Jump to content

Messerschmitt 109 early versions up to Emil-1


dov
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hallo

Because of my projects, I need your help:

The color scheme. After looking at pictures in some good books and consulting Ullmann’s book, I had to resume that the use of RLM 61, 62 and 63 are the proper colors.

Not at all to use RLM 02. The Spanish aircrafts of the civil war are also in RLM 63. So do I think.

The Japanese Emil, as flown from Stöhr, are also in 61 and 62.

The mottled camo scheme as it was used during A, B, C and D series are they in 63 as basic and 61 and 62 mottled?

Need your opinion and your knowledge!

Happy modelling

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My idea is:

 

RLM 61 is Mr. Gunze 131

RLM 62 is Mr. Gunze 303

RLM 63 is Mr. Gunze 332

 

Any better suggestion?

 

Happy modelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, dov said:

The Spanish aircrafts of the civil war are also in RLM 63. So do I think.

The Japanese Emil, as flown from Stöhr, are also in 61 and 62.

The mottled camo scheme as it was used during A, B, C and D series are they in 63 as basic and 61 and 62 mottled?

THE book on SCW Bf109's is German Eagles in Spanish Skies

https://www.amazon.co.uk/German-Eagles-Spanish-Skies-Messerschmitt/dp/0764356348

 

There are several schemes used, initially Silberweiss,  and IIRC 4 others.   I'm not about to dig the book out now, it's late, but it's stunning, 100's of photos,  some showing multiple 109s in different schemes in the same photo.

 

Bf109 C and D were in 70/71,  there are colour photos showing this. 

30572751558_1a1d5c46d4_c.jpgMe Bf 109 JEC 00502 by Jeffrey Ethell Collection, on Flickr

 

HTH

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/05/2022 at 08:35, dov said:

The Spanish aircrafts of the civil war are also in RLM 63. So do I think.

The Japanese Emil, as flown from Stöhr, are also in 61 and 62.

The mottled camo scheme as it was used during A, B, C and D series are they in 63 as basic and 61 and 62 mottled?

from the book.

first 17 aircraft in Spain , 3 prototypes, 14 bf109A, were silberwiess.  Survivors eventually painted 63/65.

Photos suggest all Bf109B and most bf109D and E were painted in 65/70/71,  later repainted into 63/65

 

Modified 65/70/71

I/J88 modified this, overpainting the black green, on the wings, possibly with 62 and 63,  with fuselage painted in 63.  Various airframes

 

one Bf109B 6*55, looks to have wings in 61/62/63, with 63 fuselage

 

finally the standard scheme became 63/65

 

There are photos of all these in the book, German Eagles in Spanish Skies, there are 150+ , maybe 200, photos in the book,  most unpublished.  I was very impressed when I got a copy.

 

HTH

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will get the book at Friday. @Troy Smith, this is a wonderful delighting. I built so many 109, twenty years back, many wrong, to less knowledge. Now, I want to make all of them more accurate. 

B.T.W.

Japanes Emils? 

Airfix kit A82012 has concerning to photo reference a wrong paint sheme.

As I see it: 

61, 62, 63 in the earlx mottle style. But no photo from top view for wings.

Well, maybe someone can help.

Happy modelling 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dov said:

Japanes Emils? 

Airfix kit A82012 has concerning to photo reference a wrong paint sheme.

As I see it: 

61, 62, 63 in the earlx mottle style. But no photo from top view for wings.

The ONLY reference I have seen to any 109 using 61/62/63 is in relation to infield repaints trails in the SCW, as mentioned in the book.

AFAIK, 61/62/63 were used in splinter scheme, not mottled.   

Early Bf109's, as I mentioned were Silberweiss, and then switched to 65/70/71

a look here, with 100's of photos, does not show any early 109 in camo in Germany, not in 65/70/71.

 

From photos, and the date, 1940, the Japanese Email is just in standard Luftwaffe camouflage, this suggest 74/75/76, but sounds a bit early for that scheme, 

https://j-aircraft.com/captured/testedby/me109/me109.htm

 

me109.1.gif

 

 

I'll @SafetyDad @FalkeEins @G.R.Morrison @David A Brown   as they maybe able to add some info,  

 

HTH

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only to add Troy that the link you've posted suggests 1941 as the date of the transfer of the Bf 109Es to Japan. This is much more in keeping timewise with the appearance of the 74/75/76 scheme - the photos on that link certainly seem to show that was the scheme used.

