Late Hundert Neun ID

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

so Milosh, 2048 new-build G-10s? So how did Prien miss this when he said the G-10s were rebuilds? Prien p158
or does having two data plates mean it counts as a new aircraft vs a rebuild keeping one data plate
he mentions production batches in the same paragraph

You posted the link earlier, missed the significance, thx.
 
Last edited:
During the transition from G-K series 118 G-10s were built by Messerschmitt Regensburg,all new build by the way.
The way they were built says much for the state of German aircraft production at this time,November 1944. They were built with whatever was available. Some had G-6 wings and smaller (660v160) mainwheels and some had the K-4 wing with the larger (660x 190) mainwheels. They had whatever length tail wheel was available. They had various engines,typically DB 605 AS or DB 605 N.Some got MW 50 boost,but not all. Even the armament varied depending on what was available,MG 151 or MK 108. These aircraft were assembled all over Eastern Bavaria and maintaining series details seems to have been a very low priority.
This all happens in a batch of only 118 aircraft!

Steve
 

Prien has admitted there is several errors in his old 109 book. New info has come to light since published.
 
maybe I could send you my book and you pen in the corrections?
appreciate your comments....

OK, is there a newer book that shows all the current known info?

Some of this research will appear on many of the Bf109G miniatures I am preparing and painting. Want to make them historically random! Working up for some 9th AF P-47s etc vs the LW over Western France throughout the summer of 1944. Not many games feature low altitude opns. Should be interesting brawls ahead
 
Last edited:
Prien pg 149 says Bf109G14s built in batches 780 000 and later may all be G14/AS.
Any idea when this would have been during 1944? Aug? SEPT?

I have seen it written somewhere that the MW50 tank or GM1 tank was not removable. I'm thinking NOT SO, pretty sure it comes out somehow
 
The first batch in that range (780319-780394) was started in July 1944 and the run went until effectively the end,March 1945.

According to my list in Peter Schmoll's production summary ther are a few G-6/AS in the range.

Never thought about removing the MW 50 tank. I can't see any easy way of getting it out,I'll see what I can find.

Cheers

Steve
 
Not so much about removing the tank just that building the aircraft around the tank seems an odd concept
Probably a real pain in the rump but I'd think the seat comes out, maybe some other stuff, then the tank goes in.
Also, was not MW50 installed in earlier planes during refits/refurb/major repairs

I'll keep looking on that thought about the 780 000 and later being all Bf109G14/AS
With Messerschmitts, I'm finding new info all the time. Think I may have the answer to my question


from Wm Wedcalf's list of Neubau posted by Milosh pg 4 of this thread

Ja Fe Ma Ap Ma Jun Jul Au Sep Oct Nov Dec J45 F45 M45

G 6 MttR 430 309 135 343 550 659 662 260 242 50 53 109 1 9 * = 3812
G 6 Erla 291 270 203 200 319 300 305 * * 106 295 * 64 * * = 2353

G 14 MttR * * * * * * 440 144 30 59 11 1 157 47 = 889
G 14 Erla * * * * * * 232 472 339 25 * 78 * * = 1146


G 14AS Mttr * * * * * * * * 303 379 101 203 211 62 11 = 1270
G 14AS Erla * * * * * * * * 95 9 3 * * * * = 107

o Based on Medcalf's numbers, probably better to say Bf109G14/AS were built far more frequently than Bf109G14 with /AS production starting SEPT 1944
o It makes sense to me that most of the Bf109G14AS production would be sent to the West and Defense of the Reich where combat was generally at higher altitudes. Am I correct? I am aware most of the LW 'moved East' in January 1945
o I also note in the later months, both Bf109G6 and Bf109G14 production.....I would have thought the G6 would have been suspended. Yet I see ERLA cranked-out 295 G6s in Nov 44. I am aware late G6 = G14 but this really does not make sense. Or did Erla simply not get the Memo saying 'change the data plate to read G14.'
 
Last edited:
780666-780669 G-6/AS
780785-780793 G-6/AS
781117-781207 Mixed G-14 and G-14/AS
782340-782344 " " " "
787067 G-14.

Some of the anomalies were completed at outlying facilities and maybe whatever was available was fitted. For example 787067 was completed at Micheldorf/Cham. The fuselage probably came from Bodenwohr and the wings from Regensburg. The engine supply at the time it was assembled in Feb/Mar 1945 was uncertain to put it mildly.

The GM-1 system was earlier fitted to some aircraft (which I'd have to look up) with the intention of converting it to MW 50.

It's always possible to do anything if you are prepared to dismantle the aircraft enough!
 


OK, where did you get that information on those work numbers? Always interested in expanding my library....
 
The list is from Peter Schmoll's "Nest of Eagles- Messerschmitt production and flight testing at Regensburg 1936-1945". ISBN 978-1-906537-12-8

He produces one of the most complete lists of werknummern and Stammkenzeichen for Regensburg produced Bf 109s.

