The Best Fighter Aircraft of all Time

[MiloMorai]

In Arheim, the Germans initially only had badly battered troops withdrawn to rest and refit, awaiting for reinforcements and re-organisation. With those ragtag forces, the Germans succeeded in holding their positions, encircling British elite forces, until the Konigstigers and the rest arrived to realize your last sentence.

And the other bridges? Allied victory(British XXX Corps). 9 days to defeat lightly armed Allied soldiers against German troops with years of battle experience, and 23% of the soldiers escaped.

Should Stalingrad be mentioned? A whole German Army destroyed.

Crete, a wholesale wasted German effort. Stopped the invasion of Malta. LOL, the Germans could not even stop the re-supply of Malta.

No, it killed a lot more.

Over several centuries and in different times and not so deliberately. Unlike the Germans and its allies which did their deliberate killing in only a few very short years.

[Dowding]

OK, give me one example where the British Empire killed 6 million people, started a war that killed 20 million+ all within 6 years. Try as you might to paint the BE as the Third Reich, I'm afraid you'll fail. Even going to the extremes of talking about slavery etc gets you nowhere - they were global norms at the time. Now exporting people like cattle to be murdered has never been a norm - congratulations to your blonde friends for inventing that one!

The camps in the Boer war were more like refugee camps - plenty of people went there to escape the fighting. The problem was poor organisation and sanitation, and an unresponsive government thousands of miles away. Hardly Auschwitz. An indefensible oversight, but the result was not the desired one. Public pressure after the reports got back to Britain changed the policy entirely.

Public pressure in Nazi Germany would bring what? A knock on the door at 2am by jack booted minions and a one way trip to Dachau? Did that happen in Britain too?

Austro-Hungary is the generic term I'm using for the two countries... I'm sure that is not too hard to understand.

I don`t care much about the Germans.

Who are you trying to kid?

So how do you feel about the holocaust? Exaggerated half-truth or full blown myth? What is the current thinking among master race obsessives?

[Shiva]

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim

Originally posted by Angus
How about the times Hartmann was shot down. Or Rudorffer? Or Rall? Galland for that sake?  Divide their score with it, what do you get?

Let`s try Hartmann`s example.

Hartmann scored 352 victories.
He was shot down 0 times.

AFAIK, by math theory, this means Hartmann had an infinitive number of kills (divide by zero).[/B]

Well, except for the fact that Erich Hartmann was shot down sixteen times, your logic is flawless.

Wait -- that's a flaw, isn't it? Then that means your line of reasoning is chock full of manure here, right?

Remember, being shot down does not equate to being killed. Being shot down ended the careers of most Allied pilots in Europe once the Allied bombing offensive started, because if they were shot down, they were almost always captured and put in prison camps (as happened the other way during the Battle of Britain), but they weren't necessarily killed when shot down. Hartmann either landed in friendly territory or was able to make his way back to friendly territory after each time he was shot down.

[Rino]

Originally posted by Overlag
errr lightly armed paratroopers vs heavy armour divisions taking a rest from the easten front?? (i think it was) I think they did rather well holding out as long as they did. And the plan was extreme, and they got the worse of the deal...im 100% sure the 101st or 82nd landing in Arnhem would have NEVER lasted that long.

 



oh and the British didnt win anything? thats laughable, didnt they kick Rommel out of affrica? Wasnt they the only ones that compleated there D-day objectives? Didnt they wipe out the German surface fleet on there own? Didnt they WIN the BOB? Air superiority over Europe maybe, but over the UK, NO.

I fully understand your first arguement with these guys saying the 109 sucked....it doesnt suck, it most like was one of the best planes in WWII but stop making up other stories about Germany being the master race...your digging yourself a hole you cant get out of.

      Might want to lighten up on the cheapshots to American
airborne forces there chum.  The 101st did just fine at Bastogne
with very limited logistics and facing alot more troops.

