|
Posts:
1
Registered:
4/23/07
|
|
(1 of 21)
Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Apr 23, 2007 7:26 AM
|
|
That was an epic battle of planes b/w 109s and spitfires it would be really cool if u made one on that
|
|
|
Posts:
93
Registered:
12/12/06
|
|
(2 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
May 1, 2007 12:26 AM
|
And between Hurricanes, Me-110s, Stuka's, He-111s, Ju-88s, Do-17s, F4F Wildcats (Marlins), Boulton Paul Defiants, and Wellingtons (I list the Wellington bombers, because it was their night strikes on Berlin that caused Hitler to change tactics to attack London in response, which allowed the RAF to rebuild and win the battle)
A set of BoB episodes would be very welcome indeed...
|
|
|
Posts:
3
Registered:
6/19/07
|
|
(3 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 19, 2007 8:32 PM
|
The show is obviously Americentric.
If it ain't about Americans then I doubt if you will see it.
Hopefully I'm proven wrong but everything I've seen so far is all about Americans.
How about Germans? Japanese? Russian, RAF? many of those had better and higher scoring pilots than the Americans.
|
|
|
Posts:
3
Registered:
6/19/07
|
|
(4 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 19, 2007 9:06 PM
|
Let's not forget the RCAF.
And yes I find this show lacking in anything that isn't american, i'm canadian I wanna hear about Spitfires, and our other planes, even the brits (im french-canadian, so brits aren't that close to me lol) and yes germans, japanese, russians and chinese too
|
|
|
Posts:
216
Registered:
4/20/07
|
|
(5 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 19, 2007 9:18 PM
|
You must have missed the eps about the IAF in the ME wars, or the sinking of the Bismark.
There's only been one season so far, so I'm sure it will become more "diverse" as time does on.
It is produced by Americans, so having it begin with primarily American stories should not be too surprising to anyone.
"Many of those had better and higher scoring pilots than the Americans."
Not "better." Read "1,000 Destroyed," and you won't then say such ignorant things.
But certainly more experienced. They had higher kill numbers because some of them had been at war 3+ years before our pilots had any combat experience.
Also, as in the case of Luftwaffe pilots in the early days of the war against Russia, they faced a much inferior enemy - in both the lack of experienced men and lack of modern machines; so they were able to rack up impressive numbers of kills with relatively little effort.
For the first year or so of our involvement in the war, our pilots flew inferior aircraft and had little real combat experience - yet they accounted for themselves very well.
Just ask the Japanese about the Tigers, or about the Cactus Air Force.
Ask the Germans about our North African P-40 squadrons, or Groups like the 56th and 99th.
|
|
|
Posts:
216
Registered:
4/20/07
|
|
(6 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 19, 2007 9:19 PM
|
Biggo,
I wasn't responding to you - but the previous poster.
|
|
|
Posts:
3
Registered:
6/19/07
|
|
(7 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 20, 2007 11:28 PM
|
> You must have missed the eps about the IAF in the ME
> wars, or the sinking of the Bismark.
I did but the majority of the shows are still about the Americans.
> There's only been one season so far, so I'm sure it
> will become more "diverse" as time does on.
>
> It is produced by Americans, so having it begin with
> primarily American stories should not be too
> surprising to anyone.
Only because it is produced by Americans. if it were produced by any other country then it would be far more international in nature. After all, Americans in general are only interested in Americans not in the rest of the world.
> "Many of those had better and higher scoring pilots
> than the Americans."
>
> Not "better." Read "1,000 Destroyed," and you won't
> then say such ignorant things.
Yes "better". The German pilots were, until the last quater of the war, the better trained and better equipped. Remember, the Luftewaffe developed all the air to air tactics we still use today.
Americans seem to think they are the best in everything, yet when there are military competitions that pit other countries against the much vaunted American armed forces, other countries frequently come out on top. Not al the time, of course, the Americans have their share of victories but in Canadian Vs Americans, Brits Vs Americans, Germans Vs Americans, all frequently better the Americans in various competitions.
> But certainly more experienced. They had higher kill
> numbers because some of them had been at war 3+ years
> before our pilots had any combat experience.
