one (photo B) and the mottles around the badge and cockpit seem match.
What do you think?
Flavio
Attachments
I wonder, was Galland's 'E-type' flown into the ground by someone else ? shot down but he parachuted ?
I know he switched to a somewhat rare 5-gun F type to test the new features, gun arrangements etc
In fact, thinking about it, did most 109E's end their days as Jabo's - flown until destroyed or just plain knackered ?
