PDA

View Full Version : Baer : was he the best fighter pilot of WWII ?



XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 05:49 PM
Thinking about aces, particularly german ones (the scores (and skills) of the allied pilots, US, Brtish, or soviet ones high as they were cannot compare to these of the LW veterans who flew hundreds of sorties), I found that they are very difficult to compare to each other : how would Hartmann or Nowotny have done in the West ? Would Priller or Marseille have survived in the East ?

This is a difficult question since the way the air war went was very different from one front to the other, as can be seen by the number of aces killed or wounded a short time after changing fronts (Nowotny, Wilcke (from East to West), but also Schnell, or Homuth (from West to East)).

Finally perhaps the best pilots were the ones who could adapt to any combat environment, and in among these Heinz Baer seems to be the best or among them : 94 kills in the East, 127 kills in the West, he scored during the phoney war in 1939-1940, over France in 1940, over the UK in 1940, over the USSR in 1941-1942, over Africa in 1943, over Italy in 1943, and over Germany in 1944-1945.

From the escorts of the phoney war to the jet combat over Germany (16 kills on Me-262), the guy adapted to every combat situation on any type of aircraft (Me-109D, Me-109E, Me-109F, Me-109G, Fw-190A, Me-262A, or Me-262C (he was the only one to score a kill (a P-47) with this one)).

Impressive record, isn't it ? Does antone has an opinion on who could have an even more impressive one ?

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 05:49 PM
Thinking about aces, particularly german ones (the scores (and skills) of the allied pilots, US, Brtish, or soviet ones high as they were cannot compare to these of the LW veterans who flew hundreds of sorties), I found that they are very difficult to compare to each other : how would Hartmann or Nowotny have done in the West ? Would Priller or Marseille have survived in the East ?

This is a difficult question since the way the air war went was very different from one front to the other, as can be seen by the number of aces killed or wounded a short time after changing fronts (Nowotny, Wilcke (from East to West), but also Schnell, or Homuth (from West to East)).

Finally perhaps the best pilots were the ones who could adapt to any combat environment, and in among these Heinz Baer seems to be the best or among them : 94 kills in the East, 127 kills in the West, he scored during the phoney war in 1939-1940, over France in 1940, over the UK in 1940, over the USSR in 1941-1942, over Africa in 1943, over Italy in 1943, and over Germany in 1944-1945.

From the escorts of the phoney war to the jet combat over Germany (16 kills on Me-262), the guy adapted to every combat situation on any type of aircraft (Me-109D, Me-109E, Me-109F, Me-109G, Fw-190A, Me-262A, or Me-262C (he was the only one to score a kill (a P-47) with this one)).

Impressive record, isn't it ? Does antone has an opinion on who could have an even more impressive one ?

RichardI
07-04-2003, 05:54 PM
For my money - the two best fighter pilots of WWII;

1.) **** Bong

2.) Robert Johnson

Rich

<Center>http://www.ghosts.com/images/postimages/THUNDERBOLT.jpg <Center>I've got 140 109's cornered over Berlin!

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 05:59 PM
RichardI wrote:
- For my money - the two best fighter pilots of WWII;
-
- 1.) **** Bong
-
- 2.) Robert Johnson
-
- Rich
-

Best american fighter pilots (though in the Pacific, given the overclaim rate, it is difficult to know who actually had the highest score).

BTW, why Bob Johnson and not Gabreski ?

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 06:09 PM
I like B¤r not because of his impressive kill record, but because of who he was:
He came to I./JG 51 shortly before the war as the pilot of the Group's Ju 86 transport plane. In his broad saxonian accent he always liked to taunt the pilots of the "small planes" until Douglas Pitcairn, the Staffelkapit¤n (Pitcairn is actually related to a member of the Bounty mutiny crew who fled to Prussia, but that is another story) talked him into trying a Me 109. B¤r fell in love with fighter planes and was trained "off record" by Pitcairn how to be a fighter pilot. He never attended a fighter pilots course. Pitcairns training paid off, when the in early 1940, during the groups first arial engagement, both Pitcairn and B¤r shot down a Curtiss Hawk.
During the battle of Britain, B¤r with his never wavering humour developed into a skillful fighter ace with 14 kills. But he had to ditch into the Channel once.
A typical B¤r episode followed. G¶ring himself visited the Group just after B¤r had been rescued. G¶ring asked B¤r how he managed to swim for serveral hours and B¤r answered in broad saxon accent: "Well, with every swimming stroke, I thought about your words, Herr Reichsmarschall: Thanks to the Luftwaffe, England is no Island anymore!"
A lowly NCO said that to his Commander in Chief.
B¤r was known for loving candy bars of the "Prizl" brand (hence it became his nickname) for lack of military discipline, a never wavering humour even in the worst situations and for having no respect for high ranks.
When B¤r was flying with JG 1 in the Home defense in 1943, it suddenly became too much: he had been flying combat missions for three years without pause and simply had a breakdown. Galland (something which he never wrote in his book) had him removed of his post. After a few weeks of recovery, B¤r started to fly again, as a Staffelkapit¤n. His comment "in my plane I am my own Kommodore". After another tour with JG 1 he was assigned to command EJG 2, the operation conversion unit for the Me 262. He didnt care much for his command duties, but rather waged his own private war, often flying lone wulf missions in his 262 (he often flew prototype 262s with auxiliary rocket boosters or additional armament) to hunt allied recon planes. When Galland founded JV 44, he went there and took over command after Galland was wounded.
His 16 kills put him on top of the list for the Me 262 aces, even though at least three other pilots have larger, but unconfirmed scores.

http://people.freenet.de/JCRitter/1sigklein.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 06:29 PM
one pilot comes to mind .... does anyone know his name ?

he got shot down over england and captured. he fled his prison in canada and made it across the border to the states. since the us were not at war yet, he could just buy a ticket and sail back to germany to fight again. i was watching this on discovery but had to rush out (real life calls). ???

dont know if he ever became a high scorer but he got 13 confirmed kills in the BoB and a few more claimed or hit.

but Hartmann stand out mostly for the fact that he flew for the last years of the war and missed out on the early "turkey shoots" - and still has the highest score.

there was an icelandic fighter pilot named žorsteinn J³nsson flying spitfires (and for some time - early mustangs for ground attack) for the RAF - got 7 confirmed kills and 5 propables. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif yep - the only icelandic fighter pilot ... ever http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif he was in training in the north of england/scotland during the BoB and was then on coast patrol or somthing similar - he said his only regret was that he was just a few days late to fight in the BoB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 06:32 PM
The one who escaped was Franz von Werra, the "escape king of Canada". He was killed in a flying accident over the north Sea in 1942.


http://people.freenet.de/JCRitter/1sigklein.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 06:34 PM
My money's on Joachim Marseille. 15 kills in one mission. He would have whiped Hartmann's *** (who just died a few years ago) but his engine died and he bailed out but chute didn't open. They transferred him to Africa I think because he was nuts!

A few of my dad's friends actually met Hartmann before he died. I think it would have been in the late 80's.

lil'

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 06:47 PM
Read Rall's book and then answer the question.

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 07:56 PM
Sorry,

Marseille had 17 kills in 9 hours.

lil'

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 08:00 PM
johann_thor wrote:
- but Hartmann stand out mostly for the fact that he
- flew for the last years of the war and missed out on
- the early "turkey shoots" - and still has the
- highest score.
-

The fact is that many of the top scorers (Nowotny, Kittel,...) of the LW achieved most of their claims after 1942 because, there were more and more opportunities to fight with less and less fighter pilots, which explains why the piots who survived achieved enormous individual tallies, often flying more than ten sorties a day.

Hartmann had perhaps the highest score but it was achieved in 1404 sorties, showing the fact that he saw at least as much fighting as all his competitors.

In fact, the problem with Hartmann's or Marseille's score is that it was achieved on a single front (or almost, Hartmann got 7 Mustangs, and Marseille scored his first kills (while being shot down several times) in Bob), and it's difficult to estimate wether they could have been successful in other conditions.

In my mind, one who could compare to Baer was Molders, who was, by the time of his death, the top scorer of the LW (his 115 kills being 14 in Spain, 54 in the West, and 47 in the East) and, at the same time, established many of the modern air combat tactics (individual and group ones) which were used by all air forces for the following decades (his allied equivalents being Bader and Pokrishkin).

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 08:02 PM
RCAF_lilseed wrote:
- Sorry,
-
- Marseille had 17 kills in 9 hours.
-
- lil'
-

"Bully" Lang was the only one who did better with 18 kills in one day.

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 08:19 PM
Dont forget the germans shot down many airforces before they even got off the ground 40,000+ and got kill credits which the russians didnt.

The polish airforce for example

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:00 PM
Marseille was the most accurate pilot of the war. the most kills in shortest time. if he lived he would have had over 700 kills by the end of the war at the rate he was going....heck he might have hit 1000. he could bring down a plane with 3 bullets. literally. he was a master of deflection he could always hit the cockpit and kill the pilot. i think in one flight he fired less than ten rounds and took out 3 planes...i read about him ages ago but someone can probably back that up

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:04 PM
nicli wrote:
-
- RCAF_lilseed wrote:
-- Sorry,
--
-- Marseille had 17 kills in 9 hours.
--
-- lil'
--
-
- "Bully" Lang was the only one who did better with 18
- kills in one day.
-


A day has 24 hours. Hardly better. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:13 PM
As I've stated before, Marseille gets my vote.



LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- Dont forget the germans shot down many airforces
- before they even got off the ground 40,000+ and got
- kill credits which the russians didnt.
-


You mean they were "vulchers" and recieved full points for their "vulched" kills?





http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/_uimages/TBolt.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:20 PM
Do you have any info on Gunther Rall's book?

Thanks!

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:23 PM
More like strafers, same with the US, many ground enemy plane kills

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:30 PM
I don't believe the germans counted strafing kills.As far as the "best"most german pilots consider Marseille.Also they thought the western front was tougher than the eastern,which to them included africa.

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:33 PM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- More like strafers, same with the US, many ground
- enemy plane kills
-

I absolutely agree LeadSpitter. Which is why I don't quite understand all the "hooplah" about it in the game. Anyway, The bottom line is, I have unlimited respect for anyone who flew and fought and we can only contemplate what it must have been like to battle the extreme elements of wind and cold on the Eastern Front.



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/_uimages/TBolt.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 09:56 PM
strafing kills were counted as destroyed groundtargets in the LW

http://diablo_bayern.bei.t-online.de/Fw190.JPG

Zuerst war ich unsicher, ich hatte nicht viel Erfahrung damit. Aber heute bereue ich nichts. Meine Freunde taten es schon lange. Ich wollte auch mitmachen, aber mir war unwohl dabei. Ich hatte Angst davor. Irgendwann war dann doch meine Neugier zu groß und ich wollte es auch unbedingt ausprobieren. Alles war so fremd. Heute blicke ich zurück und es war die beste Entscheidung meines Lebens. Es geht nichts über einen Würger und 2000PS unterm Hintern! -Hpt. von Stranzki, Fw190 Pilot, Kampfpilot des StS! Horrido!

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 10:27 PM
Its funny that around here any pilot account by a RAF or USAAF pilot is scrutinized and discounted because everything is biased towards the victors, but no one ever questions accounts about LW pilots being snipers in the air, or just how kills were tallied by the LW and so on.
Same thing goes that USAAF and RAF pilots are discounted because they scored most of their kills when the LW was outnumbered and the pilot pool was "green". Yet no one says a word about how many kills the LW pilots tallied against poor pilots and AC from the Polish, British, French, Russian, ad nasuem air forces. I understand that the LW was one of the greatest AF's in history probably, but their best pilots were no better than the best British, Russian, Japanese or US pilots.

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 10:37 PM
BillRK

They were better, at least at the beginning of the war. They collected experience and trained skills, created tactics in Spain and had time to firm them over Poland and France in 1940. This tactics are the solids of today's modern Rotte fighting.

Except the Russians who also had own good tactics until Stalin "cleaned" the rows, all other AF copied German tactics til late 1942/43. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu es une tªte carée comme un sale boche!"

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 10:51 PM
Luftwaffe procedures were very strict when it came to confirmation of victories. To register one, pilot had to fill comprehensive victory report which was followed by combat report. To this, Gruppenkommandeur endorsement had to be attached. Then a report from Unteroffizier from air intelligence regiment was added. A report from a witness (or preferably two) completed the claim. There wasn't much room to overclaim, and the Luftwaffe was difficult to fool.

