PDA

View Full Version : Fabulous Mosquito - According to Galland



MOH_FOX
07-11-2006, 07:49 PM
S~ Gentleman!

Here is some food for thought when one considers the Mosquito.

€œ A special chapter was the fight against the Mosquito. England had developed an all-purpose aircraft with an extraordinary performance whose action over Germany caused a lot of trouble. The twin-engined De-Havilland had a speed that none of our fighters could approach. By day it flew on reconnaissance flights at high altitude, but it also performed bombing missions. It had a very precise bombsight called €œOboe€. It was also successful, at little cost, in nuisance raids at night. Until we were able to send up the Me-262 jet fighter planes, we were practically powerless against the Mosquitoes. Like their namesake, they became a plague to our Command and the population. Our fighters could only catch up to them when we dived on them from a much greater height, this maneuver could only be performed when the approach of the aircraft was discovered early enough and if it could be passed on from one radar station to another. Here were the difficulties: First, our radar network was by no means without gaps, and second, the Mosquito was of wooden construction, so this little €œbird€ only gave a very faint signal in our sets. These were simply the facts one had to accept for the time being. Anyhow, with this aircraft alone, the German war industry could not be hit decisively, There was no danger that we might lose the war on account of the Mosquito. It was for quite different reasons that Goering went mad about our inability to stop these raids. In daytime the Mosquitos flew without losses and went wherever their mission took them; at night they chased the population out of their beds. The latter who were justifiably annoyed at this started to grumble, €œthe Fat One can€t even cope with a few silly Mosquitos€ Ignoring me, Goering recalled two experienced group leaders from the east and ordered them to clear up this daily nuisance in one way or another. Two strengthened flights were formed specially for this purpose, bombastically christened 25th and 50th Fighter Wings. The aircraft were €œsouped up: by all sorts of tricks. Special methods of attack were worked out. Without avail! As far as I know neither of these units ever shot down a Mosquito.€

Adolf Galland
An excerpt from his memoir:
€œTHE FIRST AND THE LAST€
The Rise and Fall of the German Fighter Forces, 1938-1945
Copyright 1954 by Henry Holt and Company, Inc.

Buccaneer Books Inc. edition
Cutchogue, New York, 11935
ISBN:0-89966-728-7
Page 153

MOH_FOX
07-11-2006, 07:49 PM
S~ Gentleman!

Here is some food for thought when one considers the Mosquito.

€œ A special chapter was the fight against the Mosquito. England had developed an all-purpose aircraft with an extraordinary performance whose action over Germany caused a lot of trouble. The twin-engined De-Havilland had a speed that none of our fighters could approach. By day it flew on reconnaissance flights at high altitude, but it also performed bombing missions. It had a very precise bombsight called €œOboe€. It was also successful, at little cost, in nuisance raids at night. Until we were able to send up the Me-262 jet fighter planes, we were practically powerless against the Mosquitoes. Like their namesake, they became a plague to our Command and the population. Our fighters could only catch up to them when we dived on them from a much greater height, this maneuver could only be performed when the approach of the aircraft was discovered early enough and if it could be passed on from one radar station to another. Here were the difficulties: First, our radar network was by no means without gaps, and second, the Mosquito was of wooden construction, so this little €œbird€ only gave a very faint signal in our sets. These were simply the facts one had to accept for the time being. Anyhow, with this aircraft alone, the German war industry could not be hit decisively, There was no danger that we might lose the war on account of the Mosquito. It was for quite different reasons that Goering went mad about our inability to stop these raids. In daytime the Mosquitos flew without losses and went wherever their mission took them; at night they chased the population out of their beds. The latter who were justifiably annoyed at this started to grumble, €œthe Fat One can€t even cope with a few silly Mosquitos€ Ignoring me, Goering recalled two experienced group leaders from the east and ordered them to clear up this daily nuisance in one way or another. Two strengthened flights were formed specially for this purpose, bombastically christened 25th and 50th Fighter Wings. The aircraft were €œsouped up: by all sorts of tricks. Special methods of attack were worked out. Without avail! As far as I know neither of these units ever shot down a Mosquito.€

Adolf Galland
An excerpt from his memoir:
€œTHE FIRST AND THE LAST€
The Rise and Fall of the German Fighter Forces, 1938-1945
Copyright 1954 by Henry Holt and Company, Inc.

Buccaneer Books Inc. edition
Cutchogue, New York, 11935
ISBN:0-89966-728-7
Page 153

IAF_Phantom
07-12-2006, 08:50 AM
I have this book, its an exellent account of the Germen side of the war. It gave me new perspective of how the war was manged.
Its a MUST for any serious WW2 military reader

JG54_Lukas
07-12-2006, 09:57 AM
And what exactly does this have to do with ORR?

MB_Avro_UK
07-12-2006, 04:25 PM
Good post MOH_FOX http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

The Mosquito we have in this sim is from 1942 and not the better performing late war versions.

It's success cannot be replicated in a dog-fight server.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

LStarosta
07-12-2006, 04:30 PM
Funny tendency Oleg has to model British and German airplanes to their lowest specs (Fw-190 A, Mosquito, Tempest etc) while their Soviet counterparts are always modelled most optimistically (La-7, La-7 w/B20, La-5FN, LaGG-3 etc).

HayateAce
07-12-2006, 04:33 PM
.....P38s with fake compressibility, P47s without paddle props, P51s without boost. Watergate was nothing compared to what we got goin' on c'here.

http://www.meristation.com/EPORTAL_IMGS/GENERAL/articulos/IMG2-111352/OlegMaddox_art.jpg

http://www.medaloffreedom.com/RichardMNixon.gif

LStarosta
07-12-2006, 04:56 PM
And now little children who play this game go away thinking that Soviet planes won the war in the East for some reason other than sheer numbers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

hotspace
07-12-2006, 05:03 PM
Nice read http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Haigotron
07-12-2006, 05:43 PM
he does mention the 262 was the end of the mosquito over germany right after that part no?

WWMaxGunz
07-12-2006, 05:59 PM
Except for the trolls who never back their whines up, nice thread.

As for Mosquito speeds, I don't think that side by side the Mossies could beat all LW fighters
at least not from the specs I've seen. However they didn't have to. First the fighter has to
catch up and the Mossies only had to change course to avoid an intercept.

Wasn't that the concept of the Schnell Bombers in the first place?

Xiolablu3
07-12-2006, 07:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Haigotron:
he does mention the 262 was the end of the mosquito over germany right after that part no? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Mosquitos flew as pathfinders for the heavies right up to the end of the war, every single night a Mosquito layed the path for the heavies to follow.

The Mossies would go in, drop their different coloured flares on various targets and then the bombers would be told which one was the target.

JG53Frankyboy
07-12-2006, 07:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Good post MOH_FOX http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

The Mosquito we have in this sim is from 1942 and not the better performing late war versions.

It's success cannot be replicated in a dog-fight server.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK the FB.Mk.VI came in service spring 1943 ?!

but yes, one of Maddox "strange" decissions to make such an early Mosquito.
a later FB one, with higher boost Merlins and Rocket armament would have made more sense......... considering the given maps.

its not the first time http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

horseback
07-12-2006, 07:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Haigotron:
he does mention the 262 was the end of the mosquito over germany right after that part no? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No, he said that they were powerless until the Me-262 became available; after the 262 became operational, the Mossies had to look over their shoulders a bit more often.

Given the low numbers of operational 262s on any given day vs the number of Mosquitos flying hi-alt reconn, low level daylight strikes, night bombing, and accompanying the bomber streams as escort night fighters, I don't think the 262 made much of a dent.

I think it should be pointed out that the daylight fighter-bomber versions were NOT used as classic fighter a/c. Most of their fighter on fighter kills were gained with the classic 'bounce and run' method, making the most of all those cannon, rather than staying and dogfighting.

The Mossie's speed was such that it could run with most contemporary fighters, and it's range was such that most contemporary fighters didn't have the fuel to complete the interception; unless they were perfectly positioned before the Mossie's crew saw them, Axis fighters rarely caught them. Most of the time, the Mossies generally had a substantial head start.

cheers

horseback

CUJO_1970
07-12-2006, 09:15 PM
Nov. 14, 1943 - Luftwaffe ace Addi Glunz took off from his airfield and ran down a Mosquito of RAF 1409 flt. in his FW190A-6, and blew it up.

The key for LW fighter pilots was to know where the Mosquito was - and this one had been tracked on radar for some time.

In WWII, any aircraft flying at high speed and in small numbers was difficult to intercept, and this is key in the Mosquitos success.

La7_brook
07-12-2006, 11:07 PM
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43

Daiichidoku
07-12-2006, 11:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Except for the trolls who never back their whines up, nice thread. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Re: P47

SOURCES:
-- Sever the Sky, Edward Maloney [Planes of Fame 1979]
-- P-47 Thunderbolt, From Seversky To Victory, Warren Bodie [Widewing 1994]

P-47D-10 1942 = 2000hp R-2800-63. POP: 500.

P-47D-22 1943 = 13'2" Hamilton-Standard paddle-blade prop. POP: 850, of which 180 to RAF as Thunderbolt Mk I.

P-47D-27 1944 = Hamilton-Standard prop, dorsal fin, dive brakes. POP: 611, of which 30 to RAF as Thunderbolt Mk II.

http://aerofiles.com/_repub.html


shall we go further, particularly on the subject of the P-38?

Skarphol
07-13-2006, 12:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Mosquitos flew as pathfinders for the heavies right up to the end of the war, every single night a Mosquito layed the path for the heavies to follow.

The Mossies would go in, drop their different coloured flares on various targets and then the bombers would be told which one was the target. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I read a very interresting article about the british air-raid on Kjeller airfield outside Oslo, Norway. Kjeller airfield had the pleasure of first beeing bombed by the germans in 1940, the americans in 1942 and the british in 1943.

First, Lancaster pathfinders flew in at midnight, dropping parachute-flares from quite high. Then Mosquitos flew in low and dropped their colored flares. They flew so low that one of the Mosquitos damaged the wind-indicator on the side of the runway. The flares dropped by the Lancaster were so bright that it was possible for the german groundcrew to read the serial numbers on the mosquitos flying by. Some of the colored flares landed inside the target hangars, and had to be dropped again. Then the Mosquitos pulled about 5km away and circled the area. After this the main force of Lancasters started to bomb the airfield. The Mosquitos went in every now and then in order to lay new flares as the first ones burned out.

Skarphol

luftluuver
07-13-2006, 01:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43 </div></BLOCKQUOTE> And were disbanded (JG25, JG50) within 6 months because of the lack of any real success.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1114844/MossieLosses.jpg

woofiedog
07-13-2006, 01:39 AM
Quote from a Mosquito Pilot...

Keith Miller €" Australian international cricketer, regarded by many as the greatest Australian all-rounder.

In later life when asked how he dealt with pressure on the cricket field, Miller replied: "Pressure is having a Messerschmitt up your arse, playing cricket is not."

His cricket career was interrupted by the Second World War, during which he served with the Royal Australian Air Force in Europe, as a pilot of Mosquito fighter-bombers.
Miller had several narrow escapes, and injured his back when making a bellylanding after one of his plane's engines failed. This injury restricted his bowling on occasions during his subsequent cricket career.

Kurfurst__
07-13-2006, 01:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Hi,

I've seen this one before, and it jibes nicely with my GM-1 climb tests, can you share a bit more detail on that incl. a referece for further reading? Thanks!

Otherwise CUJO_1970, and Max summed it up all nicely - higher speed, and on the PR versions, high flying alt meant a smaller time window for interception, but if the fighter was vectored in, it wasn't particularly hard to catch up with the Mosquito and shoot it down. Their early daylight missons were twice as costly as ordinary bombers iirc with 8% loss rate...One of Heinz Knoke's earliest kills was a Mosquito in Norway, which he catched in an early 109G with no special boost at all at low altitude. He had no problems closing the range withing a few minutes. 'Running out of fuel' is quite silly IMHO - even at high powers, the internal tank is enough for about an hour (say half). If can't catch an EA in a 3-500 km chase, then you never can...

