PDA

View Full Version : Aces of the Luftwaffe



BillyTheKid_22
02-15-2007, 05:15 PM
http://www.luftwaffe.cz/images/head03.jpg



www.luftwaffe.cz (http://www.luftwaffe.cz)


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif just see!!

joeap
02-15-2007, 05:40 PM
I just did thank you!

carguy_
02-15-2007, 05:41 PM
AcesofTheLuftwaffe!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-15-2007, 06:28 PM
Thanks Billy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

darkhorizon11
02-15-2007, 06:29 PM
Very good website I've seen it many times, its not biased, it just states the facts!

Xiolablu3
02-15-2007, 06:41 PM
Great site!

It does contain a bit of bias tho,

'Indeed , Americans had on their side :

the best technology (with "the best fighter of WWII", namely the P51 Mustang ;'


This is very disputable. 'One of the best' would have been a better thing to say.

Pierre CLostermann preffered the Spitfire for example :-

AJ: 'What did you think of the P-51 Mustang, the so-called flower of the American aviation industry?.

PC: Yes, well it was a beautiful plane but it was not as worthy as the Spitfire in my opinion because of the weaker match of engines to airframe; it was a wonderful fighter primarily because of its long distance flight capacity.'

To say that the P51 was the best plane of WW2 is a bad thing to say IMO. Especially when you have the Me262 in the mix.

BillyTheKid_22
02-15-2007, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Thanks Billy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif



Welcome!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Chris0382
02-15-2007, 09:21 PM
The TA-152 seems like a special plane.

WTE_Ibis
02-16-2007, 12:05 AM
Great site Billy. thanks m8.
Cheers.

.

mynameisroland
02-16-2007, 03:05 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Great site!

It does contain a bit of bias tho,

'Indeed , Americans had on their side :

the best technology (with "the best fighter of WWII", namely the P51 Mustang ;'


This is very disputable. 'One of the best' would have been a better thing to say.

Pierre CLostermann preffered the Spitfire for example :-

AJ: 'What did you think of the P-51 Mustang, the so-called flower of the American aviation industry?.

PC: Yes, well it was a beautiful plane but it was not as worthy as the Spitfire in my opinion because of the weaker match of engines to airframe; it was a wonderful fighter primarily because of its long distance flight capacity.'

To say that the P51 was the best plane of WW2 is a bad thing to say IMO. Especially when you have the Me262 in the mix.

~Its a reflex thing for Germans I think Xiola. When I lived in Germany while studying I chatted to a few people about the war and overwhelmingly they said it was the US that defeated them. So if you also take in to account the proliferation of US history, books, documentaries and also US led interviews of German Aces it comes as no surprise that many Germans say the P51 was the best. Part of it is being polite imo, honouring your victors and part of it undoubtably holds some truth.

Yet people who read more about WW2 know that the Russians were largely responsible for Germanys defeat, that the Luftwaffe were terrified of the Tempest in the last months of the war, that they mytholised the Mosquito ect yet you will never read anywhere that a German Ace regarded the La 7 as the best fighter of WW2. You can however find Germans saying that the RAF were their toughest air opponents, followed by the USAAF second and VVS third.

StG2_Schlachter
02-16-2007, 03:13 AM
Roland, it's a czech website http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The general public in Germany does not know very much about the Eastern Front. People are influenced by endless streams of pro-American documentaties and movies like Saving Private Ryan. They are just not interested in history and especially the war. The most important thing they know about is the holocaust and very little about the conflict from a military point of view.

JG52Karaya-X
02-16-2007, 04:54 AM
An interesting personality is Oskar Bösch, a fellow citizen of mine:


Oskar Bösch was born on 18 May 1924 at Höchst in Austria. He was a qualified glider pilot when he joined the Luftwaffe in 1943. Bösch underwent his flying training at Flugzeugführerschule A/B 118 at Stettin-Altdamm. After completing his advanced fighter pilots training with JG 101 at Nancy in France, he was posted to the Ergänzungs-Jagdgruppe West, based at Avignon, in February 1944 to await a posting to a front-line unit. Bösch was soon posted to JG 3. En route to his new posting Bösch was caught up in a bombing raid. He resolved to become a bomber destroyer and volunteered for Sturmstaffel 1, a dedicated anti-bomber unit, flying heavily armed and armoured Fw 190s, then based at Salzwedel to the west of Berlin. He joined the unit a few days before its dissolution in late April. He made his first flights in a Fw 190 on 28 April: four flights lasting a total of 60 minutes! Unteroffizier Bösch claimed his first victories on 29 April, when he claimed a USAAF B-17 four-engine bomber shot down and another Herauschuss out of a force of 578 US Eighth Air Force four-engine bombers targeting Berlin. When Sturmstaffel 1 was absorbed into IV./JG 3, Bösch was assigned to the 11. Staffel. He continued his success against USAAF four-engine bombers. By November 1944, he had added a further five four-engine bombers to his tally to raise his victory total to seven. By Early November 1944, Bösch was serving with 14./JG 3. He added a further 11 victories with this unit, including his 10th victory on 1 January 1945 when he shot down a RAF Spitfire fighter. The balance of his victories were recorded over Russian opponents. Bösch also survived a mid-air collision with a Russian Yak fighter over Berlin in the last days of the war! Bösch survived the war and continued to make a name in gliding circles.
Oskar Bösch was credited with eighteen victories. He recorded eight victories over the Eastern front, including one Il-2 Sturmovik. Of his 10 victories recorded over the Western front, eight were four-engine bombers.

