Spits!!

[C]

J.E. Johnston (RAF) - 38 kills
A. Galland (Lw) - 103 kills
(European theatre)

So *if* the RAF had the better aicraft, how come that a whole bunch of Luftwaffe pilots - even on the western front - had about double the kills of the best scoring RAF pilot (41)?

Maybe because post 1941 the Luftwaffe was on the defensive in Western Europe? The Eastern front by comparison was a lot busier I imagine.

Secondly, the RAF were probably very stingey in awarding "confirmed" claims. Just like they are nowadays with anything...

[Boca]

Hardly idiotic of the Russians, you've destroyed an aircraft. Doesn't matter where it was, it'll help your war efforts.

[ozzy72]

Not really. The Germans had a rather strange sense of humour (a bit like the British who did exactly the same thing) they made dummy aircraft and put them on fields to distract the enemy into attack lumps of wood and stuff.... the Germans must have been laughing till it hurt

[Boca]

That would make sense right up until the Russian tanks rolled into Berlin. The German tactics were WILDLY wrong (thanks to Mr Hitler who simply WOULDN'T listen to his Generals ) and the only thing that 'hurt' was their national pride.   Now I'm not saying your references to "dummy aircraft" tactics were wrong, they are 100% right in fact, and, as you say, the British used to do the same thing. But to suggest that it helped the Luftwaffe in any way is clearly being denied by history itself.
  If you want to summarise why Hitler's Nazi's lost , it was essentially because they underestimated the British then the Russians (nearly 2 years before the USA entered the war)  and why wouldn't they. They'd conquered Holland, Norway France in less time than it takes to smoke some dope, cook a herring and  fry an onion. And they over-estimated their kill ratio on both western and eastern fronts, giving themselves a false sense of victory when there was none.

I have to say at this point ,,especially to Heretic,, that this isn't a bashing of his country ( at least I assume he's German  :-/)... today, there are few places in the world that I would rather live than the active, vibrant , forward looking (more-so than the U.K. ) country that is Germany.  I'm especially interested in their Oktoberfest  festival.. , and wouldn't cry if someone gave me one of their marvellous cars.  ( a nice BMW or Merc. Brabus SL65 AMG  would be nice   saw it on 'Top Gear' tonight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0SOTrUum9A ). So what I'm trying to say is, I'm not some anti-German crazy guy, Ich suche nicht zu beleidigen. Just relating historical facts, and trying to keep the whole thing friendly.  ;)

[ozzy72]

Your points are all valid Boca and I agree with them in principle. I feel that as you said the Germans were lead by the nose into a war that shouldn't have been and then their leadership failed them miserably inspite of the valiant efforts of the German soldiery in various capacities.
A wise man once said "Wars are won by the side that makes the least mistakes" and it is true. At the beginning of the war the first RAF battle was against itself The French had the amazing Siegfried Line And the Dutch were all stoned as usual
Alas as long as we have politicians we'll have war 'cos these idiots have no idea about the real world

[Mr.Mugel]

Anyone who has Shockwave

[Hagar]

[quote]Anyone who has Shockwave

[ozzy72]

I'm with you on that Doug
The 109 was ugly and difficult to fly. The best looking German aircraft IMHO was the FW-190.... now that thing was and is a babe 8-)

[C]

[quote][quote]Anyone who has Shockwave

[ATI_7500]

Simple...the Luftwaffe pilots were LYING  ;D

I took the numbers from Edward H. Sims' book "Fighter Pilots". That guy compared kill/loss numbers from both sides, so his conclusions concerning kill numbers *have* to be accurate by at least 90%.

The fact that less than 600 Spits and Hurricanes repelled an invasion force of over 3400 German aircraft doesn't make your assessment of the ME 109 as the better aircraft very believable.

Wrong again. The number of 109s/Spitfires was almost equal. The rest of involved german aircraft (far, far less than 3400) were bombers, heavy fighters and ground assault aircraft - easy targets for an interceptor/fighter.

You can play with stats all you like, for me the proof is written in history.

