Bf 109F info

[Viking]

Originally posted by gripen
There was no such option after Casablanca, the policy of unconditional surrender was declared public there. British intelligence also made this clear to Canaris.

Nothing was set in stone. With Hitler gone there were possibilities for diplomacy.

Originally posted by gripen
I don't agree. Large part of the people who died in the last year of war were not Germans. And I don't support collective punishment.

What you support is of no consequence; you weren't there. The allies sure as hell believed in collective punishment. Every major German city got to know that for a fact.

Originally posted by gripen
That is exactly what Canaris did and so indirectly also Stauffenberg.

"Indirectly" lol ... The funny part is that you probably believe the bull crap you shovel. Graf von Stauffenberg was part of the German military aristocracy, a nobleman officer. What you're saying would be a betrayal to everything he was brought up to believe in. He was for German expansionism, he was for German supremacy, he was for German nationalism, he was for enslavement of other people ... he just was too religious to be a Nazi. Graf von Stauffenberg wanted to get rid of Hitler long before Germany lost the war, and if that had happened Germany would still have fought on. Graf von Stauffenberg thought Hitler was an idiot, and a danger to the Reich because of his inadequacies as a military leader. He wanted Hitler gone to replace him with competent military leadership, not to stop the war.

Originally posted by gripen
Our Military was eventually succesfull enough and supported by sensible leaders and solid nation. Same can't be said about the Third Reich.

If Graf von Stauffenberg had been successful then the Reich would probably have a lot more sensible leadership. Of course by that time you would already have betrayed them to the enemy.

By your insane philosophy the Russians should have betrayed their leaders and military in 1941/42 and the Germans would in all likelihood have won the war. I'm glad the Russians weren't as stupid as you.

Originally posted by gripen
The Russians made peace only to finish the business later due to risk that war might expand.

Then why didn't they "finish the business later"? The continued existence of Finland defeats your argument.

[Angus]

"Nothing was set in stone. With Hitler gone there were possibilities for diplomacy."

Now there my nose tells me that you're right. Especially after Stalin had a conflict with Churchill about Poland.

Actually, things like that happened on a mini-scale. Will dig one event up this afternoon.

[gripen]

Originally posted by Viking
Nothing was set in stone. With Hitler gone there were possibilities for diplomacy.

Nothing indicates that; Roosevelt announced policy of unconditional surrender, the Brits made this clear to Canaris as well Stauffenberg & Co despite their interest on Poland and other eastern European countries.

Originally posted by Viking
What you support is of no consequence; you weren't there. The allies sure as hell believed in collective punishment. Every major German city got to know that for a fact.

It was choice of the Nazi leaders to be punished. Canaris, Stauffenberg, Bonhoeffer and others tried to stop that madness. The allies just used what ever instruments they had available.

Originally posted by Viking
"Indirectly" lol ... The funny part is that you probably believe the bull crap you shovel.

Stauffenberg was just part of German resistance, he probably knew well what Abwehr was doing. Note that Canaris started work against Nazi goverment at very early stage; Stauffenberg was indeed a latecomer despite he has became the symbol of resistance. From ethics point of view I see Bonhoeffer as symbol of German resistance; he was against the Nazis right from the beginning supporting the passive resistance, during war he started to support more active methods being part of the Abwehr.

Originally posted by Viking
If Graf von Stauffenberg had been successful then the Reich would probably have a lot more sensible leadership. Of course by that time you would already have betrayed them to the enemy.

If the resistance had been successful, the Abwehr and Canaris would have been center part of new German leadership.

Originally posted by Viking
By your insane philosophy the Russians should have betrayed their leaders and military in 1941/42 and the Germans would in all likelihood have won the war. I'm glad the Russians weren't as stupid as you.

What I'm saying follows the ethics of Bonhoeffer ie sometimes a person must make difficult choices between bad and and even more bad options, including killing and betraying others.

Interesting thing is that used LW tactis against the US bomber offensive resulted about maximum waste of most valuable resource of the LW ie experienced pilots.

Originally posted by Viking
Then why didn't they "finish the business later"? The continued existence of Finland defeats your argument.

