Why I fly VVS

[leonid]

Okay, I'm out of this thread  

enjoy ...

[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 08-05-2000).]

[Sorrow[S=A]]

Why do I fly VVS Planes in a VVS Squad?

Well, let me tell ya, it was a long road.

When I first started AH I had never flown a single airflight sim in my life. No- wait, I lie. I flew Falcon 2.0 on a C-64 but that hardly counts here. Way back then Landing and taking off were insanely hard. It took me over 40 attempts to take off the first time (finally ran off the end of the cliff).

In those days I just wanted a docile plane that could be flown and fought with by me. One night while I was playing roulette with planes I kept tangling with Wardog in his P-51D. I believe at the time I was flying a spit IX as it handled the easiest for me. After (me) dying 2x wardog suggested I try an La-5FN as it was easier to control.
The humble start of a love affair began.
Taking off I found her quick acceleration and rudder control and low alt speed were incredible. I could turn with a spit and loop like a 109, just could do neither for as long as those two due to the E loss. I can still remember my only complaint..
"but WD theres only 2 guns in this plane"-sorrow
"<S> their 20mm sorrow...."-Wardog

I was hooked....
to this day I have shot down 237 unlucky pilots in my La-5FN. Got blasted too- 359 times but since beta 1 I have been close to .7 or .8 to 1 k/d. Not bad for a beginner in a '43 plane!

In truth after I migrated to the Knights, when knights usually mustered less than 10 pilots at any time, I found out _why_ I love VVS planes- every one I have ever flown.

When one thinks about how certain planes fight- it reflects the country that made them. German planes are E fighters- they loop vertically and climb well and kill with grace. American planes are B&Z mostly- fast powerfull and plentifull guns they swoop in and kill. British planes are B&Z planes. sleek lines that outturn and gain angles until the parting kill.
Russian planes? What do they do? Russian planes can do all of these things but master none of them. A russian plane instead is the king of the overshoot. Manueverable, low stall speeds and high acceleration, and guns that can hammer an opponent down as quick as possible. They are truly planes made for pilots who almost never have the advantage.

When this came to me I truly became dangerous. Then I met leo. Leo is quite simply the master of the La-5FN. He knows how to use it like a musical instrument. Whether at a disadvantage or not he can work magic.
I met- I died. I begged to come and learn.

But that doesn't answer the question. Why am I in a VVS squad still? The answer lies deeper.

Much about the plane made me think about the pilots who flew them. You know- alot has been said here about who's country had the "best" pilots. Germany had their aces and so did the US and Finland as well. But long before the subject came up _I_ allready knew- at least in my heart. Unlike any other country Russian pilots were the bravest ones to fly in WWII. Often massacred by superior planes they continued to fly low altitude to protect their troops and comrades. No other country adapted their planes to make them tougher and more capable of encountering an enemy coming from a superior position. In truth I think Russian pilots by the end of the war were the most dangerous ones. They neither expected or needed an advantage to fight the enemy. They accepted that their lifespan was probably going to be shorter than a WWI pilots. And still- they flew. And I think the success of eastern front german aces on western fronts vs. the opposite proves how incredibly strong  opponents Russian pilots were.

One can bring up Finland ad nauseum. The fact was that it was just a proving ground for the VVS where they lost- yet gained experiance. And in one way I feel much much sorrier for the russian conscripts who died trying to conquer Finland than anyone else. Finland didn't have a maginot line- but they had preperations and successfully made their border a dying ground Russia could not take short of total war. Hurrah for them- it has nothing to do with why I fly VVS though.  

Do I like Stalin? no I don't. However I do feel obliged to point out that he was a strong leader when Russia could not afford to waffle. Am I communist? Certainly not! However I feel in my heart Russian people are the most strong willed in the world. As leo pointed out victory for them was  personal like NO other country. Hitler was welcomed into the Ukraines in '39. But the resulting Genocide hardened people like no other army on earth. They did not fight to conquer europe, or to save the jews or to resist fascism. The fought to kill germans. No mercy, no quarter.

