The Bf 109 aka ME-109 landing gear myth research thread.

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

I see the vast vast majority were Bf109E/T's.. thats crazy. 'F' and up was a tiny fraction. the FW190 had far far more accidents then the Bf109F/G's. guess from now on I'll refer to the 'F' and up models only. thats probably typical for the rest of the JG units also. thanks.
 
Last edited:
Well, I also have the lists for 1944-45 and, as expected, you have the Fs/Gs. My point was to only take a slice of the whole picture and maybe deduce some truth from that.
 


Yeah, okay, sure, but how about that other thing, you've failed to factor that in, you know, the thing...

Moss
 
Last edited:
ditto. It shows landing and t/o accidents are a significant factor in aircraft losses. This is consistent with what one would expect. Aircraft whilst airborne dont tend to fall out of the sky. their greatest moments of risk are when they are being shot at, and when they get close to the ground.

What we dont know as yet is whether the Me109 suffered a higher than normal atttrition rate due to its narrow track and general undercarriage design. We have heard from people that flew it that it was a handful to fly, and an even bigger handful to land/takeoff. Maybe thats as good as we can do, simply to note that it had landing.takeoff characteristics that were "tricky"
 
FLYBOYJ said:
Do you have a source for that? Does that include combat losses not attributed to actual combat. See link

United States Army Air Forces in World War II
Click to expand...

Sorry I do not know source. I recall reading it in book, cannot recall which.. but figure stuck, because it was surprising to me, how many aircraft were lost due to fault of pilots, mechanics.. and not to enemy! I recall figures were ca. 20% during mid war, and source said, 40% lost of all in accidents in 1944/45, USAAF! But you can check source Milosh and you gave.

Also I find source for 2% loss. I recall wrong exact number, but it is in "ballpark".

Bf109 has very little torque....why? - Topic

less than 1000/26 000 = less than 3.8% incident.. so say this list shows all cases.. even minor like 10% damage, say, undercarriage damaged, replaced, plane flew next day. So myth solved - BUSTED! 1/3 is myth.

But one idea... I believe basic attitude is wrong.. we look at how many plane lost out of how many produced.. of course sooner or later all planes would be lost in theory, if they fly long enough.. accidents happen. Professionals for reason use statistics like flying hours against accidents.. our accident per flying hour.. higher the better.

 
I think Tante Ju makes a good point, if the LW in Norway never saw an enemy AC then all losses would be some sort of accident. The 109 cannot have been intrinsically dangerous in skilled hands or Gallend et al would not have finished the war.
 
Mustang nut said:
I think Tante Ju makes a good point, if the LW in Norway never saw an enemy AC then all losses would be some sort of accident. The 109 cannot have been intrinsically dangerous in skilled hands or Gallend et al would not have finished the war.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the premise on which this theory is based is flawed. The Luftwaffe in Norway, whilst a relatively quiet sector, nevertheless saw considerable action. Firstly, it was the base of operations for LF5, which undertook considerable activity attempting to suppress the port of Murmansk, and also in attacking the Arctic Convoys to Russia. In between these major operations, the LW also had to do its best to protect its own coastal convoys from attack from Coastal Command (Beafdighters and Mosquitoes mostly) undertake patrol duties up and down the coast, training duties and a whole bevy of other reoutine things that airforces do. It was anything but a quiet sector from the point of view of air activity.

My point isnt so much that the 109 was more or less dangerous compared to its other stablemates. However credible sources have been advanced that show in at least two sectors (France'41 and Norway 42-3) attrition rates due to landing and takeoff accidents was about 50-70% of all non-combat losses, and non-combat losses accounted for a staggeringly high proportion of overall LW losses (never less than 30%, even in quiet times of the war). According to Murray, at various times in the war this climbed to and attrition rate of nearly 45% per month of the force structure.

Unfortunately, we cannot deduce from those figures, whether the 109 had a relatively higher, or lower accident rate expressed as a percentage of its total number
 
I agree, but by the same token an airforce that is doing very well as in France 1941 will suffer high accident losses as a percentage of the total because they wernt suffering large combat losses. An airforce that is wiped out on a mission will have no landing accidents. The problem I feel is in the use of percentages, they dont represent the whole picture.
 
