Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by claymore. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Because they were liars! One of the principle reasons for German failure in The Battle Of Britain was the consistent overstating of "kills" as a consequence based on the figures given, Goerring assumed that the R.A.F. had been destroyed when from out of the clouds 100s of Hurricanes and Spitfires would descend upon his planes and smah em up.
I honestly fear that people who espouse German superiority in many aspects of the war are themselves unwitting victims of Nazi propoganda.
I honestly fear that people who espouse German superiority in many aspects of the war are themselves unwitting victims of Nazi propoganda.
Another explanation, which lies in a fact normally overlooked in the West, is that until 1944 the majority of the German forces were pitted against the Soviet Union, who bore the brunt of the fighting from 1941 to 1944. Against the Western allies the Luftwaffe fighter pilots were, as the war went on, progressively more and more outclassed and out numbered. However, on the Eastern Front in terms of training, doctrine and technology the Luftwaffe faced a vastly inferior air force, particularly during the early days of Barbarossa when the Soviets were in full retreat. Much the the reported German 'kills' were during this period.
Of course the Nazis were renowned for their honesty and candour!
It was a bit harder for the R.A.F. to fake their kill rate as we had to go and pick the wreckage up off the ground as well as bury their pilots (Battle Of Britain, Africa, Europe) most of the fighting with the Germans was done over land we controlled or later occupied, I dare say if 2 pilots wanted to claim the same plane then they just both took it. The verification of kills was far more strenuous in the R.A.F. than the Luftwaffe also the rewards for boosting your kill rate in Luftwaffe was greater, if I remember correctly the Germans were having to create medals in order to cope!
To put it simply we were better at fighting than they were, that's why we won.
It was a bit harder for the R.A.F. to fake their kill rate as we had to go and pick the wreckage up off the ground as well as bury their pilots (Battle Of Britain, Africa, Europe) most of the fighting with the Germans was done over land we controlled or later occupied, I dare say if 2 pilots wanted to claim the same plane then they just both took it. The verification of kills was far more strenuous in the R.A.F. than the Luftwaffe also the rewards for boosting your kill rate in Luftwaffe was greater, if I remember correctly the Germans were having to create medals in order to cope!
To put it simply we were better at fighting than they were, that's why we won.
P.S We were engaged wth the axis on several fronts, Crete, Cypus, Greece, Africa and of course Malta. All of which were heavily targetted by the Luftwaffe. Crete could'nt have happened without the Luftwaffe, and Malta was attacked daily for months. The Germans also had to protect the Italian convoys to Libya, which we sank with ruthless effiecency and reguarly destroyed their air cover.
Face the facts we've kicked German arses all over the world TWICE!
Face the facts we've kicked German arses all over the world TWICE!
Actually, claymore has a point, it must be remembered that the Geman pilots were mostly all war experienced, eg the Spanish civil war, Poland etc, whereas when Britain entered the war, in comparison our pilots were novices, and come the Battle of Britain, we were sending up pilots with just two weeks training.
Our 'Green' pilots were being shot down at such a rate, that Air Vice Marshall Dowding took experienced pilots out of the front line, and sent them to training squadrons to pass on their knowledge and experience.
Thats when the tide of the air battle started to turn in our favour.
The rest is history.
Our 'Green' pilots were being shot down at such a rate, that Air Vice Marshall Dowding took experienced pilots out of the front line, and sent them to training squadrons to pass on their knowledge and experience.
Thats when the tide of the air battle started to turn in our favour.
The rest is history.
It's a well established fact that German pilots overstated their kill rate in order to get an Iron Cross 1st class, or to get 1 with a laurel reef or a gold laurel reef, this boosted their figures and gave them the acclaim that resulted from newsreel footage of their deeds. Did I say newsreel? I mean propoganda.
German pilots were battle hardened (t's true) but neither Poland or Spain (the German Condor squadron had to fly Franco and his troops into Madrid(?) in orrder to defeat the Communists) had an airforce to threaten them , the princple advantage to the Germans in that instance revolved around the refinement of tactics, discipline and coordinated bombing runs.
The turning point in the Battle Of Britain came when the Germans switched their attention to bombing civilians rather than the aerodromes.
German pilots were battle hardened (t's true) but neither Poland or Spain (the German Condor squadron had to fly Franco and his troops into Madrid(?) in orrder to defeat the Communists) had an airforce to threaten them , the princple advantage to the Germans in that instance revolved around the refinement of tactics, discipline and coordinated bombing runs.
The turning point in the Battle Of Britain came when the Germans switched their attention to bombing civilians rather than the aerodromes.
Just wanted to reply to a few of 123Everton's well-reasoned arguments -
- First of all, I must take issue with you equating 'Nazis' and 'Germans'. The two concepts were obviously closely linked, but they are and were simply not the same thing! Apart from the many Germans who actively fought against the fascists throughout the war, most Germans fought because of beliefs and motivations wider and older than those of Nazi ideology. Also, a great many who fought for the Nazi anti-communist cause were not German. Describing the German armed forces as 'Nazis' in a proper historical context is just lazy.
- I thought the principal reason for Germany losing the Battle of Britain was a muddled bombing strategy combined with a lack of a long-range air superiority fighter, disinterest from the Kreigsmarine and the Heer along with political lack of will? Not faking kill figures?
- Why is asserting a high level of German military capability necessarily 'Nazi propaganda'. They were a single country who successfully fought for 3 1/2 years the world's three largest economies in a total war. They must have been doing something right surely? Aside from the fact that as a total war victory was ultimately achieved by economic and geopolitical factors rather than fighting ability - THAT is why we won.
- It seems to me that while the actual fighter pilots (on both sides) would want to exaggerate their successes their superiors would have a vested interest in verifying everything and not just assuming that the enemy was taking massive losses. As far as I have read, the figures from both sides now available to historians more or less confirm the recorded German ace 'kills'.
- Understandably, due to our incredible effort, courage and fortitude during WWII, we Brits conveniently forget that the Mediterranean and North Africa was a secondary theatre until the invasion of Sicily, by which the Germans were on the back
- First of all, I must take issue with you equating 'Nazis' and 'Germans'. The two concepts were obviously closely linked, but they are and were simply not the same thing! Apart from the many Germans who actively fought against the fascists throughout the war, most Germans fought because of beliefs and motivations wider and older than those of Nazi ideology. Also, a great many who fought for the Nazi anti-communist cause were not German. Describing the German armed forces as 'Nazis' in a proper historical context is just lazy.
- I thought the principal reason for Germany losing the Battle of Britain was a muddled bombing strategy combined with a lack of a long-range air superiority fighter, disinterest from the Kreigsmarine and the Heer along with political lack of will? Not faking kill figures?
- Why is asserting a high level of German military capability necessarily 'Nazi propaganda'. They were a single country who successfully fought for 3 1/2 years the world's three largest economies in a total war. They must have been doing something right surely? Aside from the fact that as a total war victory was ultimately achieved by economic and geopolitical factors rather than fighting ability - THAT is why we won.
- It seems to me that while the actual fighter pilots (on both sides) would want to exaggerate their successes their superiors would have a vested interest in verifying everything and not just assuming that the enemy was taking massive losses. As far as I have read, the figures from both sides now available to historians more or less confirm the recorded German ace 'kills'.
- Understandably, due to our incredible effort, courage and fortitude during WWII, we Brits conveniently forget that the Mediterranean and North Africa was a secondary theatre until the invasion of Sicily, by which the Germans were on the back
The axis was a predominently an Austro German unit, there were Romanians, Bulgarians and Italians (and I think Hungarians) fighting with them under their own banners, but apart from a few Liebstandarte S.S battalions our enemy in the west was Germanic.
The wehrmacht was a highly effective fighting unit with innumerable remarkable victories and examples of tenacity to their "credit" but thankfully played no part in the Battle Of Britain.
An amphibious assault on England could not succeed without air superiority (the fact that Operation Sealion looked doomed to fail anyway is another issue) it is a fact that Goerring reported the losses to Hitler and announced that the R.A.F was finished, a couple of days later the Luftwaffe suffered their heaviest losses to that date. Hitler was not pleased.
The R.A.F. could'nt embelish their record, because during the Battle Of Britain losses could be counted, and similarly in the advances later in the war ground was retaken and losses could again be recorded. The rewards for shooting down alot of planes were less in the R.A.F. and to be awarded a medal one needed the deed to be witnessed by an Officer.
Economic and political factors clearly helped to swing things our way, but ultimately our ability to keep an army in the field against all odds added to the fact that we sank all their ships, we destroyed all their tanks, we shot down all their planes, wiped out all their major cities and killed more of their people than they killed of ours is what won us the war. The fact is we beat the Axis in every field we met them in when it mattered, at the end.
German anti fascism was small, splintered, disconnected and impotent this was due to Hitlers' highly effective pogroms from 1933 onwards.
And let's be fair apart from Poland and the low countries the only country they defeated was France, and we've been doing that for centuries!
The wehrmacht was a highly effective fighting unit with innumerable remarkable victories and examples of tenacity to their "credit" but thankfully played no part in the Battle Of Britain.
An amphibious assault on England could not succeed without air superiority (the fact that Operation Sealion looked doomed to fail anyway is another issue) it is a fact that Goerring reported the losses to Hitler and announced that the R.A.F was finished, a couple of days later the Luftwaffe suffered their heaviest losses to that date. Hitler was not pleased.
The R.A.F. could'nt embelish their record, because during the Battle Of Britain losses could be counted, and similarly in the advances later in the war ground was retaken and losses could again be recorded. The rewards for shooting down alot of planes were less in the R.A.F. and to be awarded a medal one needed the deed to be witnessed by an Officer.
Economic and political factors clearly helped to swing things our way, but ultimately our ability to keep an army in the field against all odds added to the fact that we sank all their ships, we destroyed all their tanks, we shot down all their planes, wiped out all their major cities and killed more of their people than they killed of ours is what won us the war. The fact is we beat the Axis in every field we met them in when it mattered, at the end.
German anti fascism was small, splintered, disconnected and impotent this was due to Hitlers' highly effective pogroms from 1933 onwards.
And let's be fair apart from Poland and the low countries the only country they defeated was France, and we've been doing that for centuries!
"....we sank all their ships, we destroyed all their tanks, we shot down all their planes, wiped out all their major cities..."
Good thing we don't need to resort to exaggeration.
What exactly is the difference between propaganda and this example of chauvinistic hyperbole?
BTW you need to research Russian hosted military air training for German pilots at Lipetsk (1924-1933) and the response required against Russian fighter aircraft (many piloted by Russians) of the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War to truly gauge the level of experience Luftwaffe pilots had gained in air-to-air combat prior to WW2.
Good thing we don't need to resort to exaggeration.
What exactly is the difference between propaganda and this example of chauvinistic hyperbole?
BTW you need to research Russian hosted military air training for German pilots at Lipetsk (1924-1933) and the response required against Russian fighter aircraft (many piloted by Russians) of the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War to truly gauge the level of experience Luftwaffe pilots had gained in air-to-air combat prior to WW2.
One reason Britain won was because it had better foreigners. The top-scoring unit was the 303 Polish Squadron. The top aces were Frantisek and Urbanowicz - a Czech and a Pole.
Here's a bit I found on the web - can't say how true it is
"Polish pilots constituted 5% of RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were responsible for a disproportionately high number of kills (12%), even though they were allowed to join the Battle when it was about 1/2 way through.
The Brits did not believe Poles could actually fly, so they made them train flying formations on the ground using tricycles. Some of the best pilots in Europe (and possibly the world) during WW2 were riding tricycles while British rookies were slaughtered in the air.
Lt-Colonel - Gabreski of USAF In 1943 joined RAF 315-th (Polish) Fighter Squadron "Deblinski" since the Americans believed he was not good enough to join any of their air units. He became the top U.S. ace of WW2 in Europe with 28 air-to-air combat victories and 2 enemy planes destroyed on the ground. Gabreski's parents were both Polish."
But I couldn't find the History Today article I quoted before - sorry.
Here's a bit I found on the web - can't say how true it is
"Polish pilots constituted 5% of RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were responsible for a disproportionately high number of kills (12%), even though they were allowed to join the Battle when it was about 1/2 way through.
The Brits did not believe Poles could actually fly, so they made them train flying formations on the ground using tricycles. Some of the best pilots in Europe (and possibly the world) during WW2 were riding tricycles while British rookies were slaughtered in the air.
Lt-Colonel - Gabreski of USAF In 1943 joined RAF 315-th (Polish) Fighter Squadron "Deblinski" since the Americans believed he was not good enough to join any of their air units. He became the top U.S. ace of WW2 in Europe with 28 air-to-air combat victories and 2 enemy planes destroyed on the ground. Gabreski's parents were both Polish."
But I couldn't find the History Today article I quoted before - sorry.
Fair play, when I said "all" I did'nt mean every single one, but (it is a fact) the U-Boats for example were finished as an effective fighting unit because we sank so many of them, their capital ships (Bismarck, Graf Spee etc) were sunk by us. We kicked them out of Africa, halfway out of Italy, out of France, Belgium, Holland and so on. Apart from the bit about the French I fail to see the chauvinism in anything I've said (they attempted one offensive during the whole war, The Saar Offensive, and failed).