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 10:57 PM
isnt this the guy in that stupid pearl harbor movie
who hit the water at 300mph and survived?

http://prod.bsis.bellsouth.net/coDataImages/p/Groups/92/92091/folders/62167/451284peacepins.jpg
regards: surveyor_1





Message Edited on 07/04/03 05:57PM by surveyor_1

Message Edited on 07/04/03 05:58PM by surveyor_1

Message Edited on 07/04/0305:59PM by surveyor_1

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 11:31 PM
surveyor_1 wrote:
- isnt this the guy in that stupid pearl harbor movie
- who hit the water at 300mph and survived?
-
And he hit the water at day and came to surface when it was dark... a true hero http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

regards


Last Hussar

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 11:33 PM
Last_Hussar wrote:
-
- surveyor_1 wrote:
-- isnt this the guy in that stupid pearl harbor movie
-- who hit the water at 300mph and survived?
--
- And he hit the water at day and came to surface when
- it was dark... a true hero /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- regards
-
-
- Last Hussar
-
-


I think you guys are talking about Das Boot /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://members.shaw.ca/cuski4678/sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 11:38 PM
Achilles97 wrote:
- Do you have any info on Gunther Rall's book?
-
- Thanks!

I bought the book a month ago, finished it about 2 weeks ago. Was a pretty good book. It´s not like a combat diary, hardly actually, but its more of his memoirs through his beginings in the LW, the end of the war, and then how he rose up through the new luftwaffe untill his retirement.

Interesting stories through all his life.

I recomend the book, I even learned a few things from it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Got it from Amazon for 20 bucks too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0971553300/qid%3D1057358445/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F1/002-5313541-1059250

-----------------------------------------------------
</center>http://members.fortunecity.com/stg77/stg77banner.jpg
-----------------------------------
When a German Infantry unit's advance is halted...who do they call?? The Fighter jocks? Get real!!...They call the STUKA Pilots !!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.stg-77.net

Message Edited on 07/04/0306:41PM by StG77_Kondor

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 11:43 PM
nicli wrote:
-
- RichardI wrote:
-- For my money - the two best fighter pilots of WWII;
--
-- 1.) **** Bong
--
-- 2.) Robert Johnson
--
-- Rich
--
-


Very funny /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-04-2003, 11:43 PM
Bizzare:: I read German cound rules were so strict there was this mid~war LW twin engine fighter unit based in western Euro that stood down from operations because they never could get any kills confirmed over Atlantic ocean. That was either posted here, or an article that was posted here. I dunno.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:39 AM
1. Marseille
2. Galland
3. Hartmann

LW had the best pilots in the war, they flew outdated planes, had to answer to a incompetent Goring, and fought againts 3 air force US,Brit,Russian. To say anything that theyre equal to all other pilots is rubish. Against all odds when the war was turning sour they fought hard if not harder then the beginning of the war. When all is said is done will all remember the great LW aces i doubt anyone will remember much about the american,brit or russian ace.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:47 AM
not right finns has much more obsoletely plane fly and have with brester 35 killratio

that means by american logic this is the best fighter ww2

and interesting finns,rumainia,ungarn,bulgarn etc have too very good killratio against russia and have not experience advantage

it was not only experience too bad russia plane at begin until 43

in spain has rata lose the air rule as 109 came,

and the 109 pilots has not experience advantage in spain,
contrary the rata pilots has there more experience

and despite lose



Message Edited on 07/05/03 03:00AM by Skalgrim

Message Edited on 07/05/0303:01AM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:55 AM
Well for Brewster Finns had experience from Winter War.


And the best pilot was Jorma Sarvanto of course! He scored 6 kills in five minutes!

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


-jippo

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:44 AM
Stop argueing!
Hartmann. period
Many of the Lw pilots, obtained alot of kills during first 2 years of russian campaigns.
In the case of Hartmann, except a I-16, 3 U-2 and one R-5, he shot down oly LA5, La7, P-39,etc.
85 La5, 8 La7, 26 P-39 shot down until the 150 kill,.
The major part of his victories was obtained in 1943 and 1944, when the russian alredy becamed more experienced and, especialy, more numerous then the LW.
Anyway, this guy was capable to shot down a plane with only ONE 20mm bullet, so....

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:56 AM
I think Baer was shot down about a dozen times in his career. Was he better than Joachim Muncheberg, or just luckier? Who can ever know? Would Marseille continued to flourish against overwhelming numbers of quality aircraft, as opposed to the Hurricanes and P-40s his reputation was built upon? Doubtful.

There were many, many highly skilled fighter pilots. To try to decide which was best is pointless. Opportunity and plain luck play too large a role to allow any of us to know who was better than who.

How do you compare a Priller with a Hartmann? Different enemies, different conditions, different responsibilities. Or Baer, who was productive in every fighter type, including jets, with Tony Hackl, who may have been the most successful pilot on the Western Front in the last year of the war? Marseille spent his entire career basically as a hunter, while Oesau was crushed by his responsibilities as a geshwaderkommodore. Which was the better fighter pilot? I don't know, and neither does anybody else. Nobody, even their fellow pilots, saw all of them in combat. It's all speculation.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:20 AM
Ya know what I find funny? Everyone here in this thread is totally forgeting facts. Lets name a few:

1. Most are saying top LW aces purely because of score. Compare their scores with aces of both Britian and the U.S. who were circuited through their tours of duty and sent home, or to trainer status or war bond rallies. If the Americans were in the war from 1939-45 and didn't circuit home, their scores would have had huge numbers too. Japanese, Russian and Germans fought the whole war, where as others spent tours, which equaled less time, which equals less combat sorties.


2. Where are the Japanese pilots? Sakai? Nishizawa? Iwamoto? Tanimizu?


3. Where is Bader? Sailor Malan? Robert Tuck, for christ's sake?!?


4. No one really mentions RAll, even though it was by his hand that most of the high ranking LW aces were taught. Galland was good, but not the best. Don't think I don't like Galland, I collect his stuff personally, but he was a great pilot, great leader, but even he said that Marseille was better.


I would have liked to seen more thinking in some of these answers. For my money, Rall, Marseille, Tuck, Boyington, Nishizawa, in no particular order.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 06:05 AM
Hedus wrote:
- Ya know what I find funny? Everyone here in this
- thread is totally forgeting facts. Lets name a few:
-
- 1. Most are saying top LW aces purely because of
- score. Compare their scores with aces of both
- Britian and the U.S. who were circuited through
- their tours of duty and sent home, or to trainer
- status or war bond rallies. If the Americans were in
- the war from 1939-45 and didn't circuit home, their
- scores would have had huge numbers too. Japanese,
- Russian and Germans fought the whole war, where as
- others spent tours, which equaled less time, which
- equals less combat sorties.
-
-
What leads you to believe that USAAF, USN and RAF pilots would have had huge scores if they had been allowed to fight till death, nervous breakdown, incapacitating wounds, grounded because you're too valuable as a war hero or promotion? After all the VSS, IJN and IJAAF pilots certainly did not come any where near producing 5,000 5+ aces as the Luftwaffe is purported to have done nor the insanely high scores of the top Luftwaffe scorers yet fought under a similar scheme as the Luftwaffe.

Also the idea that there was a hard core of Luftwaffe pilots that fought throughout the war is silly and unsubstantiated considering most of the top scorers entered the war as late as 1942. A lot of BOB aces were eventually promoted out of combat (Molders, Gallad, Priller, come to mind), as were Barbarossa aces such as Gollob and Trautloft. Good god Germany produced so many 100+ aces that most of them are unknown, never mind 5+ 20+ 40+ etc never mind the psychological strength to actually preform 200 plus combat missions.

Fact is the Luftwaffe system was geared to produce aces and it did so with remarkable success that even superficially similar Soviet and Japanese systems could not match.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 06:29 AM
Look, why everyone is saing that the germans are the best?
Because they were!
After 1942, they were outnumbered, they were fighting against tehnicaly superior enemies,but still, they fought better.
What value sistem the alies had?
In RAF, USAF, a pilot became an ace when he had 6 kills.
In LW and axis airforces, a pilot with 6 victories was a poor one!
Ok, Bong was an ace, but would he lived more than one day if he would fought in Europe? Don't think so...
What's the good to shot down 40 Japs in the Pacific?
Don't get me wrong, but a Zero stand no chance against a P-38.
Firs it has no speed, they were incapable to dive without disintegrateing, and it had no armour.
What so great shooting down a "paper" plane how the zero and other jap planes was(no armour), when in Europe, RAF and VVS had to fight with heavy armoured planes like 190 or 109?
There were alot of US "aces" with P-38, shot down By Romanian pilots in inferior planes like IAR-81, so...
The LW pilots deserved every kill they got.period

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:32 AM
I'm not quite sure why some people are pushing the view that German pilots were intrinsically better than Allied ones.

If you believe that, you have to explain it. Why were they better? Superior aircraft? Superior training? Or superior just because they were German?

My own view is that some German pilots performed very well because early in the war they met less experienced pilots often with inferior aircraft. A number of very good pilots benefited from this and built up their skills to a point where, when they met equivalent aircraft and well-trained pilots, they could still survive and score.

But this edge was not a guarantee of victory though, and this core of experienced pilots was slowly erroded as the war progressed with few new pilots surviving long enough to join it.

The situation for the Japanese was similar but even worse. Initially their pilots were at least the equal of the Luftwaffe's pre-war cadre but they had fewer and more hastily trained pilots joining it as replacements and reinforcements.

-------------------------------------

Swarms of Mosquitoes flew into Reich territory on an average of more than ten nights a month. Beginning with October [1944] these swarms grew into larger formations of 60-80 aircraft, against which the Luftwaffe could do hardly anything. In July three of these 'wonder-birds' were destroyed by He 219s.of which only one was near its operational ceiling.as a result, and also because of high losses.the Uhu Mosquito hunt was discontinued. From that time onwards the He 219s themselves became victims of British long-range night fighters.

Gebhard Aders, History of the German Night Fighter Force

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:16 AM
the best true fighter pilot was marseilles bar none. there was no other fighter pilot with his accuracy. read the reports of what he did. to read it is to still not believe it. he was so good you read his stories and say to yourself....no this must be wrong that is IMPOSSIBLE...really. the luftwaffe had huge kill counts due to circumstances...even hartmann had 352 kills only because he flew so many combat missions. marseilles got his kills due to mixing it up in t and b fights . he was psycho. truly fearless. with great reason. there was no better at dogfighting than him. if he could see your plane at any angle of deflection you were dead. even the german aces were all flabbergasted at his kills and how he got them. look him up on the net. and be shocked. im the biggest usa red white and blue guy here but no us pilot could beat this guy. none. of course most of us are descended from germans anyway.



Message Edited on 07/05/0309:35PM by RedDeth

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:16 AM
Mr_Nakajima wrote:
- I'm not quite sure why some people are pushing the
- view that German pilots were intrinsically better
- than Allied ones.
-
- If you believe that, you have to explain it. Why
- were they better? Superior aircraft? Superior
- training? Or superior just because they were German?

German pilots had a 'hunting' mentality. Individual scores counted for a lot - to be an 'experte'. This attitude was far less prevalent in allied forces.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:21 AM
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/hanstate.html OK thats the link. read that story and come back posting about great us and british and jap pilots. you wont trust me. hartmann was a babe in the woods next to marseille. and note that story was written by a USAF pilot.


Message Edited on 07/05/03 08:32AM by RedDeth

Message Edited on 07/05/0308:35AM by RedDeth

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:36 AM
bump

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 09:54 AM
Mr_Nakajima wrote:
- I'm not quite sure why some people are pushing the
- view that German pilots were intrinsically better
- than Allied ones.
-
- If you believe that, you have to explain it. Why
- were they better? Superior aircraft? Superior
- training? Or superior just because they were German?
-
-

That's called putting words into another's mouth, it's generally considered bad form and quite intellectually dishonest.

Again it was mentioned that the Luftwaffe system was geared to creating aces or "Experts" as part of the wider role of the Luftwaffe in insuring air superiority and thereby intervening directly to the benefit of friendly ground forces. You're the one introduced the straw man idea of Germens as intrinsically better pilots. Again it has to be pointed out that with similar systems the Japanese and the Soviets never managed to create such a cadre and sustain it throuough the war inspite of fighting a two front war.

RichardI
07-05-2003, 12:15 PM
nicli wrote:
BTW, why Bob Johnson and not Gabreski ?

I'm not dissin' the accomplishments of anyone else including the great German aces. I think I admire Johnson because of the physical abilities he seemed to have that no one else had. And, he was a loner. He got in trouble with Gabreski on more than one occasion for being a "lone wolf".
Check the link below and it will become apparent that this question is not as straightforward as it might seem.

http://users.accesscomm.ca/magnusfamily/ww2.htm

Rich /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<Center>http://www.ghosts.com/images/postimages/THUNDERBOLT.jpg <Center>I've got 140 109's cornered over Berlin!