 

HTH

 

SD

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This info about the Japanese Emil is superb!

 

My next issue is the 109 for the Luftwaffe, where I intend to make one in an overall RLM 70 paint.

I prepared my first D-IALY to get a RLM 63 paint overall from CA

My Japanese Emil to get 74/75/76 from Airfix

And my White 2 from 1 / JG137  1939 in overall RLM 70 like

 

 https://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109D/ZG2/pages/Messerschmitt-Bf-109D1-1.ZG2-White-2-Polish-campaign-Sep-1939-Jet-Prop-0A.html

 

What do you think about?

 

Happy modelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, dov said:

What do you think about?

Never trust a profile without a photo....

 

Problem is,  70/71 can appear one colour.    IIRC there example of 1 colour Luftwaffe uppers, Hs123 I think?  Export types had one colour uppers. 

 

And for many years profiles showed Luftwaffe types to have one colour uppers,  when they had 70/71.    

 

even in colour the contrast can be very little, 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109E1-2.JG77-Red-3-and-

 

But, from memory  the specification was for the uppers to be in 70/71?    I'll @SafetyDad again,  as he has the more recent works on this,   and I have memories of their being more 1939 era colours shows like the above that do show 70/71 uppers. 

 

HTH

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the shout @Troy Smith

 

The issue of monochrome Bf 109s appears to be a bit of a :worms:.

Checking Merrick's work (Vol 1 of his 2 Volume set on Luftwaffe Colours and Markings) he describes how 'controversy continues' over the possibility of monochrome Bf 109s, and highlights (quite correctly) how the low contrast between the two uppersurface greens can often give an impression of a single colour, even when that is not the case.

 

Mombeek takes a different view here

 

IMG_1272

 

he helpfully places the 109 in question on the front cover. Inside he provides this profile

 

IMG_1270

 

Similar (but not identical) to the Asisbiz link above - note the lowered fuselage paintline and the band here is portrayed simply as white, rather than B/W/B on the linked profile. 

And, to please Troy, there are pictures

 

IMG_1273

 

You be the judge about the paintwork - 70/71 or all 70? I'm not sure - I think there are certainly some areas of tonal difference - look above the White 2 and then behind the narrow white band. The two areas look quite different to me, with the first being lighter than the second. Colour difference or lighting artifact? Shadow from the mechanic's arm? Possibly, especially as the chap standing on the wing seems to have reflections of his legs in the upperwing paintwork.

 

Note also that the band does appear just white - no black bands with it to my eye.

 

HTH

 

SD

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hallo

@Troy Smith, I got yesterday the book about Spanish eagles.

My surprise: Ex V-4, later on Trautloff's aircraft: The pitot installation.

Did not know, that it was sidward at the fuselage on the right side of cockpit.

This was a surprise!

Anyway, the photos are an excellent record of flying there in this time!

Happy modelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here an update:

I bought the book from Helmut Vogt the 109 Einsatzmaschinen.

This book is about all versions.

The early versions, he says no motor canon was installed in early versions until the Friedrich.

Here in opposition to Spanish Eagles.

Many myths are obsolete now. In other books, I have, the same myths exists.

Maybe for   @Troy Smith and @SafetyDad an important book. It is in German,  but I could translate sections.  My offer!

Happy modelling 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2022 at 12:54 PM, SafetyDad said:

Thanks for the shout @Troy Smith

 

The issue of monochrome Bf 109s appears to be a bit of a :worms:.

Checking Merrick's work (Vol 1 of his 2 Volume set on Luftwaffe Colours and Markings) he describes how 'controversy continues' over the possibility of monochrome Bf 109s, and highlights (quite correctly) how the low contrast between the two uppersurface greens can often give an impression of a single colour, even when that is not the case.

 

Mombeek takes a different view here

 

IMG_1272

 

he helpfully places the 109 in question on the front cover. Inside he provides this profile

 

IMG_1270

 

Similar (but not identical) to the Asisbiz link above - note the lowered fuselage paintline and the band here is portrayed simply as white, rather than B/W/B on the linked profile. 