They were also better pilots. A top Luftewaffe pilot was the creme de la creme of fighter pilots. By the time the Americans got heavily involved in the airwar, the top Luftewaffe pilots were disappearing and the Germans had drastically cut back on their training programmes.
> Also, as in the case of Luftwaffe pilots in the early
> days of the war against Russia, they faced a much
> inferior enemy - in both the lack of experienced men
> and lack of modern machines; so they were able to
> rack up impressive numbers of kills with relatively
> little effort.
You are trying to belittle their scores. Many Luftewaffe pilots scored well over a hundered kills on the western front.
> For the first year or so of our involvement in the
> war, our pilots flew inferior aircraft and had little
> real combat experience - yet they accounted for
> themselves very well.
I'll not argue that. You did very well with very inferior equipment.
> Just ask the Japanese about the Tigers, or about the
> Cactus Air Force.
Yes, very brave men flying outclassed aircraft.
> Ask the Germans about our North African P-40
> squadrons, or Groups like the 56th and 99th.
|
|
|
Posts:
138
From:
Conroe, Texas
Registered:
1/24/07
|
|
(8 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 21, 2007 2:37 PM
|
Okayy, some of you non-American types obviously have sand in your craw about World War II. There are certain general facts that you cannot deny, because they are the facts.
1. Many German and Japanese pilots started getting combat experience as early as 1936 and 1937 in Spain and China, and some of their early kills during this period were against very inferior opponents.
2. German pilots who scored 100+ kills, and 200+ kills, or even 300+ kills were very skilled individuals.
3. German pilots who scored 100+ kills or more did so because they were never rotated back to training commands to teach new pilots. They stayed in combat until they were either killed, seriously wounded, or captured by the enemy.
4. American pilots, even early in the war, were rotated home to work in the training commands to pass their skills on to the tens of thousands of new pilots and airmen who were trained to fight the war.
5. As the war progressed, American pilots became, on average, much more experienced than their typical German or Japanese opponents. For example, early in the war, the average American naval aviator had 300 to 400 hours of flight time and the Japanese naval aviator had more than 800 hours of flight time (many of those hours in combat conditions over China). By January, 1944, that was reversed. The average American pilot on his first combat tour had 600 plus hours and the average Japanese pilot just out of training had about 100 hours. The American pilot was also being led by very experienced flight, squadron and group commanders.
6. As the war progressed, Germany continued to develop better planes and weapons, particularly the Fw 190 and the Me 262. Although Japan continued to develop and modernize its planes, they were still fighting the war with late 1930's designs and tactics. They were greatly hampered by material shortages.
7. America and its major allies overwhelmed Germany and Japan with industrial might and the ability to turn out far greater numbers of "excellent" pilots starting in 1943 and continuing through to the end of the war. Whereas Germany and Japan, after 1943, still had planes to fly but the new pilots weren't even close to the standards of the average pilot in 1939-42. America was able to succeed in training so many new pilots because it already had a large number of civilian pilots who could go to work directly in the training commands to teach basic flying skills to new aviators. The surviving (and presumably more successful) pilots who rotated home in 1942 and 43 imparted their knowledge and skills to these new pilots, who were much more ready for combat as a result.
8. Germany and Japan both went to war against the Americans (and Germany against the Soviet Union) hoping for a quick victory and really unprepared for the long struggle it turned out to be. By late 1943 America was outproducing both countries by itself in vital war materials, not to mention what was being produced in Great Britain and the Soviet Union. Germany itself didn't go on a total war footing with its economy until 1943. By then they had already lost the war at the economic level. It was only a matter of time before they lost it on the battlefield.
9. Very successful American pilots, especially those who earned medals for heroism, were often sent home to sell war bonds and taken out of combat to prevent their death or capture from becoming a propaganda coup for the enemy.
10. American industry did a great job of continuing to develop basic aircraft designs to adapt to lessons learned in combat. They continued to improve the speed, range, firepower and survivability of fighters and bombers.
11. Although America was far behind Germany in the development of jets, American designers developed the piston-engined aircraft to its pinnacle. The F4U Corsairs and P-51 Mustangs in use at the end of the war were so well adapted for ground attack that they continued in service throughout the Korean War. And the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, which continued in use through most of Vietnam, first flew in late 1944. Production was just starting when the war ended.
