Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SKJohn on March 05, 2005, 10:38:55 AM
-
Came across this while reading recently:
.......Many of the P-38 aces prefered to meet Japanese fighters head on. Dick Bong especially showing a strong inclination to attack from this angle. The "Oscar" was particularly vulnerable from the front, and it's inferior armament of just two 12.7 mm machine guns mounted above the cowling were no match for the P-38's overwhelming mix of mahine-guns and cannon - Bong claimed at least 10 of the 21 victories in his first tour of duty with head-on attacks. One of the great advantages enjoyed by USAAF pilots employing this tactic was that it negated the superior manoeuvrability of the nimble Zero and :"Oscar."........
(P-38 Lightning Aces of the Pacific and CBI, Osprey Press, John Stanaway, p. 41.)
Well, if it was a good enough tactic for America's #1 fighter ace, then I guess it should be ok to use here in Aces High, right? After all, people are always clamoring on these boards for more "realism"......
So, the next time you see a guy coming at you head on - remeber to aim carefully, squeeze the trigger, and HO one for the Dick!:D
-
One constant in humanity is the penchant for the insecure to prop themselves up by demeaning others. One way is to whine about HO's especially when they lose one.
In my book a gunnery solution is a gunnery solution. I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.
-
heck, that would be like hoing a D3A in AH, i will gladly do that 10 times out of 10.
in fact, one dared to HO my tempest last week... he didn't last long.
I HAVE A GRAYT IDEYA!!! ILL HO THAT TEMPEST IN MY D3A!!1!!!! I R L33T!
-
In addition, the USN taught HO shots (or high degree front quarter deflection shots) as the preferred method for the same reasons.
-
Originally posted by SKJohn
Came across this while reading recently:
.......Many of the P-38 aces prefered to meet Japanese fighters head on. Dick Bong especially showing a strong inclination to attack from this angle. The "Oscar" was particularly vulnerable from the front, and it's inferior armament of just two 12.7 mm machine guns mounted above the cowling were no match for the P-38's overwhelming mix of mahine-guns and cannon - Bong claimed at least 10 of the 21 victories in his first tour of duty with head-on attacks. One of the great advantages enjoyed by USAAF pilots employing this tactic was that it negated the superior manoeuvrability of the nimble Zero and :"Oscar."........
(P-38 Lightning Aces of the Pacific and CBI, Osprey Press, John Stanaway, p. 41.)
Well, if it was a good enough tactic for America's #1 fighter ace, then I guess it should be ok to use here in Aces High, right? After all, people are always clamoring on these boards for more "realism"......
So, the next time you see a guy coming at you head on - remeber to aim carefully, squeeze the trigger, and HO one for the Dick!:D
Yanno...........
Anyone can find historical precedent for HOing as a valid tactic. I've used several incidents as "devil's advocate" type arguments for guys who whine about HO's not being "realistitc". They were.
However, I don't go around advocating the use of it in AH. Those guys were defending their homes and their lives, and if they got shot down there was a damn good chance they weren't going to make it home, even if they survived the bail-out. They wanted what worked, and showing off your "skillz" was a good way to die. We get unlimited lives and a broad choice of planes to fly. There is no need for you to feel so afraid of your opponent that you must use the HO. This is more like a Top Gun shootout than any real battle, and its even less than that because there is absolutely no danger to anyone (except their ego's). IMO yall who keep harping on how we should "embrace" the HO are just as bad as the ones who whine about it not being "realistic". Yall are just score potatos, plain and simple. Nukes were real too, but nobody is advocating we use them. Well, except Furball. And we all know Furball sucks. :)
-
Yup, Furball said it best...
AMIWERICAN PLENEZ WITH NOOKS"""!!!! NOOKEIES!! I NEED NOOKIE! BigG BOOM!"!!!"$!!! 111 !! ROFLME"!!!! NOOKIEE NOOK!!!1!!
:rofl :lol :aok :lol :rofl
-
what StarofAfrica2 said...
a HO in AH won't get any respect until the players start falling out of their chairs & bleeding to death like the REAL WW2 pilots did.
-
Yup, hoing is a far different proposition in RL than it is in AH. When you're flying right at another plane at 700mph closure speed and throw the high risk of death in it is a totally different ballgame than the spray and pray constant hoing tactics of AH.
-
I honestly think that their definition of a "head-on" attack and our version of the HO are 2 different animals. I believe that they are talking a very high aspect deflection shot.