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:19 PM
Bastables wrote:
- That's called putting words into another's mouth,
- it's generally considered bad form and quite
- intellectually dishonest.
-

Sorry Bastables, I didn't have any intention of putting words into peoples mouths - I was using hyperbole to try and prod people into explaining their thoughts more. Apologies if it didn't come across that way. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

-------------------------------------

Swarms of Mosquitoes flew into Reich territory on an average of more than ten nights a month. Beginning with October [1944] these swarms grew into larger formations of 60-80 aircraft, against which the Luftwaffe could do hardly anything. In July three of these 'wonder-birds' were destroyed by He 219s.of which only one was near its operational ceiling.as a result, and also because of high losses.the Uhu Mosquito hunt was discontinued. From that time onwards the He 219s themselves became victims of British long-range night fighters.

Gebhard Aders, History of the German Night Fighter Force

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 12:50 PM
Mr_Nakajima wrote:
- Bastables wrote:
-- That's called putting words into another's mouth,
-- it's generally considered bad form and quite
-- intellectually dishonest
Look, all I'm saying is that the germans( togheters with Finns, Romanians) were a "better quality " fighters.
The were capable to fight against a superior(from almost all points of view) enemy, and still win.
The alies usualy obtained their victories due to superior number, while the Axis didn't had this advantage.
My point here is(I dont wanna offend any US), that you cannot compare Bong with Hartmann or Bar, or McGuire with "Bazu"Cantacuzino..
The first ones were simply given better planes to fight against a inferior enemy, while the others did exactly the oposite...
The only thing that LW didn't had was strategic capabilities And so I accept they coundn't won a strategic war, like WW2 becamed after 1941.


"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 02:59 PM
nicli wrote:

- Best american fighter pilots (though in the Pacific,
- given the overclaim rate, it is difficult to know
- who actually had the highest score).

"Given the over claim rate?" (Rolls eyes.)

What makes you think the "overclaim rate was any more for Americans than it was for the Germans? Bias?

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/LT150.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:02 PM
Douglas Bader - He had no legs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hot Space

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 03:11 PM
hotspace wrote:
- Douglas Bader - He had no legs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ya but he had those things to replace them(I forgot the word).
Rude flew with only ONE legg, BTW there were also some pilots who flew with legg replacers long before Bader.

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 04:45 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- What makes you think the "overclaim rate was any
- more for Americans than it was for the Germans?
- Bias?

Hello Skychimp,

I think all he is saying is that in the Pacific this was true. From what I've read both Japanese and Allied forces overclaimed more in the Pacific than in Europe, the reasons being:

a) that the standard late war Allied tactic was a quick firing pass followed by regaining altitude for another run, thus allowing little time to observe results;

b) the terrain was mostly uninhabited, jungle, or sea, making confirmation of kills by finding a wreck very difficult at times.

As far as I know in Europe the ratio of claimed to actual kills was about the same for all sides. But I'm sure you know this already /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

-------------------------------------

Swarms of Mosquitoes flew into Reich territory on an average of more than ten nights a month. Beginning with October [1944] these swarms grew into larger formations of 60-80 aircraft, against which the Luftwaffe could do hardly anything. In July three of these 'wonder-birds' were destroyed by He 219s.of which only one was near its operational ceiling.as a result, and also because of high losses.the Uhu Mosquito hunt was discontinued. From that time onwards the He 219s themselves became victims of British long-range night fighters.

Gebhard Aders, History of the German Night Fighter Force

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 05:46 PM
AcePilots.com will tell you.......Erich Hartmann had 352 kills on the German side. American side was Richard Bong who had 40 kills in a P-38.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 05:47 PM
AcePilots.com will tell you.......Erich Hartmann had 352 kills on the German side. American side was Richard Bong who had 40 kills in a P-38.




nicli wrote:
- Thinking about aces, particularly german ones (the
- scores (and skills) of the allied pilots, US,
- Brtish, or soviet ones high as they were cannot
- compare to these of the LW veterans who flew
- hundreds of sorties), I found that they are very
- difficult to compare to each other : how would
- Hartmann or Nowotny have done in the West ? Would
- Priller or Marseille have survived in the East ?
-
- This is a difficult question since the way the air
- war went was very different from one front to the
- other, as can be seen by the number of aces killed
- or wounded a short time after changing fronts
- (Nowotny, Wilcke (from East to West), but also
- Schnell, or Homuth (from West to East)).
-
- Finally perhaps the best pilots were the ones who
- could adapt to any combat environment, and in among
- these Heinz Baer seems to be the best or among them
- : 94 kills in the East, 127 kills in the West, he
- scored during the phoney war in 1939-1940, over
- France in 1940, over the UK in 1940, over the USSR
- in 1941-1942, over Africa in 1943, over Italy in
- 1943, and over Germany in 1944-1945.
-
- From the escorts of the phoney war to the jet combat
- over Germany (16 kills on Me-262), the guy adapted
- to every combat situation on any type of aircraft
- (Me-109D, Me-109E, Me-109F, Me-109G, Fw-190A,
- Me-262A, or Me-262C (he was the only one to score a
- kill (a P-47) with this one)).
-
- Impressive record, isn't it ? Does antone has an
- opinion on who could have an even more impressive
- one ?
-
-

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 06:10 PM
Its has to be a german ,molders,maraellie( however you spell it ),thats all i can say .The americans had such massive odds in their favour its hard to take them seriously .One small note though iam not claiming that he was the best piolt is Johnny Johnson who had 39 kills for the RAF and only ever once returned from a mission with any gunholes in his plane .Galland for example was shot down at least four times

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 07:46 PM
Brewsters hardly fought in winter war...they came that late. But yes, Brewster pilots did miracles. Even as late as 1944 they managed to take down a whole bunch of Soviets.

I think Hartmann was one of the best, definately. A few Finns are a must on this list...Hans Wind, Ilmari Jutilainen and Jorma Sarvanto (the mircleman of winter war...6 kills in five minutes...).

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:20 PM
Yes, SturmFuhrer42 has got the best picks IMHO .

Marseille : 17 kills in one day , he was a loner , and he loved American jazz (black music they called it). Had a discipline problem , like all great fighter pilots .

Galland : An excellent tactician , pilot , and he had the balls to stand up to Goering (the fat one). He also saw the Me-262 for what it could've been , Germany's savior against the allied bombers .

Hartmann : 352 kills speaks for itself .

Another one of my favorites is Werner Molders . Galland said that had he not been killed in a flying accident( he was traveling to Berlin to attend Ernst Udet's funeral
when the pilot of the bomber he was in crashed on take off)
he would have been the most highest scoring . Galland even claimed that Molders was a far better pilot than himself .
Who knows ? His death actually put Galland in charge of all fighters in the Luftwaffe , a position Galland did not want .

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 08:53 PM
How about Erich Rudorffer? He excelled on all fronts, and was very similar to Bar....and he had 13 victories in one sortie! He finished just ahead of Bar with 222 victories during the war, scored well in the west, and had 12 (?) kills flying with JG-7. Anyone read Mike Spick's "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces?" He does a comparision at the end of the book, and his conclusion comes down to Bar and Ruforffer, for alot of the reasons noted by others during this thread. i.e., success on all fronts, differing conditions, aircraft, etc. Rudorffer was considered by many to be on the level of Rall and Marseille as a deflection shot.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:33 PM
has Anyone read the link to Marseille? after reading and combining it with the title of thread which is basically who was THE best fighter pilot of ww2 ? then there can BE only one....an were not talkin bout the movie highlander. read this link. http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/hanstate.html the best stuff is in the second half...



Message Edited on 07/05/0309:34PM by RedDeth

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:46 PM
IMHO, Marseille would not have lasted long fighting in the west or east. He was a dogfighter, could maneuver with the best of them, but when faced with a hundred Mustangs or La-5s his dogfighting or shooting skills would not have saved him.
Take Hartmann as an example, he never tried to dogfight in the classic sense, and survived the war with the highest kill total of any pilot.

----------------------------------
=38=Backfire
Starshii Leytenant - 38. OIAE

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 10:51 PM
who would win in a fight with hartmann vs marseille? remember marseille would see hartmann first. and have the advantage. his eyes were unparalleled in distance. and backfire you logic is flawed. marseille could see the 100 american planes first. then he would engage and climb away or dive away...read the story. he was too experienced to fail at what you describe. the desert war was the most difficult front for the germans it was said.

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:02 PM
IMO Marseille was the RBJ of the luftwaffe.


It was not about how well you can turn and burn that let pilots survive the war. It was the discipline of always attacking at an advantage and not taking stupid risks. Hartmann had this discipline, Marseille did not.
With the way he fought I think it was luck that got him to where he was.


----------------------------------
=38=Backfire
Starshii Leytenant - 38. OIAE

XyZspineZyX
07-05-2003, 11:13 PM
lol@backfire! goot one man....RBJ of the luftwaffe...please no one coin that phrase....yikes

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 12:38 AM
Hmmm,

We'll I think my answer is here on my sig. McCampbell had the highest shootdown kill in one sortie, 9 and 7 in another. He trained deflection shooting to a fine art.. cutting tow ropes carrying the target planes (instead of the target planes..)

From the sounds of Marseilles, it appears to my reading he wouldn't run away from a fight up against McCampbell, or Yeager.. and might have come out ahead.. dunno..

Not sure all the high-scoring aces would charge into the fight to the finish.

Courage and skill, and the ability to perform are in my criteria, not numbers...

" The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down ": General Chuck Yeager, USAF, describing his first confrontation with a Me262 - - -
" Aggressiveness was a fundamental to success in air-to-air combat and if you ever caught a fighter pilot in a defensive mood you had him licked before you started shooting ": Captain David McCampbell, USN, leading U.S. Navy ace in W.W.II.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:58 AM
The best of the LW were trained very well. But to say they were the only was is complete B.S.

The top U.S. pilots had HUNDREDS of hours in trainers and fighters before thrown into combat. They were as well trained as the top LW pilots, and had they fought as long as the LW pilots did, would have racked up enormous scores too.

The ETO bias really shows here when no U.S. or japanese pilots are named, and shows that you are not gonna get a fair answer from anyone. To say the LW didn't overclaim is pure niavity. LW were more stringent on their claiming, but even Mike Spick said there was overclaiming by the LW.

Score does not clarify who is the best, not by a long shot. Marsielle was great, but his score of 13 or so in one day was against P-40s and Hurricanes, both of which had tropical filters applied to their planes, which greatly reduced the manueverability of each plane. The tropical filter applied to the 109 was nothing compared to the allied filters.

So many pilots had flying abilities that you'll never hear about that it is impossible to even be close to fair. Stanford Tuck was an incredible pilot. Sailor Malan was a deadly shot with the 20mm cannon. Sakai shot down Hellcats while fighting malaria and dysentary.

LW pilots in the east called it a "Fighter pilot's Heaven" as the Russains were inexperenced early in the war, and if you were shot down, odds were you could land your plane on the flat plains and walk back to base. Do you think that Hartmann would have survived in the Pacific where being shot down and living was against the odds, let alone being shot down many times? To say that he would have is to be ignorant of the nature of the Pacific Theatre.

Last of all, could ANY of those LW pilots land on a carrier? At night? In a storm?

Use some brains. The answer lies far away from just having high scores.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:40 AM
The question that if LW pilots could land on a carrier is dumb, why are you so sure the couldn't???
If US. brits, and Japs, could, why they couldn't?? " use some brains". Nobody says that the alied pilots weren't trained enough...
Did **** could land on a carrier?
You must know how fragile was 109's landing gear, and if they could land it On muddy russians airfields, covered withsnow and ice, without brokeing it, then they for sure could land more resistent aircrafts on carriers.
You should know that germans too were designeing carriers, an therefore the Me109T, and german pilots succeded in landing it, despite his fragility, on short enohgh runways..
The alies always had some advantages against their enemy.
I'm not saying there were no good, Mein got, Hartmann was shot down 16 times, ans I doubt that everytime the one that shot him down was an ace...
Explaine this why an alied pilot with 6 victories was an ace, but a geman rone with , let' say...18 victories was an usual pilot???
Bong shot down atleast 10 bombers(I dunno have exact numbers) that't 25% of his victories Hartmann shot down just a few bombers, and even so, you cannot compare the Zero-sen wth the La5..
Yes the russians were inexprienced early in the war, but Hartmann obtained his kills since 1943!
Hartmann ssshot down in Pacific??? no way, by who, by Zero's??
So what, Alex Vraciu was shot down, and he makeit back...
Il give you a comparision: 10 jun 1943 250 P-38 "aces" from the western front, attacked rafineries near Ploiesti, and the Popesti-Leordeni airfield there: in less than 10 min, 23 of those that attacked the air field were derstroyed by IAR-81's!, BTW, the americans were numerical superior, and a P-38 is still better than an IAR-80...
That, excepteing the rest of plane lost during their attac on rafineries. The IAR pilots, were pilots from the eastern front, that probably couldn't land on a carrier...
If you keep the proportions, that's equivalent with the "Mariana's Turkey shot"...."use some brains"...
Hope yu'l read some history before posting here in the future.
Have a plesant read!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:48 AM
The best fighter pilot is the virtual pilot.....
nobody hurted....

my 2 cents
Derzasi

img src="C:\Documents and Settings\Danilo\Meus documentos\Fotos de Quadros\Hudson2p_internet.jpg"

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 04:13 AM
Derzasi wrote:
- The best fighter pilot is the virtual pilot.....
- nobody hurted....
-
- my 2 cents
- Derzasi
-
- img src="C:\Documents and Settings\Danilo\Meus
- documentos\Fotos de Quadros\Hudson2p_internet.jpg"
-
-

Correct!
"Your URL" means that you have to upload that picture on a server before , it won't work just by wrighteing the picture adress on your computer.


