A friend of mine's mom is a history teacher and while I was over, she gave me a book of interesting WWII facts. Tell any here you know of.
I'll start...
Did you know in WWII, in 1939 Germany owned 230,000 square miles of Antarctica?:inquisitive:
Printable View
A friend of mine's mom is a history teacher and while I was over, she gave me a book of interesting WWII facts. Tell any here you know of.
I'll start...
Did you know in WWII, in 1939 Germany owned 230,000 square miles of Antarctica?:inquisitive:
# A number of air crewmen died of farts. (ascending to 20,000 ft. in an un-pressurized aircraft causes intestinal gas to expand 300%!)
:balloon2: :book:
The legend that Polish lancers charged German tanks on horseback is a modification of the actual story. In reality, the Polish lancers had just routed a German infantry formation when it was ambushed by tanks. In the fleeing action, some of the lancers are reported to have charged the tanks.
Yeah, they send expeditions to the south pole. There are also conspiracy theories that say that the Nazis had a huge naval bay there for refueling their submarines. Supposedly Karl Donitz remarked to the allies something along the lines of "at this moment, the Third Reich is rebuilding her navy in a far away place!"
Wich is off course bull, but that would be excellent stuff for a badly written techno thriller. Fascists coming out of the ice, to conquer the world!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser of Arabia
Krojanty 1st September 1939. No tanks but armoured cars of 2nd Motorised division, retreated with loses noone ever charged tanks, though at Wolka Weglowa there were 3 tanks which were not ready ( crews were restng) and Poles charged infantry position close to those.
Whe tanks were met by Polish cavalry it ended with loses, often much higher on German side.:book:
The only situation when cavalry unit stopped Panzer corps happened in Poland on 1st-2nd September 1939. 4th Panzer division lost many vehicles without much success and the entire corps stopped.:book:
The only attack on an mainland American military installation during World War II occured on the night of June 21-22, 1942. A Japanese submarine surfaced in the Columbia River in Oregon and fired shells at Fort Steven. The only damage reported was to a baseball field's backstop.
The only occupation of North American land mass during World War II occured on September 18, 1943. U-537 landed at Martin Bay, Labrador and the crew established an automatic weather station. They stayed the night on shore, then departed next morning.
Are you not counting islands which are a part of North America as part of the North American landmass? The Japanese bombed the U.S. military installation at Dutch Harbor on the island of Unalaska in the Aleutians on June 3rd, 1942 and landed an invasion force on the islands of Kiska and Attu, further west in the Aleutian chain. Both of these were part of the Territory of Alaska (which didn't become a state until 1959). I suppose a case could be made that they weren't on the American mainland, as islands; but I'd certainly call them part of the North American landmass as I would Vancouver Island or Baffin Island.
Yes, that was interesting, i did a speech on the luftwaffe and i had that as one of my facts, another interesting one i had was that the soviet union downed more German planes by ramming them than shooting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Sorry Aenlic, I was meaning the North American mainland. If you were to include islands, then yes, the Japanese did occupy several Aelutian Islands, as well as Bell Island, Newfoundland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
Heh. OK. No worries. I was just confused and was trying to clarify. I thought that was the case and wanted to be sure. I had no idea that Labrador had been invaded, small as the invasion was!
Eh? Surely Newfoundland is in the North Atlantic? What would the Japanese be doing in the North Atlantic?
In the months between the Invasion of Poland and the start of "Fall Gelb" (German invasion of the Low Countries), the Dutch military attaché in Berlin, Major Bert Sas, was warned by German Abwehr-officer Col. Hans Oster about the data of the German invasion of the Netherlands. However, because Hitler kept postponing the date, Sas kept warning the Dutch Government regularly between 12 November 1939 and 9 May 1940. When the actual and final warning came, on 9 May, the Dutch Governement was so fed up with this they simply didn't believe him. That night, the Germans invaded. Most defences were not prepared.
The Dutch defenders against the German invaders used mounted cavalry against German troops in Groningen. The Dutch also pulled antique pieces of artillery out of the War Museum to use against the Germans.