I fail to believe that someone like Bong would constantly put himself in danger that often. I think that he probably was using very high deflection shots and if he missed ... he went merrily zooming away in his P-38.
Nobody ... 'cept that guy in "Deer Hunter" ... would play Russian Roulette over and over again ... ya gots to be insane to do that ... and the odds are definately NOT in your favor.
-
Germany Erich Hartman-352 kils
USSR Ivan Kozhedub-62 kils
And now Americas ace of aces......................wic h is HO'er
USA Dick Bong-40 kills
Bad example
-
Originally posted by ATA
Germany Erich Hartman-352 kils
USSR Ivan Kozhedub-62 kils
And now Americas ace of aces......................wic h is HO'er
USA Dick Bong-40 kills
Bad example
Still not a bad number when you consider US pilots were only allowed I believe 50 missions, where the Germans flew for years and swatted every newbie out of the sky and tons of un-escorted bombers. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
The numbers are impressive but misleading. I don't think those guys were any better pilots than some of the US aces ... especially Bong.
-
After all this HO nonsense I have decided that I will fly nothing but the N1K and the typhie and do nothing but HO for the remainder of the your.....
good day
check 12 =)
cav58D
-
Originally posted by ATA
Germany Erich Hartman-352 kils
USSR Ivan Kozhedub-62 kils
And now Americas ace of aces......................wic h is HO'er
USA Dick Bong-40 kills
Bad example
How long did the first two fly combat missions?
How many missions did they fly?
Bad comparison. Study more, it might help.
-
It's been said by flight simmers far more adept then I so I think the case rests. It Valid tactic !!
The issue isnt over a tactic IMHO, its over a so-called and hardly ever seen practice( at least in any flight-sim Ive been in ), namely a talent only based fight.
As long as there are wingman tactics, squad tactics, and jut plain roving gangs in the Main Arena the HO is an inevitable outcome.//
No body, myself included, would ( unless they have a death wish ) jockey for the best 6 shot when your cons pals wait on the sidelines.//
You see the nme you kill the nme if you live after 5 of his pals attack you, then you land the kill, simple logic and all the talent in the world wont matter,......ya jest aint ganna win gainst 3 -5 cons in a pack.
-
lightning guns spray death
in my face i go quickly
to meet emperor
-
Originally posted by cav58d
check 12 =)
:lol :D
-
Doesn't the word tactic by definition mean you are using an advanced and thought out way of maneuvering your aircraft to gain maximum advantage on your enemy while limiting youself to the least ammount of peril? A straight on ho shot is anything but this. As Slappy said, it's like playing roulette. Real life ho's were most likely high angle deflection shots. Would any right minded pilot give the enemy a chance to shoot him, especially in the case of Bong, when all he would have to do is go past merge and his P-38 would have a huge advantage over whatever his Japanese counterpart was flying? I think not. This is just an attempt by those that habitually ho to historically validate their constant lack of acm's.
-
Bong felt he was a lousy shot, so I doubt he'd go for a true HO where the enemy plane had a real shot at him, since he felt most were better shots than he was. I figure he was talking about taking a high percentage shot from in front of the 3-9 line, not going dead level in a joust.
-
Any tactic that enables you to shoot the adversary down and survive yourself, is valid.
I take the shot whenever I can.
But I'm not stupid enough to fly a mile lining up to the enemy - usually both go down on shots like that.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Still not a bad number when you consider US pilots were only allowed I believe 50 missions, where the Germans flew for years and swatted every newbie out of the sky and tons of un-escorted bombers. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
The numbers are impressive but misleading. I don't think those guys were any better pilots than some of the US aces ... especially Bong.
As far as the top German aces go, Hartmann was a relative newcomer. He wasnt in combat when Germany launched the attack into the USSR. By the time he got in combat the Soviet planes and pilots were getting better. The longer he was there, the better the opposition got. It also got far more numerous. Hartmann described furballs where the Germans were outnumbered severely. Yet he continued to score kills, at a fairly rapid pace. Hartmann also scored kills on 7 or 8 Mustangs over Romania iirc.
Hartmann imo, is in a class of his own. The other German aces like Galland, Krupinski, Gall etc, had far more stick time than he did. One of Hartmann's biggest strengths was his superb gunnery skill. He did prefer to get as close as possible before firing though.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Still not a bad number when you consider US pilots were only allowed I believe 50 missions, where the Germans flew for years and swatted every newbie out of the sky and tons of un-escorted bombers. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
True
Apart from these 62 victories, Ivan Kozhedub also was forced to shoot down two U.S. P-51 Mustangs that mistakenly attacked his La-7 on one occasion. Both these P-51 losses have been verified by USAAF sources.