"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 04:41 AM
Well Von Zero, I took a while to read your thread and understand it, a period that would have been shorter if anything was spelled right. Here we go:

Start with fact. NO LW PILOTS EVER LANDED ON A CARRIER. Nor were they ever trained to. But Navy pilots, both U.S. and British did. Hence one more skill that they had that the LW pilots NEVER had.

But you seem to think score is all there was to being good. No skills involved I guess.

Also, U.S. pilots were aces after 5 planes downed. 18 was not uncommon for a LW pilot because they flew the ENTIRE war. Had a U.S. pilot flown the entire war, 18 kills would have been common too? Do you understand the math involved?
How many years did Bong fly? 2 years? So, lets say he takes down 20 a year. Now lets compare 20 a year, using Gallands tour of duty of 1939-1945, 6 years. So, 6 years with 20 kills a year, thats 120. Thats more than Galland. See the comparison yet, or am I spelling too correctly for you? Lets throw in the fact that Galland was shot down many times, and Bong maybe once if that. Are you seeing the comparison yet?

Lets also bring up the fact that early on the Russian front, it was a LW's dream. Untrained pilots in crappy planes were meat on the table for LW pilots. But when the VVS started organizing and having trained pilots with superior machines, the LW scores dropped dramatically. Alot of the LW eastern front men where transfered to the western front, where they didn't exactly score like they used to.


I also find your P-38 ideas amazing. Those P-38s were early modeled Lightnings, and were not good planes. 109s easily turned inside of them, they could not dive without compressing. They were pulled out of the ETO due to lack of performance till the later models came along. The IAR-80 was mistaken for the 190 by allied pilots.

Let me know when you crack those history books, or finally find out that different models of the same planes performed rather differently.

To ignore the Pacific Theatre is to show ignorance of Fighter Pilots.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:44 AM
Von_Zero wrote:

- I'm not saying there were no good, Mein got,
- Hartmann was shot down 16 times, ans I doubt that
- everytime the one that shot him down was an ace...


Eric Hartmann did have to crash land and bailout on a few occasions in his career, but never as a result of being shot down by an enemy fighter pilot.



<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=200 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 05:57 AM
rgr that. that guys an idiot. hartmann wasnt shot down 16 times. i dont think he was EVER shot down. not once

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 06:25 AM
Hedus wrote:
- -
--
-
- Lets also bring up the fact that early on the
- Russian front, it was a LW's dream. Untrained
- pilots in crappy planes were meat on the table for
- LW pilots. But when the VVS started organizing and
- having trained pilots with superior machines, the LW
- scores dropped dramatically. Alot of the LW eastern
- front men where transfered to the western front,
- where they didn't exactly score like they used to.
-
-
-

For one so adamant in pointing out others perceived lack of understanding of Pacific aces you show remarkable information gaps in ETO either that or you are consciously being disingenuous to prove your jingoistic point.

For instance Gallad did not fly for the whole war, during 1942 he was all but grounded due to his rank and hero status. Also the highest scoring ace Hartmann opened his books when the Soviets upped numbers, technical superiority and trained pilots during 1943. Hartmann was also never the recipient of the gruelling and extensive pre and early war training of early war Luftwaffe pilots. Most of the top Luftwaffe scorers began opening their books during and after Russian aviation "superiority."

The East and western front air war was so dissimilar that ace Kanal front pilots and units suffered quite badly when moved east, similar to pilots shifted West.

I suggest that you yourself "crack" some east front books open.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 06:57 AM
Red death, Hartmann was shot down the first time he downed a plane, an Il-2. And he was shot down BY the Il-2. read Aviation History, either feb or march issue. It's an interview with Hartmann before he died. He was shot down NUMERUOS times.

Bastables, I used Galland as an example. Many other LW pilots could have been used, many flew before the war in the Condor Legion.

Lets also take into consideration that Hartmann was trained by some of the most expereinced LW pilots that ever flew and fought, so you might say his back was covered quite well, and he was still was shot down more times than almost all Pacific pilots, BOTH allied and axis.

Did Hartmann have the physical hardships that Sakai did? Sakai has one eye, suffers dysentary and malaria, flies with the shivers, and still shot down Hellcats, all while flying "inferior" Zeroes!

Bastables, let me set you straight on some things. I have seen and talked to Rall, I have met and talked to Stigler. I have asked endless question of these men about both western and eastern theatres. I am not a noob. Your assertation that "most" of the top LW scorers opened their books after 1943 is just plain wrong. Maybe it should also be pointed out that Hartmann joined the LW in 1941 and was sent to JG52 in 1942. He was there well before the VVS rebuild.

As to the Marseille option, there is some debate as to Marseille claims. My friend Dave "Prophet" Williams, his book review site lists this from his review of a book about Marseille: "Despite the controversy that has surrounded some of Marseille's claims, the author chooses to ignore the debate." This site is at: http://www.aviation-booklist.com/axispilots.html

Bastables, I know my eastern front stuff, because I have heard it from the horses mouth.

Now go take a time out. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 07:10 AM
You better read book about Joachim Marseille.

Regards
SnowLeopard

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 07:18 AM
WereSnowleopard, I have. I listed him in my top 5 a few posts back. You can find it there.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 07:35 AM
Hedus wrote:
-
- Bastables, I used Galland as an example. Many other
- LW pilots could have been used, many flew before the
- war in the Condor Legion.
-
-

A very poor example meant to prove a point, almost akin to lying in order to prove your argument....

Hartmann was sent in Oct of 1942
He began scoring heavily during Kursk when the tide has turned against the Luftwaffe.

Helmut Lipfert later wrote the following words about the air battle over Kuban 1942/43 of which Hartmann was a part of before Kursk:
"Things did not go well. (.) There were few contacts with the enemy but many losses. And it was not just the beginners and young pilots who failed to return, but some of the old hands as well."

Did Saki score 62 Aircraft in one month as Graf did?

Did Saki score 115 Aircraft in 333 combat sorties flying the worst 109G variant as Hartmann did?

It's also interesting that you denigrate Luftwaffe flyers due to early war training and or combat experience yet refer to Saki as better. Interesting considering the Great man had been flying combat missions since 1934.


You state that you've heard it from the horses mouth, yet your ranting is based on tenuous examples including a made up one around Galland, this is you best proof, the one that springs to mind first? I'm sorry but why should any one bother to agree with your tendentious argument after a silly misrepresented Galland example?




Message Edited on 07/06/0307:39PM by Bastables

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 07:56 AM
Made up? Now your just being silly. If Galland is considered one of the best, then his timeline can be used as an example.

Don't give me that "bad 109 variant" bs. Hartmann, as others, chose to stay with the 109 because it was their choice. Are you saying that he would have done better in the 190, which has different flight characteristics and altitude limitations? Pure conjecture to say that he would. He and Rall stayed with the 109 because that was their plane.

Foss one a Medal of honor in a Wildcat, yet that plane was inferior to the Axis planes of the time. Does that make him the best?

Maybe if Sakai DIDN"T have malaria he could shoot down that many planes. Maybe if Graf had to search the Pacific ocean like Pacific theatre pilots did he might not have been able to score so much. Maybe if he had to navigate over open ocean he might not had scored so many. But navigation is a skill, and skills don't count, just scores, right? If Hartmann had to walk hom eafter being shot down after his first kill in the Pacific, he might not have scored a second one.

This isn't a pising contest on what the eastern front was like. It is about comparing conditions, planes, skills, training. To not take into consideration the U.S., British or Japanese pilots is to make it a LW pising contest about score, and any fighter pilot will tell you it isn't about score, it's about skill. Even the LW pilots say that. They don't say "he was great, he shot down XXX amount of planes". They say "He had eagle eyes" or "He had great shooting skills".

If I give Hartmann anything, it is his best escape move, which was to go into a negative G dive to escape a pursuer. The negative G is much harder to take than a positive G, kicks in sooner, does longer lasting damage to a pilot, and is far more dangerous. It takes an Ironman to push into Neg Gs and hold it, and Hartmann could do it. Anyone who hasn't done real acrobatics doesn't know what it takes to do it. First time I pushed into a neg 2G push over I thought I was going to shoot out of the plane. Hartmann did 3-4G negs and lived through it. Thats a more impressive than his score anyday.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:09 AM
Hedus wrote:
- Made up? Now your just being silly. If Galland is
- considered one of the best, then his timeline can be
- used as an example.

No, you're being silly. Galland was not an active flyer for the entire 6 years of the war and you know it. Sorties flown would have been more rational, and better illustrated your point (which was valid).

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:47 AM
And dont forget the Aussies ,

This is a good read


http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/caldw/caldw.htm

No1RAAF_Pourshot

XO No1RAAF

http://www.froggy.com.au/edinkulelija/no1raaf/image/crest.gif


some are the hunters the rest are the hunted

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 09:52 AM
Hedus wrote:
- Made up? Now your just being silly. If Galland is
- considered one of the best, then his timeline can be
- used as an example.
-
- Don't give me that "bad 109 variant" bs. Hartmann,
- as others, chose to stay with the 109 because it was
- their choice. Are you saying that he would have
- done better in the 190, which has different flight
- characteristics and altitude limitations? Pure
- conjecture to say that he would. He and Rall stayed
- with the 109 because that was their plane.
-
-

Yes it was, the other 109 F G/14/10 versions had a clear margin of superiority over Soviet adversaries which the G-6 fighting La-5FNs and Yak-1bs did not possess

Kills are perhaps the most important indicator of for a fighter pilot, especially in a kill-focused organisation as the Luftwaffe. Being able to land on carriers and navigate over blue water are merely skills that lead up to the kill. The shoulda coulda woulda purported by you is just that. Some one able to fight through the pain of non lethal malaria is merely that, it's also not that remarkable since it's a situation that faces many more ground troops.

You want silly superficial pointless comparisons:
Sakai 1934-1945 68 kills
Hartmann oct1942-1945 352 kills

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:35 AM
Well when your talking about pilot "Skill", I would not put Hartmann in with the top aces. He never really used "skill". He never went into a dogfight were he did NOT have the advantage, and he would only get 1 pass in before he ran. He was great at gun-n-run, but that does NOT make him a skilled dogfighter. I think that would go to Bong or McGuire. Thank about it. They had the SKILL to dogfight single engine light and nimble jap aircraft in a large twin engine bomber intercepter. THAT takes SKILL! Also, what sort of Me-110 aces were there? I think that would also take skill. Also, the British aces needed a lot of skill during the BOB. Flying out numberd and inferior aircraft, they still beat back the Luftwaffa. But we never hear about any of them?

Gib

"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:23 AM
Gibbage

A skilled pilot is that one who knows when he should attack and when better stay away from a dogfight.

And McGuire is surely not the best referrence of a skilled pilot, someone who accepted dogfights in a 9 ton monster vs.lightweight fighters at tree top level and crashed because his a/c wasn't made for such kind of fights./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu es une tªte carée comme un sale boche!"

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 01:27 PM
RichardI wrote:
- nicli wrote:
- BTW, why Bob Johnson and not Gabreski ?
-
- I'm not dissin' the accomplishments of anyone else
- including the great German aces. I think I admire
- Johnson because of the physical abilities he seemed
- to have that no one else had. And, he was a loner.
- He got in trouble with Gabreski on more than one
- occasion for being a "lone wolf".

That's interresting, so it seems he was an american equivalent to pilots like Marseille or Rechkalov.

In fact, I don't rate Marseille as the best piot of WWII precisely because of this "lone wolf" character he had.

Those pilots, even though they had an almost absolute mastering of their plane (and because of this they were surely the most talented airmen) but, in my mind they didn't have such a strong influence on the whole situation as other had.

