pvanroy

It's not uncommon for the Bf 109 E to have a gap around the rear of the cowling, which is usually most pronounced at the top as shown in the photograph above. The sides are generally tighter, although they can still display a small gap as well. Apparently, 'out of wind' tolerances for the 109 E cowling were pretty wide.

Ransom & Cammann (2003, p. 411) has three photographs and a profile of W.Nr. 191659 after its arrival in the U.K., but in its original Luftwaffe markings before restoration. I've taken a quick snap of the page which you can download here: https://yadi.sk/i/pMYl9v-pfxQVwQ Let me know if you need a better image, I can have the page scanned. Reference: Ransom, S. & Cammann, H.-H. 2003. Me 163 Rocket Interceptor. Volume Two. Hersham, U. K.: Classic Publications (Ian Allan Publishing). 220 pp.

You may be interested in Phil Listemann's booklet on the Spitfire F.24 (Allied wings 18): https://www.raf-in-combat.com/downloads/aw18-the-supermarine-spitfire-f-24/ This booklet has a photo of VN 496 on p. 21, and a profile of this machine at the end. Also note that late production F.24s used the same gear covers as the Seafire FR.47.

As far as I'm aware, all documentary evidence (color photos and crash reports) suggests that Erla G-10s from the 490XXX (September 1944 - November 1944); 491XXX (December 1944 - January 1945), 150XXX (December 1944 - January 1945) and part of the 151XXX (December 1944 - March 1945) block were camouflaged in the old scheme of RLM 74/75/76. So, in fact, it seems that the majority of Erla G-10 was finished in the classical RLM 74/75/76 scheme. At some point in the 151XXX block (probably February-March 1945), Erla switched to a solid coat of RLM 81 on the top surfaces and sides. The to

Do you need to know what the different bits that are arrowed in the image are? In that case: 1. UV light. These could be aimed at the instrument panel, to excite the radium paint on the instrument dials, for night / low light flying. 2. Emergency undercarriage lowering lever. 3. Flare port. A flare pistol would be attached here. 4. Another UV light, see 1. 5. Manual control for the radiator flaps. 6. Emergency jettison of stores. 7. Radiator cut-off valve control. In the majority of Bf 109s produced, the radiators could not be shut off from each other.

The drawing of the camera is for a Bf 109 F-4/R4. In the 109 F, the fuel tank pressure equalisation valve / fuel overflow drain is located on the underside left of frame 1 - which places it in front of the camera. Therefore, to avoid fuel residue potentially soiling the camera lens, some aircraft had the drain extended with a tube past the camera window - as shown in the drawing. On later G-series airframes, the drain was moved backward, obviating the need for this kind of extension tube. Do note that this drawing is not correct for a Bf 109 E-5 or E-6, but refers to an Rb 50/30 eq

Ha! You just posted the images while I was writing my reply! Yes, indeed, that's the E-5 mentioned by Vogt (2012). If you look at the links I sent, there's another image of an unmarked E-5.

You can find two color images of the damaged Bf 109 E-5 W.Nr. 3891, Yellow 6 from 9./JG 26 referred to by Vogt (2012) here: https://me109.info/web.php?lang=en&auth=e&name=version_display&auswahl_uv=49&auswahl_hv=1&versionscategory=6 You can clearly see the rather clumsy looking box-like cover for the camera in the first image. Another image of an unmarked Bf 109 E-5 still carrying its Stammkennzeichen can be found on p. 92 of Janowicz (2008). In the book, the aircraft is not identified as an E-5, but again the box cover for the camera is

Hartmann's aircraft was an early Erla-produced G-10. If I'm not mistaken, research has shown that early Erla machines were camouflaged in the old 74/75/76 scheme. At some point in the 151XXX W.Nr. block, Erla switched over to a solid application of 81, or possibly 81/82 in some machines. Have a look at the links, they may be of use: https://falkeeins.blogspot.com/2011/09/erich-hartmanns-last-bf-109-g-10.html http://theprofilepaintshop.blogspot.com/2011/09/erich-hartmanns-bf109g-10.html http://theprofilepaintshop.blogspot.com/2014/03/barracuda-studios-bf109g-

Vogt (2012, p. 301) provides the following information (my translation from the original German): "The Bf 109 E-5 was converted from the Bf 109 E-1 into a tactical reconnaissance aircraft at the factory, and was likewise equipped with the DB 601 A. The camera installation of the Bf 109 E-5 consisted of a Rb 21/18 camera in the position where the FuG 7a was housed in the E-1 (fuselage sections 3 and 4). The film cassette contained 60 meters of film, which was sufficient for at least 300 images. Size of the images was 18 X 18 cm. Many losses of the Bf 109 E-5 were recorded in the Jag

Many thanks to both @williamj and @TAG for this great information! David Wadman is a highly regarded researcher on Luftwaffe subjects in general and reconnaissance aircraft in particular, so that information is pretty authoritative! It would make sense for these kind of differences in finish to have been tied at least in part to manufacturer - in total, seven different production organisations were involved in 109E production (with three different concerns for the E-3 and E-4 subtypes - Mtt, WNF and Erla IIRC). On top of that, as williamj already pointed out, older airframes were indeed commo

Many thanks for the information! I wasn't aware of that. I totally believe you, examples of Luftwaffe aircraft with a finish that in some aspect does not agree with official directives are pretty common. Do you by any chance know if 109E cockpits painted overall in RLM 66 were linked to a specific production plant, or was it standard on all aircraft regardless of producer?

Interesting... Regarding the Bf 109: where did you get the information of the entire cockpit being in RLM 66 from the E-4 onwards? Not saying it's wrong, just interested. I thought coloring of all cockpit parts visible from the outside in RLM 66 was only introduced in the November 1941 issue of directive L.Dv.521/1.

From 1938 onwards, cockpit should be in RLM 02, except for the instrument panel which should be in RLM 66 (prior to 1938, RLM 02 was also specified for the instrument panel). Introduction of RLM 66 for all cockpit parts visible from the outside (i.e., the entire cockpit in the 109) only occurred in November 1941.

No known wartime photographs, but there are a lot of images of the wreckage that was recovered in Oberpfaffenhofen in late 1989. Pretty much everything that is known about this aircraft, including some new documentary evidence can be found in: Vogt, H.H. 2018. Messerschmitt Bf 109. Versuchs- und Erprobungsträger und der Weg zur Serienproduktion. 496 pp. VDM Heinz Nickel: Zweibrücken, Germany. The Bf 109 V10 is discussed on pages 123-129 of this book. It includes two pages of images of the recovered wreckage, and two pages of four-side line drawings of the machine. I hig