First kills after just 60 minutes of flight time in a FW190A Sturmbock, thats a feat there!

And he is still alive and kicking and even fying gliders from time to time (now residing in Canada IIRC):
http://www.esnips.com/doc/c8fcf78d-772a-4347-bfd3-01a69...cad/Bf109_OskarBösch (http://www.esnips.com/doc/c8fcf78d-772a-4347-bfd3-01a699d83cad/Bf109_OskarBösch)

mynameisroland
02-16-2007, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Roland, it's a czech website http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The general public in Germany does not know very much about the Eastern Front. People are influenced by endless streams of pro-American documentaties and movies like Saving Private Ryan. They are just not interested in history and especially the war. The most important thing they know about is the holocaust and very little about the conflict from a military point of view.

A Czech website on German aces. Im talking about the German point of view not the Czech websites http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

joeap
02-16-2007, 06:30 AM
Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
Roland, it's a czech website http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The general public in Germany does not know very much about the Eastern Front. People are influenced by endless streams of pro-American documentaties and movies like Saving Private Ryan. They are just not interested in history and especially the war. The most important thing they know about is the holocaust and very little about the conflict from a military point of view.

Roland and Schlachter, ummm are we talking the air war or land war??? It could be argued the air war was a "team" effort, but how could the German public not know about the Eastern Front, chances are most people whose "opa" fought in the war as ground forces fought at the Eastern Front (unless he was in the navy)...we all know that stats about how many German soldiers were lost there...that means a lot more families were concerned. Now, about bombing..yes it was an Anglo-American thing, but it was the Red Army that took Berlin and expelled several million Germans from East Prussia (DON'T want to get into the who did what debate just stating some facts).

Really puzzling for me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

csThor
02-16-2007, 06:39 AM
It's a taboo here. It's known that "there was a war" but few people ask questions and even fewer discuss their findings in public. WW2 is seen as a national shame and humans aren't exactly driven to talk about things they're ashamed of. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Secondly history teaching is limited to teaching the atrocities of the NS regime and especially concentrates on the suffering of the Jews. The war itself and the military actions are not covered at all, they're not even present in the school books beyond a few absolutely meaningless lines. While Stalingrad may be a known name asking about Sedan, El Alamein, Tobruk, Kursk, Tcherkassy or other important places (in the sense of military history) is certainly useless because noone will know (except those who are interested in the general topic).

joeap
02-16-2007, 06:50 AM
What? So csThor you mean the trauma inflicted on the Soviets, and back on the Germans is not known??? Wow. Please don't misunderstand me, more than Jews suffered from the Nazis, and not only Nazis were responsible!!!! I mean people msut know about the bombing, Dresden and all, don't they? Do they also know about Rotterdam or Coventry???

Just an example. That's sad. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I thought Germans were less ignorant than other Europeans or Americans, humans blah. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

mynameisroland
02-16-2007, 07:13 AM
That's sad. Sad I thought Germans were less ignorant than other Europeans or Americans, humans blah. Angry Blue Guy

What has ignorance got to do with it joep? Or are you just trying to incite a flame thread. Did you not read the bit about German WW2 history being overwhelmingly Holocaust focused? This is what the West wanted and this is what they got.

Can hardly expect them to teach history lessons about how great their Blitzkrieg mechanised warfare was or all their victories in battle in the Eastern front like the Kiev Encirclement. That would not be politically correct - would it ?

Does anyone know if they still avoid mentioning Japanese atrocities in Japanese education?