     Not to take anything away from the valiant Brits at Arnhem,
they performed magnificently.

     Rino

[Overlag]

Originally posted by Rino
Might want to lighten up on the cheapshots to American
airborne forces there chum.  The 101st did just fine at Bastogne
with very limited logistics and facing alot more troops.

     Not to take anything away from the valiant Brits at Arnhem,
they performed magnificently.

     Rino

i wasnt bashing them that much, but then i suppose my post did kinda seem that way, sorry ...but at the time of market garden, the 101st wasnt really elite force that paras are made out to be. The 82nd was good having fought as a force for a bit longer. Was just trying to say i think the British paras did a great job of lasting more than a week without supplys and dropped way over extended.

I think the only real reason market garden failed was down to not enough troop transport planes for the size of the plan....

 and the fact the plan was found by the germans who then filled the landing fields with MG's so the later drops was mowed down.

Isegrim seems to think EVERYthing the allies did was inferior to what the Germans did, sure the 109 was great (which is what this topic WAS about) but its turned into everything non German was crap which is simply not true......

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Overlag
errr lightly armed paratroopers vs heavy armour divisions taking a rest from the easten front?? (i think it was) I think they did rather well holding out as long as they did. And the plan was extreme, and they got the worse of the deal...im 100% sure the 101st or 82nd landing in Arnhem would have NEVER lasted that long.

Wasn't it the 101st Airborne who ferried the Brits across the Rhine to safety?

Moreover, the 101st with elements of the 10th Armored CCB (little more than battalion strength) and the 9th's CCR held Bastogne for 8 days much of it in below freezing and even sub-zero temperatures. They went into the line with zero heavy equipment. Since they came straight from a R&R camp, as many as 20% didn't even have rifles (turned in to armorers for repair).

The Germans threw two Panzer Divisions and two Infantry Divisions against the 101st and failed to break into the city. Don't you remember Brig. Gen. McAuliffe's reply to German demands that he surrender the city? The Germans received a one-word reply in writing; "Nuts!".

The 101st was a tough as any Airborne unit on earth, bar none.

My regards,

Widewing

[Overlag]

Originally posted by Widewing
Wasn't it the 101st Airborne who ferried the Brits across the Rhine to safety?

Moreover, the 101st with elements of the 10th Armored CCB (little more than battalion strength) and the 9th's CCR held Bastogne for 8 days much of it in below freezing and even sub-zero temperatures. They went into the line with zero heavy equipment. Since they came straight from a R&R camp, as many as 20% didn't even have rifles (turned in to armorers for repair).

The Germans threw two Panzer Divisions and two Infantry Divisions against the 101st and failed to break into the city. Don't you remember Brig. Gen. McAuliffe's reply to German demands that he surrender the city? The Germans received a one-word reply in writing; "Nuts!".

The 101st was a tough as any Airborne unit on earth, bar none.

My regards,

Widewing

arrg your all taking my comment of them not lasting as long way to far.

i DIDNT say they was crap

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Overlag

oh and the British didnt win anything? thats laughable, didnt they kick Rommel out of affrica? Wasnt they the only ones that compleated there D-day objectives? Didnt they wipe out the German surface fleet on there own? Didnt they WIN the BOB? Air superiority over Europe maybe, but over the UK, NO.

Britain had some help in North Africa... remember Operation Torch?

When did the Brits take Caen? The British 3rd Division failed to reach their D-Day objective.... Had they moved their bustles a bit, they could have taken Caen before the 21st Panzer got there.

I'll not take any credit away from the Brits, God knows they fought like demons for two years before the U.S. was even involved. I have nothing but the highest regard for the armed forces of Great Britain. I do believe that Montgomery was Britain's version of Gen. George McClellan (research that for an interesting comparison).

Adam, I urge you to research a bit deeper about those claims when arguing with these guys... They will fall on any error and use it try and prove that the Master Race was really the "way, the truth and the light".