Mosshorn said:
Yeah, okay, sure, but how about that other thing, you've failed to factor that in, you know, the thing...

Moss
Click to expand...

What the 'ell are you talking about?

Mustang, you're right. If you look at those stats I hope people don't automatically assume that 180 losses were U/C related. THose are just non-combat related. There were emergency landing without petrol, hit obstacles and a few unknows and crashes. And how much of a loss? Maybe only 15% and it was repaired? Those are things to consider.

And to state again, this was only a part of the whole to move discussion along. Norway had its fair share of combat.


we look at how many plane lost out of how many produced.. of course sooner or later all planes would be lost in theory, if they fly long enough..
Click to expand...

Tante Ju, great point!
 
Last edited:
Tante Ju said:
Thank you.. so real interest: how many accidents per take off.. or flown hours.. say, compared 190?
Click to expand...

Wow, now that would be difficult. I would say you would first try to establish how many sorties and then how many L T/O accidents. I have the losses for Fw190s from mid-43 to 45 from that Norway file but sorties........ugh. Like I said, the Norway file I have covers all A/C losses of all types. I'll see if I can post the whole file somehow - not like those previous posts but something downloadable.
 
Not at all Najco, I think the origin of the myth is that the stats are so difficult to interpret. A 30% loss in take off and landings could mean the undercarriage was suspect, it could also mean it was a brilliant fighter with a reliable engine flying a lot of sorties from dodgy airfields with no spares.
 
Last edited:
I did - his numbers are more believeable and matches some of the tables posted
 
Mustang nut said:
Not at all Najco, I think the origin of the myth is that the stats are so difficult to interpret. A 30% loss in take off and landings could mean the undercarriage was suspect, it could also mean it was a brilliant fighter with a reliable engine.
Click to expand...

I think that this is something we have to decide, are we talking under carriage failures or landing accidents or landing AND take-off accidents?

I believe the "myth" was landing and take-off accidents. Of which collapsing landing gear would only be a minor percentage. Running into obstacles is certainly an accident but may have more to do with forward view than width of landing gear track.

Some how people keep confusing the issue.
Like this from a gaming board >

"Me-109 had an astonishing 11,000 takeoff/landing accidents resulting in destruction of the a/c! That number represents roughly one-third of the approximately 33,000 such a/c built by Germany." (usual internet claim)

followed by

- 5 % of the 109's were lost in take off/landing accidents.
- The magazine has it wrong or has misintepretated the numbers. Luftwaffe lost about 1500 Me-109's in landing gear failures.

Now even if this gentleman's numbers are correct 1500 is 4.5% of 33,000 which doesn't leave many other reasons for landing and take-off accidents.
He is not actually comparing the same thing.
 
Tante Ju said:
This is contradict one self. In one sentence. Do you have figures? Or you talk?
Click to expand...

Not contradictory at all. It was quiet because there was not as much combat action compared to other LW commands. But it was busy because there were persistent fears of invasion and a need to protect convoys along the coast from CC attacks. This is reflected in the level of committment the LW was forced to make to an otherwise backwater T/O.

According to Bauer the LW had approximately 250 A/C in Norway by June 1942. These aircraft took a heavy toll on allied convoys, but as time progressed, they also suffered heavy losses as well. I have the figures, and will dig them out for you.

In the meantime, the actual units deployed at various times into this TO were as follows (information previously posted by Lucky 13 in a Thread "Luftwaffe in Norway '40-'45..... "....but Ive seen this list in print myself:

GERMAN AIR FORCE UNITS IN NORWAY 1940-45

Source: "Flyalarm!" (Sem Stenersen 1991) ISBN 82-7046-058-3,
authors Hafsten, Larsstuvold, Olsen, and Stenersen.
Compiled by Bjoern Jervaas and Kurt Monsen.


Between 1/9-39 – 8/4 –40 these German A/C were captured:
Date Type C/N Unit Markings
9/10-39 DO 18D-3 816 2/.Ku.Fl.Gr.606 8L+FK
29/11-39 DO 18D-3 830 1/.Ku.Fl.Gr.406 K6+KH
8/4-40 Ar 196A-2 0044 Bordfl.St.1/19 Unknown
The latter was given to the Norwegian Navy, Trondheim..