They were planning to finish the business autumn 1940 but Hitler (their ally that time) refused saying that he did not want troubles in Scandinavia. In reality secret negoations between Finland and Nazi Germany were going on that time. In a way Hitler saved Finland as a part of his big war game (a year earlier he had given us to Soviets).

[Angus]

Canaris was shocked with the brutality applied in Poland. He went in a furious mode to see Hitler about it (He saw mass executions of civilians), but was stopped by Keitel with the words like "I wouldn't take this any further, - these were the Fuhrer's orders. That's when it sort of started.

As for an unconditional surrender, - yes, that was the agreement, - but there would still have been 3 possibilities for the Germans.

1. Offering conditional surrender to the W-Allies only.
2. Offering unconditional surrender to the W-Allies only.
We may be smart, but I really wouldn't be so sure if that wouldn't be a tempting thing. If both declined, -
3. Fall back rapidly on the W-Front.

The whole idea of overthrowing Hitler from power was after all twofold AFAIK. To end the war, yes, - and to avoid Germany falling under the USSR.

And here's the story I promised:

STRANGE! Prior to the capture of Wismar in northern Germany, the German 102nd Infantry Division had made contact with the British and offered to surrender. Instead they were asked to continue holding a 20km line at Bad Doberan against the Russians who were approaching the town. As soon as Wismar was fully in British hands the Division could then withdraw to the west, thus avoiding capture by the Russians. Here we have a German Division, as prisoners of war, but still fighting against the Russians (our allies) and under the orders of a British officer!. It was a strange war!!

ALLIES. On May 3, 1945, the British 6th. Airborne and the US 7th. Armoured, captured the north German town of Wismar. The actual capture was carried out by men of the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion led by Lt.Col.Fraser Eadie and under the command of Brigadier-General Hill of the 6th Airborne. Outside the town were the Russian front lines from where drunken soldiers, fuelled by a mixture of vodka and rocket fuel, were flocking into town in search of wine, women and song. The main hospital in Wismar was now occupied by the Paras. That night, a group of Russians soldiers approached the main gate of the hospital and demanded that all the German nurses be brought out. Told that no women were here they pushed the sentry aside and entered the courtyard. A half dressed Para poked his head out of a window and shouted "They are our girls, get lost" Suddenly a shot rang out followed by the rattle of a British Sten gun. The drunken Russians scattered as shooting broke out on all sides. It was all over in minutes, the Russians retiring to their own lines. In the cobbled courtyard of the hospital lay the bodies of six dead Soviet soldiers.

[gripen]

Angus,
At 20th July 1944 the center of the eastern front had allready collapsed and the best part of German armed forces bleeding in Normandy; allies had taken Caen and decisive operation Cobra starting in few days. So there was not much else than major retreat anyway in near future.

We can only speculate what would have happened if the German resistance had been successful; even in the case of unconditional surrender the Germans would have probably at least tried to slow down the Soviets. However, for the east european countries this would had given much better possibilities to resist Soviet influence, not even mentioning how many lives would had been saved and how much destruction would had been avoided.

Note that splitting of the Germany was decided later in the Yalta conference (February 1945) as well as status of the then Soviet occupied Poland; July 1944 the Soviest had reached only eastern parts of prewar Poland which were given to SU allready in the Tehran conference (Nov-Dec 1943).

[Angus]

Yes, yes, yes, Gripen, but say 25th of July, or 1st of August being either a deal or a fallback from the German army, the war (in Germany) would have fulfilled the wish of the Anglo-American forces, - all of Germany would have fallen to them already in 1944. The Germans would just have had to open up beyond the Rhine.
Would you think they would have had the USSR have all of Poland after that? It would have been a completely different deal in Yalta....

[gripen]

Most of us have grown up in the world of cold war where the SU was the main enemy of the western democracies. However, the situation was very different during WWII; the Nazi Germany was the enemy and the Su was an ally which did hardest work against german war machine. Despite Churchill and Roosevelt were obviously against the communism and expansion of influence of the SU, nothing indicates that they were willing to have some kind deal with Germany even if the resistance had succeed; changing the goverment would have not removed the existence of concentration camps etc.

Notable thing is that when Canaris presented the plans of the German resistance to the Brits via Bonhoeffer summer 1942 (ie before Casablanca), Churchill and Eden refused all co-operation. Same happened when Canaris presented similar plans in summer 1943 to the British intelligence, this time Roosevelt refused.

Summer 1944 Polish home army was still intact and ready to start uprising. Only legitime goverment of Poland was the one in London and Stalin would agree the free elections for Poland at Yalta conference so the situation would have been much better. Anyway, the SU formed a puppet goverment for Poland on 21th July so the situation was changing fast. Basicly, longer the Germans kept on fighting, larger the influence of the SU in the post war europe.

[Angus]

If I ponder on this as a reality, then had the German resistance succeeded in killing Hitler and taking over, only two alternatives would have been left to keep the Russians out, - unconditional surrender to the W-Allies, or a complete fallback on the W-Front.
Any of those would have ended the war with no Russians in Germany...
And bear in mind, the British had the motive for a grudge, for the German-USSR alliance lasted almost 2 years. Stalin was not to be particularly trusted.
You can see this from the war itself, - there were high hopes around MOperation Market-Garden, that the war would be over at Christmas, with the British and U.S. in Berlin, NOT the Russians.

If I was Churchill, and the news are out that Hitler is dead, there is a new boss called Stauffenberg, and he wants to open the gates, I have no doubts that I would have gone through them.

[Knegel]

Hi,

Stauffenberg isnt a hero for the germans today, how can he be, what has he done??

Even if he would have been successful, to kill a oponent with a hidden bomb, while he could have done it with an pistol, isnt what a hero do. A hero is willing to give his life for the task that need to be done, Staufenberg wasnt willing to do that, as result many had to die.
If a smal guy, who dont would have had the possibility to meet Hitler, would have used a bomb or poisen, ok, this smal guy would have been a hero.  

Canaris was even more poor. He was willing to sacrifice many smal german soldiers, who simply fought for their nation, but he was to much a coward to kill Hitler by himself.

Many of the guys who organized the assassination attempt on Hitler had the possibility to kill him fast and safe, many of them was high ranked officiers, who was so proud about their code of honour, many of them was mebers of the NSDAP and helped Hitler, many of them dont had problems to send others(friend and foe) into death.

This cowards shal be heros??

What was the Scholls and also Schindler and the lot of others who realy fought against the Nazis then?? They are the young generations heros.  



Viking,

it looks to me you dont know much about the power of propaganda, specialy at an time when a objective education wasnt available(lately i see similar mechanisms working in some of our "free world countrys") and the main thinking in the white world was racialist and anti-Semitic.

At that time most white people was racists and many people in europe was anti-Semits, that wasnt only in germany. Germany got many helping hands in the occupied and allieds countries, even in the USA and England was rather big NAZI partys. Even big parts of the Churches helped the Nazis.

In the USA, long after WWII, a not white person dont had the same rights  like a white one. Long after WWII the childrens of the red idians still got seperated from their familys, not allowed to speak their language and to follow their religion(in the 1970th this did change), before WWII this was even more worse, same count for england and france, not to talk about what did happen in russia and poland.

It also was well known long before WWII what the Nazi party and specialy Hitler was up to do. Why noone did act at that time?? The contract of Versaille didnt allowed germany to have a big army, why noone took care for that?

Simple answer, at that time not many found the Nazi ideas bad.

Noone did listen to Charly Chaplin, Albert Einstein and the lot of other exil germans. Later many of the guys, who did criticize Hitler, got called Kommunists.

And most strange, after WWII most real Nazis did remain in their position, tolerated by the allieds, while people like Schindler got ignored, after his work for the jew´s got public.

And where was the so called free democratic world in 1939 and after the war, when the baltic nations, finnland and poland did call for help??
The Lithuanians fought a hopeless partisan war till 1955.

Many people today still forget that Russia did attack poland, the baltic nations and finnland also in 1939, why England and france did declair the war only to germany is still a miracle for me.

One mistake, of most people of the older german generation was ignorance, and missing phantasie, regarding how evel people can be. Exact the same mistake the allied goverments made before WWII, as result they are same guilty like 90% of the germans.
A second mistake was deep racism, based on an incredible arrogance of the white man and christs, since many hundret years, as i wrote above, this wasnt only a german problem.

