1. The AAF forum will close permanently on December 1, 2017. I no longer have the time to manage a project like this, obviously, or give it the attention that it deserves. I still think fondly of the early days in 1998 when this all got started. A small, but eager group of tech savvy 1st and 2nd generation descendants made great friends with the last of the WWII veterans thru the newfangled internet. They're all gone now. It's time for me to turn the page. Thanks for being along for part of the ride. I'm sorry it got so bumpy in the end.
    Dismiss Notice

Which ship, which crew...?

Discussion in 'Prisoners of War, MIA, & Internees' started by BMBazooka, Feb 9, 2017.

  1. Lucky Partners

    Lucky Partners Well-Known Member

    Alex,

    Thanks. All 33 of the B-17s listed in vol 3 are posted in posts #15, 17, and 18. When I posted those serial numbers my objective was to see if any of those aircraft matched Suzanne's statement of there being 4 KIA and 3 POW. Unfortunately on the basis of that information there were no matches.

    Further I don't understand the reason for Dave's discussion of 'mapping systems' Bukow and Teterow are in the same place regardless of what coordinate system is in use. The Luftwaffe list describes locations by distance and direction, not by coordinates so I cannot see the point in that discussion.



    BUKOW 2.jpg
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
    Airwar likes this.
  2. BMBazooka

    BMBazooka Well-Known Member

    There was an airbattle in the Teterow area in 1944. The DPAA searched for a missing Mustang Pilot in 2015, and there are two Stukas mentioned to be in the Kummerow lake (which is close).
    Unfortunately the newspaper has a pay wall and you don't get the exact date of this battle.
     
  3. RSwank

    RSwank Well-Known Member

    Curious, I would have put Bukow above Teterow more in the center of AE, just based on the location of lakes. (Ignore the extra "t" in Teterow on the map. ) There is a little lake (Teterower See) between Teterow and Bukow. It appears as a smudge on the map.

    24 May 1944 kills 3.JPG
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
  4. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

    to answer several question -- first why did I goto the Luftwaffe mapping system - -because sometimes easier to backtrack using luftwaffe pilots report of claims then to go through 30-40 MACR's. The Luftwaffe claims for 1944 are pretty well documented regarding location, time etc..... plus I can do a search using the coordinates of a crashed aircraft to find out who was doing what (both Luftwaffe and allied sides of a battle). Most kills generally will follow the tracks of the bombers both inbound and outbound of a target.

    Regarding AE vs AF -- LUMA computer does not lie (this computer comes from a Luftwaffe grave unit recovery service).

    I can eliminate all the 42-102 aircraft -- since my first book already covers these ships, none crashed near this spot.

    What I can do is a quick search of all the Luftwaffe kills for 1944 (and AF) 24 May 1944 kills 5.JPG and see what happens --
     
    Airwar and Lucky Partners like this.
  5. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

    29 May 1944 has a whole bunch of aircraft going down in the Mecklenburg-West Pomerania area -- most are east

    There also was one kill earlier in the month on the 11th

    24 May 1944 kills 7.JPG 29 May 1944 kills.JPG
     
    Airwar and BMBazooka like this.
  6. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

    From the Luftwaffe kills, quite sure the date of the P-51 kill was 29 May 1944 - there was two mustangs shot down that date in the Teterow - Malchin area.
     
  7. BMBazooka

    BMBazooka Well-Known Member

    I am afraid before I haven't identified the place the women lived we might search in vain.
    Are the crashsites coming from the B17 Osbornes Forts Master Log?
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
  8. Lucky Partners

    Lucky Partners Well-Known Member

    Suzanne,

    Don't think anyone has used the Osborne Fort Log for this project. Several have used the Bishop & Hey Losses of the US 8th and 9th Air Forces. Some is coming from the Luftwaffe documents Dave led us to on fold3 web site. Not certain where Dave is getting his other information but appears to be a German government source. What are your thoughts at the moment? Should we continue or should we wait until you have more information?
     
  9. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

    Osbornes log is somewhat outdated - on many occasions the crash sites listed in the log do not match with the luftwaffe reports or grave records so I have been going back to the original MACR's and the KU reports to verify locations.

    Still it is a good general reference, but if you have other sources (ie original documents, aircraft cards etc...) they can be more accurate.
     
  10. BMBazooka

    BMBazooka Well-Known Member

    As for the Osborne Fort Log: I did a quick search for an actual Munich case, and the Log had a wrong crashsite. So this is no criticsm on this very helpful piece of work but a hint that one should not take the dates for granted.
    I sent the owner of the diary a mail this evening. Since I had a short look in it to verify the date and the place and I did not find something I am not very optimistic. What I thought to do is writing to Teterow if there was a crash of a bomber in May 1944.
    In my opinion its not the 29th. why should this lady write it down on the 27th, saying two days before, and it is the 29th?
     
    Airwar and 25Kingman49 like this.
  11. RSwank

    RSwank Well-Known Member

    Dave, I think I figured out what the point of confusion is on your map with the grid squares vs the computed LUMA square being AF76a.
    The grid map is not correct. If you look at this second map http://www.gyges.dk/Grossraum Lagekarte I JK.pdf and work out where
    squares AE and AF lie, the location does not agree with the grid map you gave. In particular, look at Kummerower See, which can be located on the second map.
    It would lie within AF on the second map, so the computed location for Bukow is correct, it just is not the AF that shows on the map you gave.

    For those you want to download and use LUMA (It is an Excel spreadsheet) go to: http://www.gyges.dk/reporting_grids.htm
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
    BMBazooka and 25Kingman49 like this.
  12. BMBazooka

    BMBazooka Well-Known Member

    Ok Guys: Its Buckow in the Priegnitz area. Just got a mail from my friend, who went trhough the diary.
     
  13. Alex Smart

    Alex Smart Active Member

    Hello,
    Have I misunderstood something here ?
    Why are we now looking at a fighter loss and the 29th May while showing tables for the 11th April ?

    In post 1 the question was about a B17 loss on the 24th May .
    Has that all changed ?

    Alex
     
  14. RSwank

    RSwank Well-Known Member

    OK, then it IS B-17 42-31306.
     
  15. BMBazooka

    BMBazooka Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
    Airwar and 25Kingman49 like this.
  16. Lucky Partners

    Lucky Partners Well-Known Member

    MACR is 50 pages. Most of it is in pretty poor condition. Here are two pages from the KU report that might be interesting.

    Ah, just realized that Dave posted most of this KU report in post #27


    Fold3_Page_42_Missing_Air_Crew_Reports_MACRs_of_the_US_Army_Air_Forces_19421947.jpg Fold3_Page_43_Missing_Air_Crew_Reports_MACRs_of_the_US_Army_Air_Forces_19421947.jpg
     
    Airwar and BMBazooka like this.
  17. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

    Nothing changed -- was giving the AAF Forum MORE information regarding loss's in this area - since there are numerous members who can dive deep into this data, I was just passing along what I was observing and let others have a crack at this puzzle.

    AV report 2.JPG AV report 3.JPG AV report 4.JPG AV report.JPG
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2017
    25Kingman49, Airwar and BMBazooka like this.
  18. terveurn

    terveurn Active Member

  19. Airwar

    Airwar Well-Known Member

    Emil Siewert article
     

    Attached Files:

    BMBazooka, 25Kingman49 and terveurn like this.
  20. pathfinder504

    pathfinder504 Active Member

    What a FANTASTICALLY AWESOME collaborative research thread this was to read!

    Cudoes and Plaudits to all who contributed!!!!!
     

Share This Page