Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Guppy35 on December 03, 2004, 03:56:09 PM
-
I've been working on a 109E4 profile of a II/JG54 bird based on the included photo. Problem is I'm not sure when this image was taken. I have not come across any other photos of II/JG54 Emils in this scheme. There were many F models using it in the summer of 41 but they also had the yellow fuselage band behind the fuselage insignia. There doesn't appear to be any yellow on this Emil.
Throw in that it has armor added to an early style windscreen and it makes me wonder when the photo possibly could have been taken.
I have JG54 a Photographic History of the Grunherzjager by Held, Trautloft and Bob, but there are no images like this one in there.
This image came from The Fighting 109 by Feist, Harms and Dario. The caption doesn't help with the ID.
SO, on the off chance the 109 experts here might be able to help? :)
Dan/Slack
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1102110050_jg54e.jpg)
-
Looks like gelbe 11, II./JG 54.
That would make it a 6th staffel aircraft.
6./JG54
Summer '41 II./JG 54 was in Yugoslavia.
Here's a thread that has some images of II./ JG54 Emils:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_725668/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm
Unfortunately they aren't from the same staffel and have slightly different schemes.
-
Thanks Wotan. Any idea when the yellow noses went on?
That's the other part that seems missing in the markings as there doesn't seem to be any yellow. Clearly the nose isn't and there isn't the fuselage band.
That and the early canopy. There is one photo on the JG54 photo history showing 109Es just prior to Barbarossa and some still had that early canopy, but it seems like it would be rare at that point. These Emils were all yellow nosed as well.
Excuse my ignorance on Luftwaffe markings but were the yellow markings used in Russia, not used on Yugoslavia based aircraft?
I do note that the 109Fs in this scheme did not have yellow noses but had the wide yellow fuselage band behind the fuselage insignia.
Dan/Slack
-
The yellow nose, fuselage and wingtip painting was a warning/identifying mark for friendly AAA. I don`t think it was connected to a specific theathre. As for the yellow nose, it was out there in 1940 just as well as in 1944....
The old style canopy was that used on the E-3s, but since many of those were modified to E-4 standards at repair facilities...
-
Lovely camo.
Some of the 109 camo was really cool. I really like their western desert camo for instance.
Any idea of the true colours of this aircraft???
-
Oh, BTW, could the Spinner have been bright yellow?
I think I saw something like that somewhere before.
-
I'm assuming that the spinner is still the black green color since there doesn't seem to be the indication of any brighter colors. I'm working on the profile and I'll post it when I'm done to get the critique
Dan/Slack
-
omg!! look how roomy that cockpit is!!
sorry, couldnt resist!
-
Hehe.
Furbie, you should join the party at the 109-Spit thread.
BTW, would you have the chance to go to Hendon and measure this out....?
-
Guppy Kurfurst is right in that the yellow cowlings began in 1940.
The yellow makings varied quite a bit.
Some had just the underside cowling painted yellow, or combination of yellow wing tips (sometimes just the underside of the wingtips), rudder, yellow fuselage band etc...
I looked through a bunch of pics but couldn't find anything helpful.
I was going to post a link and suggest asking over at the
Air Warfare Forum (http://www.airwarfareforum.com/index.php)
but for the link is dead...
-
Originally posted by Wotan
Guppy Kurfurst is right in that the yellow cowlings began in 1940.
The yellow makings varied quite a bit.
Some had just the underside cowling painted yellow, or combination of yellow wing tips (sometimes just the underside of the wingtips), rudder, yellow fuselage band etc...
I looked through a bunch of pics but couldn't find anything helpful.
I was going to post a link and suggest asking over at the
Air Warfare Forum (http://www.airwarfareforum.com/index.php)
but for the link is dead...
This is an earlier attempt not based on any particular bird, just to practice the camo. I'm not thrilled with it, but in terms of the yellow ID colors, this is what I went with. Obviously on yellow 11 there is no fuselage band, but I suppose the wing tips and under the nose may have been similar.
Still working on the early canopy, no drop tank E3
Dan/Slack
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1102123560_109e7jg54redone.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Angus
BTW, would you have the chance to go to Hendon and measure this out....?
nope sorry. although standing above one taking :-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/71_1085411837_109pit.jpg)
This picture, the cockpit is absolutely tiny. Kurfurst must be on crack. It is so narrow... i am thin yet i think i would struggle to get shoulders in there.
262 seems MUCH roomier.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/71_1085411889_262pit.jpg)
i guess messerschmitt learned from their mistakes.
-
Hmm, and how about this thing :
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/715_1102162412_mvc-017s.jpg)
No real wonder they needed that little door on the side, they wouldn`t fit in otherwise. And look at that legroom!! Spacious! Did all RAF pilots produced in the factory with half the leg size or was it Bader who stood model for Supermarine when sizing the Spit`s cocpit? :p
Definietely no problems with room in here :
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/715_1102162816_123-2363_img.jpg)
-
Izzy, please don't spoil this thread with your bull.
Or just a moment. What are you going to do if Furbie pops up with the absolute measures of the cockpit?
Well, Rall certainly had no doubts about it.
I looked at both. I agreed with him.
But what source is Gunther Rall, dohhhh....
-
Angie, don let things confuse you. Furbie started the cocpit thingie. You poured some more oil on it. And now I got things straight. I am just telling you so you don`t get confused. :aok
-
I have half dipped into one of these cockpits.
Looked OK for me, but not much more.
(Umm, I guess I don't pass as a dwarf though)
Anyway, We are basically being silly, haggling about some inches of absolute measures we don't have, -but of course in that haggle you are wrong, hehehe.
Oil is, btw, not only for fire, but for LUBRICATION, yeahhh.
Anyway, you guys, let's meet up in the CT late night (2300 GMT?) for a kick-arse LW action OK?