The young german generation is aware of the older generations mistakes, i rarely see the same awareness in other countrys.


Hi gripen,
------------------------------------------------
"Everyone used top cover but it means usually just that part of the formation is located higher than other planes. My original point was that for the LW 1944-45 fighting against escorts was waste of men material. At spring 1944 the LW sent large and relatively slow moving (compared to P-51s) formations of heavily armed planes (Fw 190s, Me 410s etc.) escorted by large number of G-6s (which was generally in disadavantage against the P-51 at high altitude) as top cover against US heavy bomber formations which were escorted by large number of fast moving escort fighters. The results were not good for the LW, according to Galland the LW lost about 1000 pilots in the defence of the Reich during spring 1944. Basicly the LW used the tactics which maximized their own losses in other words they gave the US escorts lot of targets."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course topcover is a waste of material, as i pointed out before, it need a very advanced plane performence to be able to operate below the enemys fighters without topcover. The G55 wasnt such a plane, as result also the G55 would have needed topcover.  The only realistic possibility to defend germanys citys successful, would have been the 262.
Where do you got the information from that there was large numbers of topcover in early 1944??


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What if the LW had chosen to use large number of smaller and faster moving formations which were looking for oppurnity to hit and run? Also these smaller formations could have a top cover but whole point is to avoid fighting against escorts. Note that in the most succesful cases the LW could avoid the escorts."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually thats what the germans did! they was spreaded all over the Reich and did attack the pulks in rather smal groups. Rarely two Gruppen did engage at same time the same Bomberformation, as result the escort had in most cases the numerical advantage. If a pulk was alone and got attacked, they could call the escort, while german JG´s couldnt communicate.
In eraly 44 the bomber formations still was rather smal, often with 150-300 Bombers, while the Lutwaffe still had a lot of fighters. Never they did attack such a formation with 200-400 fighters at same time, always they came one group after the next.  
The main problem was the 4mots and the need to attack them in one unit. Every attack of a single plane was very dangerus. The Schwere Gruppen dont got the extraplating and guns for fun.  
Afaik the number of topcover over the Reich at all times was rather smal, they only should bind the escort, until the schwere Gruppe could maouver into a good position.  In many cases even this wasnt possible cause the numerical advantage of the escort.
Topcover is only another word for escort. The B17´s had their topcover, cause they had to operate in tactical disadvantage, so had the schwere Gruppen, while, unlike to the 4Mots, fighters in a disadvantage have real problems to protect themself.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Statistics actually say that used tactics were certainly wrong. Regarding the airframes; the G-6 was the mainstay of the LW during spring 1944 and the G.55 could have done practically everything better. Note that Willi Reschke claimed majority of his heavy bomber claims in the Bf 109 (apparently most in the G-6?)."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How you be able to see wrong tactics in the statistic is a miracle for me. You seems to ignore that the escorting US fighters was on "free hunt",  cause their high nuber they was allowed to scan the area and to follow the germans to their bases and even without escort the bombers caused heavy losses. Around the Bombers they only had to spread the attacking groups to minimize the bomber losses.  
A numerical disadvantage and missing pilot skill isnt a wrong tactic as such.
The only real bad tactic i can see is the missing "big" attack, where all JG´s attack a Bomberstream at same time in same area.
The LW HQ did what the british HQ did in the desert, they did splitt the forces and made them more weak. With this bad tactic a rather smal group of enemys always will have the numerical advantage in combat area.

The test clearly show that the G55 dont had real advantages to the 109G, only in high altitude it got close to the G6. In low altitude it must have been even more slow, also the G56 wasnt that fast at sea level(550km/h).
For an US fighter, who attack with an initial advantage, there virtually wouldnt have been any different between 109 and G55, only the more big target would have been nice. Nothing would have changed.


