DAKfreak Posted July 18, 2011 Share Posted July 18, 2011 Hi all Any info on Oblt. Alfred Seidls Bf 109G-10 Black 8 << ?? He was gruppenkommandeuer of Jg 3 stationed t Paderborn late December of 44. There is a great chance he participated in Bodenplatte, attacking Eindhoven. Anyone knoow if he did? DAKfreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tango35 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Seidl, Alfred Oblt 31 victories 2(Erg)/JG-53(3/41), 8/JG-53(6/41 S.U.;4/42 Malta), 7/JG-53(7/44), Act Kdr. I/JG-3 (1/1/45), JG-7 Bf 109E-8 Wk# 1237 "Blk 15" 75%(3/41), Bf 109F-2 "Black 12" (S.U.), Bf 109F-4/Trop Werk # 7005 "Black 10 + I" (lost 9/30/42), Bf 109G-6/R6 "Black 2 + I" (Italy), Bf 109G-14 in JG-3, Me 262 in JG-7 DK-G, EP, EK 1 & 2, Wound Badge(12/19/41), Fighter Operational Clasp 614 combat missions. Seidl made a force landing at Fontenet on 17 March, 1941 in his E-8, cause unknown and was uninjured (Prien). He also flew Bf 109F-2 Werk # 5696 "Black 12" at Maldeghem in April 1941 (Prien). WIA a second time in Wk# 7005 on 9/30/42, bailed safely. At least 5 victories in the Desert (JG-53). One known victory, his 1st, a Spitfire at Deal on 17 May, 1941. Another, a Spitfire 4 km east of Insel Filfa on 10 April, 1942. His 9th, a Spitfire over Malta on 29 April, 1942. Another near Alamein on 12 July, 1942. Another British fighter near Qattara Depression on 29 September, 1942. Another Spitfire V 20 km southeast of Abu-Dweis on 30 September, 1942. His 20th victory, a P-38 over southern Italy on 13 August, 1943. His 26th, a P-38 on 16 January, 1944. Bodenplatte pilot (JG-3) against Eindhoven airfield. His 27th victory, a P-47 at Soltau-Lüneberg on 4 August, 1944. His 28th, a B-24 in the Steenwijk area on 15 August, 1944. His 29th, a B-17 NW of Lüneburg on 24 August, 1944. His 30th, a P-38 S of Giessen on 25 August, 1944. His 31st, a P-47 in the Ardennes area on 17 December, 1944. Found also on F. Mörl Interrogation Report. Alternate spelling: Siedl and Seidel. Source : Kracker Luftwaffe Pilot Archive hope it helps Thomas Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stona Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Alfred Seidl led I./JG 3 in their attack on the airfield at Eindhoven. JG 3 lost fifteen of the sixty attacking aircraft,nine pilots were killed,the other six became P.O.W. Despite this the attack may be considered a success. Aided by I./JG 6 they caused considerable damage. Cheers Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DAKfreak Posted July 25, 2011 Author Share Posted July 25, 2011 So did he fly Black 8 << + during Boden-P? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stona Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I can't check for sure but almost certainly. His personal aircraft was a Bf109G-10/AS. The black 8 under the cockpit was actually his personal marking rather than a code number (Kennziffer). You're going to need the spinner spiral,Geschwader badge and a white RV band along with his Kommandeur's chevrons. Cheers Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DAKfreak Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) I can't check for sure but almost certainly. His personal aircraft was a Bf109G-10/AS. The black 8 under the cockpit was actually his personal marking rather than a code number (Kennziffer). You're going to need the spinner spiral,Geschwader badge and a white RV band along with his Kommandeur's chevrons. Cheers Steve What was the difference between a Bf 109G-10 and a G-10/AS?? The decals (black 8, insignia and chevron) come in Kagero's "Bf 109 over Germany" book; white band can be painted, and a white spiral can be found on almost any Bf 109G-10 (or any late war luftwaffe a/c) kit. Also, on the Kagero profile, this picture is drawn of this a/c without balkenkreuzes on the wing undersides,is this true? Edited July 26, 2011 by DAKfreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stona Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) What was the difference between a Bf 109G-10 and a G-10/AS?? Also, on the Kagero profile, this picture is drawn of this a/c without balkenkreuzes on the wing undersides,is this true? The AS refers to the engine fitted but the obvious external difference is in the engine cowlings.The two Round(ish) bulges on either side of the upper cowling were not present and one of various stream lined cowlings were fitted. Check your profile but this aircraft is usually thought to be an Erla built machine from the 49xxxx batch (according to a note under the wrong picture in my less than brilliant filing system) which didn't have one of the oval looking cowls. You should see a vertical panel line below the side windscreen rather than the curved attachment of the other cowls. The accepted view is that the underwing Balkenkreuze were absent.I don't know what the evidence for this is,presumably a photograph. Cheers Steve Edited July 26, 2011 by Stona Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DAKfreak Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 So when modelling, would it be better to replace the cowling halves with.. lets say.. with that of an F-4 or G-4 or something like that? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cool Hand Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) So when modelling, would it be better to replace the cowling halves with.. lets say.. with that of an F-4 or G-4 or something like that? No. You will need the K-4 style cowling. The circular bulges typicaly found on the G-6 and later G series 109s were designed to provide clearance for the larger 13mm cowl machine guns. The A/S model G series 109s used a more streamlined cowl to reduce drag, but the bulge is much more subtle compared to the standard late G series. The A/S cowling was standard on the Bf109K-4. G-2 With no bulges. G-6 With standard circular bulges. G-10 A/S with streamlined bulges. Edited July 27, 2011 by Cool Hand Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chuck1945 Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The DB 605 engine went through several iterations in various efforts to get more power and/or altitude performance. The DB 605 AS had a larger supercharger that required a redesign of the engine bearers and the end result was the refined cowl as featured in the photo shown above. The G-6/AS and G-14/AS had this 'new' look. The DB 605 AS was however superseded by the DB 605D and this is the engine more often associated with the G-10 and K series 109s. Shortages(?) or simply not enough 605Ds to meet demand resulted in two Erla produced batches that resorted to the 605 AS, hence the designation G-10/AS. The 605D rerouted some plumbing that was not done with the AS and resulted in two small bulges on the bottom of the cowl - also visible in the photo. The plumbing changes were not common to the AS versions, so aircraft with the AS designation would not normally have had the two lower bulges. The 64$ question is whether the G-10/AS had those lower bulges. The G-10 was a hybrid, and many (most? all?) were conversions from G-6s and G-14s cycled through for repair and rebuild in an attempt to get them closer to K series standards. It is possible that the new G-10/K lower cowl with bulges was fitted regardless of engine. The G-10/AS drawing in Prien & Rodeike's book shows it without the bulge. Also, according to them, the G-10/AS did not have the enlarged upper wing landing gear bulge, but rather the smaller one first introduced on the G-4. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Mikester Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) I can't check for sure but almost certainly. His personal aircraft was a Bf109G-10/AS. I think the consensus now is that there was never a G-10/AS, what was believed to be the G-10/AS was an Erla built G-10. The 64$ question is whether the G-10/AS had those lower bulges. The G-10 was a hybrid, and many (most? all?) were conversions from G-6s and G-14s cycled through for repair and rebuild in an attempt to get them closer to K series standards. It is possible that the new G-10/K lower cowl with bulges was fitted regardless of engine. The G-10/AS drawing in Prien & Rodeike's book shows it without the bulge. Also, according to them, the G-10/AS did not have the enlarged upper wing landing gear bulge, but rather the smaller one first introduced on the G-4. Chuck, I believe that most experts now believe that most G-10's were new production rather than recycled airframes. Post war evidence shows WNF cranking out new airframes rather than recycling G-6's and G-14's. This was done, but not on a large as scale as previously believed. This drawing shows the Type 110 Cowl used on Erla machines and is lacking the cheek bulges due to different routing of the oil return lines. The other salient characteristics of the Erla G-10 would be the smaller wing bulges and the square panel immediately behind the cowl rather than the up-swept curved panel. G-10 A/S with streamlined bulges. I think this picture is a Regensburg G-10, the 151 block WN would be an Erla production machine but it lacks the square panel mentioned above and has cheek bulges. Edited July 27, 2011 by The Mikester Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stona Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The cowling type you are after is the one in the "Type 110 cowlings" diagram posted by "The Mikester". You can tell that distinguishing the various sub-types can be a minefield. You can't always be sure what engine was fitted simply by looking at external features. many aircraft were effevtively hybrids which are difficult to categorize.Production was a mess by this time. Were there G-10/AS? The G-10 was supposed to be fitted with one of the versions of the DB 605D engine. Siedl's aircraft is supposedly from the 49xxxx block and about fifty of these aircraft were fitted with the DB 605 ASM engine. Cheers Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DAKfreak Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) The Erla and Regensburg blocks produced the AS. Edited July 28, 2011 by DAKfreak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.