My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Overlag
arrg your all taking my comment of them not lasting as long way to far.

i DIDNT say they was crap

And it's a good thing you didn't!!! LOLOL

I'm not bashing you Adam, just correcting misconception.

Here's a neat little story about the 82nd Airborne during the Battle of the Bulge. The 82nd was tossed in just like 101st, IE: Unprepared.

Lt. Will Rogers jr. (son of the famous American humorist) was headed west from Stavelot with two Shermans, several trucks and jeeps and perhaps 70 troops. As they drove down the road they came upon a GI wearing the 82nd patch on his sleeve, digging a foxhole alongside a bend in the road. Stopping his small force, Roger's asked the GI what he was doing.

Holding up his Bazooka, the GI replied; "Well Sir, I'm digging me a proper position."

"What unit are you with?" asked Rogers.

"I'm the 82nd Airborne Sir, and (pointing to his hole) this is as far as those bastards are going."

A big grin broke across Rogers' face. He turned to the tank commander and said; "pull these tanks in behind that man's position and deploy the men on both sides of the road".

For the record, that was as far as those bastards got.....

My regards,

Widewing

[MiloMorai]

Was not 21 Pz already in the area of Caen?  They made a counter attack in the afternoon. Caen was ~7 miles from the 'beach'.

Must dig into Estes' D-Day book.

[Overlag]

Originally posted by Widewing
And it's a good thing you didn't!!! LOLOL

I'm not bashing you Adam, just correcting misconception.

Here's a neat little story about the 82nd Airborne during the Battle of the Bulge. The 82nd was tossed in just like 101st, IE: Unprepared.

Lt. Will Rogers jr. (son of the famous American humorist) was headed west from Stavelot with two Shermans, several trucks and jeeps and perhaps 70 troops. As they drove down the road they came upon a GI wearing the 82nd patch on his sleeve, digging a foxhole alongside a bend in the road. Stopping his small force, Roger's asked the GI what he was doing.

Holding up his Bazooka, the GI replied; "Well Sir, I'm digging me a proper position."

"What unit are you with?" asked Rogers.

"I'm the 82nd Airborne Sir, and (pointing to his hole) this is as far as those bastards are going."

A big grin broke across Rogers' face. He turned to the tank commander and said; "pull these tanks in behind that man's position and deploy the men on both sides of the road".

For the record, that was as far as those bastards got.....

My regards,

Widewing

i know all about the bulge... i had my history teacher talk about it 2 hours a week for 3 years as if HE was there

oh and about the Dday objectives...i think it was only the candanians that done theres infact? lol

or maybe i ment the british airbourne forces was the only ones to compleat objectives...... lol

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Was not 21 Pz already in the area of Caen?  They made a counter attack in the afternoon. Caen was ~7 miles from the 'beach'.

Must dig into Estes' D-Day book.

yes and no...they was closer than the brits was to it (at the beach). Taking of caen was overoptimistic, but WAS possible as it would have been relativitly lightly defended until they the 21pz got there, supprise was on the Brits side...

(please ignore my spelling errors, im still flying as i type lol)

[Widewing]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Was not 21 Pz already in the area of Caen?  They made a counter attack in the afternoon. Caen was ~7 miles from the 'beach'.

Must dig into Estes' D-Day book.

It was nearby, but utterly unprepared for battle on short notice. Elements of the division didn't even begine moving towards Caen until 1PM.

Grandmothers with walkers could have made it to Caen before 1PM. Typical of the lethergy that plagued the Brits in Normandy, they simply didn't get their show on the road fast enough.

John Barrett wrote of this lack of motivation.

"If 3rd Division was to reach its planned objectives for the day, both speed and a willingness to take risks were essential. Unfortunately neither were apparent. The congestion was probably inevitable, but both commanders and troops displayed a lack of urgency which still further reduced chances of success. The 3rd Division had seen no action since Dunkirk, and their training had emphasised the initial landing at the expense of follow-up operations.