Greetings,

Knegel

[Angus]

Knegel, I absolutely and wholeheartedly disagree with you, and think you have to read up a bit.
Some stuff here:
There was a plot to kill Hitler with sidearms. When it came to date, it was already beyond possible, - sidearms were banned.
(Interesting sidenote, - Erich Hartmann was stopped on his last trip to Hitler and asked to deliver his gun, Erich got angry and said that if he was not trusted, he would leave. He got through...but he was Hartmann, and they might have been keeping an eye on him....being alone as well)
Stauffenberg had seen fire, performed well, and was bold enough to carry a bomb to the Fuhrer.
A sheer co-incidense saved Hitler. Stauffenberg was supposed to survive this btw, an important element in the plot. And when they killed him, he didn't exactly go down weeping....
Canaris was a thinker, and turned against NAZISM when he saw what was going on in Poland. Now, not being in favour with the USSR either, he secured his position with information exchange with the British intelligence, - Canaris had his part aparently with the Wehrmacht's success on the eastern front with his British aquired information about USSR strongpoint. After all, Britain was almost at war with the USSR.
Canaris had 2 foes, Heydrich and Himmler. It is even belived that Heydrich was killed (A Brit job) to hold on to Canaris.
Heydrich BTW was one upright bastard-die-hard-nazi and one of the driving persons behind the Wansee agreement, - "Die Endlösung".
Himmler was sly, and tried to save his own arse in the end, he held on to Canaris as a possible card at the war's end, he was dealing with the Swedish Folke Bernadotte with negotiations, he even had some prisoners  let loose as a bargain.
So, back to Stauffenberg and Canaris. They tried to speed up the fall of the Nazi empire. For the Good of Germany. Their opponents had most of the cards, and had plunged a good part of the world, including Germany into the darkest of hours.
And if you want Heroes of another sort, go google....start with Scholl perhaps?

[gripen]

Originally posted by Angus
Any of those would have ended the war with no Russians in Germany...

I think that there would had been troops from SU in Germany every case, even if the Western allies had reached Berlin first because the allies were going to occupy the country anyway. However, the situation would had been very much different because destruction of the country would had been much smaller.

Originally posted by Knegel
This cowards shal be heros??

Stauffenberg can be seen as a latecomer to the German resistance but Canaris and Bonhoeffer realized the nature of Nazi regime very early and risked and gave everything to stop it. This is by the way first time I hear  younger generation German calling Canaris as a coward. Perhaps you should tell your opinion about Bonhoeffer (who worked for Canaris) as well?

Originally posted by Knegel
What was the Scholls and also Schindler and the lot of others who realy fought against the Nazis then?? They are the young generations heros.

IMHO Canaris probably fought more effectively against Nazis than any other German. Schindler saved some people so did Canaris as well, the White rose did some leaflets.
 

Originally posted by Knegel
Of course topcover is a waste of material, as i pointed out before, it need a very advanced plane performence to be able to operate below the enemys fighters without topcover. The G55 wasnt such a plane, as result also the G55 would have needed topcover.

If compared to the G-6, the G.55 was probably much better for both tasks (top cover and attacking bombers).

Originally posted by Knegel
Actually thats what the germans did! they was spreaded all over the Reich and did attack the pulks in rather smal groups.

Actually the Germans were going towards heavily armed and armoured Fw 190s which attacked from rear in large formations to avoid concentrated return fire from the bombers. The losses were extremely high with these tactics, as an example Boesch's unit is claimed to suffered some 350% losses, 3 survivors known.

Originally posted by Knegel
How you be able to see wrong tactics in the statistic is a miracle for me.

Poor results combined with high losses.

Originally posted by Knegel
The test clearly show that the G55 dont had real advantages to the 109G, only in high altitude it got close to the G6.

The test shows that the G.55 would had done pretty much everything better than the G-6 being about as fast, more maneuverable, carrying more fuel and heavier armament at same engine output.

[Knegel]

Hi,

they was able to bring a bomb into Hitlers HQ, but not a pistol??
Sounds like a real bad excuse to me.

Anyway, if Canaris was so early against Hitler, he could have done the job much more early. Canaris sacrificed many brave german soldiers and many of the civilian germans as well. Thats cheap terrorism and treasonnot mainly against the germans not against Hitler.
Who isnt willing to sacrifice himself shouldnt sacrifice others.
He, same like the others, could have done the job already in 1938-39, why he(they) didnt??

