At the risk of being stoned (not that type) like I was on Hyperscale, I thought I would make a model comment anyway. This is to simply set the record straight and not criticize anyone's model as a model. Glenn Irvine's 1/72 Heller kit of blau 1 from JG 77 is a fantastic model. He had the fortitude and effort to do what I never had the guts to do with that Heller kit. Congratulations. It is gorgeous. The aircraft depicted is not a G-10/U4. It is a G-14/AS. How does one know? Look at the oil cooler in the photos. It is the smaller "horse-shoe" type fitted on all Gs except the G-10. With the advent of the DB605D which required more oil, the larger tank was fitted on the G-10 and K-4 models. The photos of this aircraft clearly show the tank to be open at the top, typical of the early tanks. A number of G-14/AS aircraft are recorded as losses by JG 77. What difference did this make, visually? None, in reality. We cannot be sure whether this series of G-14/AS a/c had normal or large main wheels. So, you pays your money and you makes your choice. One clarification to Glenn's commentary: The G-10 was intended to bring G aircraft to the K-4 standard in every way possible, except new airframes. It was not a precursor to the K-4. Indeed K-4 aircraft were in service before the G-10 series. John Beaman =============================================================================== Hello John, my historical knowledge of Bf 109 is limited but I have another opinion of some historical facts than the general usually (I've found in books and websites). You wrote: "The G-10 was intended to bring G aircraft to the K-4 standard in every way, except new airframe. It was not a precursor to the K-4." I think the first is wrong, the second is right. The facts: The Erla production plan from 07.07.1944 intended two versions as removal for G-5 and G-6 --- were the G-14 with DB 605AS (attention: not yet with designation "G-14/AS" !!!) and the G-10 with DB 605D. Was spoken about a "neue Serie mit AS Motor" ("new serial with AS engine"). That could it mean that at first wasn't planned to built the G-14 with the DB 605A. The Erla-Werk I in Leipzig-Heiterblick got a batch from 250 DB605AS from NKF (Neue Kühler- und Flugzeugteile-Fabriken, Kurt Hodermann, Freiburg in Schlesien -- now Poland) in June/July 1944. (FOR DOC 109: in your article to the DB 605AS you wrote: "...while the DB605AS engines were delivered exclusively to the workshop and repair centers,..." ---- ERLA had another way because here the main subcontractor delivered the AS engines to the workshops and repair centers like Erla-Werk VII Antwerpen!!) And in fact --- the first G-14 builded by Erla were G-14 with DB 605AS! (planned was to built 1160 G-14 with AS engine and 4535 G-10 with DB605D) Two weeks later the plan was completed with the G-14 (DB605A) and now was spoken "official" from G-14 and a G-14/AS - but the priority had the G-14/AS and the G-10. The K-4 had not a big importance by Erla -- the reason is clear: was planned to change the production from Bf 109 to Tank Ta 152H-1/R11 in the middle of 1945. So wasn't produced not ONE Bf109K-4 to 31.01.1945. A month later (August 1944) the G-14/AS-programm was scrapped after the building of 135 a/c. The priority now -- the G-14 with DB 605A and the G-10 with DB605D. And Erla produced the G-14 and the G-10 at the same time -- both together. It's one of the reasons why I say the G-10 WASN'T GENERALLY A REBUILDED A/C FROM G-6 OR G-14. My opinion is that the G-14 and the G-10 used new fuselage tubes (there were some rebuilded a/c's but I think that wasn't the generally practice by Erla --- FOR JOHN: There are real historical documents speaking about the "rebuilding" practice? -- the pic(s) with two ID-plates are known). Another idea is more logical nature -- I think the german troops had other problems in the last months of the war as to collect damaged fuselages and send to Erla, there was the problem with the destroyed railways and the lack of transport cars/fuel and not making sense to produced the G-14 in March 1945 when "the G-10 was intended to bring G aircraft to the K-4 standard in every way possible" -- no, I think the G-10 was a normal serial like the G-14. It wasn't the precursor -- more a connecting link like an Archeoptheryx. FOR FERDINANDO: you remember on your