Interview with german ACE 1945

[rod367th]

Adolf Galland
'We could have stopped the American daytime bombing offensive, that's for sure.'



CUNNINGHAM: In the course of your long career, you've flown, I'm sure, many fighter types in combat, and you have over a hundred victories. What, in your opinion, are the characteristics of a good fighter aircraft?
GALLAND: First of all, you need speed. Manoeuvrability is good, but speed is the most important thing. Next, acceleration, which is important. Then climbing. I would not say this is the right order. A good mix of these, and a stable platform for your weapons, you need. Manoeuvrability, you need. You need good strength of your structure - of the structure of your airplane. It should stand at least six-and-a-half, seven g, or more.

CUNNINGHAM: Nine g's?
GALLAND: Nine g's is good, if the pilot can stand it. We couldn't stand it. Not in the airplanes of World War II.

CUNNINGHAM: In your first combat in Spain, what aircraft were you flying then, general?
GALLAND: I flew the Heinkel-51 biplane. But this was, at the time, already an obsolete fighter. Therefore, we used it only for ground support, strafing, and a little bombing in direct support of the Spanish infantry. This was a very great success.

CUNNINGHAM: In design, the heinkel-51 and most of the biplane fighters of the 30's were really quite similar to the aircraft of WWI, weren't they?
GALLAND: Very similar. The -51 was a good biplane. Of course, not very different from the airplane of WWI. Many pilots of the time were the opinion that a fighter pilot in a closed cockpit was an impossible thing, because you should smell the enemy. You could smell them because of the oil they were burning.

CUNNINGHAM: Did you feel a little trapped, also, in the enclosed cockpit? Was there some concern about whether you could get out and that sort of thing?
GALLAND: Yes. Not with us, but with the older generation of which our generals consisted, mostly.

CUNNINGHAM: In the Spanish Civil War you saw the end one design era in aviation - the biplanes with their strut bracing, open cockpits, and stiff gear - and the beginning of another new era of aircraft design - the cantilever monoplanes with enclosed cockpits and retractable gear. And those types, I suppose, sometimes met in combat in the Spanish Civil War. Were these combats sometimes surprising?
GALLAND: Very surprising. Especially the Messerschmitt 109. Even in their first version, they were superior to anything that flew in Spain. And only the addition of one single squadron decided the air superiority in Spain. It's unbelievable what one squadron of twelve aircraft did to tip the balance.

CUNNINGHAM: How was the Italian Fiat CR-32? It seems to have had quite a reputation as being a good fighter at the time.
GALLAND: You mean the biplane?
CUNNINGHAM: Yes, the Fiat..
GALLAND: In speed, it was not good at all. And they had fear for the Ratas of the other side.

CUNNINGHAM: The Rata? The Russian Polikarpov I-16?
GALLAND: Yes. The I-16. It was one of the new generation of fighters. A fast airplane with retractable gear. And very manoeuvrable. You can say instable, therefore manoeuvrable.

CUNNINGHAM: Did you ever engage an I-16?
GALLAND: Yes, but we were mot supposed to and did not intend to attack them. We were trying to defend ourselves because our mission did not consist in fighting in the air. We were fighting against the ground only.

CUNNINGHAM: In Spain you flew, I think over 300 sorties. Most of them ground support?
GALLAND: Yes. All of them. I flew the 109 for the first time in Spain. But my squadron didn't fully convert to 109s until after I left Spain and my squadron was taken over by Werner M”lders.

CUNNINGHAM: The air force that Germany had at the beginning of WWII was essentially built in about four- and-a-half years. Were the Me.109 and Me.110 essentially the basis of this fighter force at the time?
GALLAND: The Me.110 came about '37. According to Goering and the Luftwaffe High Command, they were supposed to be the fighter elite. They were designated mainly to escort the bombers on long distance flights, but it was proven very soon - in the Battle of Britain - that the 110 had a strong armament, but not the acceleration, speed, not the maneuverability necessary to stand Spitfires or Hurricanes.

CUNNINGHAM: Did you ever do combat in one?
GALLAND: No, Not Combat. I flew it as an aircraft for making trips to the fronts.