 So in effect why do I fly VVS? Respect. For the pilots who died doing their duty. For the instruments they used. And for the spirit they carried.

"Our cause is just. The enemy will be crushed. Victory will be ours."

------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.

 

[This message has been edited by Sorrow[S=A] (edited 08-06-2000).]

[Zigrat]

Great post sorrow <S>, makes me wanna join a russian squad  

[Sorrow[S=A]]

We are available >wink wink<

PS. Russian blondes...  yummmyyyy...  

[miko2d]

 Hi guys,

 My post was not a troll. Nowhere in it I spoke with less then admiration about the finnish army.

 Finland was the only outside eyewitness of the Bolshevik's atrocities of 1917 "Revolution", so they had good reasons to be afraid of intervention and it's consequences. They were preparing for 20 years while the rest of the western counties were happilt trading with communists. Arguing otherwise would only insult their intelligence.
 By demeaning their enemy you do nothing to prove their worth as soldiers and you expose your own ignorance. Finns faced a dangerous and very strong enemy.
 They won in large part due to their preparation, determination and training. Also in large part due to the weather and landscape conditions favoring the defence much more then attackers.

 Staga:
 1. What kind of "old" or "out-dated" fortifications could be there? 22 years before Finland was part of the Russian Empire and they did not have any anti-tank fortifications then.

 2. You are saying that Finns were so stupid as not to use minefields in the defence? What about some 500,000 land mines sent to them by France to **augment** their defence? French missed those landmines mines later when german tanks were driving to Paris.

3. The mined roads in front of the defences affect the attacker more then they affect defenders, wouldn't you say? Finns had no reasons to drive cars among the russian columns in front of their defence line. They also had no reasons to mine their own rear roads.

4. From many eyewitness account russians were attacked by ski-equipped snipers and machinngunners who quickly killed the drivers and officers, blew up the front and rear vehicles and dissapeared usually without casualties leaving the disorganized and russian soldiers to freese to death in immobilized column.
 May be those guys were just stupid and ignorant finnish peasants, but they sure look like highly trained soldiers to me. They were definitely better prepared and trained then russians.
 You are arguing, Staga that russian army was worthless and then you state that finns were also untrained and ill-prepared. You even post a picture of civillian-looking armed men that allegedly defeated the russians. So I guess they won because the aryan finn is much superior to a subhuman russian type? That was what Hitler thought also. How come it did not work for him? Of probably finns are even superior to germans?

 5. Do not give us that BS about the warm stoves. Attacking russians did not spend their time in heated tents. They did not even had skis for the most part.
 Russians did have diesels in their tanks, BTW.

 6. I served in teh Soviet tank forces (gunner and up) right across the border from Finland and I am talking from the personal experience about -40 degrees and the swamps and thin ice on the lakes, at least in the beginning of the compaign. Of course thy freeze eventually, but what idiot would argue the properties of snow as an exellent insulator?
 I was able to sleep under 5 feet of snow in -30 decrees celcius and did not freeze in six hours. Other people falling asleep in -10 outside where found dead in two hours.

 People in Estonia and other baltic countries were fighting the communists even after the 1945 - they are heroes, no question. But their countries got annexed by Soviet Union peacefully unless you count a few shots fired. It is a historical fact. The government just surrendered, whether formally or not - practically it was all the same.
 Some of the things they kept in mind while deciding to surrender were:
 a) russian's success in the terrible conditions during the winter war.
 b) the fact that the world did not give a sh*t about the finns then and would not help them now.

 Russians did claim that finns shot across the border first. Unlike the democratic countries with reporters and witnesses, they did not really have to stage that and shoot their own soldiers. They could just say so. Who was going to argue?

 About posting the stupid pictures - germans posted lots of them of ripped of russian prisoners. Russiand did something better - they paraded hundrds of thousands of german soldiers through the streets of Moscow in 1943 headed by Paulus and his generals, and washed the street after them. So you can find a picture of some bedragged finns - what does it prove?

