Me109 or Bf109 - Which one is correct? Let Willy Messerschmitt Decide?

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

A bit hard to read....

The entire matter is not which marking is correct or not but it is the Law problem. However using of both of them is correct because these reffer to the same plane that was known in 1937 as the Messerschmitt Bf 109 and late as the Messerschmitt Me 109.
They are both correct as the RLM couldn't get it right and has had both on the same document. To be safe go with Mf 109
No they aren't. The RLM did NOT change the designator. All Messerschmitts up to Bf 163 (re-used for a different aircraft as Me 163) were Bf for Bayerishe Flugzeugwerke, and remain so to this day. Anybody that says otherwise is talking out of their .....

I remember there was a knock against William Green for using Me 109 because according to the "Werks plate" attached to the 109s falling all over England during the battle of Britain it was Bf.
Researched this some time ago. It was said that all new aircraft had a Bf data plate, aircraft that had been reworked because of accident or battle damage and possibly incorporated components from a variety of wrecks were often given a Me data plate, this being a result of officialdom paperwork that incorrectly used the Bf and Me interchangeably, by rights the correct prefix is Bf, all current civil registrations carry the Bf designation.
The enigma of the 109's technical name is an enduring one.

But if we want to get super technical, it is a Bf109 by virtue of the RLM's assignment prior to Messerschmitt taking over Bayerisch Fleugzug Werke in 1938.

The Bf108, Bf109, Bf110, Bf161, Bf162, Bf163 and Bf165 were all BFW projects, not Messerschmitt AG.

The same happened with Blohm und Voss, who's company name was Hamburger Fleugzugbau GMBH and subsequently, their RLM designation was Ha before 1940.

Users who are viewing this thread