CUNNINGHAM: The Me.110 was a disappointment, then, as you say?
GALLAND: Absolutely, absolutely. And I think the Lightning was an equal mistake.

CUNNINGHAM: The P-38?
GALLAND: Yes, the P-38.

CUNNINGHAM: You mentioned in your book that P-38s were not difficult to handle in combat, that you can..
GALLAND (laughing): Many, many P-38 pilots are angry with me about this statement, but it's true.

CUNNINGHAM: Was fuel in short supply during WWII?
GALLAND: In very rare cases only. In Africa, in Sicily, sometimes in Russia. But only for a short time. The Luftwaffe had preference and they got fuel as they needed it. Not so for our training. We had to shorten the training time of our pilots drastically. In the last months we got pilots who had fifty hours total flying time, including five hours of the operational aircraft. It's not very much.

CUNNINGHAM: And these pilots went into combat?
GALLAND: Yes. And most of these pilots were lost during the first five flights.

CUNNINGHAM: Was there a problem in getting good instructors also?
GALLAND: Yes, because the German Luftwaffe always fought without any reserves. This is also the reason why we have pilots with extremely high numbers of victories. We have many, many pilots which have been wounded twelve or fifteen times during the war, but we had to use them. They were constantly in combat.

CUNNINGHAM: How many missions did you have, General?
GALLAND: I didn't have very much because I had been grounded already in late '41.

CUNNINGHAM: You had many administrative duties as Inspector General.
GALLAND: Yes. Of course. I had to inspect all fighter units in Russia, Africa, Sicily, France, and Norway. I had to be everywhere.

CUNNINGHAM: You still found time to get in the cockpit and make a mission occasionally? Against orders?
GALLAND: During this time period? Yes, yes. Absolutely against orders. But I knew that my friend M”lders (Werner M”lders was Inspector General of Fighters until his death in 1941.) in the same position had done it also.

CUNNINGHAM: That sets an example for the men.
GALLAND: Yes. On the other side I want to say, Mr. Cunningham, that if a fighter commander or general of the fighter arm - as I was at the time - would not have known the conditions of combat as they were at present, then this man is not able to extend combat advises and tell the pilots how they should fight and how they should operate. They don't accept it anymore from you. They must know that "der Alte" as we call it - the old man - is still up to date because he is also in the air from time to time doing combat successfully.

CUNNINGHAM: You did have some additional victories then?
GALLAND: Yes. But I could not claim them because I was not supposed to be flying in combat.

CUNNINGHAM: With the introduction of the jet-powered Me.262 fighter you saw yet another era in fighter design come about. You then became one of the world's first jet aces. What were the good qualities of the Me.262?

[rod367th]

GALLAND: First, I would like to mention that I have flown the 262 - one of the two prototypes - first in May '43. At this time, the aircraft was completely secret. I first knew of the existence of this aircraft only early in '42 - even in my position. This aircraft didn't have any priority in design or production.

CUNNINGHAM: What was your impression?
GALLAND: It was amazing the procedure to start this prototype which was still sitting on a tail wheel; a lot of them were not able to bring the tail up, so they had painted a white stripe across the runway, and after passing this white stripe you had to use the brakes, shortly in order to get the tail off and then just hold it until the next white stripe came up. And on this point you had to rotate, or you were lost. At this time, the engines were very, very sensitive to handle. The throttles could only move very, very slowly, always watching the temperature, always watching. And even in throttling back, you could bust it, even being very careful. The best thing was to go to a certain point and leave it, and then fly, and throttle back only when you are going to land.
Nevertheless, the performance and the flight characteristics were so overwhelming that the first impression of jet flight in a pilot's life is something extraordinary. I personally was convinced that if this aircraft is a little bit further developed, the engines are more reliable, and the aircraft fuselage has been redesigned to nose-wheel, then it would be a perfect fighter. And I made a written report which is still today in existence. I have a photocopy of it, and I am saying (that) in production this aircraft could perhaps substitute for three propeller- driven aircraft of the best existing type. This was my impression. And from there on, the further design was forced and the production was forced.
But when Hitler saw this aircraft first time presented, he asked Messerschmitt - I was present at this time "Is this aircraft able to carry bombs?" And Messerschmitt answered, "Yes." And Hitler asked, "How many kilos?" And Messerschmitt said, "Perhaps, if I find out fur sure, two 500-kilo bombs." And Hitler said, "This is the fighter/bomber - the blitz bomber - which I am requesting for years. With this aircraft I can fight the invasion, the coming invasion." And this was the sentence to death for this aircraft being used as a fighter or interceptor - what it really was.