That's why I would rather choose great tacticians (such as Molders for Germany, Pokrishkin for the USSR, or Bader for Great Britain) or pilots who demonstrated they could fight in any conditions (such as Baer, Hackl, or Lang), and, as far as this is concerned it must be remembered that Marseille was shot down 3 times during BoB while achieving his first 7 kills (the way it went in North Africa was perfectly suited to the way he behaved, and he may not have proved so successful on another theater (cf. the famous "changing fronts syndrom" : e.g. : Marseille's commander in JG 27, Homuth (63 kills), was killed four days after having been posted on the Eastern front in 1944).

As far as the german scores are concerned, it must be remembered that their overclaim rate was, in the West similar that that of the 8th AF fighters (not the bombers whose claims had nothing in common with reality) : about 3:2, in the East it was slightly higher (because of the different way they fought, in much more confused low altitude furballs) : about 2:1 (or a little under that).

And it should be remembered that even with partially destroyed records on the allied side 80 percents of Molders' claims against the RAF can be confirmed and so do more than 100 of Marseille's ones.

When asked to explain these scores Clostermann once said : "When these guys survived, they acquired an incredible experience, you even had guys who fought firdt in Spain, then in Poland, in France, over Britain, over Africa, Russia,.. And there was nothing you could do when facing one of them. You could only feel him in a fight, like one could feel a predator turning around him, and avoid him at all costs".

That's the reason, experience, but it was also the "Achille's heel" of the LW as, 1., these pilots, being mintained on the front weren't used as instructors or posted elsewhere they could make the others benefit from their experience (except for a few ones like Nowotny, Galland,.. but nothing really organised), and 2., when one was killed (because they were still men who could fall in accidents or to a more numerous, luckier, or simply less battle-tired opponent), the shock on LW morale was enormous and the death of pilots like Marseille or Nowotny was hard to suffer for the LW.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 01:57 PM
galland has not fly from 39 through 45,

only at begin and at end

after his 100 victory he has rare fly combats 42-44 only without permit,then he has not allow to fly combats

later has he permit to fly combats in jg44 with jets

good book"the first and the last" write from galland


Message Edited on 07/06/0305:58PM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:14 PM
Gibbage1 wrote:
- Well when your talking about pilot "Skill", I would
- not put Hartmann in with the top aces. He never
- really used "skill". He never went into a dogfight
- were he did NOT have the advantage, and he would
- only get 1 pass in before he ran. He was great at
- gun-n-run, but that does NOT make him a skilled
- dogfighter. I think that would go to Bong or
- McGuire. Thank about it. They had the SKILL to
- dogfight single engine light and nimble jap aircraft
- in a large twin engine bomber intercepter. THAT
- takes SKILL! Also, what sort of Me-110 aces were
- there? I think that would also take skill. Also,
- the British aces needed a lot of skill during the
- BOB. Flying out numberd and inferior aircraft, they
- still beat back the Luftwaffa. But we never hear
- about any of them?
-
- Gib
-

Well, the P-38 was a single seat light fighter, even if twin engined and one could point out the fact Bong or McGuire had a faster, better armed, and better armored fighter, and that their tactics were not (at least for Bong) so different from those of Hartmann.

I think the best day-fighter ace on Me-110 had 38 kills, but the best night fighter one on the same plane had 121 kills.

It remains that in my mind, surviving 1404 combat sorties while being involved in 852 combats, and achieving 352 kills
is something that requires being skilled.

And, for BoB, I think everybody heard about Bader, Malan, Lacey, or others. The fact they are not often suggested as the most skilled pilots of WWII is linked to the fact that their scores are vastly inferior to those of the LW who was also outnumbered from 1942 onwards (though not engaged in massive engagements until 1943 but rather on intensive tactical war), scores which were achieved because the pilots who attacked the american B-17s or russian Il-2s in 1945 were sometimes the same that had fought the RAF in 1940.



PS : BTW, apart from Bader, another fighter ace of WWII had lost his legs before becoming so : Alexei Maresyev.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:30 PM
good pilots can bnz and dogfight

hartmann has too some ace shootdown at doghfight,

as hartmann lose his wingman capito,
the only wingman that he lose,through p39 that had altitude advantage

he has doghfight with this p39 pilot that has capito shotdown and defeat him,it was 26 victory p39 pilot

hartmann could both doghfight and bnz,but prefer bnz

and hartmann tatik to dive with great speed to his opponent and shoot at distance 50-30m need too skill

only handful pilots has so many nerve for this tatik and the brain to recognize that is the best way

and hartmann was one of the first that use this style with very success

in game can you not lose you live,when you collide with this tatik,you can fly again,
it need not nerve

hartmann jg52 has too fight against garde squadron,
2 garde squadron was station in the near jg52,
with the best ally pilots,

one was pokryschkin,perhaps best ally pilot



Message Edited on 07/06/0310:57PM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 02:33 PM
Hartman lost "one" wingman.Bong was known as a wingman killer.He lost 5 or 6 can't remember which.If all pilots had to fly the same amount of missions (which you can compare by multiplication).You will see that the LW still rules.Two points with the pacific,first that many missions you saw nothing but water.Second,because of their idiotic training (for a world war) the japanese had nothing except a few aces left by the beginning of 1943.I agree with one thing Hedus,that the zero was "not" a miracle plane.It was a "miracle" because it was a "carrier plane" in 1941.The only other country to have a better fighter for carriers would have been germany in 1941.The only british ace that was exceptional in my eyes was the one on malta,sorry I forget his name.In my opinion if you pick the top 25 the deck is stacked 20 to 5 for the LW.I'm talking major combatants I don't know enough about the finn's etc.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 03:07 PM
turenne wrote:
- The only british ace that was exceptional in my eyes was
- the one on malta,sorry I forget his name.In my
- opinion if you pick the top 25 the deck is stacked
- 20 to 5 for the LW.I'm talking major combatants I
- don't know enough about the finn's etc.
-

Are you talking about "Screwball" Beurling ?

He was a great pilot, but others were too.

Why is Pattle always forgotten ?

I know his real score is difficult to assess (the most precise account I saw until now listed 44 kills, with 8 more probables) because of the RAF's overclaim rate against the italians at the beginning of the war (e.g. : Pattle claimed 2 kills in a fight in which the RAF claimed 11, while the italians lost 3 planes) and because many of the RAF's documents from units in Africa and Greece in 1941 were lost.

But, nevertheless, it seems he was a really wonderfully talented pilot.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 06:45 PM
Without really wanting to get into a detailed maths discussion, a couple of things bear pointing out:

If you're flying for a side that is flying far greater numbers of total sorties flown by far more pilots and planes, the distribution of kills is likely to be much more even among pilots. Given that the allied aces were taken out of circulation after a certain amount of time - not by score but by sorties/time in theatre, it's even less surprising that the one side that expected its pilots to fly until they croaked had the higher individual kill tallies.

Sturmfuhrer, when all is said and done I think people are more likely to forget all about the axis aces, probably the second they look at an atlas and see Germany sitting squarely between the borders it was allowed to have by the allies.

Second - the post content and nicks on threads like this sometimes really make me shake my head about the mentality of some people here. Until I found this board I didn't think there were all that many more revolting things in the world than wrestlemania-like USAUSAUSA chest beating, but misty-eyed 3rd reich nostalgia really takes the cake.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:15 PM
Come on, people. The best of the best is DEFINITELY Johannes Nordmann. Come on, 570 kills !!! 570 CONFIRMED kills... Compared to him, Erich Hartmann was a miserable rookie, and I'm not even mentionning the rest.

Who's Johannes Nordmann ?

What do you mean who's Johannes Nordmann ? You don't know Johannes Nordmann ?

Well, maybe it's just because I created him in the Leningrad campaign /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:26 PM
For those of you that have read Trevor & Constable's Horrido, or the related books glorifying the German fighter pilot, I think it would be instructive to consider that in real terms, the Luftwaffe never suffered technical inferiority, like every other major Air Force in the war (sorry RAF fans, but the Spit was grossly undergunned and your pilots poorly trained at the outset of hostilities). There are cultural advantages to consider also. In central/Western Europe, it would appear to me that only the Germans and Austrians had anything like a hunting culture, which is to say that large portions of the male population were familiar with guns and shooting. Certainly the British had no such tradition; their working class types had had access to small arms restricted for a couple hundred years now, and the RAF's syllabus (sp?) certainly didn't include air to air gunnery before the war, if Johnson, Bader and Tuck's memoirs are to be believed. The fact that the RAF's top scorers in the early war were pretty heavily weighted towards New Zealanders and South Africans, particularly considereing their numbers, would seem to confirm this.

Now, as for great aces, Baer would be right up there, as would Hartmann, Rall, Barkhorn and Marseille. I do, however, think that score should not be the only qualifier; the US alone had at least a half dozen aces who scored every time they made contact with the enemy, and I suspect the Brits and Japanese and Russians had similar individuals in their ranks. These air forces had lots of combat pilots who never actually made air to air contact with the enemy. There just weren't enough German or Japanese planes to go around after late '42.

Take Don Blakeslee for example. Entered combat with the RCAF in mid '41, eventually ending up in the Eagle Squadrons by early '42, and continuing in constant combat until August of '44, he was easily the US combat hours champion. I think he had about 15 kills from RCAF and USAAF combined. Admittedly, he was a lousy shot, but he made very little contact for his time, because after mid '43, he had to go a lot farther to find the enemy than the Baers and Prillers had to go to find him.

Bong flew his first combat sorties in December of '42, continuing with one less than six month break through January of '45, and his Air Force commander made a special effort to keep him in (relatively) 'target rich' environments. He only got 40 kills credited to him, and by all accounts, he was very good at finding the enemy, and even better once contact was made. But even he had to hit the silk at least once, and had to land a badly perforated Lightning more than once after making contact with those lightly constructed slow Zeros and Oscars.

But I don't think he compares very well to Joseph Foss who rang up 26 kills in less than two months over Guadalcanal, or to David McCampbell, who got 34 in in less than six months (7 and 9 in single sorties) while running a Carrier Air Group and flew half his combat hours in TBFs or Helldivers. McCampbell in particular is an interesting story, because he was kept from combat in the early war because he was too valuable as a Landing Signals Officer on the WASP until it was sunk off Guadalcanal. Since many early war naval aviators recalled him as being in the same mold as Jimmy Thach and Butch O'Hare, he could easily have rung up a good twenty more kills with only slightly different circumstances.

The point I've taken so long to get to is this: it takes more than skill or talent or a good airplane to make a great ace. You still have to make contact, and while you're tagging your chosen victim, your buddies have to help keep you alive, and vice versa. The great ones didn't just run up big scores, they kept their buddies alive, and made them better too. On that score, the top Luftwaffe guys deserve company from the Brits (Bader, Malan, and Johnson, to name a few), the Yanks (Zemke Meyers, and Blakeslee in the ETO, and Lynch, Johnson, and McCampbell in Pacific), and the Soviets (Pokryshin is a good example) have some valid candidates too.

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" - LCOL Don Blakeslee, CO, 4th FG, March, 1944

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 08:35 PM
clint-ruin wrote:
- Second - the post content and nicks on threads like
- this sometimes really make me shake my head about
- the mentality of some people here. Until I found
- this board I didn't think there were all that many
- more revolting things in the world than
- wrestlemania-like USAUSAUSA chest beating, but
- misty-eyed 3rd reich nostalgia really takes the
- cake.
-

Well, we can often see bad faith in this forum (and people believing all they were told, or, in other situations, only what they were told by their side because they were the "good ones"), but in this thread I didn't see any 3rd reich nostalgic.

Second point, you are right about the fact that, on one side, the total number of kills was shared between many more pilots than on the other, but this doesn't change the fact that the few pilots who scored the kills for the axis side were sometimes really more dangerous and more likely to survive dangerous situations than their allied counterparts because of their enormous amout of battle experience (and this while the young pilots getting out of flying schools from late 1943 were likely to be killed before their had completed even a few sorties).

BTW, something that it's worth remarking is that, as far as allied aces are concerned, the soviets are most often forgotten while they had the highest scoring aces, US president FDR even once praising Pokrishkin (who officially scored 59 individual and 6 shared kills, but to these more than 20 probables (including 13 over Kuban, not confirmed because they fell on german held ground) can be added) as "the best among allied fighter pilots" (he was also given a watch marked to commemorate his kills while flying the Airacobra by the president of the Bell corporation).

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 09:08 PM
My sentiments exactly, only worded better!
Thank you clint-ruin.

Plus don't forget the early VVS pilots lacked radio coordination, flew in WWI style formations while LW had more efficient 2/4 combo, often were locked into low altitude patrols, started of with static attachment to army groups rather than fluidly responding enemy air formations, etc, etc.

And on the topic of kills, i'd wager the Stuka did more for the German war effort than all the "Expert" dogfighters. i know dogfights and kill counts always catch the eye...
But...
There was also a war on the ground. Don't forget the Great Patriotic War was different than island hopping or pure bomber hunting or tankbusting or strategic bombing etc etc.