Another 'fall Gelb' anecdote:
The strategy behind 'fall Gelb' was to rush through the Netherlands and Belgium to attack France and by doing so avoid having to fight mobilized armies. The Belgian fort of Eben-Emael was an obstacle in this plan. The fort was build after WWI and was one of the strongest in the world and was regarded as impenetrable. When the Germans attacked it took them just one day to force the defenders to capitulate and suffer only 6 dead and 18 injured. The Germans landed on the roof of the fort with gliders and used hollow charges to destroy the gun turrets. The interesting thing about it is that only weeks (I'm doing this from memory) before the attack there were trees on the roof, making a landing with gliders impossible. The trees were cut down in order to make place for a soccer pitch to entertain the garrison. Or how soccer caused the strongest fort of Belgium (wikipedia says of the world) to fall in just one day.
http://www.5ad.org/AmazingFacts.htm
Seems a lot of these facts are flying around the web
Is this true? I'm sure I read once that some South American country wanted to bring the Graf Spee up from the depths...Quote:
Originally Posted by The site
I like this one, nice to see the officers keeping up the side.Quote:
24. During the Japanese attack on Hong Kong, British officers objected to Canadian infantrymen taking up positions in the officer’s mess. No enlisted men allowed!
“Yes, that was interesting, i did a speech on the luftwaffe and i had that as one of my facts, another interesting one i had was that the soviet union downed more German planes by ramming them than shooting them.”
In doing that how many pilots did the Soviets lost?:inquisitive:
Total Soviet casualties (military, 1941-1945) mounted 8,668,400 soldiers, or more, they never were particularly truthful. I don't think an idividual pilot mattered a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Unfortunately, the books I have with me do not contain precise division within that number.
From the way I read it, the landing was via German u-boat (my bold):Quote:
Originally Posted by English assassin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homo Sapiens
Well i dont know for sure, but it must have been a heck of a lot, but than again the soviet leadership during the war didn't care a whole lot about an indvidual pilot, kind of the like the japanese who trained their pilots only how to fly into a ship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
She sank all right, just in shallow water.Quote:
The Graf Spee never sank, The scuttling attempt failed and the ship was bought by the British
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/...ry/3490360.stm
“kind of the like the japanese who trained their pilots only how to fly into a ship”
I just don’t believe in the story of “more rammed than shot down” The 2nd Allied As is Alexendar Pokrshkin.
“Pokryshkin was born on March 6, 1913 in Novosibirsk. In the air force he worked his way up from a military technician to a marshal of the air force. During the Second World War he flew 650 missions, carried out 156 fights and personally shot down 59 enemy planes. Pilots of Pokryshkin's 9th Guards fighter air division brought down 1,147 enemy aircraft. In the war he was awarded three Gold Stars of the Hero, many orders of the USSR and another 19 decorations of Asian, European and American countries. It ought to be noted that during the war none of Pokryshkin's wingmen was killed.” NONE was killed. That gives a other picture from the rammed thing isn’t it?:laugh4:
Well not necessarilly, that is merely anecdotal evidence. But I'd still be interested to hear how it was determined that the Luftwaffe lost more planes to ramming than being shot down, and how large the difference was.
I dont know that exact figures, but my guess would be that it isn't by too much.
Was pokryshkin the Soviets top ace? Because he looks small when compared with the top luftwaffe pilots. There are 36 known luftwaffe pilots with over 100 kills. Also three japanese pilots that had over 60 kills and even two pilots from finland with over 75 kills. Even though the U.S.'s top pilot only had 40 kills. We didn't fight in the war as long you the others and most of the great air battles were past.
the ramming was not ramming but doing sumthing with the wings. i saw it on discovery but i forgot how it was
I'm not sure but one of german pilots got over 300 planes destroyed - mostly russian planes. I know that one of their bomber pilots destroyed over 500 russian tanks.
Canadians engaged the Japanese in combat before the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbour. The Japanese attack on Hong Kong was met by a mixed force of British, Indian and Canadian garrison troops. The Canadians were undertrained and undersupplied, since they were intended merely for show as a deterrent, but were the last defenders to surrender (which took place on Christmas Day).
I believe its a myth also that grew from the early days of the German invasion into Russia. Before Russia got its act together but refused to give up any ground without a fight. With the outdated equipment of the Soviet Airforce prior to 1943, such a tactic would not be surprising considering the seemly ingrained desire to protect Mother Russia from the invaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
From Wikipedia - other information is available also but it borders on increasing the myth of how many were done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
I heard this from a friend, not sure if it's true though:
Luxembourg decided to support the Allies and sent their army of forty men South to fight Italy. On the way, they decided they didn't want to face certain death, and returned to Luxembourgh with forty-one men. They found a friend on the way. :tongue:
I know better fact.
When Rommel landen in Africa and attacked Brits, they sent tank division to stop it. Division has been withdrawed just before battle and when they got back to previous positions, it appeared that they got 10 tank more than they got at the beginning :)
Maybe these tanks simply copulated :P
“one of german pilots got over 300 planes destroyed”: Erich Hartman, 352 victories. He wasn’t the only one (Galland, Rall, Nowotny etc).
