All the stupid bf109 questions here

[fastterry]

Hi Phil, the MG17's on the E, F & early G models had sleeves toward the outer ends of the barrels, the forward ends of which were tapered to match the cutout in the cowling. The guns and sleeves stayed on the fuselage when the cowling was removed. See photos by JackG above. Also don't forget that the port gun was mounted further forward than the stbd gun to accommodate the ammo feed chutes. hth

TRF

[kitchentable]

Some of you helped me prep for building the Airfix 1/48 Emil back in January.  Since then I managed to get hold of the Eduard PE set for the Airfix which seems very scarce now.  I found one in Poland!   I also bought the Brassin DB601, which is a lovely beast.  I have joined the main parts of the 601 together, but there are still about 35 to go!   Anyway, I do have a question, which is suitably stupid (well basic anyway).   I want to be sure which airframe panels wrap around the longitudinal centreline, and which are split on the centreline.  I know the Emil has a single piece main engine cowling.   Can I check that the under nose panel (the most forward one) is one piece please.  Also, the Airfix kit has a rectangular hole in this panel.  Is it simply a hole?  The Eduard set has no extra parts for this.   Are there any other fuselage panels that are split on the centreline?   

I have some photos of a clipped together trial fit, after hacking out the Airfix upper block representation.  The test will be if the exhaust manifold lines up, and the manifold seats onto the block!   Remember, the Brassin 601 is built for the Eduard kit not Airfix.

Here is the forward underside panel I was asking about.

Thank you in advance.

[JackG]

[ScheF15]

Hi there,

 

I just discovered this topic on this forum and I'm flabbergasted by the informations and pictures!

Recently I bought the Airfix 1:72 starter kit...

https://uk.airfix.com/products/messerschmitt-bf109e-4-a01008a?

...but because I am still busy with an other kit it might take a while before I start with this one.

However, one detail of this kit that really fascinates me is the absence of the swastika on the tail. Now, I'm no expert at all on nazi-Germany aircraft and their markings, so does anyone know the reason? According to the text on the box this particular aircraft was 'flown by Oberleutnant Anton Schön, 9/Jagdgeschwader 54, Holland, January 1940.' (This date fascinates me as well, as the German occupation of the Netherlands started in May 1940)

 

Cheers,

Rob

[Graham Boak]

Not a suitable colour scheme for that early either, the mottle on the fuselage side didn't appear until after the French campaign.

 

The swastikas are missing because public display of such is forbidden in Germany, and Airfix are clearly unwilling to produce specialised boxes for different markets.  This is nothing new, and having to buy specialised transfer sheets of the symbols used to be the norm.  They are still available.  Even outside of Germany, many people are offended by seeing them.  Remember that those specifically interested in accurate representations of history (even now) are a minority in the model world, and kits are largely still sold as toys.  (Though I suspect this is more true of the smaller ones such as this.)

[Troy Smith]

3 minutes ago, ScheF15 said:

However, one detail of this kit that really fascinates me is the absence of the swastika on the tail.

Standard removal on box art to avoid showing swastika.   Display of it is banned in Germany ,  and gets negative attention in many other places.  But the plane definitely had one.

 

10 minutes ago, ScheF15 said:

According to the text on the box this particular aircraft was 'flown by Oberleutnant Anton Schön, 9/Jagdgeschwader 54, Holland, January 1940.'

sounds like a mistake.  Profiles here  https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109E/JG54-III.html

suggest Oct 1940, which is more likely from the markings,  though this looks believable for the Netherlands  

 

 

 

 

HTH

[Graham Boak]

There was one Bf.109 unit in the Battle of Britain which flew without swastikas, at least for a while, though the explanation commonly given  (their commander was sacked for being married to a Jewess, and the unit removed the Nazi Party symbol as protest) has been doubted.

[Troy Smith]

10 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

There was one Bf.109 unit in the Battle of Britain which flew without swastikas, at least for a while, though the explanation commonly given  (their commander was sacked for being married to a Jewess, and the unit removed the Nazi Party symbol as protest) has been doubted.

JG 53

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/camo/bob/bob_camo.htm

 

scroll down to 

The Red Band of JG 53

For a short period during the second half of 1940, all three Gruppen of JG 53, and only JG 53, displayed two distinct anomalies in their markings, the purposes of which have yet to be fully determined with 100% certainty. 