WOLFMondo
07-13-2006, 02:52 AM
A quote from Adolf Galland, arguably one of the finest fighter pilots of all time:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
€œ A special chapter was the fight against the Mosquito. England had developed an all-purpose aircraft with an extraordinary performance whose action over Germany caused a lot of trouble. The twin-engined De-Havilland had a speed that none of our fighters could approach. By day it flew on reconnaissance flights at high altitude, but it also performed bombing missions. It had a very precise bombsight called €œOboe€. It was also successful, at little cost, in nuisance raids at night. Until we were able to send up the Me-262 jet fighter planes, we were practically powerless against the Mosquitoes. Like their namesake, they became a plague to our Command and the population. Our fighters could only catch up to them when we dived on them from a much greater height, this maneuver could only be performed when the approach of the aircraft was discovered early enough and if it could be passed on from one radar station to another. Here were the difficulties: First, our radar network was by no means without gaps, and second, the Mosquito was of wooden construction, so this little €œbird€ only gave a very faint signal in our sets. These were simply the facts one had to accept for the time being. Anyhow, with this aircraft alone, the German war industry could not be hit decisively, There was no danger that we might lose the war on account of the Mosquito. It was for quite different reasons that Goering went mad about our inability to stop these raids. In daytime the Mosquitos flew without losses and went wherever their mission took them; at night they chased the population out of their beds. The latter who were justifiably annoyed at this started to grumble, €œthe Fat One can€t even cope with a few silly Mosquitos€ Ignoring me, Goering recalled two experienced group leaders from the east and ordered them to clear up this daily nuisance in one way or another. Two strengthened flights were formed specially for this purpose, bombastically christened 25th and 50th Fighter Wings. The aircraft were €œsouped up: by all sorts of tricks. Special methods of attack were worked out. Without avail! As far as I know neither of these units ever shot down a Mosquito.€
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A quote from Kurfurst, arm chair expert:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Otherwise CUJO_1970, and Max summed it up all nicely - higher speed, and on the PR versions, high flying alt meant a smaller time window for interception, but if the fighter was vectored in, it wasn't particularly hard to catch up with the Mosquito and shoot it down. Their early daylight missons were twice as costly as ordinary bombers iirc with 8% loss rate...One of Heinz Knoke's earliest kills was a Mosquito in Norway, which he catched in an early 109G with no special boost at all at low altitude. He had no problems closing the range withing a few minutes. 'Running out of fuel' is quite silly IMHO - even at high powers, the internal tank is enough for about an hour (say half). If can't catch an EA in a 3-500 km chase, then you never can... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Notice the difference? :P

stathem
07-13-2006, 03:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

Otherwise CUJO_1970, and Max summed it up all nicely - higher speed, and on the PR versions, high flying alt meant a smaller time window for interception, but if the fighter was vectored in, it wasn't particularly hard to catch up with the Mosquito and shoot it down. Their early daylight missons were twice as costly as ordinary bombers iirc with 8% loss rate...One of Heinz Knoke's earliest kills was a Mosquito in Norway, which he catched in an early 109G with no special boost at all at low altitude. He had no problems closing the range withing a few minutes. 'Running out of fuel' is quite silly IMHO - even at high powers, the internal tank is enough for about an hour (say half). If can't catch an EA in a 3-500 km chase, then you never can... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh Kurfurst, you really do need a memory upgrade €" or to read Knocke€s book, which you so heavily rely on, again.

You€ve been continually referring to Knocke€s supposed Mosquito victory in every Mossie thread that€s popped up recently, despite my having disabused you of the notion in Sept 2005. So I suppose I€m going to have to go through it again with you. Pay attention this time.

First thing, Knocke€s second confirmed kill was not when he was based in Norway €" you€re getting confused. His Mosquito claim came when he was flying with 2/JG1 out of Jever, Northern Germany. I think you€re mistaking it for the PR Spit he and his wingman intercepted whilst in Norway, which was credited to Gerhardt.

Secondly, the passage surrounding the Mosquito claim makes it sound almost exactly like the famous first daylight Mosquito raid on Berlin €" the filthy weather, the frantic calls from a furious Goering to his CO, the double penetration. But that raid was in January 1943, not 6/11/1942. You don€t think he might have embellished the story slightly with a rather famous incident? There were NO BC Mosquito losses that day. There were 3 Ventura losses, including one in exactly the right area. There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie €" but why would a PR Mossie but going home on the deck in filthy weather? Perhaps someone has a record of PRU losses so they can confirm/deny.

Finally, don€t take my word for it. How about you have a good look here (http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/My-Site/Victory_2.htm), at a site dedicated, and sympathetic to, Knocke. Try as they might they can€t confirm it as a Mosquito either.

You need to be careful trying to twist propaganda out of very popular and well read books.

WOLFMondo
07-13-2006, 03:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
Funny tendency Oleg has to model British and German airplanes to their lowest specs (Fw-190 A, Mosquito, Tempest etc) while their Soviet counterparts are always modelled most optimistically (La-7, La-7 w/B20, La-5FN, LaGG-3 etc). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats not quite true. There is an uber boosted Spitfire IX and one of the VB variants is the later example of the VB, theres the Mustang MkIII with 25lbs boost, which is by far one the highest performers going.

The mossie is just one variant, used in its correct time frame its pretty damn quick for a '42 aircraft.

I'd 100% agree on the Tempest though, its a total odd ball with its series I pre V1 offensive performance yet its batch 2/3 Series II appearance. Its boost though is down on the list of things wrong with it, it would have been nice to get the either Batch 2 Sabre IIA 11lbs boost or batch 3/4 Sabre IIB 11lbs boost though.

luftluuver
07-13-2006, 04:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

Otherwise CUJO_1970, and Max summed it up all nicely - higher speed, and on the PR versions, high flying alt meant a smaller time window for interception, but if the fighter was vectored in, it wasn't particularly hard to catch up with the Mosquito and shoot it down. Their early daylight missons were twice as costly as ordinary bombers iirc with 8% loss rate...One of Heinz Knoke's earliest kills was a Mosquito in Norway, which he catched in an early 109G with no special boost at all at low altitude. He had no problems closing the range withing a few minutes. 'Running out of fuel' is quite silly IMHO - even at high powers, the internal tank is enough for about an hour (say half). If can't catch an EA in a 3-500 km chase, then you never can... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh Kurfurst, you really do need a memory upgrade €" or to read Knocke€s book, which you so heavily rely on, again.

You€ve been continually referring to Knocke€s supposed Mosquito victory in every Mossie thread that€s popped up recently, despite my having disabused you of the notion in Sept 2005. So I suppose I€m going to have to go through it again with you. Pay attention this time.

First thing, Knocke€s second confirmed kill was not when he was based in Norway €" you€re getting confused. His Mosquito claim came when he was flying with 2/JG1 out of Jever, Northern Germany. I think you€re mistaking it for the PR Spit he and his wingman intercepted whilst in Norway, which was credited to Gerhardt.

Secondly, the passage surrounding the Mosquito claim makes it sound almost exactly like the famous first daylight Mosquito raid on Berlin €" the filthy weather, the frantic calls from a furious Goering to his CO, the double penetration. But that raid was in January 1943, not 6/11/1942. You don€t think he might have embellished the story slightly with a rather famous incident? There were NO BC Mosquito losses that day. There were 3 Ventura losses, including one in exactly the right area. There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie €" but why would a PR Mossie but going home on the deck in filthy weather? Perhaps someone has a record of PRU losses so they can confirm/deny.

Finally, don€t take my word for it. How about you have a good look here (http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/My-Site/Victory_2.htm), at a site dedicated, and sympathetic to, Knocke. Try as they might they can€t confirm it as a Mosquito either.

You need to be careful trying to twist propaganda out of very popular and well read books. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>What is this? Kurfurst got <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">pwnd</span> again. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

stathem, he never learns, just keeps repeating over and over again dispite being pwnd in Spitfire threads, pwnd in 100/150 fuel threads and so on and so on.

When he is getting pwnd the thread is locked or he never posts again in the thread.

mhuxt
07-13-2006, 05:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, there isn't. There were no PR losses that day.

stathem
07-13-2006, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mhuxt:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, there isn't. There were no PR losses that day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I also found from here (http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avmoss2.html#m3):-

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
"A PR.VIII became the first Mosquito to photograph Berlin, on 8 March 1943." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Knocke's book quite clearly states that the "Mosquitos" were returning from Berlin.

WWMaxGunz
07-13-2006, 05:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1114844/MossieLosses.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That pretty much matches what I get between reading from Galland and other sources.
Enough times I've read of them vectoring off enemy fighters and getting clean away
and never have I read of any 300 to 500 km chases... but that doesn't mean it never
happened. Just compare the high cruise speeds and ranges of the planes, the fighter
uses how much fuel just getting to alt and position. If there is clouds enough to
hide the approach of the fighters then they also hide the Mossies but still between
fighters and flak there were some lost. I've read about shot up Mossies returning
as well that were patched... it cannot be easy to patch such laminates that depend
on the grain and cross-grain structure for strength.

Ratsack
07-13-2006, 05:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Except for the trolls who never back their whines up, nice thread. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Re: P47

SOURCES:
-- Sever the Sky, Edward Maloney [Planes of Fame 1979]
-- P-47 Thunderbolt, From Seversky To Victory, Warren Bodie [Widewing 1994]

P-47D-10 1942 = 2000hp R-2800-63. POP: 500.

P-47D-22 1943 = 13'2" Hamilton-Standard paddle-blade prop. POP: 850, of which 180 to RAF as Thunderbolt Mk I.

P-47D-27 1944 = Hamilton-Standard prop, dorsal fin, dive brakes. POP: 611, of which 30 to RAF as Thunderbolt Mk II.

http://aerofiles.com/_repub.html
? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

G'day Daiichidoku,

Not commenting on the P-38 issue at all.

On the P-47s:

* firstly, there were no P-47D-10s in 1942. It's a 1943 bird.
* secondly, I'm dubious about the D-22 block as a 1943 build. We might usefully say late 1943.
* thirdly, none of the P-47s in the field were retrofitted with the paddle-bladed prop until early 1944.
* fourthly, according to Roger Freeman, the dive flaps were introduced on the D-30 block, not the D-27.
* fifth, only 250 D-10s were built. If you add in the 400 D-11REs (same except for water pump) and the 250 D-11RAs (same as D-11RE, just built at Evansville instead of Farmingdale), then the production run is about 900. In any case, the way the water injection works in-game, the version that's modelled is the D-11. There were 650 of those built. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Finally, the two bubble top P-47s in-game have top speeds that closely match the rated speeds for those types. If we take the D-27 as a typical early bubble top, running 100/130 fuel, it should come in with a top speed of about 425-30 mph, which it does. If we take the D_1944 version as a typical late 1944 bubble top running 100/150 juice, we'd expect a top speed of 441 mph (according to the US Navy report from Oct 1944). That's pretty much what we get in the game (I get 443 mph at 28,000: close enough for me).

I've never tested the razor backs for speed, so I make no comment.

Incidentally, the manifold pressure readings on the cockpit gauges of the two bubble tops are wrong. The reading at max power in the D-27 (64") corresponds to the performance of the D_1944, while the reading in the latter (72") corresponds to what you'd see in a M or N series Thunderbolt running the R-2800-57 on 100/150.