The big amount of German As is due to several factors: First, some of hem fought during the Spanish Civil War in the Condor Legion with Franco’s Nationalists. Second, at the beginning of the war, their opponents weren’t so well equipped. It is not to deny the courage of the Polish pilots, but a PZPL couldn’t fight against the Me. 109, or the obsolete air forces from Yugoslavia, Holland, Belgium and the early Soviet Air Force. Even France and the UK had some of their planes which could consider as equal as or even better than the Germans. So, some victories were just sitting ducks…
Third, the German never withdraw their pilot from the Front. The allied used their As to teach other pilots to fight.
At the end of the war, you had either Untouchable Germans pilots, either easy target ones.
Same story happened with the Japanese.
“their bomber pilots destroyed over 500 russian tanks” Hans Rudel on a Ju-87 G1. He destroyed around 150 various artillery pieces, 519 tanks, around 1000 various vehicles, 70 landing crafts, 2 Lavochkin La-3 fighters, Il-2 Stormovik and sunk Battleship "Marat", 2 Cruisers and a Destroyer.
Heres a dubious one, world war two only ended in 1989 when Germany officialy became a country again after the fall of communism, and therefore the allies could declare peace. True im not sure but interesting.
This is the idea of the "long war", seeing 1919-1989 European history as a contest between authoritarian and liberal political systems for hegemony. Its not so much a fact as a way of thinking about facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithradates
Seeing as history did not "end" in 1989, contrary to the hype, and authoritarian political systems seem to be just as much in evidence as ever before, (albeit many sponsored by religion rather than states) in my humble and ill informed opinion, it hasn't turned out to be a very accurate perspective.
Technically, Germany only became one country again in 1990. :book:
This might be going a bit offtopic, but the same happened with the Third Punic War. It was only officially ended in 1985, when the mayors of Rome and Tunis signed a peace treaty after 2200 years of officially being at war.
Brenus,Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
If you take Hartman as an example: he started his 'career' in 1942. There were no more easy targets. The Russian fighters were as good as the German ones.
I think the main reason is most German pilots stayed in combat until the end. Another reason is that they, especially in the east, had plenty of targets. Hartman could make three or four sorties a day and pick up one or two planes. The RAF or USAAF pilots escorted the big bombers. They flew only few missions per week, some missions without contact with Germans at all. Hard to get 300 scores that way. Another reason: German pilots often fought over or near their own territory. So they could return to combat even after being shot down. If memory serves, Hartman was shot down three times.
“If you take Hartman as an example” I didn’t. I just answer a question about a pilot who got more than 300 victories.
But the analyse is still valid, one tree can’t hide the forest…
Certainly in the early part of the war German pilots were on the whole better trained and had better tactics. That coupled with the fact that they stayed on the front lines till they died or were captured and fought against a numerically superior enemy helps up their scores.
Whereas RAF/USAAF pilots would be rotated out after a tour and either used as an instructor or promoted to fly a desk. And they spent most of the war fighting over occupied territory,so if they were shot down "the war is over for you Tommy!". Bob Stanford Tuck had nearly 30 kills in just a few months between Dunkirk & the end of the BoB. How many kills would he have got if he had not been shot down on a Rhubarb in early '41?
Lastly, one cannot discount the effects of inflated scores - either for propaganda or the usual over-claiming (as happened in all AF's). H-J Marseilles was meant to have shot down 17 RAF aircraft in one day in N.Africa, yet RAF records show they never lost a single plane that day.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tornio
"During the attack on Tornio, Finnish troops liberated a German supply depot containing a large quantity of brandy... as a result the advance was halted for day until the soldiers had sobered up."
Also dozens of german soldiers were able to escape during that time.
Edit: Eer, were did those two other posts come from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tornio
"During the attack on Tornio, Finnish troops liberated a German supply depot containing a large quantity of brandy... as a result the advance was halted for day until the soldiers had sobered up."
Also dozens of german soldiers were able to escape during that time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tornio
"During the attack on Tornio, Finnish troops liberated a German supply depot containing a large quantity of brandy... as a result the advance was halted for day until the soldiers had sobered up."
Also dozens of german soldiers were able to escape during that time.
Late in the war the Germans were ramming bombers too.
They even had some planes modified with armoured leading edges to help them with slicing through wings/tails, the intent being that the plane would be able to land & do the same thing again.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: im srry for the family when the segeant has to tell the family the newsQuote:
Originally Posted by Ice
"Ma'm your son has died in a farting accident":laugh4: :laugh4:
It happened outside of war as well. This person, I forgot his name, was a musician, and his instrument was his bum-hole and the farts were his music. Apparently, one day he farted one time too many, and the pressure or something caused an artery to pop and bye-bye Mr Fart-Man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannibal99
That was Le Petomane. UK posters over 30 will be absolutely delighted to lear that a film of his life was made, with Leonard Rossiter playing the flatulent hero. A role he was born for surely.
http://www.ljhelms.com/pet/_pujol/thestory/retro.htm
Sort of thing that could happen to anyone, that.Quote:
Through a weird mixture of motions, extortions and contortions, Pujol could "inhale" as much as two quarts of air (as measured by Dr. Marcel Baudouin in 1892) through his distended bottom. The young man quickly found that by varying the force with which he expelled this air, he could produce musical notes of varying pitch and timbre. He soon mastered simple tunes, and found himself entertaining astonished school chums with impromptu Bel cantos and arias.
He died peacefully of old age rather than as a result of farting though.
During Battle of Britain polish pilots fought together with Brits but sometimes they got problems with british culture. One of them had no ammo into his fighter and decided to land on british airfield. Every second was important because Germans attacked like mads. When he did it, he noticed that airfield is ... completely empty.
After searching for a while, he entered shelter and notice that all Brits are there. When he asked why they don't fight (it was one of the hardest days), they replied "5 o'clock". All airfield crew (even with AA guns crew) was into shelter calmly drinking tea........
Typical :laugh4:
During the Battle of Britain Prince Bernard of the Netherlands also flew a spitfire for the RAF and flew over occupied Europe in a B-24 bomber attacking V-1 launch pads.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_...he_Netherlands
THis predates the typical 1939-1945 WW2 but during the Second SIno-Japanese War, there were 8 Chinese divisions that had been trained and equipped by the Germans. Germany had once been China's close ally in the fight against communists and Germany wanted China's manpower to fight hte Soviet Union - but the war against Japan set plans back and soon Germany realized that Japan would be more modernized and ready to fight the Soviets than the Chinese would be.
It turns out my friend had forgotten the fact.
In fact, it was some time in the 19th century, and it was Liechtenstein, not Luxembourg, who had sent her army to fight the Italians. They started with 40 or 80, and returned with 41 or 81.
This hardly constitutes as a WWII fact, it just shows the British character (I think), my grandmother was 12 in 1940 and was living in London with her family. During the blitz her cousins were sent to the countryside but returned because they found it far too boring. So she never left London for the entire duration of the war.
I remember watching a WWII program on the history channel (Is there anything else on?). It talked about Churchills visit to the North African front. During this time, the British intercepted a message from Rommel to Hitler that he had no tanks and needed more badly. Chuchill, seeing this weakness, ordered an attack. Of course, however, the British attackers soon found out Rommel had plenty of tanks. He only told Hilter he didn't have any so he could recieve more!
And about the German/Soviet Airforce, it was pretty lopsided. At the Battle of Kursk, a major Russian Victory, Germany lost 200 planes. In retrospect, the Soviet Union lost 1000. Thus, it can be said that German to Soviet air loses were extremely gapping. However, despite this, the Allied Ace of Aces (IE, the Allied Fighter Pilot with the most kills out of -any- allied Nation, whether they be Brit, American, or otherwise) was the Russian pilot Ivan Kozhedub. He had a total of 62 kills to his name, including an ME-262 Jet Fighter. Also, he has two P-51 Mustangs to his name oddly enough. During one of his flights, he spotted a box of B-17's being attacked by German planes. He attempted to aid in their defense, but the escorting fighters thought that his La-5F was infact an attacking FW-190. When fired upon, Ivan had no choice but to return fire. He wasn't able to flee from the unfortunate mistake until he shot down two escorting P-51 mustangs. One pilot bailed out, one was killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Kozhedub
Typical... If he had been British it would have made me laugh. They seem to be the ones to get all the 'friendly' fire from the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerVX
Most of Germany's highest scoring aces were relatively late comers. I personally think the reason for this is that the Soviets began to pump more and more planes out, while the Germans had less and less. So around mid 43 the numbers were so lopsided that the good German pilots could bag more than ten a day. The highest I have encountered so far that is confirmed is poor Hubert Strassl who bagged 15 on the first afternoon of Zitadelle, ten the next day, then two and finally three befrore getting killed, 30 planes in four days (added to he previous kills he ended up with 67).
Also the early aces were fewer and fewer, combatattrition and promotions took them from the field (Galland was promoted away from the cockpit for isntance).
It is interesting to note that the Germans didn't really think you were a good ace until you had crossed somewhere around 50-60 kills. That says something. That is more than most of the best Allied aces, or Japanese for that matter.
It says that they stayed in combat for a long time and had a lot of poorly trained enemies to shoot at.
As I pointed out earlier, Bob Stanford Tuck shot down nearly 30 german planes between Dunkirk and the end of the BoB. USAAF pilots were rotated out after they finished their tour. Some pilots in 44-45 flew a whole tour and never saw a German plane.
And Mölders would certainly have beaten that as he managed to down 28 RAF fighters during the BoB alone (he was captured in France onthe 5th of June, then wounded on his first combatmission after his return, though managed to down the offending Spitfire). Had he had the same time as Tuck he woul have gotten if not 40 then 45 kills in the same period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mount Suribachi
The Allied pilots had plenty of inexperienced enemies to shoot down when they came with their large bomberstreams in 44 and 45. It wasn't until 45 that the bombers were largely free to enter Germany. Some days it would be empty skies, the next there would be swarms of German fighters to greet them. It all depended on when you were slated to fly.
If however the fighterpilots were among the taxi-service (flying around on call) over the frontlines, then the chances of meeting German planes was rather slim. Especially when you consider the number of Allied fighters and fighter-bombers. A few hundred German planes against thousands of Allied planes... you hadto be lucky/unlucky to meet them.
Also, the Russians were not easy targets per se. When experienced formations were transferred from the west to the east in late 44 and early 45 they suffered serious losses to the Russians. Of course they gave a good account of themselves, but they suffered far more than the 'local' Gruppen. The same happened when the roles were reversed.
The two theaters were different to the point of being a superb ace in one place wasn't a secure thing on the other. Even Hartmann only managed to shoot down two Mustangs when he was posted to defend Rumania's oil fields.
A few interesting facts (all from the East Front).
Highest scoring fighter-bomber pilot in air to air combat:
Leutnant August Lamber with 116 kills.
Highest number of kills done by a reconnaissance pilot:
Hauptmann Herbert 'Mungo' Findiesen with 47 kills (later transferred to JG54 where he added another 25 to his score).
Highest number of kills in one day:
Leutnant Emil 'Bully' Lang with 18 kills over Kiev on 3rd of November 1943 (total score of 173, 29 of which were western fighters and a single bomber it appears).
Craziest killrate in aireal combat:
Major Erich Rudorffer with 13 (some sources say 14) kills in 17 minutes (final score was 222 or 224 again sources differ).
Highest number of passenger in a Fw190:
5 plus pilot, two behind the pilot, one in the fuselage and one each in the wing ammunition bays (supposedly the onlookers' faces was something to have watched when the passengers clambered out).
Funniest award to a pilot:
In a fit of good humour the commanding officers of Major Erich Rudorffer awarded him with paratrooper wings for his 9 parachute escapes from his plane (was shot down 16 times in total).
That fighter-bombers and recon pilots could amass such high scores says something about the situation the Germans faced in the east. And for a pilot to be able to get confirmed kills at least one other person had to attribute the kill to him, often this was his Katchmarek (wingman), but it happened that it was a groundunit such as an AA crew that confirmed the kill, so I suppose those 17 kills of Marseille remained unconfirmed kills an didn't count towards his total score of 158.
I'm not too sure what the point of all this is, but a question applicable to both sides: are all these numbers verified from post war records of the other side? We all know the Luftwaffe destroyed the entire RAF about 6 times in the Battle of Britain...
The Russians didn't really keep as much in terms of books, and would genrally deny any significantly lopsided losses, but their general losses conform with these scores. Of course you can take some and pull them to one side or another.
Luftwaffe did claim to kill more planes than they did in BoB, but that was the higher up commanders that tried to suck up to Hitler and Göring. In general the pilots' direct claims were much closerto the admitted losses, which btw were hardly truthful either. The Allies weren't exactly the voice of truth either. I mean the B-24 bombers were supposedly directly responsible for 6500 fighterkills, and the B-17 a similar number. And the fighter/bombers wiped out the German tankforces on a daily basis (look up the numbers for Mortain alone).
That the Germans had similar rules as the Allies as towards aireal kills and claiming them we should offer them the same trust. I mean we have even accepted Russian claims eventhough we know that they were perhaps the least trustworthy in this regard.
Both sides inflated their figures, either by accident or design. A common tactic was for 2 pilots to agree to back up each others claim for a kill.