On a side note Dresden and Hamburg are the two names that spring up most when talking to Germans about British involvement - so they are aware of notorious aspects but in general WW2 history they are undereducated - deliberately.

csThor
02-16-2007, 07:19 AM
As I said it's known that "there was a war". It's also known that "there were bombings of german cities". It's also known that germans committed atrocities against he polish and soviet populations and that the soviets weren't exactly nice when they came to the eastern provinces of the Reich. BUT:

The period of 1933 - 45 is basically reduced to the Holocaust and other victims of the NS regime. It's being used as "killer argument" to subdue discussions and whatever interest folks may have in german history. Military history has no lobby in Germany and it isn't taught in schools - not even the Bundeswehr universities teach it in depth (a friend of mine is Leutnant in the Luftwaffe and I helped him preparing a rather basic paper on operation Citadel). So the military side of WW2 is basically unknown, even important battles or campaigns. If it wasn't for a load of documentaries (some of doubtful quality) few would know about D-Day, without the movie few people would know about Stalingrad or about the service aboard a german submarine.

And for the younger generation the motto is "That was 60 years ago, so why bother?". They're being taught that german history is full of ugly things so they're not exactly encouraged to study it.

waffen-79
02-16-2007, 08:07 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

mynameisroland
02-16-2007, 08:11 AM
It is basically the result of a concentrated effort to 'demilitarise' the German(Prussian)people - which is fair enough I suppose http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Klemm.co
02-16-2007, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
It is basically the result of a concentrated effort to 'demilitarise' the German(Prussian)people - which is fair enough I suppose http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Yes, it was fair at the time- but not anymore.
Back then everything was done to prevent Germany from ever starting a war again. The measures undertaken were harsh and radical, but i guess they were appropriate for the time back then.

But nowadays its getting ridiculous IMO.
I am certain that the Germans will NOT start a war in some time (say 400-1000 years) and most people hate the nazis like they are supposed to.
But the propaganda against Germany (the Germany 65 years ago of course) and eye-closing still seem like they will never stop.
ONCE in my life i want to see a movie that portrays the war and the Germans entirely realistically. Most probably most people in Germany and many Allied Nations would ban this film as Nazi-supporting, even if it would show the entire truth about the time.

bazzaah2
02-16-2007, 09:43 AM
I'd like to see a film like that as well. 'Stalingrad' was pretty good.

Jaws2002
02-16-2007, 09:59 AM
This things happened not only in Germany but in many their former allies. Specially the countries that ended up under communist control. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

I remember my history lessons from school and high school back in Romania.
As we were studying history chronologically I was excited when we got to study about WW2.
Well we were thought absolutely nothing about the part where Romania was on the Axis side. Nothing. You couldn't find the date when Romania entered WW2. Not in our history book, not in the school's library. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
The only thing they mentioned is that evil Iron guard started a shameful war against our good neighbor (USSR). You could not find out why Romania went to war. They said nothing about the territories that were taken by the neighbor to the east, in 1940.
We were thought to be ashamed of that dark period when we fought against the USSR.
Then we had to study what Romania did after August 23-rd 1944, when it started fighting along side USSR. We studied those last eight months of the war in about two months worth of classes. And nothing about the three years of war until then.

Don't get me wrong. I know what's right and wrong when it comes to WW2, but I just wanted to know what happened during those missing years. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

It took the fall of the communism in the Eastern Europe to bring the lost history to schools.

fighter_966
02-16-2007, 10:08 AM
Germany didnt start First World war and I COULD say neither second because Our behated Adolf was citizen which started also first one.. Austria or Austria-hungary ..(And also was the Fuhrer.. that really makes some interesting questions) ..BTW. What escapes me how someone can follow person who call himself a Fuhrer and who sits in bierstube all day. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Iwoudnt!!
There was Austria- Hungary and Serbia which had something do with beginning of the first one.. But Truth of course is that Germany started second WW
German experten rocked!!! pros and gentlemen

BillyTheKid_22
02-16-2007, 11:19 AM
http://graphicommunication.com/files/bf109e_wick_onwhite764_486.jpg



http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG52Karaya-X
02-16-2007, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by fighter_966:
Germany didnt start First World war and I COULD say neither second because Our behated Adolf was citizen which started also first one.. Austria or Austria-hungary ..

Well I'm afraid its not as simple as that. Had a certain guy not shot the arch-duke and heir of the throne in Sarajevo there would have been no war declaration and as a result the whole chain reaction of countries jumping into action as allies wouldnt have taken place.