The first case concerns the replacement of the ‘Pik As’[12] emblem.   According to RAF intelligence sources in Air Ministry Weekly Intelligence Summary No.60, the emblem was ordered removed by Hermann Göring and a red band applied in its place, stating that the unit was to become known as the ‘Red Ring Geschwader’.   While there is some evidence to suggest that it may have stemmed from some personal antipathy on the part of Göring, or possibly from some ideological difference with the leadership of the Geschwader[13], the definitive reason for the order has yet to be determined.  In the past, several valid theories for this change have been examined in depth, but most have been subsequently disproven although one, containing some merit, submits that it may have been nothing more than a temporary identification feature. There was however one event which transpired at this time that may have been of some significance.  During early August, at around the time of the appearance of these red bands, Göring replaced the majority of the Jagdwaffe Kommodore with younger men, although two units serving with Luftflotte 3, JG 27 and JG 53, retained their existing Kommodore until October.  Then, after Oblt. Günther von Maltzahn had taken over command of JG 53 from Oblt. Hans-Jürgen von Cramon-Taubadel at the beginning of October, the ‘Pik As’ emblem began to reappear on the Geschwader aircraft in a somewhat newer and larger format than previously seen.  As a matter of interest, the first recorded incident of a Bf 109E being brought down over England where the red band had replaced the ‘Pik As’ emblem occurred on 16 August.  On that date the aircraft of Fw. Christian Hansen of the 2./JG 53 force landed at Godshill on the Isle of Wight and when examined was reported in Crashed Enemy Aircraft Report No.11 of 19 August 1940 as having a “red band around nose 6” wide”.  

 The second case, and one frequently recorded as a political gesture on the part of the Geschwader, occurred almost concurrently with the reintroduction of the ‘Pik As’ emblem. Many aircraft from the II and III Gruppen had the Hakenkreuz on their fins overpainted with several pilots using these areas to display their individual Abschuss tallies rather than in the more usual location on the rudder.  Although some aircraft of the Gruppen did re-apply the Hakenkreuz after a short period of time it was often placed on the rudder rather than in the usual position on the fin.  The period of time that these anomalies with the Hakenkreuz covered is not known for certain but some aircraft of the III./JG 53 were photographically recorded as still without their Hakenkreuz in late November 1940[14].  

 

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/walkaround/4034/4034.schmidt.jpg

 

 

[G.R.Morrison]

Regarding the 1/72 Airfix boxart:

Sometimes we can answer, “Who is this?”  Other times we can say who it is not.   It seems implausible that this one was ever used by Anton Schön, who had been the Technical Officer with the I/JG 21, and then flew with the 8./JG 54 (black numbers).  The ‘asisbiz’ site has assembled a lot of images, but I would be wary of their captioning.

 

Schön was injured in a crash-landing 12.August 1940 at Fl. Pl. Guines-Süd, the aircraft damaged “60%”.  He had earlier (27.Nov. 1939) been involved in a collision near Lingen (on the Ems), the other pilot, Signals Officer Lt. Bischof, died.  Schön was killed in a crash-landing 27.Sept. 1940 (WNr.1538 of the 8./JG 54) near Brenley House, Boughton, E. Faversham.

 

It is more-likely that the “gelbe 13” on the Airfix boxtop was the machine of Lt. Josef Eberle, WIA 12.August 1940 in combat with Spitfires, photographed after crash-landing at Fl. Pl. Guines-Süd.  Eberle was KIA 9.October 1940 in WNr.1573, “gelbe 13” of the 9./JG 54.  Another possibility is that this is one of several “gelbe 13” flown by Waldemar Wübke, although my money would be on Eberle.  (This is a different Eberle than Friedrich, who flew with the JG 51 and later led the 10./JG 1, and eventually, the III./JG 1)

 

GRM

[ScheF15]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

I could have guessed about the absent swastikas. I recently returned to the modelling hobby after an absence of about 30 years, and in my heydays swastikas on models were no issue at all.

 

Cheers,

Rob

[Graham Boak]

The ban on Swastikas certainly predates the 1990s, as does the relevant legislation in Germany..  Sheets of swastikas were available in the late 1960s.  However, modelling was much less widely spread internationally then.  By the mid-1970s, the Heller revised Bf.109K was available in two different boxes, one with the swastika on the box art blotted out by a black disk.  Both boxes appeared in the UK, but one still had the older "yellow box" version of the K inside.  I forget which...

[kitchentable]

Hi, I have posted here before about my 109Emil build from the Airfix 1/48 kit.  It is coming on well, and giving me some good challenges of adding the Eduard -601 to the Airfix plastic.   Its well known about the longitudinal offset of the fuselage mounted MG17s.  I would like the best possible info on what that offset is.    Its obvious the offset is the distance of one complete 7.92mm round plus the magazine wall thickness (x2) and any internal slop in the magazine.   I reckon that might be as low as 75mm or as high as 88mm.   Fixing the guns (I bought Aires resin) to the fuselage in a way that allows the Eduard engine cowling to be put on/taken off is a mighty problem, and every 0.1mm makes a difference.    Any accurate info out there please?

[SafetyDad]

Not a measurement, but there's a lot of information in this picture

 

that should help. I would use engine landmarks to place the guns - look at the 'double-lump' (magneto?) installation between the guns, the hose and cap on the engine top, and the lightening holes and mounting point on the engine bearer. Also note that the starboard gun appears to be mounted as far back as it can go, almost touching the firewall. The port gun muzzle appears to be exactly level with the rear of that cap on the engine top.

 

HTH

 

SD

 

 

[Vlad]

What is the small filler hatch on the rear fuselage spine, right hand side, of late was Bf 109s for? It's just behind and above the fuselage cross, usually marked with a yellow triangle like fuel, but doesn't have the typical "87" or "C3" writing inside.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Vlad

[Graham Boak]

M%50?  Methanol water.