No one pilot could do it all, no one plane could do it all. Maybe better to ask about who was the best angle fighter, deflection shot, luckiest man to escape after so many times being downed, exceptionally good at keeping a wingman alive, best teacher to squadmates, best tactical innovator?

And leave out the whole question of the skill involved in flying a Lancaster, Peshka, etc. Til the next sim/add-on.

Since this is an IL-2 board, i'll mention that Sturmovik pilots ought to be considered in the category here too as having flown well in the war. For all the complaints of the sniper AAA who'd really want to fly routinely into flak?

And since it is a sim i will mention that i am less likely to be killed if my escadrilla has two or three aces in it (no matter the planes involved) than when i follow orders and fly at 1500m as ordered just to be bounced on that first flight of the Lvov campaign.

Having said all that i'll contribute to the madness by saying don't forget about Boris Safanov!

"'Weapons are tools of ill-omen'. War is a grave matter; one is apprehensive lest men embark upon it without due reflection."

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:10 PM
In answer to the post that we who consider LW pilots some of the best in the world are weepy eyed nazi's.Does that mean that anyone who proposes the russian aces are dyed red commies happy to help stalin kill 25 million of his own people(10 million more than hitler seeing this is a scoring thread).Or that someone who puts forth japanese pilots is an emperor worshipper,and if you put forth english pilots you beleive that Gandhi should have been shot and england still ruled India.I would much rather be simming in the pacific(love japanese planes),and the moment somebody comes up with a sim as good as FB even with it's flaws.I will be.Personally I find the russian front boring but this is the best sim out there so here I am.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 10:33 PM
OK. This is about the 3rd time you have said this. Do you read ANY of my reply's or do you just keep posting this same BS because its how you want history to be? McGuire did not drop his drop tanks. THATS why he crashed. Not due to a limitation of the P-38!!!! Get it correct you nimrod!

Gib

KIMURA wrote:
- Gibbage
-
- A skilled pilot is that one who knows when he should
- attack and when better stay away from a dogfight.
-
- And McGuire is surely not the best referrence of a
- skilled pilot, someone who accepted dogfights in a 9
- ton monster vs.lightweight fighters at tree top
- level and crashed because his a/c wasn't made for
- such kind of fights

"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:12 PM
In my book any pilot that made it thru his tour of duty, made ace and lived to tell about it is the best.

It only takes one moment of unawareness or blind bad luck and you've got a one way ticket for the dirt. Charles "Chuck" Yeager was bounced by a German pilot that he never saw even after getting hit and was forced to bail from his P-51, after landing in Occupied France he had to escape via the Resistance into Portugal, which traded escaped pilots for oil with the United States.

http://www.redspar.com/redrogue/CraggerUbisig.jpg

About after 30 minutes I puked all over my airplane. I said to myself "Man, you made a big mistake." -Charles 'Chuck' Yeager, regards his first flight

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:20 PM
turenne,

i tried to bring this back to topic.

if i had time i would have looked up some links about the contribution Boris Safanov made. he spent a lot of time trying to teach the incoming pilots. personally i was trying to bring this back to what aspects makes a pilot good.

having failed in that...

one - i think it is dangerously sick to call this a "scoring thread" and bandy about the number of people killed by Hitler. Or the number of killed by Stalin.

two - ever consider that amidst the honest admirers of German engineering and those with a healthy respect for the tactics and skill of "Experten" there might be a few using the distinction between Nazism/the Reich and the German people as just a cloak for their real beliefs?

three - it is a false dichotomy to suggest that because one is opposed to the Reich that one must be a Communist.

four - how is this...

"Only a dead Indianer is a good Indianer!"

Now if i am an Indian and i see this... what am i to think when i see such a sig? accompanied by vociferous assertions that all things Reich-related were better?

Tell me there is a man called Indianer.
Ah. This makes it all better, my concern over a pun advocating genocide is unjustified because i take things too seriously.

While i consider that i ask you consider my suggestion regarding the flipping theme of the thread - what makes a good pilot?


Author: turenne
Rank: Over 10 Postings
Date: 07/06/03 09:10PM




In answer to the post that we who consider LW pilots some of the best in the world are weepy eyed nazi's.Does that mean that anyone who proposes the russian aces are dyed red commies happy to help stalin kill 25 million of his own people(10 million more than hitler seeing this is a scoring thread).Or that someone who puts forth japanese pilots is an emperor worshipper,and if you put forth english pilots you beleive that Gandhi should have been shot and england still ruled India.I would much rather be simming in the pacific(love japanese planes),and the moment somebody comes up with a sim as good as FB even with it's flaws.I will be.Personally I find the russian front boring but this is the best sim out there so here I am.

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:23 PM
theRealAntEater wrote:
- The one who escaped was Franz von Werra, the "escape
- king of Canada". He was killed in a flying accident
- over the north Sea in 1942.

Actually his death was never confirmed 100%.
But it's higly likely it was as you said.

I was asked once online if my weird alias was inspired by von Werra... the answer is no. It was inspired by a role-playing character from over 12 years ago.

I use a skin based on von Werra on some 109 models. But I usually add some purple and red, and the black tulip of Hartmann. This has nothing to do with my (lacking) aiming skill :-)

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:32 PM
Hedus you have ZERO knowledge regarding hartmann or aircombat. hartmann was not shot down on his first kill. his first kill WAS an IL-2 but he was not shot down. actually he got so close for the kill that some of the flaming debris from his kill hit or caught his engine on fire damaging his plane. he actually LANDED that plane. he didnt bail out. admittedly it was a crash landing. and your saying that he was shot down numerous time ? when
? where ? hedus i suggest you read The Blond Knight Of Germany before you spout any more incorrect dribble here. ps he was hit by flak a couple times chasing and killing low IL2s but he would belly land when that happened.



Message Edited on 07/06/0311:42PM by RedDeth

XyZspineZyX
07-06-2003, 11:55 PM
I think you took my post completely wrong someone on page 3 of the thread had accused the people myself included who thought that the LW pilots were the best in ww2 of being nazi's.Just because some people had refuted his arguments with the truth and logic.I was answering his statement about our loyalties if you will with a question .Roughly did he feel that that anyone else posting had ulterior motives or thoughts also.I should have kept my dander down but I was insulted,so I posted what I did.These dicussions ( best boxer,football player etc) always end the same way who you thought was good or great when the conversation started you still do.However they do put forth some arguments for future reading etc. so you can see the other point of view.There might be pro nazi's posting but until you find me at a meeting with those sicko's don't add me to the pile.If you are intelligent enough to fly the sim I naturally assumed you would be able to hold a "normal" conversation.I guess I was wrong.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 01:07 AM
Red death, I have 3 years experience in North American Top Gun in T-6s. I have more expereince than you'll ever hope to have.

Red Death, this is for you:

"The secret of Hartman's success was summed up in his advice to young pilots, "Fly with your head, not your muscles." Rejecting the strenuous thrust-and-parry tactics of traditional dogfighting as a waste of time and ammunition, he preferred to take his victim by surprise: He would bore in close and attack at point-blank range. A less skilled pilot would have almost surely collided with his adversary, but Hartmann possessed an uncanny knack for breaking away at the last possible second. In 825 instances of aerial combat, he was never wounded, and his plane was forced down only 16 times - and often it had been hit by debris from aircraft Hartmann had destroyed. "

This taken from: http://usfighter.tripod.com/hartmann.htm

Does that help? 16 times he went down. Gonna argue that one, too?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 01:15 AM
you said he was shot down . he was never shot down by an enemy plane. still waiting. you also said he was shot down on first kill. he hasnt been shot down ever.
. ps. my first time up in a T6 in modesto i did barrel rolls and loops with no queesiness. im talking about your knowledge of ww2 fighter pilots which is nonexistant. you may be an excellent t6 instructor though. stick to what you know .pps i would say almost all of his forced LANDINGS were due to debris from his own kill. thus he damaged his own plane and had to land. as in his first kill. maybe a couple times he was hit by flak when on the deck making a forced LANDING


Message Edited on 07/07/03 12:17AM by RedDeth

Message Edited on 07/07/0312:22AM by RedDeth

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 01:33 AM
Red deth, you aren't getting it yet. I have talked to Gabreski, Rall, Stigler, Kunkle, Olds, Boyington, Bruce Gamble, about 5 different Black sheep, Jerry Collinsworth, Mcworten, Kuwato, many bomber crews from the 100th BG. Red, this is what I do! One of my best friends in Canada interviews all the top WWII aces and tells me about them. I have gone to Dayton U.S. Air force Museum and Pensecola Naval Museum and talked to countless WWII pilots. Christ, 2 weeks ago I flew in a b-17 with a WWII B-17 pilot!


Maybe Hartmann wasn't shot down by the first Il-2, even tho I have to speculate that it was more than debri. But to say he was "forced" down 16 times and never because a plane shot him is against viable odds. Rall, who trained Hartmann was shot down even a couple times.

By the way, did you get the 262/109 take off/landing tips?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:12 AM
262 109 tips? i dont need those. i just cut to 0 throttle and bank till slow over runway cut engine and drop onto runway in jet. 109 is a simple zero throttle 100 percent prop and stop on a dime always using guns to slow down with engine off rolling on runway. always go to full open rad and landing flaps.p.s. all the pilots you talked to have been shot down i think. EXCEPT hartmann. i still consider Marseille a better pilot than hartmann. OR i should say a better marksman

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:23 AM
RedDeth wrote:
- rgr that. that guys an idiot. hartmann wasnt shot
- down 16 times. i dont think he was EVER shot down.
- not once


You're an idiot!!!
Harmann crash landed 16 times, well, true, iI didn't knew the cause wasn't enemy fighters! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:44 AM
My eyes did not see any implication that you were numbered amongst the swastika-adoring lot in clint-ruins post.

Doesn't mean it wasn't there but i'm just saying i didn't see it.

Your point about the British soldier and Ghandi was valid. If i fly a Normandie-Nieman campaign that doesn't speak to my view of the Vichy regime. It would be a digression to quibble about the divine ancestry of the Japanese emperor but i caught your drift on that. It was just that in comparing the Austrian corporal with the man in Moscow who spoke with a Georgian accent, your response mentioned certain things that seem like bad mojo to speak about in that context.

Granted it turns out i was wrong on where i was worried you were coming from. To be clear i think call someone a member of that crew to be Fighting Words.

Which is why i suggested that Usual misty-eyed Suspects might possibly include that dude who's sig always ---expletive deleted--- me off when i see it.

Back to my original babbling - i was trying to get people to avoid the "Lennox is better than Iron Mike is better than Ali is better than..." discussion. That's why i made mention of radio, flight formations,and so on.

And in the offline campaign - anybody here suddenly notice when you get three or more aces in a squadron it can be hard to get in a kill once the furball starts?
Or that it is a right royal pain to finish the next mission if ack-ack-flak wipes out your buddies because now you're the only pilot who has completed a sortie?

Finally just wondering how many studies have been done on how many aces sprung fully-formed from the head of Zeus and how many flew with other aces as they started their learning curve. Not just the hours of training involved but the aces around to teach them once shots were fired in earnest.







Message Edited on 07/07/0303:45AM by cascadingstyle

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:45 AM
Hedus wrote:
- Well Von Zero, I took a while to read your thread
- and understand it, a period that would have been
- shorter if anything was spelled right. Here we go:
-
- Start with fact. NO LW PILOTS EVER LANDED ON A
- CARRIER. Nor were they ever trained to. But Navy
- pilots, both U.S. and British did. Hence one more
- skill that they had that the LW pilots NEVER had.
-
- But you seem to think score is all there was to
- being good. No skills involved I guess.
-
- Also, U.S. pilots were aces after 5 planes downed.
- 18 was not uncommon for a LW pilot because they flew
- the ENTIRE war. Had a U.S. pilot flown the entire
- war, 18 kills would have been common too? Do you
- understand the math involved?
- How many years did Bong fly? 2 years? So, lets say
- he takes down 20 a year. Now lets compare 20 a
- year, using Gallands tour of duty of 1939-1945, 6
- years. So, 6 years with 20 kills a year, thats 120.
- Thats more than Galland. See the comparison yet,
- or am I spelling too correctly for you? Lets throw
- in the fact that Galland was shot down many times,
- and Bong maybe once if that. Are you seeing the
- comparison yet?
-
-
- Lets also bring up the fact that early on the
- Russian front, it was a LW's dream. Untrained
- pilots in crappy planes were meat on the table for
- LW pilots. But when the VVS started organizing and
- having trained pilots with superior machines, the LW
- scores dropped dramatically. Alot of the LW eastern
- front men where transfered to the western front,
- where they didn't exactly score like they used to.
-
-
- I also find your P-38 ideas amazing. Those P-38s
- were early modeled Lightnings, and were not good
- planes. 109s easily turned inside of them, they
- could not dive without compressing. They were
- pulled out of the ETO due to lack of performance
- till the later models came along. The IAR-80 was
- mistaken for the 190 by allied pilots.
-
- Let me know when you crack those history books, or
- finally find out that different models of the same
- planes performed rather differently.
-
- To ignore the Pacific Theatre is to show ignorance
- of Fighter Pilots.
-
-

Well, firt I suggest you to learn to read, then buy some glases to actualy see what you read, and BTW, after that
remove HUSTLER from the front of your monitor, and read something more aviation-releated. will ya?
Hartmann, as stated already got his kills since 1943.
Those P-38 ideeas are not mine.. they are facts that took place..
And they were not early modeled Lightnings, they were, P-38H, wich becamed operational in 1943(some sources indicates them as J models).
So what if the IAR-80 was mistaken for the 190?
You compared here Bong with Galland, well, wrong, first Galland didn't flew the entire war, second, I was talking about Hartmann here so be so kind to compare him to Bong..
let's see: Hartmann flew 3 years of war, 20 *3=60, and if we add to this that Hartmann flew against superior planes...
Fist Graduate your Highschool, then talk.
BTW, there were about 60 Bf 109T build, and they were used on airfields with short runway. So they trained pilots for this...
As I was saying... have a nice read.