 I was was not joking when I said that the casualties of the winter war should have been  divided to cover other "bloodless" conquests. Of course it is from the communist's standpoint. The russian people did not need those counties and a single soldier killed for them was too much, but that was the reality of the day.

 Also, Staga, from the tone of your post it looks like you just hate russians. At least you wish more of them had killed each other.
 Russians suffered much more then finns from the Communists.
 Also there were plenty of Communists (and Nazis) among finns and people of other Baltic countries.
 Communists did not have much support among the russian people in the civil war of 1917-22.
 Many would argue that their use of considerable number of mercenaries and volunteers from baltic states in atrocities against russian peasants was the contributing factor to their success.

 RAM,
 Of course when russians got the piece of Romania they did not expect the Romania to attack them eventually.

 Thought I may still be right. I read the memoirs of the german generals, and while Manstein is very polite in his memoirs and tries not to offend Romanians, it is obvious that they had trouble around Odessa so the germand had to bail them out and they broke first diring the battle of Stalingrad and left the 6th army out to dry.
 For all we know the germans may have been better off without such an ally.

 I am not trying to knock down the romanian soldiers as inferior humans - they hust did not have much motivation to fight for germans and were much worse prepared.
 Finns did not go further then the territory russians took from them. Most romanians wanted to do the same and not continue "conquering" Russia. Or maybe the germans would have won if the finns did not sit on their tails.

 P.S. Another thing you all have to consider is that while the brave finns fought for their country and idealistic germans fought for their race and living space for their descendants, the russian pesants fought to conquer the world for the communists after they saw those same communists terrorize their own country for 20+ years and starved and killed millions of people in the process.
 It would be stupid to expect the same kind of dedication from the russian soldier, wouldn't it? Germans had the whole armies of russians fighting on their side! I want to see any other general winning a war, winter or summer, with an army like that.
 Somehow nobody is surprised that the russians were capable of brilliant operations and dispays of bravery when they were driving germans out of their country in 1943 and later.

miko--

[This message has been edited by miko2d (edited 08-07-2000).]

[miko2d]

 Staga,
 Thanks for your link to the Winter War site. It is very interesting.
 Unfortunately a lot of stuff in it is pure BS having the communist propaganda (including the post-Stalin one) as it's source that later made it's way into the western textbooks.

1. The russian army was in no way based on the old Tzarist army, though it is a minor point.

2. The political officers - "komissars" served only officially to inspire the russian soldiers. Really they were the party's people not in the army line of command. They kept an eye on soldiers and officers and watched for any misstep on their part - political or otherwise.

2. Stalin did not kill the capable officers before the war and replaced them with politically correct officers. The cleanup of 1937-38 was quite the opposite process.

 The number of 40,000 officers killed out of 200,000 officers would not leave the army headless even if it was correct.
 In reality, about 36,700 is the number of people who left the army in 37 and 38, plus about 4,000 more in the navy. That number was used as the number of all the victims.
 In reality most of those people left for different reasons.
 12,000+ were arrested but not all were killed and quite a few of them later returned to the army, including some brightest stars of the russian military in 1941-45.

 Only about 3000 were really killed out of 200,000 officers. Almost all of them were political officers and officers of the NKVD (former KGB) or party leaders with military ranks (almost all of them were). Thy were the criminals that comprised the top communist layer - vicious, arrogant and mostly incompetent. Included in that number of "victims" are the executioners themselves - people who repressed the population.

 When Stalin cleared his way to power and needed an army for the real war headed by competent people he killed off the scum that brought him to power and and freed room for real officers.

 The komissars themselves were abandoned shorthy thereafter. They were replaced by political officers but this time they were in the chain of command and had to take orders from the field commanders and could not interfere in the military matters.

3. The slogan and doctrine of the Soviet Army was to bring the war to the territory of the attacking enemy. That really was was a political ploy to justify theor own forthcomong aggressions.
 That is exactly what they did when they invaded Finland, Poland, etc. - they were defending and bringing thewar to the "agressor".
 Russians did not pay any attention to the defence and prepared for none.