Canaris did work as effective against Hitler as Schindler and the White Rose, they all didnt work direct againt Hitler, but he did work more effective angainst germany.
While Canaris, same like others, had a good position to kill Hitler very early, without to sacrifice others, but he, like the others, simply wasnt willing to die for a better germany, cause their idea of a good germany wasnt that far away from Hitlers.

To try to kill Hitler in1944, when it was MUCH to late(for many Millions and germany), always will have the smell of "the rats leave the sinking ship" or "They saw their goods and chattels floating away".
In 1938 KZ´s  and killing "non aryans" already was reality and afaik the anti-Semitism and the 6 million dead Jews are the main reason to disagree with the Nazis, while Canaris and the other Officiers seemed to have more a problem with the bad military leadership and the obvious resulting  "bad"  end of the war for germany and their own goods and chattels.

You shouldnt set Bonhoeffer on one stage with Canaris!

Bonhoeffer never did agree to the Nazi Racism/anti-Semitism and was working against the Nazis right after they took the goverment and he never was in a mighty position like Canaris.  Bonhoeffer is on one stage with the White Rose.

Greetings,

Knegel

[Knegel]

Hi Gripen,

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Actually the Germans were going towards heavily armed and armoured Fw 190s which attacked from rear in large formations to avoid concentrated return fire from the bombers. The losses were extremely high with these tactics, as an example Boesch's unit is claimed to suffered some 350% losses, 3 survivors known."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was the only effective tactic against the 4mots with relative smal losses, the problem was to get into a attacking pisition with a complete group.

Single attacks from the rear was hopeless and did lead to much higher losses, while a successfull headon attack only was possible without escort, cause it did need even longer to manouver into a good frontal attack position that into a rear position, further more it need a rather high pilot skill to shoot a bomber down while a headon attack.

Attacks from 7-11oc and 2-5oc  also was out of range for an normal skilled pilot and even a good skilled pilot had problems while this to bring a bomber down.

The problem was that much to late the "schwere Gruppen / topcover tactic" got developed. If they would have had this while Schweinfurth and even in early 1944, the US losses would have been much more big.  

I think its realy the other way around to what you say, much to long the german JG´s had to fight in tactical disadvanatge, without or a to smal topcover.

Regarding the G6/G55 you now change your arguments like you need them. Once you say the clean 109 wasnt needed, cause the topcover was a waste of material, then you say the G55 could do both better, while the test show a better 109G4 flight performence and the clean G6 wasnt that far behind the G4 (at least the FAF pilots dont saw a different between the even more light G2 and G6).  And the claim, the G55 could done have both better, is like to say a 5,5year old boy can fight a 20year old man better than a 5 year old boy could do.  
 

Greetings,

Knegel

[Angus]

A front attack doesn't need so much superior speed. The closure speed is insane, so the key factor is a stable plane with heavy firepower.

A set up for attack may need some fuel. The more, the better.

A lower wingloading will give you both of those benefits, - carrying more as well as alt performance improving and ROC (if you work with the same weight).

Anyway, Knegel:

"they was able to bring a bomb into Hitlers HQ, but not a pistol??
Sounds like a real bad excuse to me."

Would you have had the brass to pull that one yourself? Do you think that you would have been quick enough in a room full of people, and possibly an armed guard behind you? Come on.....
It took balls to bring a bomb rather than a gun anyway, - a gun could be a forgivable careless thing, but a bomb was very absolute. And what I mentioned before, - Stauffenberg was supposed to survive. He was the person to fit as a "face".