[Vlad]

I think the MW50 hatch is further forward, almost in line with the fuel filler cap, and has an orange triangle with some variations e.g. oranage with a white line. GM-1 is another possibility, but I'm speculating now, would be nice to have confirmation.

 

It would be good to get some sort of reference of the hatch variations and combinations and what they do. For example, were there ever 109s with both MW50 and GM-1 installed?

[Vesa Jussila]

23 minutes ago, Vlad said:

For example, were there ever 109s with both MW50 and GM-1 installed?

 

I have read somewhere that Ta-152 had both systems installed. Was this just for testing I don't know.

[tempestfan]

On 2/17/2022 at 9:09 AM, ScheF15 said:

Thanks for the replies, guys.

I could have guessed about the absent swastikas. I recently returned to the modelling hobby after an absence of about 30 years, and in my heydays swastikas on models were no issue at all.

 

Cheers,

Rob

 

Somewhat off topic, but Swastikas on kits by European manufacturers were not that common, with Frog and Matchbox showing them, and Airfix and Revell did not for quite some time. The first Airfix kit ever to appear with a Swastika was the 1/24 109E, in 1972 (I think). It was used by all new Airfix kits, but generally not introduced on pre-existing tools. Use ended when in 1979 the Federal High Court decided that a long-established law about the use of the symbols of anti-constitutional organisations applied to Swastikas on kits; the offending kit was the Matchbox SdKfz 251 with the ultra-prominent Fliegersichtzeichen on its hood. I am fairly sure the use of Swastikas is also outlawed in other European countries.

On 2/17/2022 at 10:41 AM, Graham Boak said:

The ban on Swastikas certainly predates the 1990s, as does the relevant legislation in Germany..  Sheets of swastikas were available in the late 1960s.  However, modelling was much less widely spread internationally then.  By the mid-1970s, the Heller revised Bf.109K was available in two different boxes, one with the swastika on the box art blotted out by a black disk.  Both boxes appeared in the UK, but one still had the older "yellow box" version of the K inside.  I forget which...

That must have been the black box with Bergèse artwork? Mine with the pixelled-over Swastika has the new mould in it.

[Crimea River]

4 hours ago, Vlad said:

What is the small filler hatch on the rear fuselage spine, right hand side, of late was Bf 109s for? It's just behind and above the fuselage cross, usually marked with a yellow triangle like fuel, but doesn't have the typical "87" or "C3" writing inside.

I'm not near my references at the moment but I think there was a small tank for primer fuel there.

[Vlad]

14 minutes ago, Crimea River said:

I'm not near my references at the moment but I think there was a small tank for primer fuel there.

 

Interesting, thank you. Any idea why this primer fuel tank only started appearing on late war variants?

[Vonbraun]

5 hours ago, Vlad said:

 

Interesting, thank you. Any idea why this primer fuel tank only started appearing on late war variants?

On earlier models the primer tank was in the cockpit.

[Max Headroom]

Just found this colour picture on Reddit. The junked Hungarian G (K?) is nice, but that red prop blade??

 

 

I know 190 Doras protecting 262’s had red and white undersides but a prop blade?

 

Trevor

[Troy Smith]

25 minutes ago, Max Headroom said:

Just found this colour picture on Reddit. The junked Hungarian G (K?) is nice, but that red prop blade??

💩  colourisation job.    It's the very very famous oft photographed, there are maybe 10 pics of this airframe,  '12' of 101 Sq, it's a G-10/U4, 101 Vadaszezred,  WNr 612769 dumped on Me262, though I think it was one of the Hungarian 109 handed over to JG 52 pilots to flee the Soviets and fly to Neubiberg to surrender to the Americans, as a result there are lots of pics... though sadly none in colour 

 

 

What has been debated is the colour of the 12,  I have seen it as red, blue, yellow and grey....  

 

note another photo of the dumped 109 appeared in Aircraft in Profile back in 1966... the top image of 21 is from Neubiberg as well...

 

[quangster]

Dear modeller friends,

I’m currently backdating a G-14 to an earlier G-6/R-6 with the MG 151/20 underwing gunpods.
I suppose the G-6/R-6 was not fitted with the motorkanone and would like to know what I should do with the motorgun cover provided in the cockpit.
 Should I leave it on or should I remove it? A picture of a G-6 cockpit without the motorgun would help me enormously.

Thank you all for your input.

Cheers,

Quang

[Mark Proulx]

On 11/7/2022 at 9:15 AM, Max Headroom said:

Just found this colour picture on Reddit. The junked Hungarian G (K?) is nice, but that red prop blade??

 

 

I know 190 Doras protecting 262’s had red and white undersides but a prop blade?

 

Trevor

This is a prime example of how colorizing photos only serves to distort history. While great "eye candy" to many, the false narrative created is worrisome. I do have a bit more consideration for those who colorize, but at least watermark the photo saying the effect has been applied. However, even some of those watermarks can be eliminated.

 

Mark Proulx