Yes, because you believe every propaganda stuff they throw at you.

The RAF recorded a 3 to 1 kill ratio and it was Hitler's first major bloody nose of WW2

Yes, but induced by himself, not the RAF which wasn't a shadow of what it had been at the time the Luftwaffe decided to tackle London, etc.

//----//

The Eastern front by comparison was a lot busier I imagine.

I haven't even taken the eastern front into consideration.

But it was easier business over there - at least until you were shot down and lynched by russian ground troops.

//----//

Doesn't matter where it was, it'll help your war efforts.

As does eradicating cities, right?

And they over-estimated their kill ratio on both western and eastern fronts, giving themselves a false sense of victory when there was none.  

Humbug.
When a pilot shot down an aircraft he had to have it eyewitnessed by his wingman to get the score.

I have to say at this point ,,especially to Heretic,, that this isn't a bashing of his country ( at least I assume he's German  undecided)...

No offense taken. Once in a while, I need the tension and anger of a heated discussion.

I'm especially interested in their Oktoberfest  festival..

Go away. I hate anything bavarian even more than I hate the Spitfire.

//-----//

The 109 was ugly and difficult to fly.

*Parks a Tiger II on Ozzy's car*

Care to say that again? ;P

[Mr.Mugel]

What Heretic says is quite right, the german propaganda did increase the numbers a lot, I think, but even I don

[ATI_7500]

[quote]What Heretic says is quite right, the german propaganda did increase the numbers a lot, I think, but even I don

[Mr.Mugel]

Right, I just wanted to say that in those times, the radio often reported numbers a bit more positive then they were....

And my point was, that pilots couldn

[Boca]

"Yes, because you believe every propaganda stuff they throw at you. "

..em, no. The Battle Of Britain wasn't propaganda. It was fact. It's in the history books freely available for you to look up. The Luftwaffe (then the most powerful and invincible airforce in the entire world)  invaded Britain, thats a fact. Britain repelled the Luftwaffe, that's also a fact. Because the Germans couldn't break the RAF like they did the French, Norwegians, Czechs ,Poles and for a good while, the Russians airforces, they were forced to cancel their planned assault on the United Kingdom.

The fact that the Nazi's ( I won't say Germans because that implies all the German people and thats unfair on Germans of today ) were defeated in this battle can not be under-estimated.  If they had won, and conquered the U.K.  the United States would have had no bases from which to join the war. (Essentially Britain was the worlds largest aircraft carrier) and would most likely have sued for peace with Hitler, allowing him to turn his entire resources ontowards Russia without having to watch his back from western attack.  He might have won against Stalin, he might have lost, but the bottom line is, it would have been an even bigger bloodbath than it was.

I also find it rather hypocritical that you mention "As does eradicating cities, right?"  in same post where you tell of the Luftwaffe bombing London.  ::)

[ATI_7500]

The Luftwaffe (then the most powerful and invincible airforce in the entire world)  invaded Britain, thats a fact.

Attacked Britain.

Britain repelled the Luftwaffe, that's also a fact.

The attack was shifted, and then mostly cancelled because forces were gathered for the eastern front.

Because the Germans couldn't break the RAF like they did the French, Norwegians, Czechs ,Poles and for a good while, the Russians airforces, they were forced to cancel their planned assault on the United Kingdom.

Wrong again. The RAF was on the verge of collapse when Hitler decided to go for London instead of crushing the airforce first. That mistake saved the RAF's butt...and was the death sentence for all bigger german cities.

The fact that the Nazi's were defeated in this battle can not be under-estimated.

No defeat there. Stalingrad was defeat. D-Day was *maybe* a defeat.
But the BoB? No.
It was luck for the allies, plain luck.

I also find it rather hypocritical that you mention "As does eradicating cities, right?"  in same post where you tell of the Luftwaffe bombing London.  ::)

Tackling a city of London with some medium bombers stands in no comparison with eradicating whole cities in an exactly planned thousand bomber assault using weapons that were developed for setting as much on fire as there was.

They should have shot Harris after the war for that.