 All in all, the same wrong information can be seen in most western sources because it was taken from the communist sources in 1950s.
 Rather then admit that they were preparing an agression and were hit when most vulnerable, they prefered to blame it on Stalin being stupid, Stalin being afraid of Hitler and at the same time not beliving in Hitler's attack  and not preparing for it (what was he afraid then if he did not believe that H. would attack?) and such crap.

miko--

[This message has been edited by miko2d (edited 08-07-2000).]

[Staga]

Hiya Miko

First: I dont hate russians. Some of my co-workers and also some people which used to work for my parents in motel they owned few years ago were russians. What I "hate" are people who attacked in Finland back then.

About that artillery strike in Mainila:
If I understand right what you are saying you still believe Finns shooted those granades ? Better buy a newer history book then.

Did you check that link above ?
If not you really should check it and also read it.
Of course you don't had to believe anything in there.
btw: Some russian historian has made a book about bomb raids over Helsinki and in that book are even amount of bombs dropped to our city. One thing they didn't tell was that the bombers squad sometimes dropped their load to bay of Finland because they were afraid of Helsinki's AAA and Fighters covering our city.
Also few miles east of Helsinki are another cape and people put some bonfires there and voila; Bombers thought that it was burning city   Mission succesful  
Russians send a spy to look what kind of damage bombers did but fortunate police get him. After that All bomb raids were very succesfull. Did your historian teacher told you this ?  

And yes,I know later russians tanks used diesel engine (btw:Very nice construction with double over head cams, looked HiTech if compared to Chevy's smallblock ).
Tanks used in '39-'40 were mostly BT-5,BT-7,T-26 and T-28 models with petrol engine.
We have plenty of them in our museums (one T-26 and T-34 are in driving condition and also one Sturmgeschütz III).

Stupid pics? Well I have plenty of those in my books and other sources but I'm not gonna send those pics here. Those are too offensive IMO.

For me it looks like you have your point of view to history and I understand it if you're born russian as it looks like. You should also understand my POV.

I see no reason to continue this. We have different opinions and in world we are living now it's possible.
Good luck in your new life in U.S!

Staga

[miko2d]

 Staga,
 you accuse me of something I never said.

 I was actually agreing with you and you just attacked me for a minor correction to your story.
 I did not say that finns shot across the border. I agreed that it was rhe russian provocation. I just said that russians did not have to actually shoot their own people or shoot at all because they could just lie about it.
 It may not be obvious for westerners the completenes of communist propaganda and the dimension of their lies.
 Americans would have to stage something because they would expect some experts to verify their statements. Communists did not have to worry about that behind the Iron Curtain.

 Here are my words:
====
"Russians did claim that finns shot across the border first. Unlike the democratic countries with reporters and witnesses, they did not really have to stage that and shoot their own soldiers. They could just say so. Who was going to argue?"
====

 It looks like you just want to blast people even if they agree with you, just so that you could get the last word...

 I also made some specific comments about the
incorrect things on the Winter War Site. I never said anything about bombings.
 All airforces exagerrated their results, including finns, germans and allies.

 The spy story I hear for the first time, but
if you believe that russians needed to send a single spy to Finland when the war started to do the damage asessment, you are completely out of touch with reality.
 Russians had plenty of communists inside and outside of Finland and more spies then you could shake a stick at.
 In fact many finns were very instrumental in bringing the communist rule over the russian people.
 I am not a russian for your information. I hate comunists for what they did and were going to do. I just do it for real reasons, not imagined ones, like you do.

 Also, my history teacher did not teach me about the Winter War. It did not exist at all in our history. No mention whatsoever.

 I do not understand your POV.
 Marshall Mannerheim is famous for his insight and years of preparation and training he gave to the Finland. How can you state that after all his efforts the Finland had just a few untrained irregulars to defend itself?

miko--