Those are the facts behind America's success in the war and the failure of Germany and Japan.
|
|
|
Posts:
3
Registered:
6/19/07
|
|
(9 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 21, 2007 3:10 PM
|
> Okayy, some of you non-American types obviously have
> sand in your craw about World War II.
No, just pointed out things you glossed over or, in the case of Luftwaffe scores, tried to belittle.
>There are
> certain general facts that you cannot deny, because
> they are the facts.
Everything else you mentioned I agree with.
Keep in mind, the German "kill" system was far stricter than the allies. No "half kills" to German pilots. If the plane wasn't seen to blow up, hit the ground or the pilot seen to bail out, and there wasn;t an independent witness of gun camera film, it wasn't a kill. No taking the word of a lone pilot beciase he was "An Officer and a Gentleman" There was also no such thing as claiming a "damaged" aircraft.
The Americans were, the only "western" Ally to allow its pilots to claim aircraft destroyed or damaged in staffing runs. This was added to their kills. All other western nations only permitted pilots to claim aircraft shot down in air to air combat.
Regarding tours of duty. Yes, all allied pilots and aircrew, with the probably exception of the Russians, were cycled out to training or less hazardous duties after their tour. The Geremans only got leave and were back a week or so later and yes, this does to some extent expain their really high scores.
Yes, by the end of the war, the average allied pilot was better trained than the average luftwaffe pilot and far better trained than the average Japanese pilot.
|
|
|
Posts:
216
Registered:
4/20/07
|
|
(10 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 21, 2007 5:47 PM
|
>Only because it is produced by Americans. if it were produced by any other country then it would be far more international in nature.<
I agree with that. If it were produced by the French I'm sure it would have countless eps of French aces during WWII. Etc.
>After all, Americans in general are only interested in Americans not in the rest of the world.<
We saved your asses a couple times when we didn't really have to. But by your tone, perhaps it's more accurate to say that we beat your asses a couple of times. Perhaps that's why you seem so nasty and pissed towards us.
>Yes "better". The German pilots were, until the last quater of the war, the better trained and better equipped.<
Discounting the 262 - which was not in nearly sufficient numbers to matter - our planes were either on par with, or superior to, any Luftwaffe plane - as were those of the Brits.
Also, we had P-80 Shooting Stars in Italy at the very end of the war, so had the war continued, they would have become involved in the hostilities and neutralized the 262 (our pilots, generally, being the better at that time.)
>Remember, the Luftewaffe developed all the air to air tactics we still use today.<
No, many - but not all. Most books I've read said that we had the "Tactical two" formation at about the same time the Luftwaffe developed the Rott formation. So on that development, it was simultaneous.
Unfortunately, only the Brits were still using the three fighter formation at the start of the European war - but they quickly switched.
Also, an American named Jimmy Thatch (ever hear of him?) developed a little manuver called the "Thatch Weave," which allowed our F4F pilots to regularly beat the superior Zero.
It wasn't developed by Adolf Krautmeier - or anyone having a Prussian moniker.
So please don't be so egotistical as to say the Germans were supermen - as that BS was killed off (in general) in '45.
>Americans seem to think they are the best in everything<
Sounds like typical Euro trash talk. But I agree that we are the best in many things - as it appears you also believe for your nationality, whatever it is.
>..yet when there are military competitions that pit other countries against the much vaunted American armed forces, other countries frequently come out on top. Not al the time, of course, the Americans have their share of victories but in Canadian Vs Americans, Brits Vs Americans, Germans Vs Americans, all frequently better the Americans in various competitions.<
Any links to prove that?
I have no doubt the Brits, Israelis and Germany have good weapons and soldiers/pilots today - just as they did years ago, nor do I believe we win all war games. But I've seen programs on games between us and those countries ("Heavy Metal" - and another, hosted by the head guy of Jane's, which I can't think of the name of,) and most often - if not always - our men and machine triumph.
We did most of the heavy lifting against Soviet Communist expansionism after WWII - so it's only natural that we would have had the most active weapons programs, weapons and training.
