LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, production

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6452
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Jon G. » 18 Oct 2011 14:00

The description applies to Ju-52/3mg5e and /3mg6e sub-marks.

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3667
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Urmel » 18 Oct 2011 14:01

Jon G. wrote:I think category 3) , above, is too loosely defined.

Some interesting info gleamed from Martin Pegg, Luftwaffe Transport Units vol. 1, p 82 tells us that in July 1942, the number of Ju-52s in the Mediterranean doubled from 150 to 300, and that efficiency also increased because, it is implied, only by the summer of 1942 was there sufficient storage in Crete itself for the Transportgruppens' daily fuel requirement, which is given as 360,000 litres of fuel a day.

As a very crude hack - assuming only Ju-52s and equivalents, assuming that all a/c had 2,400 litres of fuel capacity, and further assuming that every a/c would need a full tank of gas for each mission, that comes out as 150 missions a day, or a flight every other day for Crete-based Ju-52s, which is actually pretty good measured as a sustained performance. Ibid. DAK needs are given as 25 tons of equipment and 1,000 troops/day.


Don't forget that personnel transport was also carried out by other planes, including Italian.

Category 3) only refers to the initial lift in Sonnenblume, not the whole of the African campaign.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 14:19

The description applies to Ju-52/3mg5e and /3mg6e sub-marks


That would be right ; Nowarra mentions that experiences in the West and Norway with the g3e and g4e resulted in considerable development work and the advent before the end of 1940 of the g5e, g6e...and the g7e.

(I presume all those Ju52s putting down in rather unsuitable locations in Holland without the fuel to abort to home was a rather impressive lesson for the LW.... :lol: )
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6452
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Jon G. » 18 Oct 2011 15:51

Table of Transportverbände quarterly losses, taken from Martin Pegg's Luftwaffe Transport Units 1943-1945, p. 180.

Image

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 16:06

Jon, what are the critera - is it total loss, or losses "on the day" I.E. later write-offs on inspection not taken into acount?

I'm asking because the Spring 1940 spike - which would cover BOTh Norway and Holland - is suspiciously small...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3667
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Urmel » 18 Oct 2011 16:12

What on earth happened in July-Sept 43????

@Phylo - I take it these are TWOs (total write-offs). Look at the April-Jun figure for 1941.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6452
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Jon G. » 18 Oct 2011 16:14

I have no idea what the criteria are. Pegg doesn't specify or go into details about his table. However, given that the summary is in a quarterly format, I would presume that it only includes total losses, and not initially lost but later repaired machines.

For example, many of the aircraft initially lost in The Netherlands were later repaired and put back into service.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 16:25

would presume that it only includes total losses, and not initially lost but later repaired machines.


Only way that makes sense of that spike.

For example, many of the aircraft initially lost in The Netherlands were later repaired and put back into service.


From Zuylen's material some time ago - this process does seem to have been quite rapid for Holland; given that Fokker locally was contracted for a good aprt of the repairs.

But the article some time ago now in Flypast that discussed returns from Crete by barge etc. from Maleme, this was still going on by the end of 1941...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3667
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Urmel » 18 Oct 2011 16:32

I thought Zuylen said the last of the planes lost in Holland did not return to service until January 1941?

In any case, you would expect Maleme wrecks to take longer. The nearest capable repair station with free capacity is not quite Fokker in Amsterdam, but probably closer to Amsterdam than to Maleme.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 16:40

Yes, the last of - but inspection and dismantling began within 3 weeks; in Crete, the FJ were still wandering round "pacifying" three weeks later :cry:
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3667
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Urmel » 18 Oct 2011 16:48

But that's also a function of capacity. If they had been able to bring sufficient mechanics over, I am sure they could have pacified the area around Maleme at least to really get cracking.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 17:03

But that's also a function of capacity.


...and ALSO transport capacity; in 1940 there was a convenient fleet of several thousand assembled barges to hand in Holland and Belgium... :lol:

Also - the type of damage at Maleme may have been different from Holland; there, as well as the damage from actually landing on the bumpy, rock-strewn gravel strip, they spent several days being merrily peppered by the Commonwealth artillery behond Hill 107...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6452
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Jon G. » 18 Oct 2011 19:24

I'm not particularly happy with the table myself but thought it would instigate useful debate.

JBond wrote:...What on earth happened in July-Sept 43????


Umm... Kuban bridgehead evacuation, Kursk offensive, loss of Sicily and possibly associated losses of aircraft on the ground, and ditto for the Italian armistice and also the Aegean campaign in the autumn of 1943. However, none of that really answers why the 3rd quarter of 1943 apparently was the period of the entire war with the highest a/c transport losses.

There could be some spillover from one quarter and into the next due to the accounting format, but you'd think that all aircraft lost in Tunisia would have been accounted for by June at the latest.

FWIW, Ju-52 production peaked in 1943 with 887 units produced, or some 45% of transport aircraft lost that year.

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3667
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby Urmel » 18 Oct 2011 20:18

It could of course be that a lot of heavily damaged but deemed repairable Aunties were still on the Sicilian aerodromes, awaiting repair, when the Allies paid their visit?
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: LW transport fleet - losses, operations, stock, producti

Postby phylo_roadking » 18 Oct 2011 20:19

loss of Sicily and possibly associated losses of aircraft on the ground,


These two came to mind; the LW likewise lost a lot of aircraft on the ground U/S for various reasons - damage, normal servicing etc. - as the British rolled over them after El Alamein.

and ditto for the Italian armistice


Would there be large losses as a result of this? Just lately - courtesy of the thread in the WI Section over Italian and other manufacturing - the Germans actually took on charge a lot of Italian materiel....so I can't see them loosing much of their own!

There could be some spillover from one quarter and into the next due to the accounting format


Jon, this is what I meant in my cack-handed way about the Crete losses in 1941; with the much longer process for getting them dismantled and back to Germany...reassembled aircraft coming back into service mightn't have shown up in that case for many months.

FWIW, Ju-52 production peaked in 1943 with 887 units produced, or some 45% of transport aircraft lost that year


Here's something I've wondered about for some time - but I as yet haven't found anything either way....what triggered to ordering process for more??? Did the RLM just order replacements by batch when required by major losses...or was ordering/construction of 52s a rolling process?

As in....did 1943 see peak production BECAUSE of the losses, or simply because Junkers had got their sh1t together and got the production rate up as mentioned before?
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...


Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot]