Ground Support Aircraft

[Michael Dorosh]

As for "hundreds of kills", we all know the Blond Knight "only" had 262 or so, so even the greatest scorer in history "only" had 250+, not "hundreds" of kills to his credit. (Technically 262 counts as "hundreds" - two hundreds to be precise, but the quote is a little misleading).

[Spook]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

As for "hundreds of kills", we all know the Blond Knight "only" had 262 or so, so even the greatest scorer in history "only" had 250+, not "hundreds" of kills to his credit. (Technically 262 counts as "hundreds" - two hundreds to be precise, but the quote is a little misleading).<hr></blockquote>

"We" all know?

Insofar, all the websites I've reviewed all have Erich Hartmann at the score I've always recalled---352. If his score really was 262 instead, then how would the scores of Barkhorn, Rall, & Kittel now be revised to (priorhand also indicating over 262 kills in each case) if Hartmann is still rated as the top German ace?

Just curious to your reference(s).

[tabpub]

I believe that the "Blond Knight" he refers to is Richtofen. Somehow, WWI has bled in to the WW2 continuum. I fear the ramifications of this. Perhaps the Chef will correct this imbalance.

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Spook:

"We" all know?

Insofar, all the websites I've reviewed all have Erich Hartmann at the score I've always recalled---352. If his score really was 262 instead, then how would the scores of Barkhorn, Rall, & Kittel now be revised to (priorhand also indicating over 262 kills in each case) if Hartmann is still rated as the top German ace?

Just curious to your reference(s).<hr></blockquote>

LOL!

Yeah, yeah, 352...you knew what I meant!

Mama Mia, give me a break! I finally got the first 6 episodes of BoB in the mail - I had stuff on my mind!

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tabpub:

I believe that the "Blond Knight" he refers to is Richtofen. Somehow, WWI has bled in to the WW2 continuum. I fear the ramifications of this. Perhaps the Chef will correct this imbalance.<hr></blockquote>

This one was not an error - Erich Hartmann was indeed the Blond Knight.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

As for "hundreds of kills", we all know the Blond Knight "only" had 262 or so, so even the greatest scorer in history "only" had 250+, not "hundreds" of kills to his credit. (Technically 262 counts as "hundreds" - two hundreds to be precise, but the quote is a little misleading). i beleive Eric Hartmaan had just a little over 300 kills, i don't know how you could put "only" next to over 200 kills, americas top ace had like 40, but yes i see how it could be misleading to others,next time i'll be more descriptive

[Iron Chef Sakai]

wow someone beat me in correcting Dorosh, my bad, next time i'll scroll though the whole page before i make my reply. well world war 1 in fact had everything to do with world war 2, Goering actualy flew in the same squad as the red barron, and was himself an ace of ww1. but i'll stop here, i can see what you mean. but i would suggest to anyone interested in world war 2, read up on germany short war with france, then world war 1, then world war 2, think of it as a trilogy, their all actualy closely connected, kind of like return of the jedi never would have happend without star wars, i can already hear the laughs at my analogy but it's late here, hehe

[Richard Morgan]

Somewhere, I have Galland's book "The First and the Last" kicking around. This is a very interesting read. He really rated the ME262 BTW. What is really fascinating is the fact that in the latter part of the war, most of his fighting seemed to be not against the allies, but against good ol' messaniac meddling Hitler whose diktats seemed the product of fantasy and bore little relation to the exigencies of the war. As someone has just stated, he got it into his head that the ME262 should really be a fighter-bomber instead of a fighter/interceptor, and all the subsequent prannying around delayed production of a superb aircraft.

Anyway, back to air power as ground support, I seem to remember reading a long time ago about an American Airforce General called Pete Queseda, who whas particularly gifted and innovative in this regard. I know very little about him though. Can anyone out there tell me a bit more about him?

Cheers,

Richard.

[Simon Fox]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Richard Morgan:

[QB]Somewhere, I have Galland's book "The First and the Last" kicking around. This is a very interesting read. He really rated the ME262 BTW. What is really fascinating is the fact that in the latter part of the war, most of his fighting seemed to be not against the allies, but against good ol' messaniac meddling Hitler whose diktats seemed the product of fantasy and bore little relation to the exigencies of the war.<hr></blockquote> That may be fascinating but it is a common theme running through most post war memoirs from higher ranking Germans. Basically the: 'we wuz robbed by Hitler' excuse. The question then arises as to how much weight to give such essentially self-serving statements when they come from men whose reputations would most benefit if everyone beleived them. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>As someone has just stated, he got it into his head that the ME262 should really be a fighter-bomber instead of a fighter/interceptor, and all the subsequent prannying around delayed production of a superb aircraft.<hr></blockquote> Yes and someone else just refuted it citing some definitive multi volume tome on the Me 262.

[Michael Emrys]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Richard Morgan:

What is really fascinating is the fact that in the latter part of the war, most of his fighting seemed to be not against the allies, but against good ol' messaniac meddling Hitler whose diktats seemed the product of fantasy and bore little relation to the exigencies of the war.<hr></blockquote>

It might be worth keeping in mind that Galland composed his memoir at a time when he was hoping for an appointment in the newly-rebuilt Luftwaffe. It would have been to his advantage to emphasize his differences with the Nazi leadership.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Anyway, back to air power as ground support, I seem to remember reading a long time ago about an American Airforce General called Pete Queseda, who whas particularly gifted and innovative in this regard. I know very little about him though. Can anyone out there tell me a bit more about him?<hr></blockquote>

A year or two back I read a book about him and the 9th. AF called Over Lord. I don't recall the author's name offhand, but I still have the book around and may come across it again.

Michael

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]</p>

[CombinedArms]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Richard Morgan:

Anyway, back to air power as ground support, I seem to remember reading a long time ago about an American Airforce General called Pete Queseda, who whas particularly gifted and innovative in this regard. I know very little about him though. Can anyone out there tell me a bit more about him?

Cheers,

Richard.<hr></blockquote>

As Michael Emryes just indicated, the book to read about Pete Quesada is titled Over Lord. I can't recall the author's name, either, but he argues that Quesada was an unsung hero and one of the key architects of Allied victory through his success in developing air to ground tactics and his championing of ground support as a role for the Army Air Corps. The book argues that after the war, the Strategic Bombing types who Quesada had bucked all through the war got control of the Air Force, now emerging as an independent service, and suppressed his memory. But Bradley, asked by Ike in mid-1945 to rank all the commanders in Europe for possible assignment to the Pacific war, ranked Quesada, IIRC, fifth, right behind, IIRC, Bedell Smith (Ike's chief of staff), Hodges, Spaatz and Patton.

Quesada's most important contribution may have simply been the emphasis he gave to the ground attack role. He really BELIEVED it was important, when most other air commanders wanted to push the strategic war. He always positioned his HQ right next to the army commander's HQ and sought close relationships with the men on the ground. Also, he took a pragmatic, experimental approach, constantly testing new methods to see what worked. He pioneered different uses of radar, esp. for command and control--he tried it as a bombing device but it was too crude at that point to be effective-- and he kept looking for ways to improve communications between ground troops and planes.

Thus, he sponsored the idea of placing FOs (as mentioned early in this thread) with ground units. These would often be veteran pilots who were in one of the lead tanks in an armored column and had radio contact with planes overhead or who were attached to attacking infantry units. (If anyone saw the PBS documentary "A Fighter Pilot's Story"--that P-47 pilot eventually became one of these FOs). In short, Quesada kept working to improve the art of ground support by air and he was very successful at it, in the face of considerable resistance by many of his superiors.

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]</p>

[Iron Chef Sakai]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Simon Fox:

Yes and someone else just refuted it citing some definitive multi volume tome on the Me 262.<hr></blockquote>

SImon, that is actualy true if you read it. if germany didnt have Hitelr as their leader, they would have won that war. Hitlers meddling was from taking over army group B, all the way down too small things like wich rifles would be produced. Hitler actualy single handedly delayed the 262 production by at least a year because of him insisting it be outfitted as a fighter-bomber, i can guarentee you that if you look this up you will find it Simon. i'm sure there are actualy whole books on all the blunders Hitler imposed on his army airforce and navy. i myself and glad he was a bad decision maker.

[Iron Chef Sakai]

That may be fascinating but it is a common theme running through most post war memoirs from higher ranking Germans. Basically the: 'we wuz robbed by Hitler' excuse. The question then arises as to how much weight to give such essentially self-serving statements when they come from men whose reputations would most benefit if everyone beleived them.

quote:

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

Simon, not only was that wirtien by germans, but historians from america and britain, heck their is even a show on the history channel based on hitlers judgment, it's called millitary blunders, it

s not all about hitler but it very well could be and he usualy is the star of the show, and i don't beleive the history channel is run by old world war 2 propaganda specialists from the deceased 3rd reich

[Iron Chef Sakai]

that was interesting Combined Arms, i did'nt know that, if that is the case i would rank him above Patton

[Gyrene]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Thus, he sponsored the idea of placing FOs (as mentioned early in this thread) with ground units. These would often be veteran pilots who were in one of the lead tanks in an armored column and had radio contact with planes overhead or who were attached to attacking infantry units. (If anyone saw the PBS documentary "A Fighter Pilot's Story"--that P-47 pilot eventually became one of these FOs). In short, Quesada kept working to improve the art of ground support by air and he was very successful at it, in the face of considerable resistance by many of his superiors. <hr></blockquote>

Did he keep working to improve it or was he just adopting the way the USMC did it?

A tour of duty as a FO with the infantry was a common experience with Marine fighter pilots until the jet age made their training too expensive to put them anywhere but in a plane.

Quesada did a lot of work to get the Army to see the merits of close air support, which was something the USMC had been doing since at least 1923.

Gyrene

[Michael Emrys]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Iron Chef Sakai:

if germany didnt have Hitelr as their leader, they would have won that war.<hr></blockquote>

Good grief. Chef, please don't take this the wrong way; I'm really not trying to be offensive, but you really need to do a lot more reading and thinking. The only way Germany could have avoided getting kicked down the chute is if they had never started the war in the first place. Since the war was mainly Hitler's idea, you are quite right to blame him for that. But once begun, it is hard to conceive of any combination of events that could have pulled their chestnuts out of the fire. Believe me, I and plenty of other people have examined this issue extensively.

Michael

[Spook]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

LOL!

Yeah, yeah, 352...you knew what I meant!

<hr></blockquote>

Actually, I wasn't sure. A recent endeavor of some WWII aviation historians has been to review & revise earlier victory claim records. So I didn't know if you stumbled on a revised claim for Hartmann.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

Mama Mia, give me a break! I finally got the first 6 episodes of BoB in the mail - I had stuff on my mind!<hr></blockquote>

OK, my anal mode is disengaged again.

(I'll have to latch onto a set of BoB soon also. I'm among the heathens who didn't get to watch it the first time on HBO.)

[von Lucke]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Richtofen was only a fair pilot, and a lousy marksman. Many of his kills were gained by picking on stragglers and cripples. He will be remembered for having the highest score of World War One, though. Doesn't make him a great pilot.

While some pilots could bring down an enemy plane with a handful of bullets, Richtofen usually had to close to point blank and fire many bursts to ensure some of his bullets hit the target.

<hr></blockquote>

As much as I am loathe to stray off topic (right!), I just can't let this propaganda go unchallenged.

This is the same line that the British published during and after the war to make von Richtofen out as less the terror of the skies, and more the skulking vulture (the enemy can't possible be competent, let alone good at what he does, eh wot?)

Von Richtofen was an excellent shot --- on occasion taking down opponents with single bursts. All high scoring aces got in close before firing because those WWI crates weren't exactly stable gun platforms --- waiting until you can see the whites of the other pilots eyes insures you hit the target, and was a common tactic among veteran aces.

Where do you get that he was only a fair pilot? He did disdeign fancy maneuvers, because he saw too many good pilots kill themselves showing off. Early in his career he took out the best the RFC had (Lanoe Hawker) in one of the epic dogfights of the war.

And far from skulking around the edges of the battle, picking on stragglers, von Richtofen usually opened a dogfight by slashing straight through the enemy flight (counting on his rep to panic the enemy formation) and then pick up whatever plane ended up in his sights. A man who liked to hide from a fight and pick on weaklings wouldn't paint his plane bright red, now would he? Let alone rack up the highest (confirmed, that is) score of the war.

I suggest you read Richtofen, Beyond the Legend of the Red Baron by Kilduff (the most throughly researched book out there on the man), or Hunting with Richtofen by Bodenschatz (a first-person account by JG11's adjutant).

[Richard Morgan]

Michael, Simon: Interesting idea about Hitler's meddling being used as a convenient excuse by the German 'Brass' - I'm not sure I agree though. From the top of my head, Guderian (Panzer Leader)Cornelius Ryan (The Last Battle ref. Gen Heinrici) And Max Hastings (ref German high comand in Overlord) plus as mentioned, Galland in The First and the Last, are all singing from the same hymn sheet here. Most of these also mention his deteriorating mental and physical condition and his little circle of toadies, yes-men and sycophants who isolated him even further from reality.

Iron Chef's contribution is much nearer the mark this time this time, although somewhat poorly articulated. What I think he really means is that if Cpl. Adolph had stood back and let the experts get on with it, it is likely that the Germans would have won. Debatable this may be, but I wouldn't really disagree. Oh, and Combined Arms, many thanks for the gen on Quesada.

All the best,

Richard.

[killmore]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Thomas Goetz:

A few more thoughts on ground attack aircraft, and at least partial answers to some recent questions.

So while the US planes were not officially coordinating with the Soviets, by the late war German aircraft and even ground troops in the East were almost as likely to be attacked by American planes as by Soviet ones.

Tom<hr></blockquote>

I have seen statements in couple of books that US Jabos were not allowed to attack anything in the east germany (march 1945 until the end). In fact some german generals found it amazing that they were safe from air attack as soon as they withdrew to the east bank of river Laba.

[killmore]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Wildman:

Several complete different aspects of aviation being tossed about here.

First, the ME-262 debate. The Me was ready to go in 1943, but Hilter wanted to make it a bomber and not a fighter, hence it was late being delivered. <hr></blockquote>

Actually engines availability and reliability was a problem. Engine average life was like 20 hours.

But you could hear engines scrape metal after just 15 hours...

But germans like to blame hitler for most of their failures. Hitler interferance was not worth much - garmans were changing design of ME262 while they were waiting for reliable engines.

[killmore]

Not all Hitler decisions were that bad. During the Soviet counter attack under Moscow in late 1941 most german generals wanted to withdraw to the west. Some wanted to retreat as far as Polish border!

Hitler insisted that the army stays put and fights it out - and germans did succeed in doing that.

This made Hitler believe:

1) He knew better what to do then his generals.

2) Later in the war his orders to fight without withdrawal caused huge losses that could be avoided otherwise.

[von Lucke]

Technically, Hitler is to blame for the lag in German jet developement, but for a different reason then the 262 fighter-bomber controversy.

German engineers first flew a jet-powered aircraft in August 1939. Then, shortly after the start of WWII, Hitler put a halt to all military research on the grounds that the war would be over quickly, and the resources and manpower could be better utilized on existing projects. The jet-powered aircraft team was broken up and scattered to the four corners of the Reich.

It wouldn't be until mid-'41 that the project would be reinstated, but by then almost two years had gone by, and a couple of the original project engineers were dead.

In any case, the sheer number of allied planes involved made the jet attacks almost irrelevant. For instance, on March 18th III./JG 7 sent up 37 Me 262s to engage a force of 1,221 American bombers and 632 escorting fighters. (This action marked the first time the new R4M rockets were used by the Me 262, by the way.) In the end 12 bombers and 1 fighter were claimed with the loss of 3 Me 262s. Even on their biggest day, JG 7 flew 38 sorties, knocking down 14 US and British bombers and 2 fighters with a loss of 4 Me 262s. Their best efforts yielded less than a 1% loss for the Allies.

[ 10-26-2001: Message edited by: von Lucke ]</p>

[CombinedArms]

I've been trying to stay out of the Hitler discussion and keep the focus ground attack tactics---but what the heck, why not plunge in!

I'd like to suggest that the notion that "Germany would have one the war if only they hadn't had Hitler" makes no sense, for the obvious reason that there would have BEEN no war without Hitler. You can't really cherry pick here. Hitler's drive and megalomania got Germany into the war and helped fuel the early successes. AND that same drive and megalomania kept him at the helm, making a LOT of really bad decisions, after 1942, when his enemies became more numerous and better armed and experienced and, arguably, a professional military mind was now REALLY needed in command.

FDR knew how to handle this sort of situation--staying out of the nuts and bolts of the war and basically managing the war's political side, only making tie-breaking decisions between his generals and Allies when absolutely necessary. But then, he was a sane and balanced political animal who knew how to manage the reins of a democracy, who sought quality subordinates, who knew how to delegate, and who also knew his limitations.

Now if we want to take the discussion to a truly surreal level, let's ask the question: what if FDR and Hitler had traded places on, say , Dec. 10, 1941 (the day Germany declared war on the US)? Would Hitler have managed to screw up the Allied war effort enough to keep them from winning? Maybe. Could FDR have enhanced the German war effort enough to allow them to win? Maybe. But when we take a half step back from these question, we realize that we face the inconceivable.

Hitler, or someone like him, is impossible to imagine as a leader of the free world, just as FDR is impossible to imagine leading Nazi Germany. (Try to swap Hitler and Churchill--another highly effective war leader-- and you get the same surreal effect.)

Ultimately, WWII was Hitler's war. You can't take him out of German war effort because it was an effort he designed and brought into being from the ground up. Instead of blaming Hitler for losing them the war, the German generals should have been questioning the rationale for the war effort itself and their own earlier support for (or acquiecence in) Hitler's agenda. Their support of this man and his agenda helped to bring on that war--and that's where their fault lies, IMHO

[Simon Fox]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Richard Morgan:

Michael, Simon: Interesting idea about Hitler's meddling being used as a convenient excuse by the German 'Brass' - I'm not sure I agree though. From the top of my head, Guderian (Panzer Leader)Cornelius Ryan (The Last Battle ref. Gen Heinrici) And Max Hastings (ref German high comand in Overlord) plus as mentioned, Galland in The First and the Last, are all singing from the same hymn sheet here. Most of these also mention his deteriorating mental and physical condition and his little circle of toadies, yes-men and sycophants who isolated him even further from reality.

Iron Chef's contribution is much nearer the mark this time this time, although somewhat poorly articulated. What I think he really means is that if Cpl. Adolph had stood back and let the experts get on with it, it is likely that the Germans would have won. Debatable this may be, but I wouldn't really disagree. Oh, and Combined Arms, many thanks for the gen on Quesada.

All the best,

Richard.<hr></blockquote>I am not argueing in principle that Hitler often bollocksed things up. However, unsceptical adherence to the concept that he was entirely or even mostly responsible for every dud decision made by the Germans is wrong. My point was made specifically with regard to the Me262 as there is a strongly supported argument that the delays were principally due to technical difficulties with engine reliability rather than Hitlers interference. That is not to say that his interference may not have had some effect, but that many accounts overemphasise it's effect. It is a common thread running through post-war German memoirs. As you cite Guderian etc I can add Manstein and plenty more. Liddell Hart is one who failed miserable to give it the scepticism it was due.

As for this Iron Chef bloke if he can't do us the courtesy of organise his arguments in such a coherent way that they can be readily comprehended, by the use of such conventions as sentences and paragraphs at the very least, then I don't see why anyone should do him the courtesy of reading them.