>They were also better pilots.<
Well, that's your obviously egotistical opinion.
I believe there were great pilots in all country's Air Forces (including Commonwealth, Poles, Italians, Chinese, etc.) - and I don't disparage any of them, as you so egotistically do.
Tell me, why the obvious hatred?
> A top Luftewaffe pilot was the creme de la creme of fighter pilots. By the time the Americans got heavily involved in the airwar, the top Luftewaffe pilots were disappearing...<
Read "KILLED" - by us and the Brits (including Poles, Czechs and various members of the Commonwealth.)
Too bad how those cremes were not good enough to best our and the Brit's "inferior" pilots. 
And don't give me the BS of their being "always outnumbered" - as at the beginning of the war it was we and the Brits who were most always outnumbered.
> and the Germans had drastically cut back on their training programmes.<
We were beating their asses, so they had fewer and fewer places to hide and train. The P-51 had the range to fly over the Kraut flying schools and kill the students before they could ever fit into a FW or ME.
>You are trying to belittle their scores.<
Far less than you are obviously trying to belittle my country's aviators as a whole. You're the one picking this fight with your egotistical crap.
I have long respected the pilots of all nations (when they deserved it) - you should too.
> Many Luftewaffe pilots scored well over a hundered kills on the western front.<
Quite true - and they had six years to do it. Stating that does not "belittle" their accomplishments, it only says that had our pilots had the same amount of air time (and quality of aircraft for the first 1.5 years of our involvment in the war,) we probably could have easily matched or bested those kill numbers.
I'm saying the Germans weren't "supermen" - just good pilots (on par with ours, the Brits, etc.) with MUCH longer combat experience, time and opportunities for kills.
>I'll not argue that. You did very well with very inferior equipment.<
Not "very" inferior, although lesser than those of the warlike Fascist states of the Axis (our country was still emmeshed in pacifism right up until Pearl.)
Our P-40 accounted for itself very well against the Oscar and vaunted 109, when used properly.
But yes, the Axis pilots had considerable advantages over our pilots until the 38, 47 and 51 came along (as well as the great Navy and Marine fighters.)
>Yes, very brave men flying outclassed aircraft.<
Yes, our Congresses then were much like ours is now. ("Peace!") So they weren't big on military expenditures.
And they were excellent pilots - as well as being "very brave."
>No, just pointed out things you glossed over or, in the case of Luftwaffe scores, tried to belittle.<
I don't think HM or I "glossed over" anything - only pointed out facts that you seem to belittle because they make the Germans less than the supermen you seem to consider them.
(HM, Very good analysis, BTW!)
>Keep in mind, the German "kill" system was far stricter than the allies.<
No, we also had strict rules as to how kills were verified - but both sides significantly overstated their numbers of kills. Both sides having pilots whose scores were reduced after the war, when records could be better analyzed.
> No "half kills" to German pilots.<
We gave half kills to pilots so a higher-ranking, more experienced pilot couldn't rob another pilot (likely his wingman,) of credit for helping to bring down an enemy plane. We thought it was more fair.
Now, if you're talking about "Probables," then keep in mind that these were NOT in the same category as kills. They only were to give "honorable mention" to a pilot who VERY LIKELY shot down an enemy - but because it dove into fog or a cloud, it's crash could not be witnessed.
A "Probable" was not considered a "Kill," but it was to say that this pilot deserved "some" recognition for his probable exploits - rather than none at all.
>If the plane wasn't seen to blow up, hit the ground or the pilot seen to bail out, and there wasn;t an independent witness of gun camera film, it wasn't a kill.<
Nor was it with us or the Brits.
>No taking the word of a lone pilot beciase he was "An Officer and a Gentleman"<
Please post a link as to when that happened. I have been reading war aviation books for 50 years and never read of that happening. So please, prove it. I'd really like to know - if it's true.
> There was also no such thing as claiming a "damaged" aircraft.<
Were were just more thorough in our reporting.
