NSG 9 badge

continued …

Evidence that the new 6.(F)/123. carried on as before comes from a recommendation dated 9 May 1944 that Ogefr. Alfred Hormann, a Horchfunker (radio monitor) with “6 Wireless Listening Regiment West” should get the Iron Cross Second Class. Hormann was on detachment to 6.(F)/123 and had made 23 war flights. Put forward for a medal at the same time were pilot Fw. Gerhard Schieck (29 war flights), whom we shall meet again, and observer Uffz. Arno Kohtz (28 war flights). Two days after this recommendation, a Ju 88 S-1 of 6.(F)/123 (W.Nr. 301181, CR+GG) was destroyed in the dispersals by bombs when Cormeilles was raided by B-26s of the 9th AF.

NOTES: (1) “6 Wireless Listening Regiment West” is the translation given in a deciphered message. I take this to mean the 6. Kompanie of Luftnachrichten-Funkhorch-Regiment West. In June 1944 this unit was based in the Pas de Calais and its role was jamming. The excellent www.gyges.dk site adds that Rodelbahn was the code name for the RAF's "Jay-Beam", a spoof navigational aid intended to divert the Germans' attention from real ones, so the prisoner may have been monitoring these transmissions.

(2) On 18 April, 3./KG 66’s Technical Officer requested the allocation of equipment for this aircraft which had been taken over from München-Riem four days earlier.

The 6.(F)/123 filed regular strength returns which mention two pilots on detachment, Feldwebel Schieck and Hauck. In addition two aircraft are repeatedly listed as “away from airfield”: Ju 88 S-1, W.Nr. 140607 and Ju 188 F-1, W.Nr. 281613, suggesting these men and machines were on the same assignment. Evidence from a pilot’s logbook indicates that the Ju 88 was Z6+DL, making the Ju 188 Z6+AL.

6.(F)/123 Aircraft on strength, 11 May 1944

Ju 88 S-1

W.Nr. 140604
W.Nr. 140607

Villacoublay, crash
away from station

Ju 188 E-1

W.Nr. 260153

 

Ju 188 F-1

W.Nr. 281613

away from station

Do 217 E-4

W.Nr. 1117

shot up by enemy

Transport and communications aircraft: nil.

 

Fw. Schieck
Fw. Hauck

detachment
detachment

Poor serviceability seems to have dogged the enterprise: by 15 May the Ju 188 had damaged engines while the Ju 88 was having its fuselage repaired. The next day, Ltn. Suchy, Schieck and Kohtz were reported to have returned from detachment but these three were away again by the 18th. Four men (Ofw. Gäbler, Fw. Grosse-Ophoff, Fw. Gäbler and Uffz. Polzin) had been detached to Beauvais on 16 May for ferrying, returning next day’ all four were ex-KG 66 and may have formed a crew. On the 20th Kommando Suchy reported to Cormeilles that Schieck and Hauck’s crews were ready for operations but that Z6+AL was undergoing an engine change while Z6+DL was having its 100-hour test and its landing flaps were damaged.

NOTE: Leutnant Ernst Suchy had served with 3./KG 66 and would later transfer to 4./FAGr. 5.

 

6.(F)/123 Aircraft on strength, 20 May 1944

Ju 88 S-1

W.Nr. 140604
W.Nr. 140607


Z6+AL

 

[Following crash damage, 140604 was handed over for repair to Junkers, Paris on 1 June]

Ju 188 E-1

W.Nr. 260153

 

Ju 188 F-1

W.Nr. 281613

Z6+DL

Do 217 E-4

W.Nr. 1117

 

Six days later the Ju 188 had a damaged hydraulic system and the ’88 an unserviceable automatic pilot. On 28 May, Fliegerdivision 2 reported among the day’s activities a test flight by a Ju 88 of “Special Detachment KG 66.” Bletchley Park’s analysts noted that 3./KG 66 had now become 6.(F)/123 and concluded therefore that the latter was meant. Serviceability was little better on 3 June with Z6+AL undergoing a 25-hour routine inspection and DL awaiting an engine change “as soon as engines available”; four days later both crews and their aircraft were reported ready for action. On the 5th meanwhile, the Staffel had reported that its machines were fitted with FuG 10 and FuG 16 radios; Peilgerät VI direction-finding gear; the FuBl. blind-landing receiver; FuG 101a radio altimeter; and FuG 25a IFF.

continued on next page …

navtag

PART TWO OF THREE


homelink back next top