Today's Me-109G-6

[Hal Marshman Sr]

I regret to say that the monogram 109 was a G-10, not a G-6.Tall tail, Erla hood, refined cowl bulges, and elongated wing bulges alltogether indicates G-10. I realize that G-6s can be found with the tall tail and Erla hood, but refined cowl and elongated wing bulges would be very rare indeed on a G-6. I won't say that;s impossible at the late stage in the war, but extremely unlikely. Most Luftwaffe fans agree that the old Monogram 109 is a G-10.

[jester292]

Well since we're being technical, and I agree that it's a G-10, it's also a Bf 109G-10, not an Me 109G-10. No, they are not one in the same.

[seawinder]

Well since we're being technical, and I agree that it's a G-10, it's also a Bf 109G-10, not an Me 109G-10. No, they are not one in the same.

Well, you might check out this article I found at the 109 Lair.

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/bf-me.htm

I don't know if Lynn Ritger wrote it -- it's not signed -- but the author presents a fair amount of solid evidence that both Bf 109 and Me 109 were correct nomenclature. I think Hal's only mistake was the hyphen after Me in his title. I also believe the proper spacing of the name is Bf (or Me) 109 G-10 (space after the 9).

[jester292]

Sweet thanks

[G.R.Morrison]

Well if we're being persnickety, Petzschler's "schwarze 14" was a Bf 109G-6/AS, WNr.412179, lost 30.May 1944 while being flown by Fw. Otto Büssow. The ex-Revell kit includes large "chin bumps" (for the DB 605D motor) and large rectangular "wing bumps" for the larger 660 x 190 mm wheels that the G-10 and 109K series needed, due to increasing weight. These features were not (yet) on the G-6/AS.

GRM

[Hal Marshman Sr]

I've read a lot of stuff lately re Me vs Bf as far as Willi's 109 series is concerned. One article stressed that while the manufacturer was named Bayerische Motorien Werke, the BF was proper. Along about the time of the -G series being produced, the name of the manufacturer was changed to Messerschmitt, and the correct designation changed to Me. In any event, I've read a gallon of stuff on that venerable warbird, and even the Luftwaffe personnel charged with its care and feeding, not to mention the pilots, used the term Me. Ya pays yer money, and takes yer chances. Thanks for the backup, George. See you at Downeastcon Apr 3?. It's only a mere spit & whistle east of you, well within BMW R75 range!

ps, I knew someone would take me to task on the old chestnut.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Hal Marshman Sr

[mawz]

I've read a lot of stuff lately re Me vs Bf as far as Willi's 109 series is concerned. One article stressed that while the manufacturer was named Bayerische Motorien Werke, the BF was proper. Along about the time of the -G series being produced, the name of the manufacturer was changed to Messerschmitt, and the correct designation changed to Me. In any event, I've read a gallon of stuff on that venerable warbird, and even the Luftwaffe personnel charged with its care and feeding, not to mention the pilots, used the term Me. Ya pays yer money, and takes yer chances. Thanks for the backup, George. See you at Downeastcon Apr 3?. It's only a mere spit & whistle east of you, well within BMW R75 range!

ps, I knew someone would take me to task on the old chestnut.

Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (not Bayerische Motorien Werke, a different company that exists to this day) became Messerschmitt AG in 1938, long before the Gustav

[Stona]

Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (not Bayerische Motorien Werke, a different company that exists to this day) became Messerschmitt AG in 1938, long before the Gustav

Correct. And whilst the term 'emee' as in Me was used by all sides (I can't think of a British or American combat/encounter report that uses Bf) the correct RLM prefix was and remained Bf for any aircraft accorded its official prefix before the establishment of Messerschmitt AG in mid 1938 (someone can check the exact date if they are bothered). After that Me became the official prefix, as in Me 210 or Me 262.

The prefix was assigned by the RLM, not the company. The RLM even wrote some rude letters to Messerschmitt AG telling it to use the correct prefixes for its own aircraft.

What people choose to use today is entirely their business. I use the Ministry (RLM) approved prefix, just as I try to use its dash numbers and various other designations, but each to their own. It's hardly worth getting hot under the collar about :)

Cheers

Steve

[Jennings]

You can find any number of official RLM and Luftwaffe documents that call it the "Me109" as well as those calling it the "Bf109". This issue really was settled in the 1980s folks. Both are equally "correct" from a historical point of view.

[Stona]

You can find any number of official RLM and Luftwaffe documents that call it the "Me109" as well as those calling it the "Bf109".

Can you? I've got hundreds of them and I can't.