JNO I agree with everything you've said about the Poles, they fought in the skies of Britain, the deserts of Africa, on the beaches of Scicily (hope I spelt that right) and overran Monte Cassino, and no doubt many more examples in between and beyond.
It is a fact that Britain never stood "alone" as the Commonwealth and Empire states were always with us, Indians, Africans, South Africans, Kiwis, Aussies, Malayans etc along with the Poles, the Czechs, the Danes, the Dutch and (yes) the French there was also more than one or two Yanks in the R.A.F at the time too.
P.S. I'm unaware of any major air battles during the Spanish Civil War (I've never fully studied it to be honest) how many planes did the Republicans have and of what type? Where were they at Guernica? Honestly I'd like to know, but I don't think any Spanish planes deployed would be able to offer much resistance to German aircraft of the day (brave though I'm sure they were). Have a look at Hamburg, Berlin and many other cities in Germany after the war, we laid waste to them, I don't feel I'm propagandising when I say that we destroyed their cities and killed more of their people than they killed of ours, although I'm sad to say I'm glad we did.
As Cicero said "if you lack an argument...."
JNO I agree with everything you've said about the Poles, they fought in the skies of Britain, the deserts of Africa, on the beaches of Scicily (hope I spelt that right) and overran Monte Cassino, and no doubt many more examples in between and beyond.
It is a fact that Britain never stood "alone" as the Commonwealth and Empire states were always with us, Indians, Africans, South Africans, Kiwis, Aussies, Malayans etc along with the Poles, the Czechs, the Danes, the Dutch and (yes) the French there was also more than one or two Yanks in the R.A.F at the time too.
P.S. I'm unaware of any major air battles during the Spanish Civil War (I've never fully studied it to be honest) how many planes did the Republicans have and of what type? Where were they at Guernica? Honestly I'd like to know, but I don't think any Spanish planes deployed would be able to offer much resistance to German aircraft of the day (brave though I'm sure they were). Have a look at Hamburg, Berlin and many other cities in Germany after the war, we laid waste to them, I don't feel I'm propagandising when I say that we destroyed their cities and killed more of their people than they killed of ours, although I'm sad to say I'm glad we did.
As Cicero said "if you lack an argument...."
Everton check this out , when your blood pressure subsides.
http://www.acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html# top
http://www.acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html# top
I'm fine honestly! I like a good discussion (that's why I come here from time to time) the trouble I find when talking about WW2 is that the most polished and proffessional footage is German, this was designed to decieve. I've studied German newsreel footage in some detail, and even when the Russians and the Allies were knocking on German doors you get the sense that they still believe they are winning and that it's all part of the plan.
The Germans were gearing up for the war long before the rest of us and it was they who instigated the engagements in the early years(Naarvik, aside) this gave them an advantage in that they tended to hold the initiative mixed with an excellent command and control structure which allowed them to respond quickly to developments.
But there is a reality that people overlook, the Spitfire was better than the 109, the Hurricane was better than the Focke Wolfe, the Typhoon was (much) better than the Stuka, the T34 was better than the Panzers, our Navy was better than theirs, our military inteligence was more successful than theirs, our specialist and elite Army'Navy units were better than theirs, our scientists were more practical in their application and more ingenious and useful in their productivity (radar, window, bouncing bomb, atom bomb, dukw, the "funnies", radio guided navigation, air to air radar, colossus the list is endless) than theirs.
The Germans overstated their kill rate in the Battle Of Britain, I stand by it as a fact. I can't say much about the Great Patriotic War in the east, because I have'nt studied it very closely.
We defeated the Nazis (Germans) on the land, on the sea, beneath the sea, in the skies, in the laboratries and in the hearts and minds of individuals becuase we were right and because we were better at it than they were..
Never forget.
The Germans were gearing up for the war long before the rest of us and it was they who instigated the engagements in the early years(Naarvik, aside) this gave them an advantage in that they tended to hold the initiative mixed with an excellent command and control structure which allowed them to respond quickly to developments.
But there is a reality that people overlook, the Spitfire was better than the 109, the Hurricane was better than the Focke Wolfe, the Typhoon was (much) better than the Stuka, the T34 was better than the Panzers, our Navy was better than theirs, our military inteligence was more successful than theirs, our specialist and elite Army'Navy units were better than theirs, our scientists were more practical in their application and more ingenious and useful in their productivity (radar, window, bouncing bomb, atom bomb, dukw, the "funnies", radio guided navigation, air to air radar, colossus the list is endless) than theirs.
The Germans overstated their kill rate in the Battle Of Britain, I stand by it as a fact. I can't say much about the Great Patriotic War in the east, because I have'nt studied it very closely.