During the attack on Norway the 9th of April 1940, these A/C were used:
Unit Type Airfield Time Number
of A/C Mission
1./506 He 115 List auf Sylt 0630 6 Reccon
2./506 He 115 List auf Sylt 0630 10 Reccon
1./106 He 115 List auf Sylt 0700 10 Reccon
1.(F)122 He 111/Do 17Hamburg 0830 3 Reccon
1.(F) 120 Do 17 Lubeck 1350 1 Reccon
Stab/K.G.4 He 111 Fassberg 1445 1 Reccon
III/KG 26 He 111 Schwerin 0245 25 Bomb missions
7./KG 4 He 111 Delmenhorst 0522 8 Bomb missions
8/KG 4 He 111/Ju 88Delmenhorst 0712 11 Bomb missions
9/KG 4 He 111 Delmenhorst 0430 6 Bomb missions
K.Gr 100 He 111 Nordholz 0615 15 Bomb missions
I./KG 26 He 111 Marx-Oldenburg 0935 8 Bomb missions
II/KG 4 He 111 Fassberg 1043 9 Bomb missions
III/KG 4 He 111 Delmenhorst 1335 17 Bombing of Oscarsborg
II/KG 4 He 111 Fassberg 1400 4 Bombing of Oscarsborg
I/KG 4 He 111 Perleberg 1454 19 Bombing of Oscarsborg
I/St.G.1 Ju 87 Kiel-Holtenau 1100 6 Bombing of Oscarsborg
1/ZG 76 Me 110 Westerland ukn 8 support for para units
3/ZG 76 Me 110 Westerland ukn 8 support for para units