As far as speed is concerned, however, they're both spot on.

cheers,
Ratsack

p1ngu666
07-13-2006, 05:38 AM
the mossie was *just* about quick enuff to shade pretty much ever other aircraft, at certain heights. noteably on the deck for most types http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

during the famous raid on the phillips factory, mossies spotted some 190s heading towards where the other bombers would be (bostons, venturas etc). one of them had sustain canopy damage early from a birdstrike...

they promptly atttracted the 190's attention, drag them awy from the other bombers, then lose them and bomb the factory. this is going off my memory, so probably abit rough XD.

the mossie with with merlin 25's could do 366mph on the deck, on ops, regulary. merlin 25's where among the first engines tobe used. some of the first squadrons to equip with FBVI's, had merlin 25's http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

its like the LF vb's tho, useless at higher alts, its actully worse than the LF' vbs. but on the deck in 43, 366mph is pretty stonking.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Anyhow, with this aircraft alone, the German war industry could not be hit decisively, There was no danger that we might lose the war on account of the Mosquito. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

but the mossie only did photo recon, weather recon, bombing, and bomber escort, decoys etc. very important roles, mostly unseen here.

ofcourse u could catch a mossie, if it wasnt going quickly, or if your "mossie" was actully a ventura http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

the early mossies did have high losses, but a) where doing significantly more dangerous missions, b)would of been much higher in pretty much any other aircraft. c) often flew at what turned out tobe the wrong height, 20,000ft. the 190 was abit faster at 20k, fly abit higher iirec and its the mossie thats faster http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the mossie, is basicaly a very desireable aircraft to have, if your fighting a war. able to match or exceed pretty much any other plane in speed, can literaly take the fight to the heart of the enemy with ease, complete its mission with near certainity, have low losses too..

if we get the merlin 25's ingame, then we will hopefully have, mega performance at low level, or perminatly mega on the warclouds, 334th etc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . carry 28secs worth of ammo for cannon, 50sec for 303. a small internal bombload, plus option for rockets http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

irl, ud have the advantage of a naviagotor too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Ratsack
07-13-2006, 05:42 AM
I wouldn't place too much faith in Knocke's recollection of dates. Judging by some other stuff in I Flew for the Fuhrer, he's more likely to have the type right, and the date wrong.

cheers,
Ratsack

ImpStarDuece
07-13-2006, 05:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
Nov. 14, 1943 - Luftwaffe ace Addi Glunz took off from his airfield and ran down a Mosquito of RAF 1409 flt. in his FW190A-6, and blew it up.

The key for LW fighter pilots was to know where the Mosquito was - and this one had been tracked on radar for some time.

In WWII, any aircraft flying at high speed and in small numbers was difficult to intercept, and this is key in the Mosquitos success. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't know about the 'small numbers' part: No 8 group regularly flew low and middle altitude bombing missions from 2 to 4 squadrons in strength. By early 1944 the LNSF was flying missions with 50+ Mossies about 3/4 times a month and by the end of the year these were increased to about 60-70 per target once or twice a week. The most Mossies ever sortied to a single target in a group was around 140 on a high altitude night time sortie to Berlin in early 1945.

La7_brook
07-13-2006, 05:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Hi,

I've seen this one before, and it jibes nicely with my GM-1 climb tests, can you share a bit more detail on that incl. a referece for further reading? Thanks!

Otherwise CUJO_1970, and Max summed it up all nicely - higher speed, and on the PR versions, high flying alt meant a smaller time window for interception, but if the fighter was vectored in, it wasn't particularly hard to catch up with the Mosquito and shoot it down. Their early daylight missons were twice as costly as ordinary bombers iirc with 8% loss rate...One of Heinz Knoke's earliest kills was a Mosquito in Norway, which he catched in an early 109G with no special boost at all at low altitude. He had no problems closing the range withing a few minutes. 'Running out of fuel' is quite silly IMHO - even at high powers, the internal tank is enough for about an hour (say half). If can't catch an EA in a 3-500 km chase, then you never can... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> from Graf and Grislawski by christer bergstrom /chapter, twenty seven / JG50

stathem
07-13-2006, 06:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:
I wouldn't place too much faith in Knocke's recollection of dates. Judging by some other stuff in I Flew for the Fuhrer, he's more likely to have the type right, and the date wrong.

cheers,
Ratsack </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aye, granted and I've made that point in the past regarding some of Knocke's dates, but in this case, if you scroll down on hte link I gave in my OP, their research is quite exhaustive and includes a scan of Knocke's flightbook from the date on which he was granted that abschuss.

Trusting Knocke's recollection of dates is very important in some of Kurfurst's other work.

Dtools4fools
07-13-2006, 07:47 AM
One thing forgotten in the Mossie/Knoke discussion is that...Wenneckers was falling behind, could not keep up with him and the Mossie. Now we don't know what 109 version he was in, but if it would have been a Ventura he should have been able to keep up as well, no?

Do not know about PR and PRU loss reports, but just like to add that not all planes perfomred best an any given date/flight and not all front line planes performed alway 100% at their specs (Variable topspeed, a funciton I would love to have in BoB, optional of course).

I remember as well reading a story here where a Mossie was shooting down a 190 and then chasing another one. The pilot decided to shoot at long range (but didn't hit) then as the 190 was pulling away.

Just am rereading Stahl's Ju88 book. They do attack British airfield flying from Sicily; they fly low all the way to get there not to be picked up by allied radar, then climb at 5000 meters (and should be on radar now), bombed just after sunset and escaped low into the darkness.
No interception as there was not enough time to get fighters on them...

All in all I'm not very surprised that this topic went into another "Oleg treats all planes except the Red Ones unfair", "My XY-plane is not fast enough", and "your sources are not valid but mine are"...

And I'm even stupid enough and posting myself...
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Dtools4fools
07-13-2006, 08:14 AM
Want to add that Knoke writes he took of on another Mossie interception few days before this, is not able to get in time on altitude of Mossie and therfore it's long gone until he's up there, not being able to catch up with it anymore.

Might want to add that he describes he is slowly closing in on the Mossie as his 109 is just able to keep up with the Mossie - means that would give him quite a bit of time to look at the plane to identify it. And again, would a 109 have such trouble keeping up with a Ventura?

As well I guess the year (42, 43, 44??) is written elsewhere on the scan linked above? All I see is 6.11, think he should habve added the part that shows 42 as well...

****

horseback
07-13-2006, 08:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:
On the P-47s:

* thirdly, none of the P-47s in the field were retrofitted with the paddle-bladed prop until early 1944.

cheers,
Ratsack </div></BLOCKQUOTE>None? According to a number of sources, including Escort To Berlin and 1000 Destroyed: the Life and Times of the 4th Fighter Group, several fighter groups in the 8th AF were somewhat miffed that the 56th FG had sufficient paddleblade retrofit kits by Christmas 1943 to field all three squadrons with the upgraded props.

Logically, the most effective groups would receive preference in getting the latest upgrades, and it appears that they did it one group at a time in this case. As a practical matter, though, the weather that winter was so filthy that there was limited air combat by ETO Jugs until the Big Week operations in late February 1943.

About the ease of intercepting Mosquitos:

IF the fighter was already at altitude,

IF he had more than half his fuel left,

IF he was given a good intercept vector and accurate altitude information,

IF he was in a favorable position to intercept,

IF his aircraft was in good repair (progressively more of an issue for the LW as the war ground on),

IF the Mossie's crew didn't spot him first,

MAYBE the interceptor could overhaul the Mossie (a tail chase is a long chase, and I should know, having chased a lot of tail...) and the pilot would have sufficient skill/luck to shoot it down.

My reading of the situation in accounts from both sides tells me that the Mosquito held most of the cards.

cheers

horseback

F19_Olli72
07-13-2006, 08:58 AM
What people sometimes forget is that it was a case of circumstances and other factors that decided if a plane got away or not (edit: just as Horseback posted above).

Another example: On March 16 1945 Flying Officer M Hays and his navigator were intercepted by three Me 163's over Leipzig. Hays threw them off by putting their PR XVI into a 480 mph dive, during which the starboard engine caught fire.

Feathering the propeller put the fire out, but they were later jumped by a 109, again they evaded by diving away. Hays landed at Lille on one engine, and was awarded a DFC. (From: Mosquito Photo-Reconnaissance Units of World War 2)

I guess most of us want to replicate 'real' stuff. But even so, if we had a flyable PR XVI in FB i doubt such results could be achieved against the same opponents. Simply because a lot of factors that occurred in reality doesnt exist in virtual flying.

Kurfurst__
07-13-2006, 11:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Oh Kurfurst, you really do need a memory upgrade €" or to read Knocke€s book, which you so heavily rely on, again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And you need a girlfriend.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">First thing, Knocke€s second confirmed kill was not when he was based in Norway €" you€re getting confused. His Mosquito claim came when he was flying with 2/JG1 out of Jever, Northern Germany. I think you€re mistaking it for the PR Spit he and his wingman intercepted whilst in Norway, which was credited to Gerhardt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and? Does it matter if Knoke take off from Norway por N. Germany before he shot down a Mosquito? I don't think that effects the core of story, it's just smokescreen.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Secondly, the passage surrounding the Mosquito claim makes it sound almost exactly like the famous first daylight Mosquito raid on Berlin €" the filthy weather, the frantic calls from a furious Goering to his CO, the double penetration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting speculation, but what supports it? Obviously you don't like to accept that a Mosquito, which you as a RAF fan you believe to be the mythical invicible animal as post-war propaganda described it, could be shot down like any other aircraft. So now start to question points of Knoke's story. 'He just made up the date' is the first attempt. And there's bad wheater, man I am sure that must have been a very special during the winter months, let it be November or January, LOL.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But that raid was in January 1943, not 6/11/1942. You don€t think he might have embellished the story slightly with a rather famous incident? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's shift it to a later date, why not... and then you can claim there was no Mosquito lost on a different day, I am sure that's where the story is going.

There's two problems with the attempt :

a, Knoke's book was written based on his Flugbuch, or flight diary, which he wrote during the war, close to the events. Thus significant errors in date, esp. MONTHs as you suggest, can be ruled out.

b, The second is far more simple, Knoke's wartime flightbook dates the flight to 6/11/1942. And it's from the site you linked in.
http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/Images/Vic/Flugbuch_HK_06-11-1942a.jpg

6 November 1942.

The site you linked also says :
"This date is clearly identified in Knoke's flightbook above."

Tony Wood also lists (two) claims for 6 November as :

Day Phase: 6. November 1942

06.11.42 Ofw. Kurt Goltzsch 4./JG 2 Spitfire W 1055: 6.000 m. 12.43 Film C. 2035/II Anerk: Nr.141

Supplemental Claims from Films & Lists:

06.11.42 Ltn. Heinz Knoke: 2 2./JG 1 Mosquito 50 km. nordl. Helgoland: 50 m. 14.55 Reference: JG 1 List f. 631


Can you answer me how could you honestly claim Knoke's victory was not in November, right after you visited the site that even shows the original documents with the date you claim to be false...?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There were NO BC Mosquito losses that day. There were 3 Ventura losses, including one in exactly the right area. There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie €" but why would a PR Mossie but going home on the deck in filthy weather? Perhaps someone has a record of PRU losses so they can confirm/deny. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Very slim chance"? Because of what, a RAF-fan that don't wish to accept that vaunted, invicible plane of his choosing could be shot down just the same as any other bomber, huh? What arms other than BC were operating Mosquitoes at that time, do you even know it?

"one in exactly the right area" - Oh yeah. Exactly. The site wrote : "Presumed lost off the Dutch coasts".
'Presumed'. 'off dutch coasts'. All crew MIA.
No comment.


Let me summerize: you claim that it wasn't a Mosquito, and wasn't on that day.

The second claim of your is obviously dishonest as you have seen the site which list the exact day you deny in an orginal document, and you must have seen that.

The first claim is hardly more than denial. The site you use as a basis doesn't even know anything about PR losses at all. The site also claim that radar stations and guidance was too primitive for accurate guidance - a claim curious enough since Knoke himself describes that he was visiting one of these fighter guidance bases with the Y-fuhrung in June 1942, and he calls it an 'extraodrinary step ahead'; in any case by that time the nightfighters were guided within a few hundred meters distance to night heavies by radar.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Finally, don€t take my word for it. How about you have a good look here (http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/My-Site/Victory_2.htm), at a site dedicated, and sympathetic to, Knocke. Try as they might they can€t confirm it as a Mosquito either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They say it was on the date you try to deny. They merely hypothesize that it may have been a Ventura, but in fact there were three of those being lost on that day, and they don't even know the location; so either Knoke was claiming just one aircraft and shot down three in fact, or there were other German units operating in the area which shot down the Venturas.