If a Cuban citizen (or any other for that matter) shoot George W. Bush, do you think the American generals would sit idle, drink a cup of coffee and chew their nails?

csThor
02-16-2007, 12:01 PM
Even though Emperor Franz-Joseph hated his nephew with a passion for his "democratic" beliefs. It's rumored that he said "He got what he deserved" when he heard of the throne heir's death. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

fighter_966
02-16-2007, 01:08 PM
Well Europe was 1914 a powder keg so war IMO was waiting to happen but maybe your more right
no war would have been result.But why people accuse Germany for starting war, as one person above says" preventing Germany ever start war again"...oh well this is far from subject Luftwaffe acesPS French Germany relations werent good 1914...And killer was serb-nationalist from group called Black hand.
What Ihave read about Arch-duke would have been quite
sensible ruler

JG14_Josf
02-16-2007, 01:28 PM
Well I'm afraid its not as simple as that. Had a certain guy not shot the arch-duke and heir of the throne in Sarajevo there would have been no war declaration and as a result the whole chain reaction of countries jumping into action as allies wouldnt have taken place.

I don't know it all but I found these three links:

Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler (http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-hitler.html)

Wall Street and the Bolshevic Revolution (http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html)

Not for everyone (http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_4314.shtml)

Through its relationship with I.G. Farben, Standard Oil would play an important role in the arming of the Wehrmacht.

On the lighter side - thread closer (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967)

BlitzPig_DDT
02-16-2007, 01:32 PM
The spark that set off the powder keg was the Tsar's movement of troops, which tied the Kaiser's hands into helping the Hapsburgs, which then caused all the rest of the domino's to fall.

Of course, it could really be argued that it was the ambassadors and assistants and backroom dealings that triggered it. Neither Franz-Joseph nor Wilhelm wanted war, and neither of them got the full story of what was going on either.

There was a letter written by Wilhelm the day the war started where he said he was sure that war could be avoided and was glad for it. He was just too far out of the loop.

But yea, the allies pretty much set the stage for the 2nd act via the overly harsh treaty of Versaille(sp?). We really had no right to depose the monarchy the way we did. And had we not..... the chaos and confusion that followed would likely have been avoided, preventing a certain private with political ambitions, from actually getting anywhere.

luftluuver
02-16-2007, 02:17 PM
Wasn't he a corporal, not a private?

ViktorViktor
02-16-2007, 02:19 PM
But when I do a Google search for something historical or military, I get plenty of German web-site hits. My impression is that Germans are as much interested in history and war as anybody else. I also remember being disappointed several times at not being able to get an English version of a German book covering some aspect of the aerial war during WWII.

Germans just can't be as unknowing (historically speaking) as you say, can they ?

JG14_Josf
02-16-2007, 03:03 PM
Some perspective - perhaps (http://www.luftwaffe.cz/hartmann.html)

That is the guy who refused to give up his gun when visiting the fearless leader as the fearless leader handed out some expensive jewelry.

Here is the latest example of something similar (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17088.htm)



"Money trumps peace" is the underlying reason for all wars as two time Congressional Medal of Honor winner and highly decorated Major General Smedley D. Butler wrote in his reflective, yet prophetic, work War is a Racket:

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.


Follow the money.

carguy_
02-16-2007, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by Klemm.co:
ONCE in my life i want to see a movie that portrays the war and the Germans entirely realistically. Most probably most people in Germany and many Allied Nations would ban this film as Nazi-supporting, even if it would show the entire truth about the time.


I`m pretty sure you saw the movie "Stalingrad".I always thought this was the most unbiased picture of them all although it never showed normal Wehrmacht soldiers killing civilians for fun which happened plenty of time.

A lot of them really saw what a real war is the moment they entered Stalingrad.

Waldo.Pepper
02-16-2007, 08:14 PM
ONCE in my life i want to see a movie that portrays the war and the Germans entirely realistically.

For me - this is it!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074695/

Stalingrad (the movie) didn't do much for me. In my opinion the reputation that Stalingrad has is greater than the movie.

Another movie I really liked was Die Bruge (The Bridge) 1959. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052654/

BillyTheKid_22
02-16-2007, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ONCE in my life i want to see a movie that portrays the war and the Germans entirely realistically.

For me - this is it!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074695/

Stalingrad (the movie) didn't do much for me. In my opinion the reputation that Stalingrad has is greater than the movie.

Another movie I really liked was Die Bruge (The Bridge) 1959. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052654/ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Wow!



http://gymnasium-heissen.de/projekte/hisprojekt/pictures/stalingrad.jpg



Stalingrad !!!

csThor
02-17-2007, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
But when I do a Google search for something historical or military, I get plenty of German web-site hits. My impression is that Germans are as much interested in history and war as anybody else. I also remember being disappointed several times at not being able to get an English version of a German book covering some aspect of the aerial war during WWII.

Germans just can't be as unknowing (historically speaking) as you say, can they ?

The great majority (what the old Romans called "plebs") is. Of course there are people interested in history, even military history, but nowadays these are kinda "closed circles" because the rest of the nation just won't care or is even suspicious of history fans.