"The show must go on..."

Message Edited on 07/07/03 06:50AM by Von_Zero

Message Edited on 07/07/0306:56AM by Von_Zero

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:51 AM
in terms of versatility its hard to go past Clive Caldwell with just under 30 kills but multiple kills against all 3 major axis powers German, Italian and japanese.


I am not sure how many other pilots couold claim kills against all three but I doubt there are many.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:09 AM
Your words:
"10 jun 1943 250 P-38 "aces" from the western front, attacked rafineries near Ploiesti, and the Popesti-Leordeni airfield there: in less than 10 min, 23 of those that attacked the air field were derstroyed by IAR-81's!, BTW, the americans were numerical superior, and a P-38 is still better than an IAR-80..."


This from http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/WWII/p-38/p38_info/p38_info.htm :

"The P-38J began production in mid-1943."

Von Zero, if they STARTED production in mid 43, they wouldn't have been in Europe yet in June. They would still have to be made and ferried across, and that in big enough numbers to be operational. They were F, G or H models, far from the superior J/L models.

As for the IAR/190 mix up, you don't know much about I.D.ing do you? You attack certain planes in certain ways due to their strengths and weakness.


Maybe you should have read farther about the 109T. ONly 10 were produced with carrier landing equipment, even though 60 were ORDERED. But because the German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin was taking to long, the rest were supplied WITHOUT carrier landing gear, keeping only the high lift wing with bomb racks to be used on short runways in Norway. Short runways are HARDLY a carrier deck.

Source:The Great Book of WWII Airplanes.

Kinda screws that idea, don't it?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:21 AM
Also, just a note. If I remember, the P-38's were carring 2x1000LB bombs on the way to the target when they were bounced by the IAR-80's. Early P-38's had 1 BIG flaw, and that they were big targets for bring bounced. #1, you an ID them from far away, and #2, it took a trained pilots a LONG time to get the P-38 into a fighting mode once they notice they were being bounced. This is demonstrated in a letter from the Commanding Officer of the 20th Fighter Group, to the 8th Air Force Headquarters. The letter spells out the problems faced by the P-38 Groups in clear.

20th Fighter Group Headquarters
APO 637 U.S. Army
(E-2)

3 June 1944

Subject: P-38 Airplane in Combat.

To: Commanding General, VIII Fighter Command, APO 637, U.S. Army.

1. The following observations are being put in writing by the undersigned at the request of the Commanding General, VII FC. They are intended purely as constructive criticism and are intended in any way to "low rate" our present equipment.

2. After flying the P-38 for a little over one hundred hours on combat missions it is my belief that the airplane, as it stands now, is too complicated for the 'average' pilot. I want to put strong emphasis on the word 'average, taking full consideration just how little combat training our pilots have before going on as operational status.

3. As a typical case to demonstrate my point, let us assume that we have a pilot fresh out of flying school with about a total of twenty-five hours in a P-38, starting out on a combat mission. He is on a deep ramrod, penetration and target support to maximum endurance. He is cruising along with his power set at maximum economy. He is pulling 31" Hg and 2100 RPM. He is auto lean and running on external tanks. His gun heater is off to relieve the load on his generator, which frequently gives out (under sustained heavy load). His sight is off to save burning out the bulb. His combat switch may or may not be on. Flying along in this condition, he suddenly gets "bounced", what to do flashes through his mind. He must turn, he must increase power and get rid of those external tanks and get on his main. So, he reaches down and turns two stiff, difficult gas switches {valves} to main - turns on his drop tank switches, presses his release button, puts the mixture to auto rich (two separate and clumsy operations), increases his RPM, increases his manifold pressure, turns on his gun heater switch (which he must feel for and cannot possibly see), turns on his combat switch and he is ready to fight. At this point, he has probably been shot down or he has done one of several things wrong. Most common error is to push the throttles wide open before increasing RPM. This causes detonation and subsequent engine failure. Or, he forgets to switch back to auto rich, and gets excessive cylinder head temperature with subsequent engine failure.

4. In my limited experience with a P-38 group, we have lost as least four (4) pilots, who when bounced, took no immediate evasive action. The logical assumption is that they were so busy in the cockpit, trying to get organized that they were shot down before they could get going.

5. The question that arises is, what are you going to do about it? It is standard procedure for the group leader to call, five minutes before R/V and tell all the pilots to "prepare for trouble". This is the signal for everyone to get into auto rich, turn drop tank switches on, gun heaters on, combat and sight switches on and to increase RPM and manifold pressure to maximum cruise. This procedure, however, does not help the pilot who is bounced on the way in and who is trying to conserve his gasoline and equipment for the escort job ahead.

6. What is the answer to these difficulties? During the past several weeks we have been visited at this station time and time again by Lockheed representatives, Allison representatives and high ranking Army personnel connected with these two companies. They all ask about our troubles and then proceed to tell us about the marvelous mechanisms that they have devised to overcome these troubles that the Air Force has turned down as "unnecessary". Chief among these is a unit power control, incorporating an automatic manifold pressure regulator, which will control power, RPM and mixture by use of a single lever. It is obvious that there is a crying need for a device like that in combat.

7. It is easy to understand why test pilots, who have never been in combat, cannot readily appreciate what each split second means when a "bounce" occurs. Every last motion when you get bounced is just another nail in your coffin. Any device which would eliminate any of the enumerated above, are obviously very necessary to make the P-38 a really effective combat airplane.

8. It is also felt that that much could done to simplify the gas switching system in this airplane. The switches {valve selector handles} are all in awkward positions and extremely hard to turn. The toggle switches for outboard tanks are almost impossible to operate with gloves on.

9. My personal feeling about this airplane is that it is a fine piece of equipment, and if properly handled, takes a back seat for nothing that the enemy can produce. But it does need simplifying to bring it within the capabilities of the 'average' pilot. I believe that pilots like Colonel Ben Kelsey and Colonel Cass Huff are among the finest pilots in the world today. But I also believe that it is difficult for men like them to place their thinking and ability on the level of a youngster with a bare 25 hours in the airplane, going into his first combat. That is the sort of thinking that will have to be done, in my opinion, to make the P-38 a first-class all around fighting airplane.

HAROLD J. RAU
Colonel, Air Corps,
Commanding.

Now, after reading the letter above, do you really find it suprising that the P-38's had a bad loss rate over Ploesti? Once they were in a fighting mode, they were more then a match for the IAR-80's. There are many accounts of IAR-80's outnumbering the P-38's, but the P-38's came out the winner. 1 mission proves nothing when out of context.

Gib

Hedus wrote:
- Your words:
- "10 jun 1943 250 P-38 "aces" from the western front,
- attacked rafineries near Ploiesti, and the
- Popesti-Leordeni airfield there: in less than 10
- min, 23 of those that attacked the air field were
- derstroyed by IAR-81's!, BTW, the americans were
- numerical superior, and a P-38 is still better than
- an IAR-80..."
-
- "The P-38J began production in mid-1943."
-
- Von Zero, if they STARTED production in mid 43,
- they wouldn't have been in Europe yet in June. They
- would still have to be made and ferried across, and
- that in big enough numbers to be operational. They
- were F, G or H models, far from the superior J/L
- models.
-
-
- As for the IAR/190 mix up, you don't know much about
- I.D.ing do you? You attack certain planes in
- certain ways due to their strengths and weakness.
-
-
- Maybe you should have read farther about the 109T.
- ONly 10 were produced with carrier landing
- equipment, even though 60 were ORDERED. But because
- the German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin was taking
- to long, the rest were supplied WITHOUT carrier
- landing gear, keeping only the high lift wing with
- bomb racks to be used on short runways in Norway.
- Short runways are HARDLY a carrier deck.
-
- Source:The Great Book of WWII Airplanes.
-
- Kinda screws that idea, don't it?
-
-
-
-



"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:24 AM
To Hedus:
My dear blind man, I was talking P-38H !!!!
They entered in service in Europe im may 1943.
Ya, they engaged them so good that they claimed about 15 shoot down(in fact only 2 IAR were lost due to an air collision), and they already have been informed about the IAR, so they shouldf't espect to meet them.
Ok, let's suppose I'm wrong, then those should be P-38G, wich were far superior to any IAR or 109.
Please read WHAT IS WROTE before posting...
They didn't trained pilots ON carriers because they didn't had one, but if they'd had, what was such a difficulty since everyone else could???
"use some brains" (if you have )

"The show must go on..."

Message Edited on 07/07/0307:27AM by Von_Zero

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:41 AM
Gibbage1 wrote:
- Also, just a note. If I remember, the P-38's were
- carring 2x1000LB bombs on the way to the target when
- they were bounced.....
Corect, but with only one correction:
The P-38 I was talking were the the escort (trere were 100 P-38 with bombs, and 150 for escort), wich had as objective to attack the airfield when the other atacked the rafineries, to prevent any counter actions, from the Romanians and germans there.
So when they met the IAR they were already in fighting mode , and without external ordinance( except some of them kept the fuel tanks).
Actualy they were carring only one 454 kg bomb(the 100 P-38 that attacked the rafinery), and 300gal external fuel tanks(the escort).

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 06:24 AM
Von Zero, ask a Navy pilot if everyone can land on a carrier. Even some well trained pilots couldn't do it.

And I don't think your take on the p-38/IAR battle is correct. I will look through my books. Did that on the 109T and proved you wrong there.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 06:50 AM
Hedus wrote:
- Von Zero, ask a Navy pilot if everyone can land on a
- carrier. Even some well trained pilots couldn't do
- it.


Look, you got it all wrong, I didn't said that "any pilot" could land on a carrier, all i meant was that If Brits, Japs, US,.. could train pilots to do it, then why the Germans couldn't?
They didn't do it because they didn't had to, But "IF" Graf Zeppelin, would have been operational, then they for sure would have trained some pilots for this.
If Bush could, Rall, couldn't? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
I dunno how correct can a P-38 vs IAR fight could be, a fight doesn't reduces only to an aircaft performances, but I gave that as an example, gosh, there were about 150 P-38 vs 60 IAR! In this kind of cases, the numbers do count.
I didn't try to minimize the Pacific war, would be imposible, I just compared the alied scale of value to the Axis one.
Don't get me wrong, bu it doesn't seem fair that Alied pilots, that had many advantages but scored less kills, to be considered better then the axis, wich fought in exact opposite conditions.

"The show must go on..."

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 08:09 AM
Did you read my post at all? It did not matter if they were loaded with bombs or not. It still took a long time to get into combat ready mode. Flying level in "cruse" mode was not in any way "ready to fight" when flying P-38's. Read the post.

Gib

Von_Zero wrote:
- Gibbage1 wrote:
-- Also, just a note. If I remember, the P-38's were
-- carring 2x1000LB bombs on the way to the target when
-- they were bounced.....
- Corect, but with only one correction:
- The P-38 I was talking were the the escort (trere
- were 100 P-38 with bombs, and 150 for escort), wich
- had as objective to attack the airfield when the
- other atacked the rafineries, to prevent any counter
- actions, from the Romanians and germans there.
-
- So when they met the IAR they were already in
- fighting mode , and without external ordinance(
- except some of them kept the fuel tanks).
-
- Actualy they were carring only one 454 kg bomb(the
- 100 P-38 that attacked the rafinery), and 300gal
- external fuel tanks(the escort).
-
-
- "The show must go on..."