It's on very weak basis I'd say, most likely simply wrong. They can't account what happened to all the three Venturas, they can't tell where they were lost, and they can't tell anything about Mosquito losses on the day except for the claim that BC did not lost a Mossie that day, without even having a source for that or any picture on PR and other units (Coastal Command for example were operating 7 Mosquito Squadrons during the war) losses. And so on.

Talk, talk, talk.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You need to be careful trying to twist propaganda out of very popular and well read books. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only one twisting very popular and well read book is you my lily-white dear.

Knoke says he shot down a Mosquito, and on 6 November 1942, it's even there on the claims list and his flugbuch.
You say Knoke did not shot down a Mosquito, and not in November 1942 but 1943.

You claim it's not the case... well, I qoute the Knoke's book then :


6 November 1942.

13.30...I take off with WENNECKERS... Tommies are heading north-west over the Bremen area.
From past experience they may be expected to cross the East Friesian Islands.
The most recent report gives the position of the Mosquitoes as map reference sector Berta-Quelle-eight, on course three-one-five.
Time : 1347hours.
I am unable to see anything at all ahead. It is maddening.
Base calls : "You should see them now. Try a little to the left."...
A shadow suddenly looms out of the greyness ahead. It is a Mosquito.
He has spotted me also, and whips round to the left in a vertical bank, almost dipping his wing-tip in the sea. Now he twists round to the right. Then he dodges to the left again...
Every time he turns I fire in front of his nose.
We are flying low, very low... at full throttle he follows a steady course of three-two-zero... my good Gustav is just able to maintain the pace...
I want to fire at only the closest possible range. Slowly i draw nearer to my opponent. I shut the radiator flaps, and the range drops to 150 feet. He is squarely in my sights...
The burst catches him in the left engine. The plane is constructed of wood. The wing goes up in flames at once and shears off at the root.
A few seconds later one De Havilland Mosquito vanishes into the green depths of the North Sea. Nothing but a sludge of oil is left on the surface.

Interesting remark is that he has been able to 'just keep pace' with it even before he shut the radiator flaps - these latter could bleed off as much as 50 kph airspeed when fully open. ASA he shut them close, he closed on the Mosquito.

http://www.motleycrow.com/ImageHost/post-17-43210-pwned.jpg

Try your own weight class next time.

Kurfurst__
07-13-2006, 11:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Trusting Knocke's recollection of dates is very important in some of Kurfurst's other work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to clear up the issue, why is the rabid RAF-fan stathem is having more trouble with Knoke ad his 'other dates'. It's because Knoke's book has some information on the early use of G-5/AS with MW50 boost in April 1944 - a date stathem would wish to push a few months later.

Unfurtunately for stathem, that horse had been beaten to death long ago, in fact there's is even photographs showing Knoke's unit (more precisly, his commander's plane) having such G-5/AS with methanol boost already in March 1944. And, Knoke was shot down in that plane not much later.

The G-5/AS type is clearly identifiable from the engine cowling, and the red painted undercarriage legs (which were painted such to remind the groundcrew to fill methanol into that plane).

In brief, stathem's rantings is just the usual nonsense stuff of his kind that can't put up with the facts.

luftluuver
07-13-2006, 12:09 PM
http://www.motleycrow.com/ImageHost/post-17-43210-pwned.jpg

So nice of you to post that image of yourself Kurfurst.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Kurfurst__
07-13-2006, 12:41 PM
That sounded like as if coming from a 3-year old. I am quite convinced some people here are no older than age here... at least mentally. Just look at the reactions.

"You are wrong!" "No, YOU are wrong!" NOOOOO, it's YOU ARE WHO's wrong - a thousend times!'

Some people's social and discussion skills here are limited to what they learned in the kindergarten. There is also a similiarity in them being the more noisier ones.

luftluuver
07-13-2006, 12:58 PM
Your fanatism for the hobnailed booted goosesteppers Kurfurst blinds you.

Ventura AE784 has the killed crew buried in Bergen Op Zoom, which is southern Holland. 2 crew survived

Ventura AJ220 has the killed crew buried in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. 2 crew survuved.

The targets for these 2 Venturas Maasluis and Velsen, are further south than Den Helder.

Ventura AE848 has the only recovered remains buried in Amsterdam.

Now logic is not one of your stronger points Kurfurst but the burial sites should point you the direction of which Ventura.


So if something is written in a log book it is gospel?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">b, The second is far more simple, Knoke's wartime flightbook dates the flight to 6/11/1942. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Daiichidoku
07-13-2006, 05:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:
[* firstly, there were no P-47D-10s in 1942. It's a 1943 bird.
* secondly, I'm dubious about the D-22 block as a 1943 build. We might usefully say late 1943.
* thirdly, none of the P-47s in the field were retrofitted with the paddle-bladed prop until early 1944.
* fourthly, according to Roger Freeman, the dive flaps were introduced on the D-30 block, not the D-27.
* fifth, only 250 D-10s were built. If you add in the 400 D-11REs (same except for water pump) and the 250 D-11RAs (same as D-11RE, just built at Evansville instead of Farmingdale), then the production run is about 900. In any case, the way the water injection works in-game, the version that's modelled is the D-11. There were 650 of those built. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
cheers,
Ratsack </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i have always known of the dive flaps as starting 30 block onwards, this also puzzled me, esp. as one of the sources is Bodie

also what is strange with this source is that it states the dorsal fin ext was started D27, AFAIK, the tapered dorsal ext started D25, and the square-cut leading edge dorsal ext from 30 block on

in any event, id like to confirm if indeed, the D10s were 42 or 43, and if so, was production or combat debut 42 or 43

also, respectively, sir, please list your sources for us, if you will



my apologies to the thread authour and contributors for going OT...Mossies rock!

WWMaxGunz
07-13-2006, 06:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

A shadow suddenly looms out of the greyness ahead. It is a Mosquito.
He has spotted me also, and whips round to the left in a vertical bank, almost dipping his wing-tip in the sea. Now he twists round to the right. Then he dodges to the left again...
Every time he turns I fire in front of his nose.
We are flying low, very low... at full throttle he follows a steady course of three-two-zero... my good Gustav is just able to maintain the pace...
I want to fire at only the closest possible range. Slowly i draw nearer to my opponent. I shut the radiator flaps, and the range drops to 150 feet. He is squarely in my sights...
The burst catches him in the left engine. The plane is constructed of wood. The wing goes up in flames at once and shears off at the root.
A few seconds later one De Havilland Mosquito vanishes into the green depths of the North Sea. Nothing but a sludge of oil is left on the surface.[/i]

Interesting remark is that he has been able to 'just keep pace' with it even before he shut the radiator flaps - these latter could bleed off as much as 50 kph airspeed when fully open. ASA he shut them close, he closed on the Mosquito.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So after some hard turns the Mosquito is unable to out-accelerate and out-run the 109
which was close enough to make shots over the nose during those turns.

But then it would not be able to. This is not some 300km chase and overhaul. It is a
109 at full effort closing short range while going from maneuver speed, far short of full
speed, up over a limited time.

But good shooting to Knoke!

berg417448
07-13-2006, 06:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:


i have always known of the dive flaps as starting 30 block onwards, this also puzzled me, esp. as one of the sources is Bodie

also what is strange with this source is that it states the dorsal fin ext was started D27, AFAIK, the tapered dorsal ext started D25, and the square-cut leading edge dorsal ext from 30 block on

in any event, id like to confirm if indeed, the D10s were 42 or 43, and if so, was production or combat debut 42 or 43

also, respectively, sir, please list your sources for us, if you will



my apologies to the thread authour and contributors for going OT...Mossies rock! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've always wondered...Is the 42- in the aircraft's serial number the year of manufacture or the year the order was made? I've read that the P-47D was ordered in October 1941 so I guess maybe it is year of production?

This site shows what happened to some of the P-47D-10 aircraft. All losses seem to be in 1944.

42-74965 through 42- 75214

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/1942_4.html (http://home.att.net/%7Ejbaugher/1942_4.html)

VMF-214_HaVoK
07-13-2006, 07:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CUJO_1970:
Nov. 14, 1943 - Luftwaffe ace Addi Glunz took off from his airfield and ran down a Mosquito of RAF 1409 flt. in his FW190A-6, and blew it up.

The key for LW fighter pilots was to know where the Mosquito was - and this one had been tracked on radar for some time.

In WWII, any aircraft flying at high speed and in small numbers was difficult to intercept, and this is key in the Mosquitos success. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since it was blown up. How do you know it was not having mechanical difficulties? If it had engine trouble? One can not take a single pilot account as gospel. Although I do realize that is unheard of around here.

LStarosta
07-13-2006, 07:31 PM
n00bz.

Skeeters had cloaking devices stolen from the Romulans.

joeap
07-13-2006, 07:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
n00bz.

Skeeters had cloaking devices stolen from the Romulans. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.hjo3.net/orly/gal1/orly_spock.jpg

stanford-ukded
07-13-2006, 08:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

A shadow suddenly looms out of the greyness ahead. It is a Mosquito.
He has spotted me also, and whips round to the left in a vertical bank, almost dipping his wing-tip in the sea. Now he twists round to the right. Then he dodges to the left again...
Every time he turns I fire in front of his nose.
We are flying low, very low... at full throttle he follows a steady course of three-two-zero... my good Gustav is just able to maintain the pace...
I want to fire at only the closest possible range. Slowly i draw nearer to my opponent. I shut the radiator flaps, and the range drops to 150 feet. He is squarely in my sights...
The burst catches him in the left engine. The plane is constructed of wood. The wing goes up in flames at once and shears off at the root.
A few seconds later one De Havilland Mosquito vanishes into the green depths of the North Sea. Nothing but a sludge of oil is left on the surface.[/i]

Interesting remark is that he has been able to 'just keep pace' with it even before he shut the radiator flaps - these latter could bleed off as much as 50 kph airspeed when fully open. ASA he shut them close, he closed on the Mosquito. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hang on Kurfurst, are you actually trying to put across the point the 109 G is as fast, or possibly faster on the deck than a Mosquito...?

grifter2u
07-13-2006, 09:35 PM
this thread is an excellent discussion on the mosquito (except for that kurfurt dude, he seems like the village idiot with his childish posts).

the official RAF document that lists the (very low) losses for the mosquito during the war really says it all, and Galland's discussion fully confirms how the plane performed. sadly it isnt represented like this in il2.

horseback
07-13-2006, 11:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by berg417448:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:


i have always known of the dive flaps as starting 30 block onwards, this also puzzled me, esp. as one of the sources is Bodie

also what is strange with this source is that it states the dorsal fin ext was started D27, AFAIK, the tapered dorsal ext started D25, and the square-cut leading edge dorsal ext from 30 block on

in any event, id like to confirm if indeed, the D10s were 42 or 43, and if so, was production or combat debut 42 or 43

also, respectively, sir, please list your sources for us, if you will

my apologies to the thread authour and contributors for going OT...Mossies rock! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've always wondered...Is the 42- in the aircraft's serial number the year of manufacture or the year the order was made? I've read that the P-47D was ordered in October 1941 so I guess maybe it is year of production?

This site shows what happened to some of the P-47D-10 aircraft. All losses seem to be in 1944.

42-74965 through 42- 75214
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>The first two numbers in the serials refer to the contract year, ie, when the aircraft was ordered. D-10s were probably available in the US no later than late spring of '43, and were in England by late summer. Active combat units would have been loathe to give up C models that had had the 'bugs' worked out in exchange for new a/c that were also needed by new units arriving in England at that time.

Besides, as much as possible, the C models would have been fitted with as many of the new aircraft's improvements as practical, upgrade kits being easier to ship overseas than new aircraft. The same principle would apply to D-10s in early '44, and escort units passed their old razorbacks on to ground attack units as the bubbletop models with longer range became available.

