The following is a quotation from page 132 of An Escort Of P-38s, by John D.Mullins
“Returning from a Ploesti Mission on August 10th [1944] the 94th [Squadron] came upon two Re. 2001s setting up for an attack on a straggler B-17 near Nis, Yugoslavia. The attackers broke off as the P-38s turned into them. Dick Arrowsmith chased one down to the deck and damaged it at the very least.”
If Allied crews had problems telling a Macchi 202 from a 205 or a G.55, the same could not have happened with the Reggiane fighters whose elliptical (Seversky) wings and tailplanes made their shape pretty unique, thus making the possibility of a mis-identification unlikely.
I doubt the 94th’s crews had run into some captured Spitfires , and all the publications I have checked don’t mention any Re-2001 being operational with the Luftwaffe and/or the ANR.
Nor could I find any mention of the Luftwaffe’s Re-2002 being operational outside of France.
Italian Co-Belligerant Air Force’s Re-2002s flew operational missions over Yugoslavia, but I seriously doubt they would have attacked a straggler B-17!
Based on the above, I believe – mho only – that the aircraft the Allied crews met were Re-2005.
The Luftwaffe is known to have taken delivery of the MMs 96100, 96102 and 96105 thru 96110 in October 1943 and 96111 and 96112 in January 1944, to serve with the Fliegerzielstaffel 20 (formerly Luftdienst-Kommando Italien) a target-towing unit, which operated from Maniago June 1944-July 1944 and from Aviano July 1944-December 1944.
On March 18, 1944 the MMs 096100, 096106 and 096110 were extensively damaged by a US raid, while at least three more were involved in accident in Maniago (MM096108 on March 16, 1944 and 096100 on June 1, 1944) and Airasca (on April 19, 1944), requiring shipment to the factory for repair.
German records indicate that five were operational with the unit as of July 31, 1944 (source Ali d’Italia # 16).
But, were they all still with the unit on August 10?
Perhaps the story of the Saggitario being used in the defense of the oil fields in Ploesti is not a complete fabrication, after all…
Re.2005 Ploesti?
Re.2005 Ploesti?
Pete57
- Mirek Riha
- Generale di Brigata Aerea
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:49 am
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Hi
I think - Re 2005 in Ploesti are chymera. Some sources report that MM.495 was sent to Romania to, but it is obvious nonsense. Similarly, claims that about 6 pieces were included in the air defense of Berlin
I have seen information that the rest of the Re 2005 was assigned to Fliegerzielstaffel to the end of December 1944..
Mirek
I think - Re 2005 in Ploesti are chymera. Some sources report that MM.495 was sent to Romania to, but it is obvious nonsense. Similarly, claims that about 6 pieces were included in the air defense of Berlin
I have seen information that the rest of the Re 2005 was assigned to Fliegerzielstaffel to the end of December 1944..
Mirek
Mirek,
Until I read En Escort Of P-38s I would have agreed with you, so far as the defense of Ploesti is concerned (I still agree with you, so far as the defense of Berlin is concerned ) but the evidence seem to indicate the P-38 crews met some Re-2001 looking aircarft trying to shoot down a straggler B-17 over Yugoslavia and, for the reasons I have given on my first post, I'm now inclined to believe the Re-2001s were actually Re-2005.
This doesn't mean they were used in the direct defense of Ploesti, but at least they tried to intercept one of the raiders on its return trip.
...and I don't buy the sometimes used reasoning the US aircrews had poor aircarft-recognition skills...
Until I read En Escort Of P-38s I would have agreed with you, so far as the defense of Ploesti is concerned (I still agree with you, so far as the defense of Berlin is concerned ) but the evidence seem to indicate the P-38 crews met some Re-2001 looking aircarft trying to shoot down a straggler B-17 over Yugoslavia and, for the reasons I have given on my first post, I'm now inclined to believe the Re-2001s were actually Re-2005.
This doesn't mean they were used in the direct defense of Ploesti, but at least they tried to intercept one of the raiders on its return trip.
...and I don't buy the sometimes used reasoning the US aircrews had poor aircarft-recognition skills...
Pete57
- Mirek Riha
- Generale di Brigata Aerea
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:49 am
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Hi
report about the Re-2001 over Ploesti is probably a bug in the detection of aircraft. Many British pilots reported a fight or kill He-113 (Czech ace Frantisek too), such an aircraft did not even exist. Often there was confusion as the Heinkel-111 as Dornier-17 (at first glance other aircraft).
It was "human error"...
Mirek
report about the Re-2001 over Ploesti is probably a bug in the detection of aircraft. Many British pilots reported a fight or kill He-113 (Czech ace Frantisek too), such an aircraft did not even exist. Often there was confusion as the Heinkel-111 as Dornier-17 (at first glance other aircraft).
It was "human error"...
Mirek
- Mirek Riha
- Generale di Brigata Aerea
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:49 am
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Hi,
and the Hungarians could not intervene in the said battle? They used Heja II, which was a derivative of Re 2000..
Btw
Deployment (in august 1944) of a small batch of Re-2005 carries logistical problems. Lack of spare parts, nonstandard ammunition to machine guns. Any damage to these conditions means the withdrawal from combat ...
Mirek
and the Hungarians could not intervene in the said battle? They used Heja II, which was a derivative of Re 2000..
Btw
Deployment (in august 1944) of a small batch of Re-2005 carries logistical problems. Lack of spare parts, nonstandard ammunition to machine guns. Any damage to these conditions means the withdrawal from combat ...
Mirek
Excellent point!...I had not considered that...Mirek Riha wrote:Hi,
and the Hungarians could not intervene in the said battle? They used Heja II, which was a derivative of Re 2000..
Were they still operational that late in the conflict?
I was rather considering the possibility they had been temporarily deployed there on experimental basis and with a limited amount of spares (mind, cannibalization is always an option)Mirek Riha wrote:Btw
Deployment (in august 1944) of a small batch of Re-2005 carries logistical problems. Lack of spare parts, nonstandard ammunition to machine guns. Any damage to these conditions means the withdrawal from combat ...
Mirek
Pete57