I can't remember if I mentioned it in this thread, or another, but Hans-Joachim Marseille, who claimed 17 RAF kills in one day over the desert. RAF records show that they didn't lose a single plane that day.......
EA, to answer your question, so (comparitively) rare were the shootings down of Luftwaffe planes in 44-45 that historians can go through the records and not only verify RAF/USAAF kills, but actually name with some certainty the crews shot down.
Well, if a pilot was to lie for a buddy, then he should be getting something out it. German tactics demanded that the wingman ALWAYS stayed on the wing of the leader. This meant that the wingman didn't get as much attention and certainly not as many kills.
For instance Walter Nowotny's primary wingman, Karl 'Quax' Schnörrer 'only' got 35 confirmed kills despite being on Nowotny's wing until 12th of October 1943 when Nowotny had reached past 250 kills. It was Quax who took the dangers and he didn't get any of the glory, just like all the other unknown wingmen for the super-aces, why would they begin to inflate their primary's score as crazily like that mention in the case of Marseille? They had little motive. The primary should at least back up a serious number of kills for his wingman, but in general that wasn't what happened.
Now I assume that Marseille was out alone on that mission, and thus the score has since remained 'claimed' and not 'confirmed'.
None of the numbers I have presented have included damaged or unconfirmed/claimed kills.
Besides, if it was so common, one wonder why there weren't more of the super-aces that got past 300 kills, or in fact rivaled Hartmann. As we all known most pilots have a huge ego, being the best is important to them. The German called that 'the Throat-ache', as a comment towards getting the various versions of the Knight's Cross.
I do not discount false claims, in fact I believe upwards of 10% might have been false or mistaken, several pilots often claimed the same heavy bomber for instance, just like the bombers' gunners often claimed the same fighter on several planes (which could lead to insanely inflated killrates, most notorious case somewhere around 160 claims, 1 actual). But actual intentional faking kills for each other in the hundreds is rather far out, also because there were often others besides the two planes involved. Having more than one in on 'MAKING an ace' is downright crazy.
Besides, it wasn't unknown that the Allies made mistakes in their book-keeping. For instance in the period of early 4-engine bomber attacks on Germany, the Germans had physical evidence on their hands for their kills (such big planes made a big splash), yet Allied records show significantly fewer losses (one has to assume this continued later but then numbers were too great for the Germans to keep up with). So either the Allied pilots went up without orders (when the losses were high I doubt they would sneak out like that), and thus messed up the records or quite simply the records aren't as realiable as we want them to be.
Don't get me wrong Kraxis, I'm saying inflated figures happened on all sides (for a variety of reasons).
The thing about pilots agreeing to support each others claims actually came from a quote I read from prominent USAAF ace.
I'm just very touchy about the whole Luftwaffe uber-ace thing, mainly due to certain people claiming that German pilots were somehow inherently (racially) superior fighter pilots. Clearly they had much better tactics & training in the early war years, I wouldn't dispute that. I think it was Hub Zemke who when asked what made a good fighter pilot said "training, training, training, training, good eyesight and training".
[QUOTE=Homo Sapiens]The only attack on an mainland American military installation during World War II occured on the night of June 21-22, 1942. A Japanese submarine surfaced in the Columbia River in Oregon and fired shells at Fort Steven. The only damage reported was to a baseball field's backstop.
What about Pearl harbour?
Britain actually started WWII. This was because Germany's refusal to withdraw from Poland drew the then Empire into conflict.
[QUOTE=Warluster]Mainland American military installation.Quote:
What about Pearl harbour?
He said "mainland America". Hawaii (where I was born, BTW) definitely isn't part of the mainland.
EDIT: simultaneous posts with Evil Maniac!
I hope it was fantasy convention because that is absolute nonsense.:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by AwesomeArcher
The Red Airforce destroyed something more than 10,000 German aircraft between June 1941 and May 1945,...they most certainly did not ram over 5,000 aircraft. There was no need to ram simply because the Red Airforce, like the Red Army, gained in experience and received newer and better equipment as the war went on and were perfectly capable of shooting down German aircraft.~;) Other posters are correct about a lot of this being nonsense.
In regards to German kill verification, iirc, they had the most stringent 'confirmation' sytem of any airforce. I tend to trust the claim of their best pilots but that does not change the fact that they simply fought more often and thus scored more kills. Hartmann, for example, flew from the second half of 42 through 45 almost non-stop.