It was originally published,as two books and in German,in 2002 and then updated and combined into one book in 2004. I think the first English translation,by Ted Oliver,dates from 2004.

Cheers
Steve
 




I got to spend some time with this Bf109G-6 in Washington DC last week. I got to thinking on the flight home if this was equipped with the 20mm or 30mm nose cannon. Then I got to thinking about what BALLPARK percentage of the Bf 109Gs got the Mk 108 30mm engine cannon. I recall the percentage was small but it increased from the summer of 1943. The Mk 108 was supposed to be standard on the Bf109K-4 yet I know some of them came with 20mm nose weapons.

Bf 109G6/U4
Would 10% in mid 43 be off?
or something like this????
15% late 43
20% early 44
25% early summer 44
30% late summer 44
35% fall 44
40% late 44

Would the near identical Bf 109G-14 have a greater percentage of 30mm cannon being fitted?
 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bf_109#Produktion

Look for production numbers of the /U4 variant, available for G-6/-14/-10. The /U4 were only produced by WNF, mass deliveries of the G-6/U4 started in late 43. Of the K-4 had about 95-100% had the MK 108, due to shortages some were supposed to be delivered with the MG 151/20.

According to en wiki your 109 is a Bf 109 G-6 trop 160163, KT + LL of 3./JG 4, marked "Yellow 4", ex-USAAF FE-496 "White 2"
 
Last edited:
Thank you Denniss!

Looks like 1663 Bf109G-6/U4 and 32 G-14/U4 by Nov 44 with another 105 or so G-14/U4 from DEC 44-APR 45
Not anywhere near the quantity available that I had supposed. I will try to sort out the ratios of 20mm equipped vs 30 mm equipped.


This leads to another question, with the somewhat limited quantity made, where were they assigned? Special Staffeln or scattered among the general population?
Any data on if the /U4 planes had special usage would be appreciated

Noted the Wiki.de site has far more data and better tables then the Wiki in English.
edit: Some missing data on the Wiki.de chart. It shows no makers but in the total a high number
this will effect the percentage of U4 planes
G-14 2.022
G-14AS 1.306
 
Last edited:
Late-war data is incomplete so a breakdown by manufacturer and type wasn't really possible.
Don't forget the ~400 G-10/U4.

The /U4 variant were only produced in Vienna (and Györ) so it's safe to assume rhe missing 550 G-14/U4 were built there
 
Gents,
Keep it up! My level of arcane 109 knowledge has increased exponentially! I had no idea what an adhoc assembly process they were using at the end. It makes sense with around the clock bombing, de-centralized construction, the ever changing front line and the constant "demand" for more.
Cheers,
Biff

PS: How the hell did they see out of that thing with the standard canopy (all the girders)!
 
BiffF15 said:
PS: How the hell did they see out of that thing with the standard canopy (all the girders)!
Click to expand...

They saw well-enough to shot down scads of enemies even through 1945 with the regular canopies

Now looking at comparative roll rates. Found a chart here on this Forum. Looking at near sea level and 5000' performance for Luftwaffe vs US 9th TAF Normandy/N France
 
These are neubau

G 6/U4 WNF 1466
G 6/U4 Györ 31

G 14/U4 WNF 593
G 14/U4 GYör 32
G 14/U4 KöB 29

G 10/U4 WNF 356

from a thread posted on the 12 o'clock board from German documentation. It has monthly production.
 
kettbo said:
They saw well-enough to shot down scads of enemies even through 1945 with the regular canopies
Click to expand...

George,
I totally agree! It's incredible to me that during the transition from open to enclosed cockpits the engineers didn't get the word visual look out (lose sight, lose the fight). I've sat in a P-38 and thought the same thing, although I think the forward visability in it's better than the Me-109.
Cheers,
Biff
 
even the heavy framing on the 109 and P-38 canopies are great compared to vision block(s) or sights in an armored fighting vehicle!
think about THAT for a few seconds. you'll never work harder with your crew and wingman to keep all the blind spots covered. Things really go to hell when the vehicle commander goes from head-up to buttoned-up.

I like the post war canopies on the 109 variants.

Milosh, thanks for the production numbers! I'll have to do the math for what the percentage is, total vs /U4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

N
German aircraft ID?
Replies
3
Views
724
DerAdlerIstGelandet
N
German biplane ID
Replies
1
Views
877
Wurger
J
RAF ID of loss in Belgium
Replies
13
Views
944
Wurger
S
Can anyone help me ID this pilot and his plane?
Replies
6
Views
834
pb43
P
Halifax ID (possible 614 (PFF) Squadron, Italy.
Replies
3
Views
997
EwenS
E
Menu
Log in
Register