As for Canaris, you seem to be confused. Here is something from Gripen:
"IMHO Canaris probably fought more effectively against Nazis than any other German. Schindler saved some people so did Canaris as well, the White rose did some leaflets."
I'll agree on that one. Canaris loved his country and got to discover the beastly nature of the regime he was working for. That was already in 1939, - long before "the final solution" and such things, even in Spain, the Nazis were excercizing mass executions. Poland was the beginning of those on a big scale, and both the LW and the SS were "applied" for the job. LW got targets to wipe out, SS were simply given a long leash.
Canaris saw that, tried to protest through official channels, and had to back with that. Even that was brave, and might have been the beginning of suspicions against him (main enemies Himmler and Heydrich), - but he was smart enough to duck them.
As an effective fighter against the Nazi regime I'd probably put him on top. And I'd call him a Hero, for he didn't jump from the ship, which he very much could have done. Nope, he carried on as he could with the hope that Germany could get through without being in ruins.
The real bandits that kept pumping "brave German soldiers" into the meatgrinder was after all, the hot beliving Nazi regime.
Guys like Rall will actually go as far as calling the Nazi regime "traitors to the people". As a pilot, finding out what was going on in the occupied countries as well as home in Germany (after the war), he described it as having been used and betrayed.

Here is something of interest for you Knegel, - something that emphasizes the regime's sense of realism as well as their grip on things to the very end.
Some days before Berlin fell, I think actually just right before Hitler took the "pop" solution, Schindler got a letter from Berlin. It was a complaint about the quality of his production, and with a threatening tone - he would have to quickly improve his quality of production or......
And BTW, Schindler was a Czech....well, Sudet? Not a German.

Now about the time:
"To try to kill Hitler in1944, when it was MUCH to late(for many Millions and germany)"

Not too late! Not at all!!! And exactly because of many Millons of lives AND Germany. Page up casualties, say from November 1944 to May 1945, - quite a bit I'd say. From all sides except the pacific. Think of all the damage done, the raizing of cities, and the absolute depletion of just about everything after the war.
1944 was a message of realizm. Any idiot could see that Germany was going to loose. (If not living in the Alps and reading only edited papers ) You had the Allies gaining foothold in France (with hopes of the war being over before Christmas) and the Russians going on at train-speed. . . .

[gripen]

Originally posted by Knegel
Anyway, if Canaris was so early against Hitler, he could have done the job much more early.

The purpose was to remove the Nazi regime from power and that would have needed much more than just killing one of them. Canaris was the most valuable member of the resistance so why risk him for that. Notable thing is that in some of the plans of resistance the purpose was just to arrest Hitler and other Nazi leaders.

Originally posted by Knegel
Canaris sacrificed many brave german soldiers and many of the civilian germans as well.

The German war machine was the main instrument of the Nazi regime and eventually the destruction of the German war machine removed the Nazis from power. And the German war machine contained many small soldiers.

Besides, it was actually the Nazi regime who sacrified millions of Germans (in addition to millions of others killed) and led the country to the destruction (just like Canaris had afraided even before the war).

Originally posted by Knegel
Thats cheap terrorism and treasonnot mainly against the germans not against Hitler.

Canaris was one of the bravest, boldest and most sensible German of those times. His last know message sent by tapping  to another  prisoner:

"Badly mishandled. Nose broken at last interrogation. My time is up. Was not a traitor. Did my duty as a German. If you survive, please tell my wife."

Originally posted by Knegel
To try to kill Hitler in1944, when it was MUCH to late...

The resistance (with Canaris) tried that many times earlier (including suicide attack). And of course it was late but not too late.

Originally posted by Knegel
You shouldnt set Bonhoeffer on one stage with Canaris!

Bonhoeffer worked for Canaris. And what Canaris did followed Bonhoeffer's ethic guidelines. Both were among the most important Germans of their times.

Originally posted by Knegel
This was the only effective tactic against the 4mots with relative smal losses

The head on attacks had obviously the best kill/loss rate as seen during Schweinfurt raids while the heavy fighter tactics caused enermous losses to LW once the escorts were present.

Originally posted by Knegel
Once you say the clean 109 wasnt needed, cause the topcover was a waste of material,

Nope, what I said is that fighting the escorts was waste of men and material and single canon was too weak against bombers (three being at least adequate).

Originally posted by Knegel
then you say the G55 could do both better, while the test show a better 109G4 flight performence and the clean G6 wasnt that far behind the G4 (at least the FAF pilots dont saw a different between the even more light G2 and G6).

Nope, what I said is that the G.55 could do about everything better than the G-6. And some FAF pilots actually saw the difference between the G-2 and the G-6. Later being notably slower and behind in other performance aspects except firepower and radio. Some also thought that the G-2s were better built.