As to the question of the first combat use of the P-47, it was early spring of 1943, when the 4th FG converted from Spitfire Mk Vbs inherited from their former RAF service to P-47Cs. They were quickly followed into combat operations by the 78th FG (originally a P-38 outfit which lost its Lightnings to Torch groups) and the 56th FG, which had actually trained up on P-47s.

Combat operation of the Thunderbolt in New Guinea began shortly thereafter, in May and June of 1943.

cheers

horseback

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 01:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stanford-ukded:

Hang on Kurfurst, are you actually trying to put across the point the 109 G is as fast, or possibly faster on the deck than a Mosquito...? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well Knoke did catch and shoot down a Mosquito in one..

It depends on what model we are speaking, and engine boosts cleared. Knoke shot down his in 1942, at which time the Merlins were probably not yet cleared for very high boost.

AAEE tests with rocket-equipped FB VI (Merlin 23) revealed:-

In MS Gear In FS Gear
Altitude.....................Sea Level ... 13,900ft ... 20,700ft
Max Speed (mph).................278..........327 .........329
Max Speed (rails fitted only).. 286......... 336 ........ 337
Max Speed (no RP gear) .........296 .........351 ........ 358

296mph = 476 kph
358mph = 576 kph

It doesn't seem to be very fast, but perhaps it's one of the earlier, lower boosted versions.

MEGILE
07-14-2006, 02:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:


Well Knoke did catch and shoot down a Mosquito in one..
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You now that Mustangs shot down ME-262s as well right?

This has nothing to do with top speed... stick to the graphs.

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 02:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
You now that Mustangs shot down ME-262s as well right?

This has nothing to do with top speed... stick to the graphs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As you wish :

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/137.jpg

Combat power being used according to the label.

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 03:28 AM
Notice that drop tanks are fitted.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1114844/Mosquito6.jpg

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 04:06 AM
Even nicer would be to know the details and date of the test. Is that one of those 150 grade anti-V1 Mosquitos that did not turn up until 1944 in small numbers?

ImpStarDuece
07-14-2006, 04:32 AM
Just did this at All About Warfare http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3494/mosquitoivspeedunaltered4gc.jpg

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/4623/mossieperform3bq.jpg


I'll favour data from the nation of manufacture over data from anywhere else, EVERY TIME.

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 04:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Even nicer would be to know the details and date of the test. Is that one of those 150 grade anti-V1 Mosquitos that did not turn up until 1944 in small numbers? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Since HX802 went missing off Malta 7.11.43 would say it was not any 25lb/150octane boost test.

Nice try Kurfurst. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 05:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
I'll favour data from the nation of manufacture over data from anywhere else, EVERY TIME. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AAEE tests with rocket-equipped FB VI (Merlin 23) revealed:-

In MS Gear In FS Gear
Altitude.....................Sea Level ... 13,900ft ... 20,700ft
Max Speed (mph).................278..........327 .........329
Max Speed (rails fitted only).. 286......... 336 ........ 337
Max Speed (no RP gear) .........296 .........351 ........ 358

296mph = 476 kph
358mph = 576 kph


It would be nice to know what is the source of difference between the trials.

Over All about warfare ii you noted :

Removing the falme dampers and fitting multiple ejector exhausts was supposed to add between 5 and 15 mph, depending on altitude.

The Merlin 25s were fitted to the B. Mk IV beginning with a small batch produced between March and May 1943, followed by a production batch of 500 at Standard Motors (June 1943- Dec-1944) split between Merlin 23s and Merlin 25s and a July 1943 to November production batch of 130 at Hatfield, with a mix of Merlin 21s, 23s and 25s.

It would appear that the FB MkVI Mosquito on your second chart is a mid/late 1943 with improved exhaust, and given the no external load remark, I suppose no wing bomb racks either.

To qoute you again from AAW2 :

"Multiple ejector exhausts increased max level speed by about 12mph TAS.
Under-wing bomb reduced speed by about 15mph TAS."

Chart 1
Performance B IV +14/3000, conditions unknown :

325 mph at SL
368 mph at 10000
(523 kph / 592kph at ~3000m)


Performance FB VI with Manifold exhausts, Merlin 25, no external load, +18/3000rpm (from Istartdeuce's chart):

336 mph at SL
378 mph at 13,000 feet.
(541 kph SL, 608 kph 4000m)

With wing racks - 15mph:

321 mph SL
~363mph at 13,000 feet
(516 kph / ~584 kph)

To me it would appear the difference between the figures is from different engines, and more importantly, no wing racks present.

In either case, it would not present too much difficulty for daylight fighters to catch up with it.

mhuxt
07-14-2006, 05:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Well Knoke did catch and shoot down a Mosquito in one.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, he didn't.

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 05:48 AM
These are the Mossie losses for 1942

W4056 PRI 1PRU Missing from PR mission to Trondheim 2.4.42


W4068 BIV 105 Missing (Cologne) 1.6.42


DK294 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 2.7.42
DK298 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 2.7.42
DK299 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 11.7.42
W4067 BIV RAE/Mkrs/AAEE/1PRU Missing from PR mission to Bergen and Stavanger 27.7.42
W4069 BIV 105 Missing (Wilhelmshaven) 16.7.42
DK289 FBIV 1401 Flt Missing on met flight 26.7.42
DK295 FBIV 105 Missing (Essen) 28.7.42


DK308 FBIV 105 Missing (Bremen) 1.8.42
DK309 FBIV 105 Missing (Mainz) 15.8.42
W4065 BIV AFDU/105 Missing (Bremen) 19.8.42
DK297 FBIV 105 Missing (Brauweller) 25.8.42


DK322 FBIV 105 Missing (Frankfurt) 6.9.42
DK329 FBIV 521 Missing on met flight 8.9.42
DD684 NFII 23 Missing 9.9.42
DD689 NFII 23 Missing 9.9.42
DK326 FBIV 105 Missing (Berlin) 19.9.42
DK325 FBIV 105 Shot down by Bf109 over OslofJord 26.9.42


DK339 FBIV 105 Missing (Duisburg) 9.10.42
DK317 FBIV 105 Missing (Hannover) 11.10.42
DZ341 FBIV 105 Missing (Hannover) 11.10.42
DZ313 FBIV 105 Missing (Hannover) 20.10.42
W4058 PRI 1PRU/1PRU Missing from PR mission to Oslo 17.10.42
DZ343 FBIV 105 Missing (Rengelo) 23.10.42
DK316 FBIV 105 Missing (Lingen) 30.10.42


DK328 FBIV 105 Missing from attack on shipping in Gironde 8.11.42
DZ361 FBIV 1655MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42
DD712 NFII 23 Missing 29.11.42
DZ320 FBIV 106 Missing from attack on ships off Vlissingen 13.11.42 (added)


DZ360 FBIV 105 Missing (Termonde) 22.12.42
DZ387 FBIV 139 Missing (Rheine) 20 12.42

Feel free to go through the list Kurfurst for I might have missed some.
http://www.dehavilland.ukf.net/_DH98%20prodn%20list.txt

Dtools4fools
07-14-2006, 06:16 AM
Just out of curiosity:

How can you know that this list of Mossie losses is 100% correct?

How, when and by whom was it made?
*****

WOLFMondo
07-14-2006, 06:20 AM
RAF records for losses, claims and victories are on public record in the national archives so there readily available to refer too.

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 06:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dtools4fools:
Just out of curiosity:

How can you know that this list of Mossie losses is 100% correct?

How, when and by whom was it made?
***** </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You hit the nail in the head, that's why I can never understand how can any of us, amatuers after a google search categorically state that an aircraft had been or not had been lost on a given they. We simply don't have the means to be sure.

The most reliable to determine this would be to go through all units operating the type within a week period, and look for losses, incidents etc. reported. And hell even those can be unreliable or missing info.

mhuxt
07-14-2006, 06:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dtools4fools:
How can you know that this list of Mossie losses is 100% correct?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Generally, one cross-checks with other sources.

WOLFMondo
07-14-2006, 06:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dtools4fools:
Just out of curiosity:

How can you know that this list of Mossie losses is 100% correct?

How, when and by whom was it made?
***** </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You hit the nail in the head, that's why I can never understand how can any of us, amatuers after a google search categorically state that an aircraft had been or not had been lost on a given they. We simply don't have the means to be sure.

The most reliable to determine this would be to go through all units operating the type within a week period, and look for losses, incidents etc. reported. And hell even those can be unreliable or missing info. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The nice thing about RAF records, is you can have them delivered to your house on a CD for 20.

The down side is, the national archives is a maze of millions of documents and takes an age to find, but you can do it online.

DuxCorvan
07-14-2006, 07:15 AM
We have the best performance Mosquito in the game. It's called AI Mosquito. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 07:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
The nice thing about RAF records, is you can have them delivered to your house on a CD for 20.

The down side is, the national archives is a maze of millions of documents and takes an age to find, but you can do it online. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yep, PRO's page is one if not the most culturated sites I've seen so far, but I prefer to order Luftie stuff from them - sadly, they are not cheap ! Best thing as always to have an 'inside man' in every archieve.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Viper2005_
07-14-2006, 07:36 AM
Merlin 23 and Merlin 25 are very dissimilar in performance.

Merlin 23 (Net dry weight 1470 lb with 2.5% tolerance)

Combat ratings
1460 bhp/3000 rpm/6250 feet/+14 psi/MS gear
1435 bhp/3000 rpm/11000 feet/+16 psi/FS gear

Takeoff power
1390 bhp/3000 rpm/sea level/+14 psi/MS gear

Merlin 25 (Net dry weight 1455 lb with 2.5% tolerance)

Combat ratings
1635 bhp/3000 rpm/2250 feet/+18 psi/MS gear
1510 bhp/3000 rpm/9250 feet/+18 psi/FS gear

Takeoff power
1610 bhp/3000 rpm/sea level/+18 psi/MS gear

Harvey-Bailey, A. (1995)THE MERLIN IN PERSPECTIVE - the combat years 4th Edition. Derby: Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust

It is hardly surprising that the early Merlin 23 Mosquitos were much slower than the later Merlin 25 versions, especially at low level.

Mosquito bombers were aerodynamically cleaner than Mosquito fighters due to the requirement that the latter featured optically flat cockpit glass for gun aiming (though this was offset somewhat by the flat bomb-aiming transparency on the former).

Anyway, the fact is that the Mosquito didn't need to be faster than the German fighters to avoid interception. To carry out an effective interception, overtake is required. From a tactical viewpoint, the most practical method of attacking a Mosquito is a traditional curve of pursuit. Head on attacks are unlikely to be effective due to the high closing speed (600 mph+) and the relatively small target. Pick the target up visually at 5 miles, and you'd have 30 seconds before it flashes by, in which time you would have to set up the attack, positively identify the target, fire and take evasive action. That's a big ask.

At night it would be impossible.

As such, a traditional curve of pursuit would be the method of choice. That's all very well, but now you've gone from too much overtake to too little. Let's assume that the Luftwaffe fighters have a 20 mph speed advantage.

If they execute a perfect curve of pursuit they might find themselves in a 2 mile trail. As they'll fire at close range, this effectively means that they need to close a 2 mile gap to fire. At 20 mph, those 2 miles will take 6 minutes, during which time the Mosquito will cover (assuming 360 mph) a distance of 36 miles!

This means that in order to intercept a Mosquito before it hits its target, a BARCAP out to about 40 miles radius is needed.

Compare this with a conventional bomber at say 230 mph. Now the Luftwaffe have about 150 mph overtake. So with the same intercept geometry, it takes only 48 seconds to close the distance, during which time the bomber covers a distance of 3.07 miles. So you could intercept it from a 5 mile BARCAP.

The larger BARCAP requirement thins out resources. The low radar cross section complicates detection.

Fighters are thirsty at high power. Range and endurance would start to become important issues when chasing Mosquitos, especially on their way home. And of course, the night fighters had even less overtake (if any!).