>The Americans were, the only "western" Ally to allow its pilots to claim aircraft destroyed or damaged in staffing runs.<
There was a great debate in the AAF about that at the time, but it was ultimately decided that getting a plane on the ground was just as - if not more - dangerous (due to all the flak guns) than getting one in the air.
Planes on the ground were counted - though separately from aerial kills - because in the last year or more of the war the Germans did not come up to challenge us and the Brits except on rarer and rarer occasions.
So we had to go down on the deck to get them.
Read, "1,000 Destroyed," and you'll have a better understanding of that.
>This was added to their kills. All other western nations only permitted pilots to claim aircraft shot down in air to air combat.<
Bully for them. But I believe it's a fact (please correct me if I'm wrong - with linked facts) - that all of our top aces who were shot down by the Germans in WWII - except for one (Ralph K. "Kid" Hofer, of the 4th Fighter Group - who was allegedly shot down over Russia by Erik Hartmann)- were shot down by ground fire.
So obviously, strafing runs were far more dangerous to our aces than were the Luftwaffe pilots.
>Regarding tours of duty. Yes, all allied pilots and aircrew, with the probably exception of the Russians, were cycled out to training or less hazardous duties after their tour. The Geremans only got leave and were back a week or so later and yes, this does to some extent expain their really high scores."
To a great extent - as does their having generally superior planes during the first third/half of the war, etc.
No doubt they had excellent pilots - my point - which you refuse to acknowledge in your obvious egotistical hatred - is, so did we (and the Brits, and the Poles, etc.)
>Yes, by the end of the war, the average allied pilot was better trained than the average luftwaffe pilot and far better trained than the average Japanese pilot.<
That's because our training system was far better and more forward looking. We didn't haveour best pilots fly until they were killed. We used ours to train more like themselves.
|
|
|
Posts:
8
Registered:
6/26/07
|
|
(11 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 27, 2007 2:12 AM
|
How this became anti-American, I'll never know.
"> There's only been one season so far, so I'm sure it
> will become more "diverse" as time does on.
>
> It is produced by Americans, so having it begin with
> primarily American stories should not be too
> surprising to anyone.
Only because it is produced by Americans. if it were produced by any other country then it would be far more international in nature. After all, Americans in general are only interested in Americans not in the rest of the world."
What?
That's the equivelent of an American watching a German show and wondering why they're talking about German's.
If you don't like American T.V., stop watching. It's that simple.
"Americans seem to think they are the best in everything,"
We do dominate almost everything. Hence the reason even you are watching an American show. We've expanded everywhere and into almost everything.
There is very little competition internationaly for great "American" shows like Dogfights for example.
You don't have to like it, but don't down play it.
"yet when there are military competitions that pit other countries against the much vaunted American armed forces, other countries frequently come out on top."
Huh?
Yeah, we lost some battles but inevitably won the wars. What's more important?
The much "vaunted" American armed forces have proven themselves unbeatable. You might survive our onslaught due to political propaganda and what not, but no Countries armed forces could best ours.
Let's put it this way, American's are so hated and people such as yourself are so eager to knock us down a peg or two that if anyone even thought they might have a chance of taking us on, they'd jump at it.
And lastly.
"Remember, the Luftewaffe developed all the air to air tactics we still use today."
Yep that's how we stay on top. We adapt things and perfect them. And to avoid an argument we have missiles now, so it has been adapted, modified, and perfected.
In conclusion, come on, you can hate us, but historicly, we've adapted to any and every war we've been in and came out on top (with the exception of political and internal complications of course).
Our only weakness and the only one capable of beating us is ourselves. Our track record proves that.
The Deanman
|
|
|
Posts:
160
From:
Riverside, CA
Registered:
5/30/07
|
|
(12 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 27, 2007 12:22 PM
|
Alright Some good points are being made on this thread. Im glad to see some people pointing out the Hawker Hurricanes. I love the spitfire but remember in the battle of Britain Hurricanes shot down more enemy aircraft by far. However most common tactic of Fighetr command(RAF) was the "Spits" would tangle with the fighters to open the way for the Hurricanes to engage and destroy the bombers.