Again, like other have posted the reason allied aces did not score as many kills was simply because they did not fly as many missions. Once a pilot reached 'X' number of missions or 'y' number of kills they were withdrawn to training schools or administrative duties. From a propaganda perspective they were worth more alive then as dead heros:book:Quote:
Originally Posted by AwesomeArcher
Rudel's claims about the effectiveness of his tank buster and the "tank kills" have also been called into question by archivists who cannot reconcile the claims with unit losses in the old Soviet archives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mount Suribachi
It is important to realize that there is a huge difference between what was published by the old Soviet regime and what has come to light after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Before the collapse, much of the published work did not pass the 'smell test' and was clearly propaganda. The most famous of these has to be the Kursk "Tank Battle" at Prokhorovka on July 12th, which has been totally debunked by authors with access to the archives previously never released to western authors.
Prokhorovka now fits more into the fantasy realms than it does history.:shrug:
The NZ government screwed up the timezones & actually declared war several hours before the UK :oops:Quote:
Britain actually started WWII
I'm not surprised that he didn't bust up 519 tanks, given how the second best scorer had just a bit more than 100 to his credit But there are a whole lot of pilots with around 100 kills), but he most certainly bagged himself a whole lot of tanks. Everybody around him agreed that he was a most superb flyer and marksman and when he attacked a tank, most often it did get destroyed. So anywhere from 200 to 500 is my guess. And since there was an official prize on his head, and a big one too, I suppose the Russians knew exactly how dangerous he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontifex Rex
Hartmann flew 825 missions... That is about once every day. And he made a kill about every two and a half days. With the density of enemies, his posting to JG52, and his inherent abilities he could certainly achieve this. He spent almost a year learning from the old aces (Edmund “Paule” Rossmann his section leader, Alfred Grislawski, Walter Krupinski) before he began to rack up the kills during Zitadelle. Combined with his fighterschool attendance he spent almost two entire years learning to become an ace. He wasn't better because he was German, he was better because he had the skills, the right teachers and the time to learn it all.
Now you've got me curious - do you mean there wasn't a massive tank battle at Prokhorovka, or that the casualty claims were exaggerated? A few details, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontifex Rex
There was a clash... But the Russians got crushed. Litterally. 32 German tank were knocked out to 259 Russian, of the German only 7 were destroyed!Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer57
I suggest you look at this article.
http://www.uni.edu/~licari/citadel.htm
Kraxis (and the essay) has it pretty much correct. Its close enough to the truth to not bother quibbling over minor details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer57
The old myth goes something like this:
On the morning of the July 12th the SS Pz Corps rolled out with some 700 tanks, of which 100 were Tigers, to breakthrough what they thought were the last of Red Army defenses.
Coming the other way was the 850 tanks of the 5th Tank Army armed with T-34s and KV tanks.
The two armoured phalanxes came together outside Prokhorovka on a battlefield only 5 miles wide (between a rail line and the River Psel) with the Rusiians charging down a slope into a giant "tank melee". Much writing about tanks ramming, swirling dust,...armageddon.
....and poppycock.
So,...why is the myth nonsense? Look at the numbers,...700 German tanks in the SS Corps. The SS Pz Corps did not have that many tanks at the start of the battle and certainly did not have that many 7 days after the offensive began. 100 Tigers? There were not that many servicable Tigers available to all the units in the southern arm of the attack and none at all with the northern arm (not counting the useless "Elephants"). 850 Red Army tanks of T-34s and KVs? Nope,....about 500 tanks with about 30% or so being light tanks (quite useless in a 1943 tank battle) and no KVs at all (but they did have 35 Churchill tanks nearby).
What actually happened is that some 110-115 German tanks and AG/TDs (with perhaps a 1/2 dozen Tigers, iirc) of the 1st SS Pz Div moved out from their positions just west of the town and were met by a counterattack by two tanks corps (roughly 500 tanks) of the 5th Tank Army. The counterattack brought the Germans almost to an immediate halt and began to drive them back a bit.
Rather than a solid phalanx of Red Army tanks the Russians came on in uncoordinated groups. There was no melee, both sides made use of AT guns, artillery and infantry. Anyway, with the Germans adopting a defensive stance, and supported by AG/TDs they were able to kill a lot of Russian tanks, even though about 1/3 were light T-70s.
By the end of the battle the Red Army lost some 200 odd tanks (+/-) to the German 35 (+/-) or about a 6-7:1 ratio. This equalled about 33% of German tanks committed and about 40-50% of the Russian tanks. Some pro-German writers (amateur and professional) like to think that if they had kept going they would have broken through but this is wishful thinking. They had no where to go and the Red Army still had uncommitted reserves to the north, south and east of the fighting. The Russians also had the Stavka reserve.