Of course, this is a very simplistic analysis, but it serves to illustrate the point:

<span class="ev_code_red">The Mosquito wasn't impossible to intercept by any means, but it was very much more difficult to intercept than the conventional bombers of the period.</span>

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
You hit the nail in the head, that's why I can never understand how can any of us, amatuers after a google search categorically state that an aircraft had been or not had been lost on a given they. We simply don't have the means to be sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Then why do you insist that it was a Mossie Knoke shot down? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 09:04 AM
I find Knoke's description, his Flugbuch records, claim papers etc. a perfectly good reason for that.

mhuxt
07-14-2006, 09:12 AM
Head Illinois State Trooper: The guy is fish food.
Deputy Marshal Samuel Gerard: Fine. Go get a cane pole, catch the fish that ate him.

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 09:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I find Knoke's description, his Flugbuch records, claim papers etc. a perfectly good reason for that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>A/c were mis-Ided all the time. Claims were based on his ident of the a/c.

JG53Frankyboy
07-14-2006, 09:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
These are the Mossie losses for 1942

W4056 PRI 1PRU Missing from PR mission to Trondheim 2.4.42


W4068 BIV 105 Missing (Cologne) 1.6.42


DK294 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 2.7.42
DK298 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 2.7.42
DK299 FBIV 105 Missing (Flensburg) 11.7.42
W4067 BIV RAE/Mkrs/AAEE/1PRU Missing from PR mission to Bergen and Stavanger 27.7.42
W4069 BIV 105 Missing (Wilhelmshaven) 16.7.42
DK289 FBIV 1401 Flt Missing on met flight 26.7.42
DK295 FBIV 105 Missing (Essen) 28.7.42


............................. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

is this FBIV a typo ?

so, when the FB .VI made its first combat sortie ?

stathem
07-14-2006, 09:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Oh Kurfurst, you really do need a memory upgrade €" or to read Knocke€s book, which you so heavily rely on, again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And you need a girlfriend. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personal insults already? This one must be dear to your heart.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">First thing, Knocke€s second confirmed kill was not when he was based in Norway €" you€re getting confused. His Mosquito claim came when he was flying with 2/JG1 out of Jever, Northern Germany. I think you€re mistaking it for the PR Spit he and his wingman intercepted whilst in Norway, which was credited to Gerhardt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...and? Does it matter if Knoke take off from Norway por N. Germany before he shot down a Mosquito? I don't think that effects the core of story, it's just smokescreen. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it does matter in a discussion of your ability to remember details of books correctly.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Secondly, the passage surrounding the Mosquito claim makes it sound almost exactly like the famous first daylight Mosquito raid on Berlin €" the filthy weather, the frantic calls from a furious Goering to his CO, the double penetration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting speculation, but what supports it? Obviously you don't like to accept that a Mosquito, which you as a RAF fan you believe to be the mythical invicible animal as post-war propaganda described it, could be shot down like any other aircraft. So now start to question points of Knoke's story. 'He just made up the date' is the first attempt. And there's bad wheater, man I am sure that must have been a very special during the winter months, let it be November or January, LOL. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What supports it? Well, if you have some knowledge of the first daylight raid on Berlin on the 30th January 1943, the one that interrupted Goering's speech, you can see huge similarities between that operation and Knoke's decription of his interception. Especially if you know that one of the Berlin mossies on the second wave of that raid was lost in bad weather, and unknown circumstances. However....

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But that raid was in January 1943, not 6/11/1942. You don€t think he might have embellished the story slightly with a rather famous incident? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's shift it to a later date, why not... and then you can claim there was no Mosquito lost on a different day, I am sure that's where the story is going. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...I'm not trying to say that Knoke shot down on of those Mosquitos. I'm saying that perhaps, when writing his book, he mixed up a failed interception of those with his victory over a twin off the northern coast on a different date. I have no doubt that Knoke shot down that twin. I have no doubt that at the time he thought it was a Mosquito. I am sure he wanted it to be a Mosquito, after all, they were a very prized scalp in the Luftwaffe of 1942. I mean, that is what this thread is about, isn't it? I have severe doubts that he was verorted onto it as it returned from Berlin, especially considering there were no daylight Mosquitos over Berlin till 30th Jan 1943. I do apologise for the confusion, and sorry that, when writing my original post, I wasn't more clear. When setting things down, I'd forgotten you're special needs.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
There's two problems with the attempt :

a, Knoke's book was written based on his Flugbuch, or flight diary, which he wrote during the war, close to the events. Thus significant errors in date, esp. MONTHs as you suggest, can be ruled out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

..and the rest of the details were filled in after the war. Which is why he may have got confused on the exact details of the interception.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
b, The second is far more simple, Knoke's wartime flightbook dates the flight to 6/11/1942. And it's from the site you linked in.
http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/Images/Vic/Flugbuch_HK_06-11-1942a.jpg

6 November 1942.

The site you linked also says :
"This date is clearly identified in Knoke's flightbook above."

Tony Wood also lists (two) claims for 6 November as :

Day Phase: 6. November 1942

06.11.42 Ofw. Kurt Goltzsch 4./JG 2 Spitfire W 1055: 6.000 m. 12.43 Film C. 2035/II Anerk: Nr.141

Supplemental Claims from Films & Lists:

06.11.42 Ltn. Heinz Knoke: 2 2./JG 1 Mosquito 50 km. nordl. Helgoland: 50 m. 14.55 Reference: JG 1 List f. 631


Can you answer me how could you honestly claim Knoke's victory was not in November, right after you visited the site that even shows the original documents with the date you claim to be false...? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please see above. If I gave the impression I was claiming he shot one down on a different day, it wasn't my intention. My intention is that he didn't shoot down one at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There were NO BC Mosquito losses that day. There were 3 Ventura losses, including one in exactly the right area. There is a very slim possibility that is was a PR Mossie €" but why would a PR Mossie but going home on the deck in filthy weather? Perhaps someone has a record of PRU losses so they can confirm/deny. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Very slim chance"? Because of what, a RAF-fan that don't wish to accept that vaunted, invicible plane of his choosing could be shot down just the same as any other bomber, huh? What arms other than BC were operating Mosquitoes at that time, do you even know it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I said a slim chance because I'd not looked into possible PRU losses. Now we know different.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Let me summerize: you claim that it wasn't a Mosquito, and wasn't on that day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, allow me. There were no Bomber Command Mosquitos lost that day. There were no PR Mosquitos lost that day. Coastal Command wasn't even using Mosquitos at that date. It wasn't a Mosquito, and it certainly wasn't one on the way back from Berlin. Now how about you go away and find the serial number of a Mosquito lost on that date? A VVS one perhaps?



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
The second claim of your is obviously dishonest as you have seen the site which list the exact day you deny in an orginal document, and you must have seen that.

The first claim is hardly more than denial. The site you use as a basis doesn't even know anything about PR losses at all. The site also claim that radar stations and guidance was too primitive for accurate guidance - a claim curious enough since Knoke himself describes that he was visiting one of these fighter guidance bases with the Y-fuhrung in June 1942, and he calls it an 'extraodrinary step ahead'; in any case by that time the nightfighters were guided within a few hundred meters distance to night heavies by radar. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It must have been damn good to vector him onto a twin flying at wavetop height over the North Sea. Read the passage again.

If we check the site it says
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
In his book on the JG1, author Eric Mombeek associates Mosquito DK328 / V crew F / LT A.N. BRISTOW, F / LT B.W. MARSHALL with this Heinz KNOKE's victory. In fact the following information proves that it is not the good aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Presumably Mombeek made quite siginificant searches for an appropriate Mosquito loss, but...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Message from Henk Welting Thu Jan 13 05:58:32 2000

Mosquito DK328/V was not 6-11-42 but one day later...7-11-42. Squadron was 105 Sqdn, attacking ships on the Gironde River.
DK328 attacked the 5,000t Merchant "Elsa Essberger" cruising on the Gironde.
F/Lt A.N. BRISTOW, pilot, and F/Lt B.W. MARSHALL, nav., both PoW-camp L-3.
Regards from Holland - Henk. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Finally, don€t take my word for it. How about you have a good look here (http://ns33.hosteur.com/%7Eheinzkno/My-Site/Victory_2.htm), at a site dedicated, and sympathetic to, Knocke. Try as they might they can€t confirm it as a Mosquito either. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They say it was on the date you try to deny. They merely hypothesize that it may have been a Ventura, but in fact there were three of those being lost on that day, and they don't even know the location; so either Knoke was claiming just one aircraft and shot down three in fact, or there were other German units operating in the area which shot down the Venturas.

It's on very weak basis I'd say, most likely simply wrong. They can't account what happened to all the three Venturas, they can't tell where they were lost, and they can't tell anything about Mosquito losses on the day except for the claim that BC did not lost a Mossie that day, without even having a source for that or any picture on PR and other units (Coastal Command for example were operating 7 Mosquito Squadrons during the war) losses. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

During the War, yes, In 1942, No.Coastal Commmand OoB (http://www.chat.carleton.ca/%7Ejnoakes/ram/cc/mar0143.html)

mhuxt confirmed there were no PR losses that day, and the first Mossie PR run to Berlin wasn't until March 1943. The site probably hadn't realised they had to conform to Kurfurst's standards of proof.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Talk, talk, talk. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And you certainly know how to do that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You need to be careful trying to twist propaganda out of very popular and well read books. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only one twisting very popular and well read book is you my lily-white dear.

Knoke says he shot down a Mosquito, and on 6 November 1942, it's even there on the claims list and his flugbuch.
You say Knoke did not shot down a Mosquito, and not in November 1942 but 1943.

You claim it's not the case... well, I qoute the Knoke's book then :


6 November 1942.

13.30...I take off with WENNECKERS... Tommies are heading north-west over the Bremen area.
From past experience they may be expected to cross the East Friesian Islands.
The most recent report gives the position of the Mosquitoes as map reference sector Berta-Quelle-eight, on course three-one-five.
Time : 1347hours.
I am unable to see anything at all ahead. It is maddening.
Base calls : "You should see them now. Try a little to the left."...
A shadow suddenly looms out of the greyness ahead. It is a Mosquito.
He has spotted me also, and whips round to the left in a vertical bank, almost dipping his wing-tip in the sea. Now he twists round to the right. Then he dodges to the left again...
Every time he turns I fire in front of his nose.
We are flying low, very low... at full throttle he follows a steady course of three-two-zero... my good Gustav is just able to maintain the pace...
I want to fire at only the closest possible range. Slowly i draw nearer to my opponent. I shut the radiator flaps, and the range drops to 150 feet. He is squarely in my sights...
The burst catches him in the left engine. The plane is constructed of wood. The wing goes up in flames at once and shears off at the root.
A few seconds later one De Havilland Mosquito vanishes into the green depths of the North Sea. Nothing but a sludge of oil is left on the surface.

Interesting remark is that he has been able to 'just keep pace' with it even before he shut the radiator flaps - these latter could bleed off as much as 50 kph airspeed when fully open. ASA he shut them close, he closed on the Mosquito. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Putting those sentances in bold doesn't make them any more true. Your whole case rests on those words. One pilot account in filthy weather. Did he manage to tell it was made out of wood just by shooting at it? Or d'you think he knew that already? I suppose Venturas don't set on fire?


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Try your own weight class next time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your high opinion of yourself is not justified by anything I've ever seen you do or say.

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 09:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
is this FBIV a typo ?

so, when the FB .VI made its first combat sortie ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Must be.

WWMaxGunz
07-14-2006, 09:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
You hit the nail in the head, that's why I can never understand how can any of us, amatuers after a google search categorically state that an aircraft had been or not had been lost on a given they. We simply don't have the means to be sure.

The most reliable to determine this would be to go through all units operating the type within a week period, and look for losses, incidents etc. reported. And hell even those can be unreliable or missing info. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And yet I have seen posted German losses to disprove Allied claims. And so many records from
Germany were lost themselves.....

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 09:41 AM
stratem,

the Gironde River is in southern France. It is the river that flows through Bordeux. That is a VERY LONG way from the position of Knoke's claim.