As a result, the troops, and their senior commanders, were so relieved at the relatively light casualties suffered in the first stages of the landing, that their reaction was to halt and consolidate what they had gained against probable counterattack rather than press quickly onwards to exploit it.

The problem was demonstrated not only by the South Lancs at Hermanville and Periers Rise, but also by the Brigade reserve, the 1st Suffolk, which , despite light resistance, made heavy weather of capturing the village of Colleville and clearing the two nearby German strongpoints codenamed "Morris" and Hillman". It would be late in the day before any real progress was made here; not only had 3rd Brigade failed to link up with the Canadians to the west, they had also not made contact with 6th Airborne, under increasingly heavy pressure east of the Orne.

It was not until about 1pm that the advance on Caen, the main objective of the day, began. The mission was assigned to 185 Brigade, consisting of three battalions - 2nd King's Shropshire Light Infantry (KSLI), which was to thrust down the main road from Hermanville to Caen, supported on the flanks by the 2nd Warwicks and 1st Norfolks."

Caen was ripe for the taking, if someone had made the effort. As it was, 21st Panzer took a serious beating, first from Allied fighter-bombers, then from Brit anti-tank guns, which caught them in the open.

The Brits fought very well, once their commanders got their forces moving. Problem was they took the better part of the day to do so.

My regards,

Widewing

[Angus]

Arnhem failed, but it was a long shot anyway, also hampered with lots of bad luck. However, if my memory serves me, the Germans lost roughly the same amount of soldiers there, which is amazing.
The Bulge was another thing, but if the same memory serves me, the Germans lost more people there than the US. They also failed in their objective.
In N-Africa there was a while untill the Brits got the hang of it. The key to victory was Malta. Crete was lost, but the Germans realized that it was a Phyrric victory. (Sp?) With Malta, the Allies could hold their supply line, although it was a very long road compared to the Axis line. They could also seriously threaten the Axis supply line from Malta, but it must be said that the Italian merchant navy did an amazing job there.
The most crucial engagement in N-Africa was presumably El-Alamein, where the Brits had a total victory. Gerries for breakfast really. After that, Axis were on the run, and at the final mopping up at the end of Torch, there were 300.000+ Axis POW's.

[Rino]

Originally posted by Overlag
i wasnt bashing them that much, but then i suppose my post did kinda seem that way, sorry ...but at the time of market garden, the 101st wasnt really elite force that paras are made out to be. The 82nd was good having fought as a force for a bit longer. Was just trying to say i think the British paras did a great job of lasting more than a week without supplys and dropped way over extended.

I think the only real reason market garden failed was down to not enough troop transport planes for the size of the plan....

 and the fact the plan was found by the germans who then filled the landing fields with MG's so the later drops was mowed down.

Isegrim seems to think EVERYthing the allies did was inferior to what the Germans did, sure the 109 was great (which is what this topic WAS about) but its turned into everything non German was crap which is simply not true......

     I think the real reason Market Garden failed was actually a
pair of reasons, poor intel on the panzer divisions and trying to
force XXX corp down one road to relieve the paras.

[Dowding]

Britain had some help in North Africa... remember Operation Torch?

Not at El Alamein. The groundwork the British had laid in preparation for dealing a killing blow had taken the previous couple of years. The destruction of the Italian fleet at Tarranto (the remnants of which then turned tail and headed North to Naples) meant the England-Gibralter-Malta-Alexandria convoys could continue to supply North African forces. Additionally, the holding of Malta with a bunch of clapped out biplanes in the early days was crucial to the harrassment of Axis supply lines which eventually strangled Rommel's forces. El Alamein saw the first deployment of Shermans, and after that was won (by British forces), the US became involved with the Torch landings and the resulting pincer movement.

The Battle for the Med was a predominantly British victory, and if it had been lost - and it was a pretty close run thing - the whole war might have been lost.