Let me point out that the so-called "Hyperaces", the German pilots who had an insane number of kills, Many of them scored most of their killes vs the Soviets. The leading Ace Erich Hartmann out of 352 kills 345 were soviets. No offense to any Russians or soviet air historians but they just werent the best fighter pilots. The reason for the high number of kills is because the germans were so good and the Soviets really wernt good at all. Again I apoligize to any Russians. Soviet Aircraft destroyed on the eastern Front were 21,000! Germans only lost about 2,100(10:1 kill ratio). Almost all of the top German Aces made there kills on the eastern front though there are some notible exceptions, Adolf Galland comes to mind.
Pilots flying soviet aircraft always get blown out of the sky pilots of western air forces and there aircraft. Look at F-86 vs MIG-15, F-4 & F-8 vs MIG-17s and 21s, Mirage III VS MIG-21s and 19s the only kills that wernt a complete blowout were the Vietnam F-4s & F-8 vs the 17s and 21s. The pilots just arn't well trained. Its clear that the aircraft are good they just never use the advantages of their aircraft against the opponate. Fight your fight not your opponates.
--
Edited by aagnew at 06/27/2007 12:24 PM
--
Edited by aagnew at 06/27/2007 12:26 PM
|
|
|
Posts:
8
Registered:
6/26/07
|
|
(13 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 28, 2007 11:51 AM
|
Hey Seville, guess our point was proven.
Soon as an American rises to the challenge, low and behold, the rest of the world is no where to be seen.
Go figure.
Guess we do dominate everything!
Cuz all the opposition does is complain~!
The Deanman-
p.s. please make fun of my country. Because as many flaws as it has, it's still the best place on Earth.
And the greatest Nation since the Romans.
|
|
|
Posts:
216
Registered:
4/20/07
|
|
(14 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 28, 2007 4:02 PM
|
DEAN,
Let's not get too "enthusiastic" now, as there are other good countries and pilots, etc.
But as Michael Medved says, we're "The greatest country on God's green earth."
|
|
|
Posts:
2
From:
SW Ohio
Registered:
6/29/07
|
|
(15 of 21)
Re: Could u make one on Battle of Britian?
Jun 29, 2007 9:05 PM
|
I've found this to be an interesting thread, though tempers are flaring a bit. With no intent to further heat the conversation, a few minor points:
1. As the war progressed German and Japanese pilots received less and less flight training for several reasons, but, I think primarily due to declining fuel supplies. In Europe the bombing campaign kept increasing pressure on the oil fields and synthetic fuel factories. In Asia, Japan was isolated from fuel sources by the submarine campaign.
2. I recall a conversation with a family friend who flew P51s over Japan towards the end of the war. He complained bitterly that Japanese pilots rarely came up to fight. His squadron would sometimes circle air fields radioing taunts to the Japanese below trying to tempt them into the air. When it was clear no one was coming, they would strafe the field and shoot the hell out of numerous planes on the ground. But they got no credit for a kill unless the target caught fire or blew up. And the planes rarely did, because they had no fuel.
Presumably, by that stage of the war, the Japanese were hoarding their remaining fuel (& pilots) for kamikaze attacks on the coming invasion beachheads.
3. RE: the high combat scores of the expert German fliers, another factor was that from 1942 or so most German pilots were fighting on the strategic defensive over friendly (or occupied) territory. Many of those German experts were shot down repeatedly. In his book, Galland recounted being shot down two or three times in one bad day over France. (That might make an interesting episode of Dogfights!) Wasn't Hartmann shot down as well? After the Battle of Britain, an Allied ace who got shot down over France or Germany, might get away to fly again, but it would be a long, uncertain journey to his home field.
4. It is common place to discount some high German kill numbers as having been racked up against "inferior" Russian pilots, but the conditions were different on the two fronts. The Soviet Air Force was largely engaged in the ground war, operating at relatively low altitude. IIRC, there were quality German squadrons which had done well flying against heavy bomber streams at 30,000' that transferred East only to be gutted in short order under the very different conditions there.
5. RE: season two, I would also like to see episodes about other wars, but assume part of the reason for the US centric nature of the series is the use made of surviving pilot accounts of the actions. As a US show, it must be easier to locate surviving US pilots to interview. Is Galland still around?
|
|
|
|
|