I guess we can put to rest, for good, that Knoke's claim was a Mossie now. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

JG53Frankyboy
07-14-2006, 09:44 AM
but still wondering about FB .VI (if this FB.IV is a typo , as it should http://home.gil.com.au/~bfillery/mossie02.htm (http://home.gil.com.au/%7Ebfillery/mossie02.htm) ) losses in 1942 ?

all i can find, internet (sure not the most reliable source) and my few books about it, are saying spring 1943 .............

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 09:49 AM
The FBIV has to be a typo. Should be BIV.

JG53Frankyboy
07-14-2006, 09:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
The FBIV has to be a typo. Should be BIV. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WOLFMondo
07-14-2006, 10:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
And yet I have seen posted German losses to disprove Allied claims. And so many records from
Germany were lost themselves..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not all true. When the RAF went in after the war they found the Luftwaffe was extrememly meticulous in there record keeping all the way until the final weeks. Enough that they could verify almost all RAF kills claims. Its took them years to study all of the documents.

Kurfurst__
07-14-2006, 10:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:

NOISE &gt; signal

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry mate but you still failed to show anything that would underline your little theory. You simply make claims and that's it.

It's perfectly OK with me. In your world, Knoke did not shoot down a Mosquito, but a Ventura, even though there's no proof for that, you keep claiming there was no Mosquito loss that they which you can't prove at all; in your world, he didn't do it on November but January. Why? Just 'cos! It is little more than a sign of how far you got from the real world in wanting it to be anything else then a Mosquito. Now curious that it's the same rabid RAFfanatic who dismiss Knoke's account on receiving AS aircraft in April 1944 for the same reason, he doesn't want those a/c to be around so soon... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I am pretty sure you cant even tell what units were flying Mosquitos in November 1942...

csThor
07-14-2006, 10:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to Christer Bergstr¶m JG50 never received anything but ordinary G-6s. It was planned to turn them into a specialized Mosquito hunting unit, but even the "ordinary" G-6s were hard to get for them. In the end they flew more normal Reich Defense missions than Mosquito intercepts. Then Graf was made Kommodore of JG 11 and the whole case was closed ...

Slickun
07-14-2006, 10:55 AM
I first read "I Flew for the Fuerher" by Knocke in 1962. All these years...and I still don't know how to pronounce his name.

Can someone enlighten me? Does it rhyme with "Pokey", or "Poke"?

Thanks in advance.

Also, how 'bout Horrido? Is it "ho-REED-oh" or HORR-i-do?

Wtornado_439th
07-14-2006, 11:16 AM
I'm just writing because I haven't seen woofie dog pics for a while and theres one at the beginning of the posts.

The pic has made my day http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

&lt;S&gt; cheers 439th_Wtornado

woofiedog
07-14-2006, 01:26 PM
Wtornado_439th... Glad your day is going better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v438/woofiedog/Woofiedog1a.jpg

fighter_966
07-14-2006, 01:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Slickun:
I first read "I Flew for the Fuerher" by Knocke in 1962. All these years...and I still don't know how to pronounce his name.

Can someone enlighten me? Does it rhyme with "Pokey", or "Poke"?

Thanks in advance.

Also, how 'bout Horrido? Is it "ho-REED-oh" or HORR-i-do? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Its Poke and HORR-i-doh

luftluuver
07-14-2006, 01:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Sorry mate but you still failed to show anything that would underline your little theory. You simply make claims and that's it.

It's perfectly OK with me. In your world, Knoke did not shoot down a Mosquito, but a Ventura, even though there's no proof for that, you keep claiming there was no Mosquito loss that they which you can't prove at all; in your world, he didn't do it on November but January. Why? Just 'cos! It is little more than a sign of how far you got from the real world in wanting it to be anything else then a Mosquito. Now curious that it's the same rabid RAFfanatic who dismiss Knoke's account on receiving AS aircraft in April 1944 for the same reason, he doesn't want those a/c to be around so soon... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I am pretty sure you cant even tell what units were flying Mosquitos in November 1942... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">That is a very good self analysis Kurfurst, so stop describing yourself.</span> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Nos 23, 25, 85, 105, 109, 139, 151, 157, 264, 307, 410, 456 and PRU all had Mossies.

Now get out of your fanatsy world, for the fact is, Knoke's claim of a Mossie can't be supported by RAF losses of Mosquitos. A Ventura loss does though AND in the correct area. It was Mosquito snobbery just like it was Spitfire snobbery for LW pilots,

Sintubin
07-14-2006, 01:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Good post MOH_FOX http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

The Mosquito we have in this sim is from 1942 and not the better performing late war versions.

It's success cannot be replicated in a dog-fight server.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like al FW190 too )))

Viper2005_
07-14-2006, 02:33 PM
The Mosquito can be extremely effective in dogfight servers, provided that the planeset is limited to 1942. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The A9 is an extremely effective killing machine in most late war dogfight servers (though the +25 Spitfire is a nightmare).

If the server correctly substitutes the A5 for the A4, or allows the boosted A5 to coexist with the A6 and A8, it's a very effective killing machine mid-war as well. And the boosted A5 can keep on trucking right to the end. In fact, against +25 Spits it's much better than the A9 IMO because it's really good at down and dirty knife fighting.

I'd rather fly an A4 than a G2. Given a decent wingman, I'd rather take an A4 than a K4. But then I really like the 190.

Getting back to the Mosquito, given a realistic mission objective (single pass and run like ****) I'd take the Mosquito we have over the P-38J all day.

If they gave us Merlin 25s, I'd say the same about the P-38L. Give us a 2 stage late war Mosquito bomber, and it's only ground pounder in town for my money.

Having said that, IMO at the moment the single engine handling at low speed is FAR too forgiving (but that applies to most twins in game).

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth.

La7_brook
07-14-2006, 02:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
JG/50 with Graf leding it they flew G5 with pressurized cockpits and polished to crease speed and the GM1 N20 supercharger ,with one of theses aircraft Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet / GRAF,S 203 clim was a mosquito in june 43 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to Christer Bergstr¶m JG50 never received anything but ordinary G-6s. It was planned to turn them into a specialized Mosquito hunting unit, but even the "ordinary" G-6s were hard to get for them. In the end they flew more normal Reich Defense missions than Mosquito intercepts. Then Graf was made Kommodore of JG 11 and the whole case was closed ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>what i got is the first twelve bf109 g5s arrived in july 43 pages 172 173

JG53Frankyboy
07-14-2006, 03:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
The Mosquito can be extremely effective in dogfight servers, provided that the planeset is limited to 1942. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

.............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

but what if the FB.VI came not earlier in service than spring 1943 ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

actually the Mosqiuto can more easily escape from a 109G6 than from a G2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

and Burma will be no proplem at all, we will have only the Ki-43-II on this map for the japanese http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
07-14-2006, 03:51 PM
i think the beaufighter is faster than the japanease planes?http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

the mossie we have is abit pants, thats why its dodgy in 43 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

LStarosta
07-14-2006, 04:06 PM
zomg don't u ppl have better things to do on a nice summer day than argue about what airplane someone shot down ~60 yrs ago?!

jebezus chriiist.

MEGILE
07-14-2006, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
zomg don't u ppl have better things to do on a nice summer day than argue about what airplane someone shot down ~60 yrs ago?!


ebezus chriiist. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are here too, noob http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

JSG72
07-14-2006, 05:06 PM
Haven't we been here before?

De Haviland Mosquito.

Was indeed a wonder weapon. But certainly not Hyped up to be by U.S.

And seen as how they had a bigger Media influence. Then B-17 Stays as War winner. (It existed and they used it.You have to Hype something to appease "Folks at Home").
So Stop comparing hardware.

Utelising. May have been the contention.
If you need reminding you are In the wrong Sim Forum!

Why, didn't they develop the ME 262 as a Floatplane?

Bet somebody answers this!

Viper2005_
07-14-2006, 06:50 PM
Perhaps because the only place they could have used it would have been the ammerlake, and frankly, the drag of the floats would have rather invalidated the concept.

Why am I answering this? Deathkick. One more minute to kill!

Oh and whilst I think about it, water plus steel components = reduced life. Reduced life + German gas turbines = zero life. Go figure.

Having said that, it could have been done. It would just have been pointless.

SARO developed a turbojet flyingboat at the end of the war aimed at the pacific theatre. It just wasn't that good when compared with a land based jet, because however you stack it the kit you need for water ops (esp steps) are draggy as heck in the air. And since water is about 864 times as dense as air, you end up with lots of Q, so you've got to build all the stuff which is going to hit the water like the proverbial brick out-house.

Deathkick over. Bye!

Slickun
07-14-2006, 07:18 PM
Thanks, Fighter_666

LStarosta
07-14-2006, 08:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
zomg don't u ppl have better things to do on a nice summer day than argue about what airplane someone shot down ~60 yrs ago?!


ebezus chriiist. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are here too, noob http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



I'm here for the Materazzi bashing.

p1ngu666
07-14-2006, 08:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Perhaps because the only place they could have used it would have been the ammerlake, and frankly, the drag of the floats would have rather invalidated the concept.

Why am I answering this? Deathkick. One more minute to kill!

Oh and whilst I think about it, water plus steel components = reduced life. Reduced life + German gas turbines = zero life. Go figure.

Having said that, it could have been done. It would just have been pointless.

SARO developed a turbojet flyingboat at the end of the war aimed at the pacific theatre. It just wasn't that good when compared with a land based jet, because however you stack it the kit you need for water ops (esp steps) are draggy as heck in the air. And since water is about 864 times as dense as air, you end up with lots of Q, so you've got to build all the stuff which is going to hit the water like the proverbial brick out-house.

Deathkick over. Bye! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah, but when the engine flames, maybe its abit better. or atleast a viking funeral http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

csThor
07-14-2006, 11:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
what i got is the first twelve bf109 g5s arrived in july 43 pages 172 173 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, just read the part again. Although then he makes a conflicting statement (still page 172):

"... It has been stated that the aircraft in Graf's unit had specially boosted engines. But they in fact were ordinary Bf 109 G-5s and G-6s, polished to increase speed and equipped with a special tank for GM-1 mixture, Nitro-oxide (N²O), originary laughing gas in liquid form. ..."

Well - were these planes "specially boosted" or not? I mean GM-1 was not something used on a broad scale at all. So if the unit used GM-1 then the planes were "specially boosted" in fact ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Oh what a mess ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Dtools4fools
07-15-2006, 12:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Picture of WOLFMondo

Posted Fri July 14 2006 05:20
RAF records for losses, claims and victories are on public record in the national archives so there readily available to refer too. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Nice.

And that makes those records 100% perfect?

And the question about HOW they were made and WHEN is still open...

I'm not trying to make Knoke the super-mossie-killer

hey, he might be the super-lier...and any other pilot might have been...never mind on which side they fought..

but I kind of doubt he had trougles catching up with a ventura...just makes no sense to me.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> You hit the nail in the head, that's why I can never understand how can any of us, amatuers after a google search categorically state that an aircraft had been or not had been lost on a given they. We simply don't have the means to be sure. </pre>

Yes, that's what I think. Neither of us will ever be able to tell if there were no Mossies lost on this given day. None of use will be able to tell if Knoke lied and never shot down the Mossie at all. Because we never gonna have THE REAL TRUE REPORT.

Only the dude upstairs knows.
I'm not up there with him (yet.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ) so I will shut up...
*****

La7_brook
07-15-2006, 02:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
what i got is the first twelve bf109 g5s arrived in july 43 pages 172 173 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, just read the part again. Although then he makes a conflicting statement (still page 172):

"... It has been stated that the aircraft in Graf's unit had specially boosted engines. But they in fact were ordinary Bf 109 G-5s and G-6s, polished to increase speed and equipped with a special tank for GM-1 mixture, Nitro-oxide (N²O), originary laughing gas in liquid form. ..."