-
US bomber crews liked Bong because he was always there in the middle of the heat.
Bong always praised the bomber crews of their bravery sorties having no freedom than to stay in formation.
Bong was a symphatic guy who turned into a devil up there .
Anyway he the highest scoring twin engined fighter pilot in the world.
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
Anyway he the highest scoring twin engined fighter pilot in the world.
Were there any other twin engine fighters?
-
There where only not so succesfull as the lightning.
How about the 110 for instance?
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
Anyway he the highest scoring twin engined fighter pilot in the world.
Actually that would be Heinz-Wolfgang Schnauffer. He survived the war with 121 kills marked on the rudder of his Bf110G.
-
shooting gliders and double deckers doesn't count
:D
seriously, impressive on the 110.
ok formulate it otherwise
It was the highest scoring twinboomed engined fighter pilot.
now don't come up with some uber fw189 scoring lw pilot
-
*lol* ;)
-
Originally posted by Stang
Doesn't the word tactic by definition mean you are using an advanced and thought out way of maneuvering .......... This is just an attempt by those that habitually ho to historically validate their constant lack of acm's.
This is no more that sort of attempt then the attempt at those who constantly complain about the HO to force others into "their own" way of flying eg seeking the 6 shot as opposed to an HO.
Bottom line......we all have opinions and no opinion is more valid then another ( as long as it is stated as an opinion and not a fact ) There will be HOs, my suggestion " live with it " just as there will be vulchers and I have to live with that :)
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
One constant in humanity is the penchant for the insecure to prop themselves up by demeaning others. One way is to whine about HO's especially when they lose one.
In my book a gunnery solution is a gunnery solution. I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.
Hear hear.
culero
-
I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.
This, of course, is not an HO. If your opponent can't get a guns solution on you at the same time you have a guns solution, then there can be no HO (as we know it in AH).
-
Most claimed HO's I beleive in this game are not HO's at all but as someone else put it here "deflection" shots.
Usually, but not always the only true HO's shots I see taken are on the initial merge. And even then its a bit iffy.
After the merge probably 9 times out of 10 it was a deflection shot unless your dealing with a boom and zoomer where you have a repeated series of merges and thus a higher rate of true HO attempts.
But if yourin a twisting turning dogfight odds are that it wont be an HO even though you both may be headed at each other.
In any event. Dont bother complaining about it. Just type in "Nice HO" and reup
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.
This, of course, is not an HO. If your opponent can't get a guns solution on you at the same time you have a guns solution, then there can be no HO (as we know it in AH).
ya, that would have been my point...:p
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Most claimed HO's I beleive in this game are not HO's at all but as someone else put it here "deflection" shots.
Usually, but not always the only true HO's shots I see taken are on the initial merge. And even then its a bit iffy.
After the merge probably 9 times out of 10 it was a deflection shot unless your dealing with a boom and zoomer where you have a repeated series of merges and thus a higher rate of true HO attempts.
But if yourin a twisting turning dogfight odds are that it wont be an HO even though you both may be headed at each other.
In any event. Dont bother complaining about it. Just type in "Nice HO" and reup
You would be surprised (well maybe not) how many times I was accused of HOing someone after shooting them down. Amazingly, these kills were scored from all sorts of angles, most of which were 6. It's just much easier for certain folks to make sure that the world knows what studs they are despite being the ones shot down.
-
Originally posted by java45
This is no more that sort of attempt then the attempt at those who constantly complain about the HO to force others into "their own" way of flying eg seeking the 6 shot as opposed to an HO.
Bottom line......we all have opinions and no opinion is more valid then another ( as long as it is stated as an opinion and not a fact ) There will be HOs, my suggestion " live with it " just as there will be vulchers and I have to live with that :)
LOL there's the "you want me to fly your way" crap again. No, I don't. I could care less how you fly. I was commenting on situations in real life and what a "headon pass" really was. You have to remember, in a real life dogfight it was usually two formations of planes meeting, not two planes lining up ho's on each other 3,000 yards out. A pilot like Bong could pick any one of the Japanese planes flying toward him to try to pick off, but I seriously doubt he would pick one flying straight at him that would put him in immediate danger. He could pick any plane he wanted that was coming at him at a high deflection angle and take them out without putting himself at any risk at all unless one of his foes tried the same on him. See, two formations of planes colliding headon, but no one really takes a true "ho" because as slappy said, you have to have a guns solution on the other plane or else its not a true ho but a very high angle deflection shot.