And, to please Troy, there are pictures

 

IMG_1273

 

You be the judge about the paintwork - 70/71 or all 70? I'm not sure - I think there are certainly some areas of tonal difference - look above the White 2 and then behind the narrow white band. The two areas look quite different to me, with the first being lighter than the second. Colour difference or lighting artifact? Shadow from the mechanic's arm? Possibly, especially as the chap standing on the wing seems to have reflections of his legs in the upperwing paintwork.

 

Note also that the band does appear just white - no black bands with it to my eye.

 

HTH

 

SD

I have this book too and to my eye I think I can see that the "hand" is sitting right in the middle of the inverted triangle formed by the lighter RLM71 on the nose just where it should be. Also in the photo taken from the rear it looks very much like there is a diagonal demarcation between 70 & 71 running up from the wing root, through the '2' and another along the spine from the tailplane. To me that aircraft is clearly painted RLM70 & 71 as per the standard and that's the way I'd go with it.

 

Duncan B

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Duncan B said:

I have this book too and to my eye I think I can see that the "hand" is sitting right in the middle of the inverted triangle formed by the lighter RLM71 on the nose just where it should be. Also in the photo taken from the rear it looks very much like there is a diagonal demarcation between 70 & 71 running up from the wing root, through the '2' and another along the spine from the tailplane. To me that aircraft is clearly painted RLM70 & 71 as per the standard and that's the way I'd go with it.

 

Duncan B

I do believe you are right as I see those demarcations as well..the pictures are underexposed as well..

 

cheers, Jan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dov said:

I bought the book from Helmut Vogt the 109 Einsatzmaschinen.

I've been "eyeballing" this book for quite some time now. Would appreciate if you can tell us how many illustrations and drawings are there & are they all from manuals or some of them are of modern origin? Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full of photos of origin and Messerschmitts 109. Museum birds are no matter in this book, because all of them have more or less differences from the original. Full of drawings. Explanations are short and precise as it should be. No stories, no tales. Full of facts only!

Best book I ever have seen about this subject. There is a second volume about developement only!

This guy is an aircraft mechanic and engine expert by profession from the Bundeswehr. 

Happy modelling 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dov said:

This book is about all versions.

The early versions, he says no motor canon was installed in early versions until the Friedrich.

Here in opposition to Spanish Eagles.

Many myths are obsolete now. In other books, I have, the same myths exists.

Correct, no motor CANNON,  but  German Eagles in Spanish Skies, does not say cannon, but an engine mounted MG17 machine gun,  page 50 shows a crashed Bf109B 6*43,  where 3 x  mg 17 are clearly seen on the wing,

 

see also page 135

"armament of Bf109B was 3 xMG17 , two above on engine, one between engine cylinder banks,. It has been claimed engine mounted weapon proved troublesome and was removed, but personal accounts and photographs reveal all 3 weapons were retained for a time."

 

It was only the Bf109B, and seems only briefly, and not a cannon.  

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/06/2022 at 10:08, Duncan B said:

I have this book too and to my eye I think I can see that the "hand" is sitting right in the middle of the inverted triangle formed by the lighter RLM71 on the nose just where it should be. Also in the photo taken from the rear it looks very much like there is a diagonal demarcation between 70 & 71 running up from the wing root, through the '2' and another along the spine from the tailplane. To me that aircraft is clearly painted RLM70 & 71 as per the standard and that's the way I'd go with it.

 

Duncan B

Here,I have a nice link of a French site about some zg2 aircraft and some very handy pictures wich conclude the use of the two colors…

https://master194.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=116428

 

cheers, Jan

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, janneman36 said:

Here,I have a nice link of a French site about some zg2 aircraft and some very handy pictures wich conclude the use of the two colors…

https://master194.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=116428

 

cheers, Jan

Some nice photos there. I hadn't seen the SCM 109 with the partially overpainted wings and tailplanes before and it is interesting to note that even on his models the RLM70/71 scheme is very low contrast as it should be (so little wonder that in so many period photos it is difficult to make out the different colours).

 

Duncan B

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...