Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:19 pm
Dave[/quote]
And this one doesn't have one.
[/quote]
Really
as I said it is the museums choice but should they paint one on , it isn't illegal, which follows that isn't the reason they didn't.
Dave
And this one doesn't have one.
[/quote]
Really
as I said it is the museums choice but should they paint one on , it isn't illegal, which follows that isn't the reason they didn't.
Dave
Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:37 am
The website says
"The following explaination for this contradiction was offered me at LBB:
"Uffz H. Maxis' (III. or 13./ JG 53) Me 109 (white 13, WNr 784993) was indeed a G-14 AS. It crashed on 1.1.45 during "Bodenplatte".
The wreck was salvaged 1987 and the wings were shipped to Austria in the mid 90s. The fuselage was not usable anymore.
The "Vienna Aviatikum", resides on the area called "Wiener Neustadt", the place where "WNF" once stood.
The wings were attached to a G-6 fuselage (only G-6 were built at WNF) and the markings of Maxis' were chosen as the wings were from the original aircraft. The camo is that of typicaly built G-6 during 1943. The markings are the historic connection and a recognition of the original wings."
"The following explaination for this contradiction was offered me at LBB:
"Uffz H. Maxis' (III. or 13./ JG 53) Me 109 (white 13, WNr 784993) was indeed a G-14 AS. It crashed on 1.1.45 during "Bodenplatte".
The wreck was salvaged 1987 and the wings were shipped to Austria in the mid 90s. The fuselage was not usable anymore.
The "Vienna Aviatikum", resides on the area called "Wiener Neustadt", the place where "WNF" once stood.
The wings were attached to a G-6 fuselage (only G-6 were built at WNF) and the markings of Maxis' were chosen as the wings were from the original aircraft. The camo is that of typicaly built G-6 during 1943. The markings are the historic connection and a recognition of the original wings."
Thu Nov 16, 2006 7:54 am
DaveM2 wrote:Dave
And this one doesn't have one.
[/quote]
Really
as I said it is the museums choice but should they paint one on , it isn't illegal, which follows that isn't the reason they didn't.Dave[/quote]
I agree Dave but they are just being sensitive to their local history I suppose. Vienna had a huge Jewish population that was decimated by '45.
Great to see another 109 displayed in good shape
Well done to those involved.
Thu Nov 16, 2006 7:55 am
First of all, well done to the restoration team for getting another 109 on display. Looks like a very cleanly done piece of work.
BUT... if they intended to honor Maxis by recreating his aircraft, why not build the fuselage in the streamlined style, with the modified tail surfaces? It's not like there aren't plenty of photos of the aircraft, or of AS-engined 109s to work from, or a pattern aircraft for the cowlings in the form of "Black 2" at the Messerschmitt Stiftung, or literally thousands of enthusiasts (myself included) who would gladly contribute anything they had to get the aircraft right? (/soapbox)
And Messerschmitt 109 production at WNF commenced with the Emil, continuing through the K... production was not limited to the G-6, as the article states, although that was certainly a large chunk of the production total.
Well, at least it's another 109 on display.
Lynn
BUT... if they intended to honor Maxis by recreating his aircraft, why not build the fuselage in the streamlined style, with the modified tail surfaces? It's not like there aren't plenty of photos of the aircraft, or of AS-engined 109s to work from, or a pattern aircraft for the cowlings in the form of "Black 2" at the Messerschmitt Stiftung, or literally thousands of enthusiasts (myself included) who would gladly contribute anything they had to get the aircraft right? (/soapbox)
And Messerschmitt 109 production at WNF commenced with the Emil, continuing through the K... production was not limited to the G-6, as the article states, although that was certainly a large chunk of the production total.
Well, at least it's another 109 on display.
Lynn