A tactical win for the Germans but an operational and strategic defeat.
This one hung on for a long, long time and some still believe it.:wall:
Cheers.
Not to forget the everpresent "and to their horror the German crews of the mighty Tigers and Panthers found out that their armour could be penetrated at these ranges, and that their turrets revolved too slowly."Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontifex Rex
Well, I would say that any tanker knows that at 100 meters or less his armours is not going to be enough in many, if not most cases. So they would not have been surprised to find out about such (German tactics were even to keep as much distance as possible to Russian and Allied tanks). Even if they had thoughts that prior to Zitadelle, they wouldhave known after day 1 where they had encountered plenty dug-in AT-guns with orders only to fire a point blank range.
Further, while the Tiger had a fairly slowly revolving turret, the Panther was faster. The Tiger was meant a breakthrough tank, thus it's enemies were at the front, while th Panther was meant to be a tank of maneuver as much. So it could find it's enemies all around mostly. Would be foolish to give it a slow turret (it is in any case).
Further, while the T-34 (I'm not going to deal with T-70s, too light) technically had a faster turret, in practice it wasn't. It was handcrancked to the German electrical system (thus the poor gunner could easily get exhausted), and it's turret seats were not connected to the turretbasket, instead they were bolted onto the sides of the hull. So the gunner would have to stand up and move about while he crancked the turret around, while falling over the poor loader who was picking up rounds from under the floor (brilliant feature of the T-34, keep all the ammo under the deck :dizzy2:).
The PzIV had comparable speeds to the Panther.
So technically the T-34 should win a turret turnfest, but in practice the Panther and PzIV would win.
Thanks a bunch for that info - it seems like all those Kursk/Prokhorovka senarios in my old board wargames were based on propaganda fantasies, eh? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pontifex Rex
Well, the movements of the forces afterwards fitted fairly nicely, so it was easy to believe if you didn't dig deep into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer57
And the massive ironing board tankbattle, unaffected by other factors, is a very alluring picture. No wonder it has been kept alive, we all want it to be true.
To answer your question shortly: Yes, but it is understandable. Keep on using it as it is a good setup. Just think of it as a hypothetical situation.
The mention of Bob Stanford Tuck reminds me of a story from his biography. Early in the Battle of Britain, when his squadron was stationed away from the main areas of battle, he was chasing a German bomber, but was only able to get off a burst of fire at long range. He did little damage, but the bomber ditched its load and headed for home. The bombs fell on an army camp, causing one fatality - Tuck's own brother in law.
Ouch! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius Clemens
The Japanese landed an infantry platoon in the Kimberly region as the first step of the invansion of Australian.
The platoon was supposed land, locate and clear a specified coastal location as a landing strip for the advance base.
Their maps were fataly inacurate and becoming lost they took shelter in a headland cave in which they, lacking drinking water and other essential supplies, and being unfamiliar with the flaura and fauna of the area eventually starved to death.
Interestingly to the local tribesmen, who were very aware of the JIF presence within their tribal grounds, the area was the equivelent of the local supermarket, with an abundance of both fresh water and food within a half hour walk of the cave.
Military Maxim : Remember the 6P's (or PPPPPP)
Prior Preperation Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
Hmmm,... I'm not too sure I'd agree with all of this (but the bit about the fixed seats in the T34 is spot on), The T34/M40, M41 and 43 models had an electric motor that could spin the turret 360 degrees in roughly 14 seconds (but the turret control did not allow for fine adjustments, thus the gunner need to switch to hand operation, the T-34/85 also had an electric motor but took about 21 secons.
On the German side we have the have the problem that turrets were more often than not completely out of balance and thus made power 'training' (using the motor to zero in) almost impossible
Pz IV - Electric motor; 25 seconds
Panther D - Hydraulic motor; 60 seconds
Panther G - Hydraulic motor; 18 seconds
Pz IV - Electric motor; 25 seconds
Tiger I - Hydraulic motor; 60 seconds
Tiger II used the main engine to drive its hydraulic motor but it came at a cost - Hydraulic motor; 10 seconds @ 3000rpm but this could damage the engine, or 19 seconds @ 2000 rpm
Sherman and Pershing came in at around 15 seconds, while the British Crusader could traverse in 10 seconds, Cromwell in 15, Comet in 24.
If you play ASL there is one scenario that is part fantasy part reality,...it has the units right but too many Tigers and resembles the old "clash or armour" a bit too much. Still it is a fun scenario and could be repesenative of of many other tank battles in 1943.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geezer57