The Norh Sea was heavily patroled by bombers, most from KG 30 and KG 26

Units attached to Luftflotte 5, 30/11-43

Unit Aircraft Number Airfield
Fliegerfuhrer Nord(Ost) Kirkenes
Stab JG 5 Me 109 G 2 2 Petsamo, Finland
Stab III/JG 5 Me 109 G 2 2 Petsamo, Finland
7,8 9/JG 5 Me 109 G 2 25 Petsamo, Finland, with det. in Alakurti "Jagdkdo Sud"
Me 109 F 4 3 Petsamo, Finland, with det. in Alakurti "Jagdkdo Sud"
13.(Z)/JG 5 Me 110 G 0 1 Kirkenes
Me 110 G 2 11 Kirkenes
Me 110 G 4 2 Kirkenes
Me 110 F 2 2 Kirkenes
14 (jabo)/JG 5 FW 190 A 2 / A 3 13 Petsamo
Jagdkdo.Nord Me 109G 1 Schwarm Altengard
1.(F)/124 Ju 88D 1 13 Kirkenes, det.in Alakurti as Kette Lappl.
Ju 88D 5 1 Kirkenes, det.in Alakurti as Kette Lappl.
Ju 88A 4 Kirkenes, det.in Alakurti as Kette Lappl.
Me 109 G 4 2 Kirkenes, det.in Alakurti as Kette Lappl.
Me 109G 4/R 3 2 Kirkenes, det.in Alakurti as Kette Lappl.
Westa 6 Ju 88 D ukn Banak
3.(F)/S.A.Gr.130 BV 138 C1 8 Billefjord
1.(H)/32 FW 189 A 12 Alakurti, det in Petsamo.(Finl.)
I./S.G 5 Ju 87 D 5 13 Nautsi, transferred to Luftflotte 1
Tr.St.Fl.Fhr.N Ju 52 3m 5 Rovaniemi, Finland
4/T.Gr.20 Ju 52 3m 12 Kemi, Finland
Sanflugber.8 Ju 52 3m 3 Kemi, Finland
Fi 156 C 4 Kemi, Finland
*
Fliegerfuhrer Lofoten Bardufoss
Stab/S.A.Gr 130 Ar 196 A 3 1 Tromsoe
1.(F)/S.A Gr 130 BV 138 C 1 9 Tromsoe
2.(F)/S.A Gr 130 BV 138 C 1 10 Tromsoe
Kü.fl.St.1/406 He 115 B/C 11 Soerreisa
*
Fliegerfuhrer Nord (West) Trondheim
Westa 5 Ju 88 D ukn Vaernes
1.(F)/22 Ju 88 D 1 8 Vaernes
Ju 88 D 5 1 Vaernes
3./KG 40 FW 200 C 16 Vaernes
1(F)/120 Ju 88 D 1 10 Sola
Ju 88 D 5 1 Sola
Ju 88 A 4 2 Sola
Stab/S.A.Gr 131 Ar 196 A 3 1 Sola see
1.(F)/S.A Gr 131 BV 138 C 1 8 Trondheim
2.(F)/S.A Gr 131 BV 138 C 1 6 Sola See
Ar 196 A3/5 5 Bergen
Bordfl.St.1./196 Ar 196 A3/5 12 Aalborg, Denmark
1/Versuchsverb.Ob.d.L ukn 1 rotte Aalborg, Denmark
*
Jagdfliegerfuhrer Norwegen Forus, Stavanger
Stab IV/JG 5 Me 109 G 2 12 Lade
10/JG 5 Me 109 G 6 5 Gossen
11/JG 5 FW 190 A 2/3 21 Sola
12/JG 5 FW 190 A 4 2 Herdla
*
Lg.Kdo.Norwegen Oslo
Stab/T.Gr.20 Fornebu
Seetr.Fl.St 3 Ju 52 See 12 Hommelvik, transf, to Athens
2/T,Gr,20 Ju 52 12
3/T.Gr 20 Ju 52 12
Seetr.Fl.St.2 Ju 52 See 11 Hommelvik
*
Seenotdienstfuhrer 5 (Nord) Oslo
5.Seenotstaffel Do 24 T 3 7 Stavanger, various detatchments
Ar 196 A 4 4 Stavanger, various detatchments
Ar 196 A 0 2 Stavanger, various detatchments
10.Seenotstaffel Do 24 T 3 5 Tromsoe, various detatchments
He 115 B 2 Tromsoe, various detatchments
Hilfseenotdienst Nord FW 58 C 7 Diff. Coastal areas.


Strength of Luftwaffe in Norway and Finland 27/7-44

Unit Airfield Type(s) Remarks
General der
Luftwaffe in Finland Rovaniemi, Finland
I/SG 5 Pontsalenjoki (Finl) FW 190
I/SG 5 Immola (Finl) FW 190
Stab/N.S.Gr.8 Pori (Finl)
1/N.S.Gr 8 Pori (Finl) Ju 87
2/N.S.Gr 8 Kemijaervi (Finl) Ju 87
3/N.S.Gr 8 Pori (Finl) Ar 66
1 (H) / 32 Alakurtti (Finl) FW 189 /
Me 109
*
Schwarm Lappland Kemi (Finl) Ju 88 D Det. from 1 (F) / 24
*
Fliegerfuhrer 3 Kirkenes
III/JG 5 Petsamo, Finl. Me 109
1 (F)/124 Kirkenes Ju 88 D /
Ju 188 Det. in Kemi, Finl.
3 (F)/S.A Gr 130 Billefjord BV 138 C
*
Fliegerfuhrer 5
Stab/S.A.Gr 130 Tromsoe Ar 196 1 schwarm det. in Aalesund.
1.(F)/S.A Gr 130 Tromsoe BV 138 C
2.(F)/S.A Gr 130 Trondheim BV 138 C
3/KG 40 Vaernes FW 200
1/406 Hommelvik He 115 det. in Kirkenes
*
Fliegerfuhrer 4
Stab/KG 40 Gardermoen
II/KG 40 Gardermoen He 177
1 (F)/129 Horten BV 222 Det. to Tromsoe
*
Aufkl.Kette Skagerak Kjevik
1 (F)/22 Kjevik Ju 88 D /
Ju 188 Det. to Vaernes
Stab/S.A.Gr 131 Sola See Ar 196
2 (F)/S.A Gr 131 Sola See BV 138 /
Ar 196 Det. to Bergen
1 (F)/120 Sola Ju 88 D /
Ju 188
*
Jagdfliegerfuhrer Norwegen Forus (Stavanger)
Stab/JG 5 Forus FW 190 / Me 109
Stab IV/JG 5 Forus
10/JG 5 Lister FW 190 / Me 109
11/JG 5 Sola FW 190 / Me 109
12 / JG 5 Forus FW 190 / Me 109
N.J.St Finland Lister Me 110 /
Ju 88 C
10/ZG 26 Herdla Me 110
12/ZG 26 Gossen Me 110
Luftwaffe in Norway – 25th december '44

Unit Airfield Type(s) Remarks
Fliegerfuhrer 3 Bardufoss
Stab/N.S.Gr 8 Elvenes
1/N.S.Gr 8 Elvenes Ju 87
2/N.S.Gr 8 Bodoe Ju 87
3/N.S.Gr 8 Elvenes Ju 87
1.(F)/124 Bardufoss Ju 88 / Ju 188
1./N.A.Gr 32 Bardufoss FW 189
Stab/S.A.Gr 130 Tromsoe BV 222
3.(F)/S.A.Gr 130 Tromsoe BV 138
2/T.Gr 20 Rognan Ju 52
Tr.St.Fl.Fhr.3 Bardufoss Ju 52
San.Flugber.8 Bodoe Ju 52 / Fi 156
*
Fliegerfuhrer 5 Trondheim
Stab/KG 26 Vaernes Ju 88
I/KG 26 Bardufoss Ju 88
II/KG 26 Vaernes Ju 88
Westa 3 Oeysand Ju 88 / Ju 188
1.(F)/S.A.Gr 130 Trondheim See BV 138
Arado-Kette Hommelvik Ar 196
Tr.Kette Fl.Fhr 5 Lade Ju 52
Seenotstaffel 51 Tromsoe Do 24
*
Fliegerfuhrer 4 Kjeller
2.(F)/S.A.Gr 131 Sola See Ar 196
1 (F)/120 Eggemoen Ju 88 / Ju 188
1.(F)/22 Kjevik Ju 88
Seenotstaffel 50 Sola See Ar 196
Tr.Fl.St."Condor" Vaaler FW 200
*
Jagdfliegerfuhrer Norwegen Forus
Stab IV/ZG 26 Lade
10/ZG 26 Lade Me 110
11/ZG 26 Gardermoen Me 410
12/ZG 26 Herdla Me 110
N.J.St.Norwegen Lister Me 110 / Ju 88
Stab/JG 5 Lade
Stab III/JG 5 Gossen
9/JG 5 Herdla FW 190
10/JG 5 Gossen FW 190
11/JG 5 Gossen FW 190
12/JG 5 Herdla FW 190
Stab IV/JG 5 Gossen
13/JG 5 Forus Me 109
14/JG 5 Sola Me 109
15/JG 5 Forus Me 109
16/JG 5 Sola same

Units directly under command of Komm.Gen.d.dt.Lw in Norwegen

Unit Airfield Type(s)
Stab/T.Gr.20 Fornebu FW 58 "Weihe"
3/T.Gr 20 Eggemoen Ju 52
4/T.Gr 20 Rygge Ju 52
See Tr.Fl.St.2 Hommelvik Ju 52 See
Flugber.Norwegen Fornebu He 111 / Do 17


