2

I have much information regarding the contemporary piston-engined Bf-109 units, as wells as the more advanced Me-262 units. However, I am wondering if any of these planes served together in the same unit and/or airfield? I have not found any information to suggest that they did, but I wondered if StackExchange had any additional information?

Here is some potentially helpful side information:

  1. It is more likely that Bf-109s were part of Me-262 jet units, and not the other way around. Furthermore, there are much fewer Me-262 jet units that Bf-109 units. The Me-262 Jet units are: A. Jagdgeschwader 7 (JG7) - World's first jet fighter squadrons. Mechanic records state absolutely no maintenance data for any Bf-109, so it is highly unlikely that any Bf-109 served with JG7 if there is no maintenance records/data. Furthermore, the regular Bf-109 squadrons were barely getting enough replacement Bf-109 aircraft, so this makes Bf-109s in this unit unlikely. However, this does not mean Bf-109s for OTHER squadrons did not (briefly) serve with JG7 on JG7's airfield(s).
    There are many false pictures that show Bf-109s with the same markings as JG7, but these have been proven false because of unit misidentification on account of the black and white photographs. B. Jagdverband 44 (JV44)- Squadron of Germany's few remain "Experten" expert pilots. This group had the regular piston-engined squadron Jagdgescwader 301 (JG 301) attached to protect the Me-262 units. However, there is a two part issue. First, did JG301 and JV 44 share the same airfield? Second, JG301 had a different pistoned-engined fighter named Ta 152, but that is a different airplane than the Bf-109. However, because there was not enough Ta 152s to serve with the Me- 262s, JG 301s Bf-109s could have filled in the role.
    C. Nachtjagderschwader 11 (NJG11)- This was group night fighters that did have both Bf-109s and Me- 262s, but they seem to have operated on different airfields from each other depending on aircraft type. This unit is one of the more likely ones to have Bf-109s and Me-262s on the same airfield and/or unit. D. Kampschwader 54 (KG54) - This group of Me-262 were dedicated as bombers instead of fighters, they operated alongside other contemporary piston-engine bombers. However, none of these bombers were the fighter Bf-109. (This one I don't expect any information, because the Bf-109 is a fighter, and this unit flies bombers, but I included it for posterity.) E. Ergänzungs-Jagdgeschwader 2 (EJG2) - This was a night training squadron that supplied pilots and planes other units, notably NJG 11. Did they ever share the same airfield, if so, which one?
  2. The Bf-109 had many sub variants, such as the Bf-109"G-6," Bf-109"G-14/AS," etc. The letter following the Bf-109 matters little to me, as long as it is a confirmed Bf-109. The same is true for the Me-262.
  3. The time frame for any shared units would be April 1944-May 1945.
2
  • 1
    What benefit would there be of mixing the two, very different, aircraft in a single unit? I could see a BF109 squadron and an ME squadron operating out of the same airfield as things got tight towards the end of the war but that's not really the same thing. – KillingTime Feb 6 at 22:31
  • IF jets and piston planes did fly together, it is also possible they had two units, one of jets, another of piston planes, with different hangars, pilots and maintenance personnel. And both would fly the same missions because they are under the same umbrella of a superior level unit. Maybe your question could be clearer and easier to answer if you acknowledge this possibility, which I think more plausible. You could ask: Did jets and planes fly together the same missions, may be with different roles? How were their units organized in the military hierarchy? were both under same parent unit? – Luiz Feb 8 at 3:55
4

Possibly yes but no concrete proof

I found this list of units operating Me-262 during the war. What we have mentioned is Erprobungskommando 262, Kommando Nowotny, Kommando Schenk (Conversion unit for bomber pilots), KG 51 (Kampfgeschwader 51 Staff unit, as well as Gruppen I and II), Kommando Edelweis (Experimental unit usin KG 51 pilots), Jagdgeschwader 7, Jagdgruppe 10 , III./Erganzungsjagdgeschwader/JG 2 (Me-262 training at Lechfeld), KG(J) 6, IV./Erganzungsjagdgeschwader/KG 51, Kommando Stamp (Experimental Night Fighter unit defending Berlin), I./KG(J)54 (Converted JU 88 unit) , Einsatz Kommando Braunegg (Reconnaissance unit), Nahaufklarungsgruppe 6 (formed from Kommando Braunegg), 1/Versuchsverband Ob. d.l. (special experimental unit), Jagdverband 44, I./Erganzungsjagdgeschwader/KG(J) (Training unit), II./Erganzungsjagdgeschwader/KG(J) (Training unit).

Casual connoisseurs of Luftwaffe would notice (beside well known units like Kommando Nowotny, JG 7 and JV 44) some interesting squadrons. For example III./Erganzungsjagdgeschwader/JG 2 . JG 2 is better known for its FW-190 but they did operate Bf-109 practically till the end of the war. What is more interesting is did aforementioned unit organizationally belonged to JG 2. Some sources actually mention it as a part of completely different Jagdgeschwader, i.e. Ergänzungs-Jagdgeschwader 2 . It is unclear was EJG 2 somehow related to JG 2. Anyway, it is unlikely that Me-262 of this unit operated together with Bf-109 except possibly on ad hoc basis.

Other possible candidate is Jagdgruppe 10 . This unit certainly operated FW-190. I could not find mention of Bf-109 but considering chaotic nature of the last months of the war, it could not be completely excluded.

KG 51 did have Ju-88, Me-410 and possibly Fw-190 (but this is disputed) but no mention of Bf-109 so we will exclude this unit. Same could be said about KG(J)54.

Nahaufklarungsgruppe 6 is another possibility but again with no concrete proof. It was reconnaissance unit, and such units were often equipped with specialized versions of Bf-109.

Finally, there is one rather weak possibility. It is well known that JV 44 had some FW-190 on hand as Platzshutzstaffel (Airfield Protection Squadron) in April 1945. However, it is quite possible that Bf-109 did protect its airfield before that. They were administratively from different units, but in these last months of the war odd ball unit like JV 44 was often subordinated to other, larger commands. Therefore, technically Bf-109 protecting the airfield and Me-262 form JV 44 could belong to same Luftwaffe unit operating in the area.

0

Would you mix petrol and diesel engines in a factory or a car repair shop? Of course not. Airplanes are vastly more complex than cars. Especially those with jet engines.

Airplanes of the same type flew (and still fly today!) in the same unit. WW2 German or modern American makes planes no difference. Operationally you can 'mix and match', for example a flight of Stuka's accompanied by BF 109. They can of course land and be maintained on the same airfield. Airfields are much larger than most people imagine.

On that airfield the BF 109 and the Stuka would have their own workshops, with their own specialized maintenance crews and logistics. You can't even change the pilots. A pilot is trained for specific types of aircraft. A BF 109 pilot would be useless in a Stuka and the other way around. At best, they could fly the other type, but no more than that.

1
  • 2
    -1 Out of necessity, Germans often operated various aircraft (from bombers to fighters) from the same fields. Late in the war mechanics often had to improvise, pilots went trough crash courses to convert to other types etc ... Comparing that to modern peacetime industry or even military is simply not possible. – rs.29 Feb 9 at 7:09
0

They used Bf 109s in an air defense role in the vicinity of the field.

The Me 262 was due to low speed, very vulnerable in landing configuration and at ground.

It didn't help that the engines were thirsty and so to conserve fuel, the pilots were instructed to shut down as soon as possible and let tractors and special motorcycles pull the aircraft into its revetment.

While marauding RAF and USAAF fighters could intrude at any time.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.