posting from 02.06.2001 to the three ANR G-10 with DB605AS (W.Nr. 491322, 491323, 491325)? I think Erla used the rest of the stock from DB605AS when the DB605D wasn't enough delivered. In all probability there not more than 50 G-10 with DB605AS (from Erla) ... but this is an supposition. I hope these is helpful for you. Best wishes Jörg P.S.: Ferdinando, I don't forgot you, I'll give the letter in the post. The last weeks were hard, for example lost my car by an technical failure. ========================================================================== "...So if one sees a photo of a DB605D engined aircraft, and the filler hatch for the oil tank is in the "normal" position (as on a standard DB605A), that would be a pointer towards an AS bird...?" Well, I'd rather say that if one sees a photo of a Bf 109 looking like as it was engined by a DB 605D (we are mainly speaking of the twin chin bulges here, even if no one named them...), the "normal" position of the oil filler hatch on the left (i.e. lower), would point towards a G-14/AS. Furthermore, as J.C. Mermet correctly pointed out, most of those G-10s devoid of chin bulges and sporting ahead of the cockpit on the left side a rectangular plate instead of the usual elliptical one, weren't "G-10/AS" but simply G-10s built by Erla with those modifications. The lack of the chin bulges was due to a more squared section of the lower cowl extremely subtle and difficult to notice in the photographs. Just as a reminder, since we have already dealt with this argument (and its exceptions) several months ago... All the best Ferdinando D'Amico ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "...Looking through a number of photos of G-10's it seems that maybe the small oil tank was at times, because of shortages, substituted on airframes with the 605D. If not, there were a lot more G-10 A/S a/c out there than we thought." This is exactly the point where I (as well as my friend Nick Beale, who had an exchange of letters with him on the "Luftwaffe Verband" bulletin...) disagree with M. Mermet and his too dogmatic approach. I am now pretty convinced that there wasn't a "G-10/AS" version meant as we and Prien/Rodeike intended it. This doesn't however mean that there weren't G-10s equipped with DB 605AS engines. The difference isn't only semantic... in Orio al Serio airfield (Italy) on May 1945, the No.1 Field intelligence Unit, RAF discovered sixteen ANR Bf 109s. Of these, W.Nr.491322, 491323 and 491325 were equipped with AS engines, reported down to their serial number. To me, this is clear evidence of two things: first that there were AS-equipped G-10s; second, that the use of DB 605AS engines on the G-10 produced by Erla wasn't casual, as proven by the sequence of W.Nr. We can discuss for months or even for years about the reasons why there was a batch of G-10s at Erla that received the DB 605AS instead of "D" (nothing can be proven until a document will eventually surface, if ever...), but the batch, though small it was, is there and casuality has nothing to do with it. This, I repeat, doesn't prove the existence of "G-10/AS"s, but prove that such engine was mounted on G-10 airframes. The fact that the G-10s built by Erla were externally different from those built at WNF and the handful (45) built at Regensburg, led to the error in believing that these were "G-10/AS" but, once established what the error was, we can't forget that some of those G-10s nevertheless had AS engines. Hope this long "speech" wasn't too boring... All the best Ferdinando D'Amico ========================================================================================= Rich Corey A few of my own thoughts..... Mon Dec 31 21:48:42 2001 Hello to all, I've been reading this very interesting thread and would like to inject my own opinion if I may. Although I never agree with any book 100%, I feel that Mermet's work is probably the best guide available. (until something better comes along) I do however read some of it with a grain of salt and shall try not to quote too much of it here. G-10s with a smaller oil tank? this is new to me. At least I haven't seen any photos of one, but then my archives are rather small compared to Mr. D'Amico's. One would think that the D series engine, being both larger and having more horsepower than the AS, required the extra lubrication. I had also thought that the larger oil tank was also horseshoe shaped. The major difference (aside from the obvious) was the addition of a circular plate in the front. As for the "chin blisters" on the G-14 and G-10, I was always confused by which was which untill I did bit of reading. They were not only for clearance for the oil piping, but for the cylinder head covers as well. Pg.43 of Patterson & Dick's 109 book (lousy book, great photos) shows this well, but this a/c is Hans Dittes' G-10 rebuild. On the G-14, later versions of the ASB-ASC engines had the same cylinder head covers as the G-10. These engines were supposed to have higher performance and according to a test report dated 4-44, the smaller Fo870 oil cooler was found to be inadequate. Not being that much of an expert, the only way I can tell the two species apart, (aside from the werk numbers) is the position of the hatches for the oil filler cap and cold start device. As for the mythical G-10/AS, I believe this to be a unicorn. I have yet to see an official designation. The MW-50 manual for the G-6/R2, dated 9-44 and 12-44 covers also the G-10, G-10/R2, G-10/R6 G-10/U4, G-14, G-14/U4 and the G-14/AS. With MW-50 being a standard option one would think the G-10/AS would be listed here. In a letter I had received from Mr. Beaman, He stated that in all his QM loss records for the G-10, and they did list the sub-types and engines, that he only has one listing for the G-10/AS. This he believes is a typo. This is not to say that there weren't G-10s powered by AS engines. The G-6, G-14 and G-10 all shared the same basic fuselage from the firewall back. I'm sure the AS engine would do in a pinch at the repair level. The factories might be a different matter, but it is still possible. You haven't met your weekly quota for G-10 production, the Fighter Staff is threatening Dachau, and because of supply problems, you have nothing but AS engines. What would you do? We have to be careful here as far as factories are concerned. Changes in the assembly line have to be tested and approved by engineering and quality control. The USSBS says that despite the bombing and disruption from factory dispersal, quality control remained high. I operate a heat treating furnace in the aerospace industry and even to change the tempreture more than 25 degrees requires an official piece of paper signed by a materials engineer and a manufacturing engineer! Specifications have to be met and woe unto those who find themselves in violation of the aerospace specs! Basically, to attach a AS engine to a G-10 airframe when there is no official G-10/AS requires someone high up in the chain of command to say: OK, do it. I'll be responsible! I'm not saying this didn't happen, Mr. D'Amico has shown a series of closely related werk numbers. I just don't think there was very many. Lastly, I agree with Mr. Beaman about the G-10 used to bring a/c up to K standards and that it was produced in parallel with the K. In the G-10 handbook, it lists the landing gear, engine, bomb rack, engine supply and control systems, window heating, cabin vents, warm air duct and oil cooler flap regulator as on the K-4. But the real kicker for me is "Provisions for a retractable tail (like the Bf-109K-4)" Well, I've babbled on long enough. Argue with me if you like, (I can change my mind if its a good argument) Stone me if you must, but these are my opinions. Happy New Year to all! Rich ===================================================================================== Ferdinando D'Amico Take this with a pinch of salt... Wed Jan 2 18:36:37 2002 Rough (very, very rough, be warned) guide... "AS" left side: oil filler hatch low (but there may have been cases in which it could be also high...) "D" left side: oil filler hatch high "AS" right side: cold start device hatch low "D" right side: cold start device hatch high The engine top cowl was, so to speak, "interchangeable" and on G-14/AS had only the lower right hatch visible, but it could also have provision for both right side hatches, though only the top one (on G-10 and K-4) was operating. Lower cowl panel came in three flavors: normal (just like a G-6 or G-14); chin-bulged (identical to a "classic" G-10 or K-4, but often seen on late production G-14/AS); widened (larger squarer section