I stand by my statement that those who try to validate straight on habitual hoing are the ones who shoot ho at every merge, probably die on about half of them and look for historical justification for their "tactics." I just don't think it's there.
-
Lots of stuff on Dick Bong at KMKE!!
Sharp
-
Originally posted by Stang
LOL there's the "you want me to fly your way" crap again. No, I don't. I could care less how you fly. I was commenting on situations in real life and what a "headon pass" really was. You have to remember, in a real life dogfight it was usually two formations of planes meeting, not two planes lining up ho's on each other 3,000 yards out. A pilot like Bong could pick any one of the Japanese planes flying toward him to try to pick off, but I seriously doubt he would pick one flying straight at him that would put him in immediate danger. He could pick any plane he wanted that was coming at him at a high deflection angle and take them out without putting himself at any risk at all unless one of his foes tried the same on him. See, two formations of planes colliding headon, but no one really takes a true "ho" because as slappy said, you have to have a guns solution on the other plane or else its not a true ho but a very high angle deflection shot.
I stand by my statement that those who try to validate straight on habitual hoing are the ones who shoot ho at every merge, probably die on about half of them and look for historical justification for their "tactics." I just don't think it's there.
sorry seems I missed the RL aspect in its intended scenerio, I thought you meant a RL situation that aped AH in a 1 V 1:o
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
One constant in humanity is the penchant for the insecure to prop themselves up by demeaning others. One way is to whine about HO's especially when they lose one.
In my book a gunnery solution is a gunnery solution. I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.
Another constant is, humans lake to take the easy way out. Don't fight, don't learn, don't try to beat the other guy. Just wait until he is engaged, point the nose at him, and pull the triger.
-
Jousting is Honorable
-
A head on merge takes a decision of two players. If one chooses not to pull the trigger (because of some idea of sportsmanship) his death will be on his own hands. When you have the enemy in your sights, you pull the trigger. The error is not in shooting another player in the face. The error is getting your plane in that position. The person who complains of a HO is criticizing himself.
The HO merge is not a good idea in most cases because it is a low pecentage move. In the PAC American iron had an advatage in a frontal merge because the Japanese fighters had no armor, no self sealing fuel tanks, and inferior guns. They were at a great disadvantage gainst the concentrated fire from the P38 cannon. I don't think this is accurately modeled in most games.
IMO, the greatest mistake of trying for a HO kill is at the moment you are shooting at the enemy you should be making your initial merge maneuver. If you do so while your opponent tries to HO you, he will most likely miss and you should have the advantage..
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
IMO yall who keep harping on how we should "embrace" the HO ... ".
That would be me, but only if I'm in a plane that has a good chance of winning the HO instead of a real dogfight, compared to what I'm up against.
Maybe I'm sick, but I like driving my P-38's guns right through a guy's windshield while his bullets pass uselessly on either side of me.
-
Originally posted by ATA:
Mustangs that mistakenly attacked his La-7
The P-51s did not attack Kozhedub first, he attacked them. Only after shooting down the second one did he realize they were U.S. planes. He was never given credit for them.
;)
-
I don't know... I thought the qualification for being an "ace" was 5 kills... Seems like a lot of guys weren't around long enough to even get 5 let alone 40... I think he has earned the right to be up there with the top german aces.
I just don't think he would knowingly put himself downrange of those 20mms on the zeroes. Heck, even a bullet from the cowl gun can do quite a bit of damage when it comes flying through your canopy. He'd have to be a maniac to fly through a stream of bullets because that was his best way to win. Just my thoughts.
-
Ok, I've played both sides of the argument. As devil's advocate to put down people who say there is no historical precedent for HO attacks, and as a player and a person who believes that others who see the HO as a tactic they can rely on are delusional.
Here's a historical precedent for you. Not an angles shot, not deflection shooting of any kind, just pure, unadulterated, flat out HOing. And the reason why its a noob tactic that most pilots (and sim pilots) who get some ACM knowledge and experience under their belts will avoid like the plague. (The guy also just happens to be from my hometown).