You won't find an RLM publication referring to Me 109. You might find 'Me' in letters and some correspondence, you will certainly find Luftwaffe personnel using it, almost as standard. Messerschmitt AG used Me instead of Bf in letters to the RLM about the Bf 110 and was told to use the correct prefix or the letters would be ignored. That's what I mean by a rude letter above. The prefix Me was nonetheless routinely used by Messeschmitt AG to refer to the Bf 109 and to the Bf 110 in particular.

Any RLM document will use the official prefix. This was an official Ministry prefix, not an option. It is allied documents, like evaluation reports or translations of pilot notes, that invariably seem to use 'Me' or more commonly the full Messerschmitt.

Did anything ever slip through? Not on anything I've seen from procurement and production plans down to pilot notes and loading plans.

I don't care what anybody uses today, for me the two terms are interchangeable,as they clearly were for most Germans at the time, but I do care about the integrity of the historical record.

Cheers

Steve

Edited February 2, 2016 by Stona

[Jennings]

Can you? I've got hundreds of them and I can't.

Well, according to the archivists at the National Air & Space Museum, you can. I can't vouch for what you have. But both were most assuredly used widely by the Germans.

What the hell difference does it really make in any event? Talk about your First World problems...

[jester292]

Well when stubborn, hard headed, "I know better than you" personalities decide to dumb off about details that both of them say "what do I care?", then you get a thread like this.

[Hal Marshman Sr]

Anyone remember why I started this thread in the first place?

[jinmmydel]

Anyone remember why I started this thread in the first place?

Doubtful. Welcome to ARC. I don't really know why I opened this thread, but I was not disappointed. Usual characters providing a good laugh.

[Slartibartfast]

The real kicker is that, technically, this thread should be in the Today's Birds forum.

[Hal Marshman Sr]

Technicalities! Confusing the issue with facts!

[Stona]

Well, according to the archivists at the National Air & Space Museum, you can. I can't vouch for what you have. But both were most assuredly used widely by the Germans.

What the hell difference does it really make in any event? Talk about your First World problems...

By the Germans , yes. I never said that it wasn't. You will find any number of non-official references from members of the Luftwaffe to the German press. In fact even Messerschmitt AG incorrectly used the prefix Me for the 109 and 110.

By the RLM, no. That's my point and I've never seen any RLM document that didn't use the official prefix for any aircraft type. It is an important distinction.

For those who might not be familiar with these documents here's some samples of RLM/Luftwaffe issued or approved documents:

Sorry about the boxes, I originally sent the image to someone to explain the format and what the various bodies/offices were.

they consistently use the correct prefix:

I have dozens of these and that's before we get into all sorts of other RLM/Luftwaffe documents demonstrating exactly the same thing.

Messerschmitt AG was inconsistent in its usage,reflecting the widespread unofficial use of 'ME' which I for one have never denied.

These are documents published by Messerschmitt, not the RLM/Luftwaffe:

I offer these little samples as clarification, nothing more.

I don't see why everyone is getting hot under the collar, the very thing I said was pointless several posts ago. Is anyone arguing that Bf was not the official RLM prefix for the 109? I'm not sure that they really are. If they are it amounts to the revision of a historical fact, that does make a difference.

That's me out...it's not worth getting over excited about :)/>

Cheers

Steve

[KOG7777]

Seems simple enough. Bf was official for the 109/110, while Me was also used concurrently and unofficially. Why so much consternation?

I like using official designations myself, so I'll keep referring to these aircraft as Bf109 and Bf110.

And anyone who wants to say Me109 and Me110 is fine, we all know what we're talking about.

Seems like pretty much all kits of these aircraft that have come out in recent years use Bf. Dragon/Cyber Hobby 1/32 Bf109 and 1/48 & 1/32 Bf110 series, Revell 1/48 Bf110 re-issues, Eduard 1/48 & 1/72 Bf110 series, Eduard 1/32 Bf109 series, Airfix 1/48 Bf109 series... etc etc etc.

[zeus60]

This is not relevant to the opening post, and is only somewhat related to Steve's post, but how do most of you type the aircraft designation? I usually write

Bf 109G-6

Note the space after Bf and the lack of space between 109 and G-6. Based on the covers that Steve posted, would

Bf 109 G-6

(note space between 109 and G-6) be more correct? (I've used a fixed-width font to make it easier to see the difference.)

Stacey

Edited February 5, 2016 by zeus60

[Robertson]

The data plate should have the last word. Well they are all over the place... But many say:

8-109G-6

So 'tis 8-109G then...

On a more serious note, I think no ever refers to the Me-262 as the BF-262, and I never heard BF-410 either, so Me-109 should logically be it for post 1938 variants.

Robertson

[Mfezi]

Thank you for that post, Steve. I also saw the use of "Me 109" by the Messerchmitt company before, but now that you mention it, the few documents that I have seen that were published by the RLM did indeed all refer to Bf 109.