Well - were these planes "specially boosted" or not? I mean GM-1 was not something used on a broad scale at all. So if the unit used GM-1 then the planes were "specially boosted" in fact ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Oh what a mess ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Graf managed to set new world record in high alt flight 14,300 meters or 45,885 feet in g5 , so how high does a standed g5 go? it will need GM-1 too do this ?/ so they were boosted g5,s

Kurfurst__
07-15-2006, 02:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
what i got is the first twelve bf109 g5s arrived in july 43 pages 172 173 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True, just read the part again. Although then he makes a conflicting statement (still page 172):

"... It has been stated that the aircraft in Graf's unit had specially boosted engines. But they in fact were ordinary Bf 109 G-5s and G-6s, polished to increase speed and equipped with a special tank for GM-1 mixture, Nitro-oxide (N²O), originary laughing gas in liquid form. ..."

Well - were these planes "specially boosted" or not? I mean GM-1 was not something used on a broad scale at all. So if the unit used GM-1 then the planes were "specially boosted" in fact ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Oh what a mess ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looking at JG50 at www.ww2.dk (http://www.ww2.dk) (excellent site btw), they had fifty-fifty G-5 and G-6. The exact substype is not listed (/U2 would be GM-1), but that's commonly missing so it does not help us much.

OTOH I've read somewhere that Graf set up a kind of a record with a GM-1 G-5, climbing to some 14 300 meter with it.

GM-1 would boost their speed at 8/10km alt by 30/40 kph.

mhuxt
07-15-2006, 04:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dtools4fools:
And the question about HOW they were made and WHEN is still open... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They were made on the basis of aircraft movement cards.

As noted above, they can be cross-checked against other sources at squadron and command level.

No Mosquito was lost on 6 November 1942.

Kurfurst__
07-15-2006, 05:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mhuxt:

No Mosquito was lost on 6 November 1942. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The story changes constantly - before it was said no Mosquito from BC, uncertain from PRU. Then it was said neither from BC, neither from PRU. And then that one was lost, but not in the location.

Now it's none lost at all. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Can you list all Mosquito Missions for 6 November 1942, +/- 1 day and the results?

mhuxt
07-15-2006, 05:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:


Before it was said no Mosquito from BC, uncertain from PRU. Then it was said neither from BC, neither from PRU. And then that one was lost, but not in the location.

Now it's none lost at all. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Can you list all Mosquito Missions for 6 November 1942, +/- 1 day and the results? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ross McNeill can. There were no Mosquito losses on 6 November 1942.

Kurfurst__
07-15-2006, 05:56 AM
37 posts.... what, your 10th nick, Milo? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

mhuxt
07-15-2006, 06:00 AM
'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Abraham Lincoln


I met Erbrirac once, supplied Mossie data.

Maybe you can ask him.

luftluuver
07-15-2006, 07:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mhuxt:
'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.'

Abraham Lincoln </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Kurfurst can't help it, come naturally. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It is hard to believe he is a lawyer when he can't follow what is being said.

Nov Losses Kurfurst:

DK328 BIV 105 Missing from attack on shipping in Gironde 8.11.42
DZ361 BIV 165/5MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42
DD712 NFII 23 Missing 29.11.42

Kurfurst__
07-15-2006, 07:54 AM
Although we all know Kutscha is not by accident the same thing as luftluuver and other nicks on this board, it happens that Mr. Kutscha was coincidentally asking about Knoke's Mosquito on another board. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

He has just been told by a Dutch member :

Hi Kutscha,

In fact 3 Ventura's, AE848 and AE784 and AJ200 were lost,all being claimed by Flak.
The crash locations are far away from the where Knoke claimed a Mosquito, 50 km NW of Heligoland.

So much about Venturas, that site and it's theories.

wayno7777
07-15-2006, 08:40 AM
Where's the gun camera footage?.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

p1ngu666
07-15-2006, 08:45 AM
anyone got losses for JU88's?
they where often mistake for mossies http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

luftluuver
07-15-2006, 08:49 AM
LOL Kurfurst, your paranoia for this Kutscha, and Milo, really has sent you off the deep end. Get some urgent medical treatment will you.

This is the <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">ONLY</span> board I am registered on AND have <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">ONLY</span> one nick here.

Since this Milo, aka Kutscha, is banned from this board, how can I be them or any of the other nicks your paranoia has you believing. Very http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. It is more than just me that can see through your uber German bs.

It is a wunder that you don't claim I am all those that post when you post your hobnailed booted goosestepping alternate history.


p1ngu666, now would not be ironic.

stathem
07-15-2006, 10:07 AM
Hello again. I realise that I started this but haven't had much further invovlement, been v.busy at work and home. Many thanks to Luftluvver and mhuxt for futher confirmation on the lack of Mosquito losses.

My interest fired by the subject, I was idly googling Venturas for performance(quite a hot plane, top speed 330 mph{at altitude presumably}, it's no shame that a Gustav could only just catch it.) when I came across the information (on Wikipedia, yes I know, not the best of sources) that the first RAF ventura combat mission was on the 3rd Nov. 1942; and that on the 6th Nov 1942, 47 went to attack a factory in Eindhoven (300 to 400 km from Jever) in daylight at low level. 9 were lost.

Fancy that.

Dtools4fools
07-15-2006, 10:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">quote:
Originally posted by mhuxt:
'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.'

Abraham Lincoln


Kurfurst can't help it, come naturally. Wink

It is hard to believe he is a lawyer when he can't follow what is being said.

Nov Losses Kurfurst:

DK328 BIV 105 Missing from attack on shipping in Gironde 8.11.42
DZ361 BIV 165/5MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42
DD712 NFII 23 Missing 29.11.42 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You missed:
FBIV 1655MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42

this seems quite kaput as well:
FBIV 105 Crashed in forced landing near Marham 8.11.42

and:
FBIV 106 Missing from attack on ships off Vlissingen 13.11.42

and even if this list was made on the basis of aircraft movement cards and can be cross-checked against other sources at squadron and command level...even then it does not mean that those dudes who made the list did never ever make a mistake. If the documents this list is based on is completely free of mistakes in the first place...

How can someone be so persistent that his source is the only valid and perfect flawless free of mistakes?

OMG.

As for the Ventura story, would make sense to me except:
- as it took some time to catch up there was quite some time to look at the plane...so time for IDing.
- what's low level speed for Ventura and 109G1? I kind of find it difficult to believe that 109G1 needs to close radiator and go full throttle to slowly catch up with the Ventura; Anybody has low level speeds for those planes?
****

Dtools4fools
07-15-2006, 11:13 AM
And btw, if it was a Ventura, why did the turret gunner not shoot at the 109?
Or did those Venturas have no turret?
****

Kurfurst__
07-15-2006, 11:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dtools4fools:
- what's low level speed for Ventura and 109G1? I kind of find it difficult to believe that 109G1 needs to close radiator and go full throttle to slowly catch up with the Ventura; Anybody has low level speeds for those planes?
**** </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Roughly 520-530 kph for the G-1, because of production tolerance... that's about as high as the ventura's at it's rated altitude so it makes the story unlikely because of the reasons you mentioned.

luftluuver
07-15-2006, 11:33 AM
LOL,

FBIV 1655MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42 is in the list posted.

this seems quite kaput as well:
FBIV 105 Crashed in forced landing near Marham 8.11.42 is not a missing a/c. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Guess you missed this &gt; "I might have missed some."

and:
FBIV 106 Missing from attack on ships off Vlissingen 13.11.42

Maybe the gunner was dead or wounded? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-15-2006, 11:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wayno7777:
Where's the gun camera footage?.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No ... A NTRK is better! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Dtools4fools
07-15-2006, 12:20 PM
Lufti,

you noted "Mossie losses for Nov", not in particular for 6.11 and mssing - so a "crashed in forced landing" makes a loss as well...

And if
DZ361 BIV 165/5MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42
is same as
FBIV 1655MTU/105 Missing 13.11.42
then it's indeed already in your list.
And TWICE in that list!!!! Take a look.
Shows very well then how flawless and free of mistakes that said list is...

You are right for the gunner thou, he could have been dead. Along with the other dude as well who fired to belly MG. Or was it the same guy who did switch between those two positions?
****

luftluuver
07-15-2006, 02:28 PM
4fool, how can a crashed Mossie be shot down in the North Sea? Remember what this thread is about &gt; the supposed complete loss (ie missing) of a Mossie off the Dutch coast.

I don't see a double listing for DK328 on pg4.

DK328 <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">B</span>IV is a correction for the typo DK328 <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">FB</span>IV.

When you acknowledge this post I will go back and add the one I missed.

Dtools4fools
07-15-2006, 04:44 PM
Right, my mistake, copy and pasted tiwce the same in that case. Or somefink like that.
Are you saying DK328 is (or better:was) actually a BIV and not a FBIV as indicated the original list?

Yet, the one you missed was close by:
DZ320 FBIV 106 Missing from attack on ships off Vlissingen 13.11.42
So two for 13.11.

part of the thread is about Knoke's shot down or not shot down Mossie, indeed. But I was rather referring your "entire 42" losses post. Didn't think that Mossies lost in any other month would be interesting for Knokes case. Added the crash due to damage Mossie rather to complete this list, not for Knokes case.
****

luftluuver
07-15-2006, 05:10 PM
There are many other losses not listed for '42. Was only concerned with those that were combat losses.

There was a reference to the high loss rate for the Mosquito in one post. This is why the '42 losses were listed.

Daiichidoku
07-16-2006, 08:05 PM
the size and shape of germany and vietnam ar eso differing as to render that example useless, let alone the nature of the targets themselves or the strategy involved

WWMaxGunz
07-16-2006, 09:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
Since this Milo, aka Kutscha, is banned from this board, how can I be them or any of the other nicks your paranoia has you believing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flawed logic there since Isegrim is also banned from this board, but.............

Xiolablu3
07-19-2006, 08:20 AM
This is what Jochen Prien said reagrding Heinz Knockes Mosquito claim....

Gentlemen,

first of all I want to point out that from the impression I got from Heinz Knoke whom I met a number of times and with whom I had many telephone conversations with respect to the unit history of JG 1 and 11 that I worked on during the late 'eighties, he was definitely no boaster and - as far as this can be judged in retrospect - certainly not intent on overclaiming. He certainly was a lively and extremely interested individual who in his late years attended university to hear - if I remeber that right - philosophy and or sociology. But he did not give the impression that he could have laid an unjustified claim on purpose.

His book was written in the early fifties based only on his memory, his Feindflugbuch ( flight log for sorties only ) and the scarce notes he still had. There are certainly a number of twisted dates and also outright errors, many of which we have pointed at in our history of JG 1 and 11 with the expressive agreement of Heinz Knoke, but that doesn't change the fact that the book conveys a very personal yet quite representative picture of the German dayfighters in the home defense.

Now, to his claim of November 6th, 1942: In his book he identified his opponent as a Mosquito, based on the entry in his flight log where it said that he shot down a De Havilland Mosquito in qbi conditions ( very bad visibility ) 70 km north of Borkum. In a claim report of I./JG 1 it said that the opponent was in fact a Blenheim, shot down at 14.26 hrs 20 km north of Wangerooge. And, what is important: It was not confirmed, although it may be the one RAF roundel that appeared on his a/c as his first claim in early 1943.

So, whatever British a/c he fired at on that cloudy Novemberday, he was not rewarded with the confirmation of an unwarranted aerial victory.

Hope this helps.

Regards

Jochen Prien

luftluuver
07-19-2006, 03:40 PM
Very interesting what Jochen Prien has to say. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif X

There are certainly a number of twisted dates and also outright errors, many of which we have pointed at in our history of JG 1 and 11

In a claim report of I./JG 1 it said that the opponent was in fact a Blenheim, shot down at 14.26 hrs 20 km north of Wangerooge. And, <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">what is important:</span> <span class="ev_code_RED">It was not confirmed</span>, although it may be the one RAF roundel that appeared on his a/c as his first claim in early 1943.

Dtools4fools
07-20-2006, 05:36 AM
There certainly can be outright errors in those documents. However those are not the only documents with errors in it. The list with Mossie losses could contain outright errors as well.

The Blenheim would make the story of Knoke having a hard time catching up (and Wenneckers falling behind) with the enemy plane even harder to understand...

In this case we most probably will never be able to figure out what really happened that day.
****