We defeated the Nazis (Germans) on the land, on the sea, beneath the sea, in the skies, in the laboratries and in the hearts and minds of individuals becuase we were right and because we were better at it than they were..
Never forget.
I'm sorry claymore I'm going to have to profoundly disagree with you there. Churchill (to his shame) distanced himself from the area bombing campaign later in the war, read his speech "Growing Confidence" 1941 (I think) to see how he felt about it when we were on the defensive.
I think it was Speer who said "5(?) more Dersdens and we've lost the war" he certainly said "that the bombing campaign was useful to the Allies, as men and materiel had to be diverted for the defence of Germany rather than the war on Russia".
It was a brutal war against a brutal and genocidal idea encapsulated within a nation.
Regardless of the fact that the Germans bombed Warsaw (first) and then went on to ravage London, Liverpool, Birmingham, Coventry, Plymouth, Glasgow (don't forget the Baedecker raids) need I go on? The simplistic reply is "they sowed the wind, now they must reap the whirlwind" if you read Edith Hahns' book "The Nazi Officers Wife" (excellent book) you'll see that the feeling (echoed by other Jews) amongst the oppressed in Germany when the bombs fell was joy. "They're not bombing me" was the general feeling.
I prefer to look at the bombing of Germany this way, in this modern day and age with all the technology available to us now, we drop bombs and still miss (sadly it happens in war) one can't wage war without tears.
But more importantly to my mind, as someone who did'nt live through the war, I feel I have no right to criticise the brave men and women who fought on our behalf during the war. We (I) was'nt there to judge.
We as a Nation, as a people, as an ideology and with our allies did what we had to do win. Sadly, there was no other way.
I think it was Speer who said "5(?) more Dersdens and we've lost the war" he certainly said "that the bombing campaign was useful to the Allies, as men and materiel had to be diverted for the defence of Germany rather than the war on Russia".
It was a brutal war against a brutal and genocidal idea encapsulated within a nation.
Regardless of the fact that the Germans bombed Warsaw (first) and then went on to ravage London, Liverpool, Birmingham, Coventry, Plymouth, Glasgow (don't forget the Baedecker raids) need I go on? The simplistic reply is "they sowed the wind, now they must reap the whirlwind" if you read Edith Hahns' book "The Nazi Officers Wife" (excellent book) you'll see that the feeling (echoed by other Jews) amongst the oppressed in Germany when the bombs fell was joy. "They're not bombing me" was the general feeling.
I prefer to look at the bombing of Germany this way, in this modern day and age with all the technology available to us now, we drop bombs and still miss (sadly it happens in war) one can't wage war without tears.
But more importantly to my mind, as someone who did'nt live through the war, I feel I have no right to criticise the brave men and women who fought on our behalf during the war. We (I) was'nt there to judge.
We as a Nation, as a people, as an ideology and with our allies did what we had to do win. Sadly, there was no other way.
This is not to be meant as a definitive list of all fighters flown during the Spanish Civil War but certainly offers a portrait of the forces at hand.
Republican Fighter Aircraft
In addition to the small, ramshackle collection of obsolete craft possesed by the Spanish Air Force, the French supplied -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewoitine_D.372
The Russian contingent included about 1000 craft (and similar number of pilots during the course of the conflict).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_I-15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_I-16
Nationalist Fighter Aircraft
As part of the 700+ fighters and bombers from Italy -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_CR.32
And of course the Kondor Legion -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_51
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_68
...which later included the plane that sealed air superiority in the Nationalists' favour -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_ 109
(although this testing ground highlighted faults in the earlier models leading up to the introduction of Bf 109 D and E)
Republican Fighter Aircraft
In addition to the small, ramshackle collection of obsolete craft possesed by the Spanish Air Force, the French supplied -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewoitine_D.372
The Russian contingent included about 1000 craft (and similar number of pilots during the course of the conflict).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_I-15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_I-16
Nationalist Fighter Aircraft
As part of the 700+ fighters and bombers from Italy -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_CR.32
And of course the Kondor Legion -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_51
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_68
...which later included the plane that sealed air superiority in the Nationalists' favour -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_ 109
(although this testing ground highlighted faults in the earlier models leading up to the introduction of Bf 109 D and E)
An interesting article on aerial warfare during the Spanish Civil War -
http://www.historynet.com/magazines/aviation_h istory/3026401.html
http://www.historynet.com/magazines/aviation_h istory/3026401.html
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles27 mins ago
ChatterBank33 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles36 mins ago
Technology64 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.