almost un-noticeable and similar to a "normal" one), visible - so far - on all the Erla produced G-10. Not an attempt to explain anything, just to give some order... All the best Ferdinando D'Amico --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Beaman big tank hatch Sat Mar 30 16:15:42 2002 12.93.73.232 Hi Ferdinando: The large oil tank was, in fact, fitted to some G-14 a/c of the 462xxx to 464xxx range built by Erla along side G-10s. Perhaps this explains why they had the large oil tanks-regular tanks not available? Vincent is correct that the piping was slightly different, but not so different that skilled designers and craftsman on an assembly line could not make adjustments when producing. Might have been a surprise to maintenance people in the field! I assume this photo was taken in late 1944 or 1945? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Monogram close-up N°7... Sat Mar 30 20:57:20 2002 193.249.4.24 Page 28, There is a pict of Bf 109G-14 "White 21" W.Nr.464549, with the big oil tank. Same plane can be seen from another angle in "Mess... Bf109 in action part 2" Squadron/signal Pub , page 40. Note that in my edition (1997) of his book, J.C.Mermet see this plane as a G-6/U2, he calls that kind of DB605A cowling with big oil tank "type 041" (complete airframe configuration : 041-15522-17). He says there was some G-6/U2 and some G-14 within this 462000 to 464000 serie, the G-6/U2 maybe having GM1 (using B4 fuel) and the G-14 having DB605AM (using C3 fuel). Hope this can help Gaël **************************************************************************** Ferdinando D'Amico G-14/AS stencil... Mon Mar 18 00:11:30 2002 151.27.18.31 The same stencil appears also on the nose of the W.Nr.785039 coded "3-13" of ANR's 1° Gruppo Caccia. Here it is the photo showing it (the bulges under the nose are a further proof that there were G-14/AS with such details... and this is only one image of a sequence of three taken around the same plane. I own the negatives, so I know what I'm speaking of, period.) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Bavaroise 784.xxx batch some information Sun Feb 3 11:41:42 2002 217.235.105.183 Hello Marco, information an late war production is very scarce and sometimes needs interpretation. Looking at the data I have, the following is my proposal: 784.xxx was a production block from Messerschmitt Regensburg with two clearly different "subblocks". The first (and earlier) block ran from around 784.000 to around 784.089. A/c from this block had their acceptance flights in mid September 1944 at Amberg. Amberg was the "Abstellplatz" for Regensburgs "Northern Department" with Bodenwöhr as final-assembly plant. Most a/c seem to be normal G-6s (!) with a very few G-14s and G-14ASs. At least 6 aircraft found their way to III./JG 5 and were captured intact after the war. We have to remember, that G-6s, G-6AS, G-14, G-14AS, G-10 and K-4 were built at the same time at Messerschmitt Regensburg, the last regular G-6s being delivered in January 1945. This subblock is typically for this "time of transistion", when old and new types were manufatured at hte same time. The other block was around 784.090 to 784.200, 784.730 - 784.785 and 784.920 - 784.999 (rough guess) and it most probably was a pure G-14AS block. Acceptance flights began around 15. Oktober 1944, reaching well into November. Therese flights were at Puchheim airfield, which at this time was the Abstellplatz for the "Southern Department" with Waldwerk Gauting and Obertraubling as final-assembly plants. These were to be the last Bf 109s from Gauting, as the Waldwerk was going to manufacture fuselages for the Me 262. There are only two known photos which show a/c from this block, both are wrecks: WNr. 784.093 from 5./JG 11 in Jochen Priens History of JG 1 and JG 11 page 1357 and WNr. 784.930 in Priens History of JG 77 page 2269. This aircraft is the well known "blue 1" of JG 77 with green/white Reichsverteidigungsband often published. It has a fairly typical MTT Regensburg camo, but don't ask my for the colors. BTW: Contrary to all published oppinions, I think that this a/c is not a JG 77 bird, but something far more rare. Not much, but I hope it will help you. All the Best Carl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Schmoll "Die Messerschmitt-Werke"