ere not a
 
And in 1945 the OB was

Luftwaffe forces in Norway 10th of May '45

Unit Airfield Type Number
of A/C
General der Luftwaffe Oslo
5.Fliegerdivision Moen
1 (F)/Aufkl.Gr 124 Bodoe Ju 188 F1 2
Bodoe Ju 188 D2 1
Bodoe Ju 88 D1 2
Bodoe He 111 H 6 1
Bodoe Fi 156 C 3 1
Gardermoen Ju 188 D2 1
Stab/Seeaufkl.Gr 130 Soerrreisa BV 222 C 12 1
3 (F)/Seeaufkl.Gr.130 Tromsoe Ar 196 A4 2
1./Nahaufkl.Gr.32 Bodoe Me 109 G-8/R5 7
Bodoe FW 189 A2 2
Bodoe FW 189 A 3 2
Bodoe Fi 156 C3 3
Bodoe Ar 199 A 0 1
Bardufoss Fi 156 D 1
*
Fliegerfuhrer 4 Trondheim
Stab Kjeller Fi 156 C3 1
Stab/KG 26 Vaernes Ju 88 A 1
Vaernes He 111H 6 1
II/KG 26 Gardermoen Ju 88 A 17 20
Vaernes Ju 88 A 17 2
III/KG 26 Gardermoen Ju 188 A3 26
Vaernes Ju 188 A 3 5
1(F)/Aufkl.Gr 120 Sola Ju 188 D2 2
Sola Ju 88 D1 1
Sola Ju 88 D5 1
Sola Fi 156 C3 3
Vaernes Ju 88 D1 1
Vaernes He 111 H6 1
Gardermoen He 111 H6 1
1.(F) Seeaufkl.Gr 130 Trondheim Ar 196 A 3 2
Einsatzkdo 1 / F.A.G 1 Sola Ar 234 B2 2
Wettererk.Staffel 3 Oeysand Ju 188 D 2 1
Vaernes Ju 88 D 1 2
11./ZG 26 Oerland Me 410 A/B 15
Oerland FW 58
Seetransportfl.
Staffel 2 Sola Ju 52 See 3
Kjevik Ju 52 See 4
Hommelvik Ju 52 See 1
Transportfl.Gr 20 Fornebu Ju 52 See 13
Fornebu Me 108 B 1 1
Fornebu FW 189 A 3
Fornebu FW 58C 2
Kjevik Ju 52 11
Kjevik FW 189 A2 1
Kjevik FW 58 B 2 1
Bardufoss Ju 52
*
Jagdfliegerfuhrer Norwegen.
Staff use: Forus Fi 156 C3 1
Forus Ju 52 1
Forus Me 108 1
Lade Fi 156 1
Stab II / JG 5 Herdla FW 190 A8 1
Herdla FW 190 F 8 1
Herdla Fi 156 C 3 1
5/JG 5 Herdla FW 190 A8 9
Herdla FW 190 F8 1
7/JG 5 Sola Me 109 G 6 16
Sola Me 110 G 2 1
9/JG 5 Herdla FW 190 A 3 5
Herdla FW 190A 8 4
Herdla Me 110 G2 1
Stab III / JG 5 Gossen Me 109 G-14 1
6/JG 5 Rygge Me 109 G 6 16
10/JG 5 Gossen Me 109 G 6 6
Gossen Me 109 G-14 6
Gossen Me 110 G 2 1
11/JG 5 Gossen Me 109 G 6 16
Stab IV/JG 5 Kjevik Kjevik Me 109 G-14 2
Forus Fi 156 C 3 1
Forus FW 58B 2 1
13/JG 5 Lista Me109G 6 7
Lista Me 109 G-14 8
Lista Me 110 G 2 1
14/JG 5 Kjevik Me 109 G 6 7
Kjevik Me 109 G-14 9
Kjevik Me 110 G 2 1
15/JG 5 Lista Me 109 G-14 14
4/N.J.G 3 Kjevik Me 110 G 4 2
Gardermoen Ju 88 G 6 5
Gardermoen Ju 88 C 6 1
*
Other units:
Verbindungsstaffel Norwegen.
Fornebu Ju 52 2
Fornebu Si 204 D1 1
Fornebu Fi 156 2
Vaaler He 111 H5 1
Vaaler Me 108 B 1 1
Vaernes He 111 E 1
Tromsoe W.34 hi See 1
Kjevik Ju 52 1
Lade Fi 156 C 2
Bardufoss Fi 156 C 2
Bardufoss Si 204 D 1 1
Flugbereitschaft/Fl.Verbindungs-
Geschwader 2 Fornebu Fi 156 F 3
Bergen Fi 156 F 3
Kdo.Flughafen-
Bereich Oslo Fornebu Fi 156 C 3 1
Kdo.Flughafen-
Bereich Dronth. Lade Fi 156 C 3 1
Kdo.Flughafen-
Bereich Narvik Bardufoss Fi 156 C 3 1
Fliegerhorstkdtr.Bodoe Bodoe Fi 156 C 3 1
Hoeh.Kdo.71 Bardufoss Fi 156 C 3 1
2/M.S.Gr 1 Fornebu Ju 52 MS
Listing – All flying units of Luftwaffe in Norway
Unit
Reccon
Kustenfliegergruppe 106, 125, 406, 506, 606, 706 and 906
Bordfliegergruppe 196
Seeaufklarungsgruppe 130, 131
Arado-Kette
Aufklarungsgruppe (H) 10, (F) 22, (H) 32, (F) 120, 122, 124, 129, Ob.d.L,
Fernaufklarungsgruppe 5
Aufklarungsketta A.O.K 20
Aufklarungskette Skagerak
Wetterkundungsstaffel 3, 5, 6
Sea Rescue units
Seenotdienststaffel 5, 10, 50, 51
Bomb units
Lehrgeschwader 1
Kampfgeschwader 4, 26, 30, 40, 54, 60, 200, 100
Dive bombers heavy fighters
Lehrgescwader 1
Sturzkampfgeschwader 1, 5
Schlachtgeschwader 5
Nachtschlachtgruppe 8
Zerstoerergeschwader 76, 26
Nachtjagdstaffel Finland, Norwegen
Nachtjagdgeschwader 3
Jachtgeschwader 5, 77, 2, 5, 11, 77
Tragergeschwader 186
Jagdgruppe Drontheim
Jagdgruppe z.b.V
Jagdkommandos Sud Nord
Transport,- and other support units
Versuchsverband Ob.d.L
Minensuchgruppe 1
Kampfgruppe z.b.V 9, 11, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108
Kampfgeschwader z.b.V 108, 1
Ransportfliegergruppe 20
Seetransportfliegerstaffel 2, 3
Transportfliegerstaffel Condor
Transportstaffel z.b.V
Kampfgruppe z.b.V 4
Verbindungsstaffel 2, 4
Verbindungsstaffel Norwegen
Transportstaffel Fl.Fuhr. Nord (Ost), Nord (West)
Sanitatsflugbereitschaft 8
Fliegerverbindungsgeschwader 2
Flugbereitschaft Luftflotte 5
Flugbereitschaft Komm.General der Deutschen Luftwaffe in Finland.
Kampfgeschwader z.b.V 5
Fliegerzielstaffel 50, 51
Luftdienstkommando Norwegen, Finland
Transportkette Fl.Fuhrer 3, 5
Fuhrungskette X Fliegerkorps
Sonderstaffel Transozean
Abbreviations used:

Kampfgeschwader KG
Kampfgruppe K.Gr
Jachtgeschwader JG
Jagdgruppe J.Gr.
Transportgeschwader T.G
Transportgruppe T.Gr.
Zerstoerergeschwader Z.G
Sturtzkampfgeschwader St.G
Schlachtgeschwader S.G
Aufklarungsgruppe (F) (F) /Aufkl.gr
Aufklarungsgruppe (H) (H) /Aufkl.gr
Bordfliegergruppe B.Fl.Gr.
Kustenfliegergruppe Ku,.Fl.Gr.
Seeaufklarungsgruppe S.A.Gr
Minensuchgruppe M.S.Gr
Nachtschlachtgruppe N.S.Gr.
Wetteerkundungsstaffel Westa or, Wekusta
Sanitetsflugbereitschaft San.Fl.Ber.
*
Naval planes (See)
Dive bombers (St.)
Heavy fighter (Me 110) (Z)
Distant reccon (F)
Close reccon (H)
Fighter-Bomber (Jabo)
Railway Bombers (Eis.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Bf 109 everything
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
special ed
S
Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
1K
PAT303
P
J
Yak-9U Vs Bf-109
Replies
0
Views
778
Jerrybandit67
J
Z
Large gun Me 109
2 3
Replies
47
Views
3K
Engineman
E
S
Why did the Me 109 roll and turn so bad at speed?
5 6 7
Replies
134
Views
10K
GregP
Menu
Log in
Register