CUNNINGHAM: You were much against that?
GALLAND: Oh, terribly against that. We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft, but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.

CUNNINGHAM: Yes, and you later commanded the squadron . . .
GALLAND: Yes, yes. When I was fired from my post as General of the Fighter Arm, I was to give proof that this jet was a superior fighter. And that's when we did it. I think we did it.

CUNNINGHAM: The Me.262 was also a twin-engine design. Was it twin-engine because of safety considerations?
GALLAND: No. It was right from the beginning designed as a twin-engine, but we were very, very lucky to have two engines at this time because the time between engine changes was a very short period. The total period averaged between engine changes was unbelievable - 12 hours! And since Hitler had given the order to use this aircraft only as a bomber, there was another mistake made: to build an even smaller aircraft with only one engine in top of the fuselage, behind the pilot. And in case the pilot should have been forced to bail out, he would have immediately gone into the intake.

CUNNINGHAM: This was the "Volksjager" 162 the "People's Fighter"?
GALLAND: The Heinkel 162 - so-called "Volksjager"- was only one jet engine on top of the fuselage, behind the cockpit. This was a mistake of the same magnitude as the mistake to use the 262 as a fighter-bomber. Pratically, the 162 had serious combats, uh, I would say a maximum of 10 times. It wasn't ready to go. There was an average time of 12 hours between engine changes. I think nobody can be made responsible when he said, "No, I don't like this aircraft" . There was a tremendous development progress made during this time. It's unbelievable. This technology was just beginning. And, in addition, Germany was very poor on war materials, especially on chrome-nickel and other steel, which were needed for the blades.

CUNNINGHAM: Engine technology has come a long, long way.
GALLAND: Yes, hasn't it.

CUNNINGHAM: Wasn't the 162 designed primarily for use by very limited-experience pilots?
GALLAND: That is true. And even this was a crime, I would say: A real crime. The whole concept was bad. But in this desperate situation, when somebody had a revolutionary idea, then he could really send it through.

CUNNINGHAM: The attempt, I guess, was to try to get a greater number of fighter aircraft into the air in a short time because you were, at that point, much out-numbered, weren't you?
GALLAND: Yes. If we would have had the 262 at our disposal - even with all the delays - if we could have had in '44, ah, let's say three hundred operational . . . that day we could have stopped the American daytime bombing offensive, that's for sure. Of course, the outcome of the war would not have been changed. The war was lost . . . perhaps, when it was started. At least it was lost in the winter of '42, in Russia.

CUNNINGHAM: In the last days or months of WWII the Luftwaffe was beset with a number of problems. In your book, 'The First and the Last', you mention that fuel was in short supply, well-trained pilots were scarce, and your fighter force was outnumbered. In a struggle for air superiority such as that, how would you choose between fighter sophistication and fighter quantity?
GALLAND: The Messerschmitt 262 is a good example that you can be successful with superior performance. But I think this was a unique situation. We had at our disposal the first operational jet, which superseded by at least 150 knots the fastest American and English fighters. This was a unique situation. This would only come if you have a revolutionary change in technology like the jet brought about.

CUNNINGHAM: It was rather shocking to opposing pilots, wasn't it, to see the performance of the Me.262?
GALLAND: Yes. And the same with the 163 - the rocket fighter

CUNNINGHAM: You just needed more of them.
GALLAND: Oh yes. Sometimes numbers are the telling factor.

[OIO]

heheh and yet a 38 almost killed him once

[rod367th]

punt for jb42

[Pepe]

Nice reading    Thks.