"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 08:19 AM
Well for 1, the Brits and the US were landing on decks since WWI, and had near 20 years of experance doing it before WWII, and TODAY its still an EXTREAMLY difficult task. Do you think that Germany would have been able to master and train its pilots to land on a deck (something they have NEVER done, and had no knolege of how to train for) without a LONG training process? By the time they learned how to do it, learn HOW to train pilots, and then train pilots to do it, it would have been to costly for the Luftwaffa to do it. Beause by THAT time, the Luftwaffa would be short on teachers and pilots. In the dark days of the Luftwaffa, pilots were very poorly trained and had next to no flight time in real aircraft. Then you add to that the extensive training for carrier ops? Lol. The Luftwaffa would have a fighter wing of Kamakazi pilots hitting the Graff Zepplin by the time it set sail. I doubt we would of had to sink her if it ever left port. Its own pilots would have done a good job of that.

Gib

Von_Zero wrote:
-
- Look, you got it all wrong, I didn't said that "any
- pilot" could land on a carrier, all i meant was that
- If Brits, Japs, US,.. could train pilots to do it,
- then why the Germans couldn't?
-
- They didn't do it because they didn't had to, But
- "IF" Graf Zeppelin, would have been operational,
- then they for sure would have trained some pilots
- for this.
-

"You dont win a war by dying for your country. You win a war by making the other fool die for his country."

<center>
http://gibbageart.havagame.com/images/sig01.jpg (http://gibbageart.havagame.com)
</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 02:22 PM
WTE_Galway wrote:
- in terms of versatility its hard to go past Clive
- Caldwell with just under 30 kills but multiple kills
- against all 3 major axis powers German, Italian and
- japanese.
-
-
- I am not sure how many other pilots couold claim
- kills against all three but I doubt there are many.
-

I knew "Killer" Caldwell was considered as an outstanding pilot, but I didn't know he had scored against the japanese as well, that makes him comparable to the german aces who scored on many fronts (BoB, Africa, USSR,...).

BTW, Marseille once fought Caldwell (in this fight he got two P-40s) and was very impressed by a long range vertical shooting which Caldwell used to down a 109 that was above him (flown by leutnant Stahlschmit (who survived), if I remember well).

Bay Adams also fought against the japanese before coming to the ETO, but I don't know if he ever scored a kill there.

That's what (in my mind), with the tactician talents of some others, make some fighter pilots above the others, the ability to manage any situation of combat in very different circumstances.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:40 PM
SturmFuhrer42 wrote:
- 1. Marseille
- 2. Galland
- 3. Hartmann
-
. . . . When all is
- said is done will all remember the great LW aces i
- doubt anyone will remember much about the
- american,brit or russian ace.


Well, if I understand correctly, us Yanks didn't leave our pilots in action for as long as Germany. I don't know the specifics (anyone?), but I'm sure that if the US (or Russia, or whoever) had forced their pilots to fly the same amount of time that the Germans did, they certainly would have had the opportunity to distinguish themselves in the same way. (Thank God we didn't!) Also, as was noted before, German pilots had to fly as many as 10 (!!!!!) sorties in one day!!!! My "money" is on ALL the brave pilots from every TOT, and every country, that had the nads to climb into a barely tested chunk of metal, ride it into the heavens, and fight to the death to defend his (and in Russia, sometimes: HER) country's honor.

http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/XP-39best.JPG


Death is just nature's way of telling you to watch your airspeed.

http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612345111

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:45 PM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- Dont forget the germans shot down many airforces
- before they even got off the ground 40,000+ and got
- kill credits which the russians didnt.
-
- The polish airforce for example



wrong. completely, sorry /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif





---------------------------------------



http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigGermany.gif




under 30k?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 03:48 PM
Marmeduke Thomas St John Pattle.Greatest Western ace with 51 kills inside 6 months,from the summer of 1940 until his death on 20 April 1941.Flew with Gladiator(!) and Hurricane.
Died in Greece in a dogfight of 15 Hurricanes against 200(!) German planes.Two Bf110s blew his aircraft after he had rescued his friend <<Timber>> Woods from another 110.Pattle had been taken ill the whole week until his death with high fever,something that didn't prevent him from flying numerous sorties every day.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:06 PM
Hedus wrote:

- How many years did Bong fly? 2 years? So, lets say
- he takes down 20 a year. Now lets compare 20 a
- year, using Gallands tour of duty of 1939-1945, 6
- years. So, 6 years with 20 kills a year, thats 120.
- Thats more than Galland. See the comparison yet,
- or am I spelling too correctly for you? Lets throw
- in the fact that Galland was shot down many times,
- and Bong maybe once if that. Are you seeing the
- comparison yet?



your attitude doesn´t safe you from the fact that galland didn´t fly 6 years like a normal pilot.
he was forbidden to fly after moelders died and did some flights on his own for a long time...

---------------------------------------



http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigGermany.gif




under 30k?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:09 PM
Someone claimed earlier that that Marseille could easily have achieved more than 500 kills if he wouldn't have been killed in that accident. Well, I have just read two pretty good books about that guy. His piloting skills seem to be unrivalled in history. I personally liked best when he was jumped by 8 marauding Hurricanes while on his landing approach, gear and flaps down. Needless to say, he shot down three before the remaining five retreated. He did this on his own and witnessed by the entire squadron.
Nevertheless both books speak about his physical and mental fatigue. It sometimes took him hours to recuperate. Edu Neumann, his commodore, wanted him to go on vacation. He refused and subsequently died in that accident. To come to the point, no way would he have survived in that German system to achieve 500+ kills. The guy was a wreck. The only way for him to survive would have meant retirement. Read the books about him, he was depressed (Sister was murdered while he was in Africa), fatigued, he was wasted!

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:10 PM
Flying a Gladiator against CR.42s is an even match. A worn out Hurricane I from BoB was an œberfighter for this theater in early 1941 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
If you read Shore's book about air combat in Yugoslavia you will see (as others allready stated here) that many of Pattle's claims are dubvious: e.g. he bounced three CR-42s, saw one spinning out of countrol into a cloud and later sighted three parachutes, so it was assumed the other ones collided, giving him three kills. In reality the three Italians just evaded the hurricane and flew home. But that was not Pattle's fault, we really was an excellent pilot.
But overclaiming was ripe there. The italians overclaimed about 10:1, but they didnt award kills to individual pilots at the time. The greeks and brits were not better. You have combats where both british and italians each claimed more than 10 victories while losing one or two pilots. So the actual engagement was a draw, while each side regarded it as a great victory.

http://people.freenet.de/JCRitter/1sigklein.jpg


Message Edited on 07/07/0303:11PM by theRealAntEater

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:11 PM
AFJ-BlackCloud wrote:
- Anyone read Mike Spick's "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces?"
- He does a comparision at the end of the book, and
- his conclusion comes down to Bar and Ruforffer, for
- alot of the reasons noted by others during this
- thread. i.e., success on all fronts, differing
- conditions, aircraft, etc. Rudorffer was considered
- by many to be on the level of Rall and Marseille as
- a deflection shot.
-
I read it and agree 100%.

But, now, are we talking purely "fighter pilot"? Because Hans Ulrich Rudel, even though getting only 12 kills in a fighter, had a war record second to none. The greatest combat pilot of all time, surely.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:11 PM
Hedus wrote:

Untrained
- pilots in crappy planes were meat on the table for
- LW pilots. But when the VVS started organizing and
- having trained pilots with superior machines, the LW
- scores dropped dramatically.



look at the best aces and when they scored where. hartmann met meat on a table? how many of the highest scoring aces met meat on a table?
how did the scores drop? in 44 less aircraft shot down than in 41?


i glad you have so cool history books.. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif





---------------------------------------



http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigGermany.gif




under 30k?

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:17 PM
- But, now, are we talking purely "fighter pilot"?
- Because Hans Ulrich Rudel, even though getting only
- 12 kills in a fighter, had a war record second to
- none. The greatest combat pilot of all time,
- surely.
-
-

He was the best, but still he only got credit for 9

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:21 PM
Gibbage1 wrote:
- Well when your talking about pilot "Skill", I would
- not put Hartmann in with the top aces. He never
- really used "skill".



complete nonnsense. the same nonsense like when you talk about hit n run as beeing a coward-tactic for the germans but ignore that the US used them in the pacific too.



Also, what sort of Me-110 aces were
- there? I think that would also take skill.



http://www.luftwaffe.cz



edit: link might again work later



---------------------------------------



http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.bryant3/ETSigGermany.gif




under 30k?



Message Edited on 07/07/0304:45PM by NuFoerki

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:33 PM
Skill is a P47 taking out a Tiger tank with his 50s

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:51 PM
S!,
Without a doubt, the most versatile aces of WWII were Bar and Rudorffer. No other pilots compare to these two in sheer number of total victories, number of fronts flown, victories vs bombers, victories vs fighters. These two were the most adaptive fighter pilots of WW2 according to the stats.

Sure, others can point out Hartmann for number of victories, Marsailles for western AC victories, etc. Additionally, the arguement 'if this or that pilot was allowed to fly longer or wasn't killed' may be plausable, it is still speculation. There is no denying that these pilots had skill. However, if one looks at the overall, established record of all pilots in WWII, Bar and Rudorffer are the 1st and 2nd best pilots of WW2.

JV44HeinzBar

American by birth; Southern by the Grace of God!

www.jagdverband44.com (http://www.jagdverband44.com)
http://www.jagdverband44.com/JV44Banner400x75.jpg



Message Edited on 07/07/0304:55PM by HeinzBar

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 04:55 PM
AdiGlunz wrote:
- He was the best, but still he only got credit for 9
-
-
Adi, are you sure? I thought he got 9 in the FW, and 3 more in the Stuka. I could be wrong here. I have a lot of trouble finding good stuff on Rudel. I have his book "Stuka Pilot" but it barely mentions his FW time.

Any help is appreciated.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 05:57 PM
Cascadinstyle back to your ?'s.Galland couldn't hit anything until taught by Molders.Molders barfed his guts up evertime he flew,how you can shoot anything down while trying not to blow chunks is amazing.Hartmann was no wizrad from the start,also Marseille had a rough beginning.I've also always been perplexed at how marksmanship with a rifle is supposed to help you in an airplane.Thanks for the retraction.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 07:04 PM
Nevertheless,Pattle scored 47 of his 51 kills while stationed in Greece against an enemy who enjoyed total superiority both in numbers and in quality .

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 07:28 PM
Have the kill totals for Pattle been confirmed? I was under the impression that he was never officially credited with 51 kills.

That it was what several folks thought he should have been credited with. 51 makes him the #1 english speaking ace of WW2, ahead of Bong, Johnson, and McGuire.

All three of them had "unconfirmed" kills as well. I'm wondering how "official" 51 is.

Nothing in the above post is meant to take anything away from Pattle. An awesome achievement.

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 07:55 PM
Cant really say who is best but one of the bests was definately Saburo Sakai, if you dont know who he was, i suggest you find a book called "Samurai" /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://stellar.no-ip.info/ban/fb.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-07-2003, 10:27 PM
Slickun wrote:
- Have the kill totals for Pattle been confirmed? I
- was under the impression that he was never
- officially credited with 51 kills.
-
- That it was what several folks thought he should
- have been credited with. 51 makes him the #1
- english speaking ace of WW2, ahead of Bong, Johnson,
- and McGuire.
-
- All three of them had "unconfirmed" kills as well.
- I'm wondering how "official" 51 is.
-
- Nothing in the above post is meant to take anything
- away from Pattle. An awesome achievement.
-

Few (but, at least 14) of Pattle's kills were officially registered as many of his unit's records were destroyed or lost, but, AFAIK, the most detailed record of his kills made by collecting the existing records of various origin, told he had most probably claimed about 44 "confirmed" and 8 "probable" kills. But, still, these are from incomplete records and other documents or interviews, and his real tally (while he can be said, that's what is absolutely sure, to have claimed at least 30 kills) remains uncertain.

While some of these claims, mainly against the italians, are doubtful, others, particularly against the LW (which had much more complete unit records for the greek campaign), can be easily confirmed when comparing the opposite side's documents.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 12:27 AM
Gibbage,

Thanks for sharingthe Rau letter on P38 "cockpit management". It was very interesting reading.


Blutarski

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 12:40 AM
nicli wrote
Few (but, at least 14) of Pattle's kills were
- officially registered as many of his unit's records
- were destroyed or lost, but, AFAIK, the most
- detailed record of his kills made by collecting the
- existing records of various origin, told he had most
- probably claimed about 44 "confirmed" and 8
- "probable" kills.

Hmmm. Looks like we can't be sure.

Neverthless, he must have been hell on wheels.

There is a lot of confusion about Japanese kills as well. We'll probably never know.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 02:39 PM
The fact that Pattle got so many kills (confirmed or not)in six months time,while others got less in six years of war flying in far superior aircrafts than Pattle's in much better circumstances says everything about him.It's a shame that he isn't as popular as Bong,McGurie e.t.c .