Lt. Col. Herschel "Herky" Green
Unit(s):
317th FS
325th FG
"Checkertail Clan"
15th USAAF
MTO
Top Ace of the 325th FG. At the time Green left combat flying for HQ XV, he was the leading "Ace" in the MTO. Green started out with the number "13" assigned to his P-40F - In his first "scrap" with enemy fighters on May 19, 1943, Green scored his first victory in a head-on pass versus a Bf 109 that put nearly as many holes in his own aircraft. Green's unlucky "#13" was ultimately declared unrepairable and hauled away as junk and he switched to lucky "#11". 3 Air Victories in P-40's, 10 Air in P-47's, 5 Air in P-51's.
Anecdotal references I have read elsewhere but cant bring up right now indicate that this first "victory" of his forever after marked the way he flew, instilling an element of caution into what was otherwise a very headstrong and "damn the odds" type of man.
-
3 Air Victories in P-40's, 10 Air in P-47's, 5 Air in P-51's.
I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by 2stony
I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.
:rolleyes:
Yeah but is that any worse than the credit some received for aircraft on the ground?
-
Yeah but is that any worse than the credit some received for aircraft on the ground?
The AAF basically told the pilots that they would get credit for ground kills to get them "down on the deck" to destroy them. When the war was over, they took away credit for those ground kills.
;)
-
Absolutely not true. Pilots on strafing missions received credit for each and every a/c they destroyed ON THE GROUND in a separate category from air kills. They got credit for trains destroyed, vehicles, etc. also. Saying they counted grounded a/c as air to air kills or that they never got credit for them at all is just an out and out uneducated statement.
By the same token, there had to be proof of kills or anything "destroyed". If it wasnt witnessed, or on camera, it probably didnt get credited (unless in a memoir or diary of the pilot).
For example, here is Herschel Green's TOTAL score:
18 Air (Destroyed)
10 Ground (Destroyed)
-
Originally posted by 2stony
I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.
:rolleyes:
Yeah? First off, it was 4 Ju-52's escorted by fighters, 1 of which he also shot down that day, and a bomber also.
During a mission to Villaorba, Capt. Green, CO of the 317th FS destroyed 6 E/A. 4 Ju-52 Transports, in one pass, a Bf 109 fighter in a tree- top chase and a Do-217 bomber. Green was flying Capt. Buzz Hearns' P-47 instead of his assigned Jug that was in for maintenance. Green was unaware that Hearns A/C was loaded with 800 rounds per gun versus the usual Group practice of 400 rounds - Capt. Green broke off any further engagement when he began to see "tracer" fire from his guns which was a Group signal for "down to 50 rounds per gun" or his tally for the mission may have been even higher. Green and his flight were credited with 15 E/A destroyed and the 325th FG total was 38 destroyed and 6 damaged E/A for the Jan. 30, 1944 mission.
Maybe before you go belittling the man's accomplishments, you should not only consider the whole story, but find out what that story actually was. Not every fighter pilot racked up 300 kills yanno. Besides that, what exactly do you think was the main objective of fighter pilots? They didnt just take off and go furball for the hell of it. And except for a few instances to the contrary during the BoB, fighters didnt usually fly missions JUST to fight other fighters. They were usually either there as escorts for bombers and/or transports, or to shoot down those same bombers and/or transports (which is why they needed the escorts in the first place). Since the bombers and transports were his OBJECTIVE, sounds like he was doing his job to me. I suppose in the same situation, you would have ignored the transports and gone off to fight the 109s?
I'd say the :rolleyes: is better applied to your post and not a man who risked his life to shoot down those wimpy Ju-52's and helped end the war.
-
Star, no ground kills were counted towards "ace" status. Yes, they did get credit for them, but not really. I have read where they said they'd give them credit towards air kills to get them to go down on the carpet more often. They did take credit towards air kills away from them afterwards. Sorry you misunderstood me. Look in the American Fighter Aces album and you'll see that no ace was given credit towards their status with any ground kills.
;)
-
Originally posted by 2stony
I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.
:rolleyes:
In war a kill is a kill, doesnt matter if it's an unarmed transport, or a front line fighter. Each plane made it's own contribution to the war effort.
-
Originally posted by Star:
Maybe before you go belittling the man's accomplishments
I'm not belittling Herkey's accomplishments by any means, I just made notice of these "easy" kills. Do you consider shooting down a goon an easy kill?
By the way, I was a personal guest of Herkey's at the 325th FG reunion in Seattle in the mid-90s and spoke at their banquet, so I've spoken to him at length. I've also talked to scores of fighter aces, and when they talk about their encounters with defenseless planes, you can see it in their eyes and hear it in their voice that these kills weren't much to talk about.
How many aces have you personally talked to Star? I don't care what you read in books because when you talk to the person that actually did it, it sounds nothing like what you read on paper. I've had dinner with Jerry Collingsworth, Mike Russo and Robert Rankin. I've had lunch with several more. Listen to their stories first hand and then compare it to what you read.
;)
-
Originally posted by 2stony
Originally posted by ATA:
The P-51s did not attack Kozhedub first, he attacked them. Only after shooting down the second one did he realize they were U.S. planes. He was never given credit for them.
;)
No offence,give me the info(link maybe) on this one and few others please.
And how dumb the BEST pilot of Red Army gotta be to confuse LW plane with USAAF.USAAF pilots mistakenly attaked Red air force few times,as far as i remember there was P38's vs yak 9's also.
Best regards
Sukov
-
give me the info
It's in Osprey's "Aircraft of the Aces", Lagg, La-5 & La-7 aces. He was also told to keep it quiet that he had shot down U.S. planes. I have the book at home(I'm at work)and I'll look it up again and try and remember to quote it for you.
:)
-
Thank you sir
-
Read your post with an objective eye, and pretend for one second you dont know what you know, and never talked to who you've talked to. See if it doesnt sound the same way to you. If you still feel I'm out of line, email me privately. I'm not looking to start a flame war here.
I deleted the rest of my post for that very reason. Forget it. Herschel cant take offense at this point. Not even sure he would anyway. Besides, from what I can see of your posts thus far you really dont care about anyone's opinion but your own, so I doubt it's worth it.
Oh, and your list is very impressive. Really. I can even say I'm envious that you have had the chance to sit and talk to some of those guys. I really dont see how who we know or dont know has any bearing though.
Thanks!
-
I never said it meant nothing, so don't put words in my mouth or try and "read my mind". As for ground kills, they were probably more dangerous than dogfights. As for the alleged "my life is more important than yours", I was just providing information that might give you insight to what type of information I've acquired over the years as opposed to most people. Just take the information for what it is and don't take it so personally in Herkey's(or anyone elses)behalf.
Aces for the most part are usually pretty humble people, but you can still see the "cockiness" surface once in a while that they had in their youth. You can also see that gleam in their eye when they start talking about their combats like it was just yesterday. If you'd like, the American Fighter Aces reunion is in St. Louis in September and I could arrange for you to meet some of them.
I'm sorry if I came across wrong.
:)
-
If there is any way I can manage to be home in September I'll take you up on it. :)
Guess I edited the post too late lol.
-
Here you go ATA:from Osprey Aircraft of the Aces, LaGG & Lavochkin Aces of World War 2.
"There were two more kiils scored by the leading ace which the Soviets never credited, and which Kozhedub was more than happy to forget. In April 1945 he saw an American B-17 being attacked by a pair of German fighters. Coming to the bomber's rescue, he fired a burst between the enemy machines and their intended prey, causing the Germans to break off their attack and dive away. Before Kozhedub could pursue them, he spotted an approaching formation of unfamiliar fighters. The leader of the group opened fire on Kozhedub at long range, and the Russian ace in turn pulled up sharply behind the last machine in the formation and shot it down in flames - the fighter fell among Soviet troops on the ground. Pulling up in a half loop, Kozhedub then fired another burst into the leader of the formation, who was also shot down. It was at this point that he saw the blue and white stars on the wings and fuselage of his 'enemy'. Kozhedub returned to base extremely upset, certain that his actions would result in a major row with the allies. Fortunately, one of the American pilots managed to bail out, and when he was asked who shot him down, he replied 'a Focke-Wulf with a red nose'. Col Churikov gave Kozhedub the gun camera film confirming his two Mustang kills, along with the admonition, 'Keep this to yourself - show no one'."
So you were right ATA, the Americans did fire first.
:)
-
Thanks Stony
:aok
-
You're welcome ATA. Consider reading Osprey's "Aircraft of the Aces" books. There's a lot of good reading.
No problem Star. If you do manage to make the reunion, you will have a great time. The aces are really a great bunch of guys and a lot of them will recite their war time experiences with enthusiasm. One of my fondest memories is when Jerry Collingsworth was telling me the difference between the Spit V and the Spit IX. When in the Spit V he was always looking behind him. When he described the difference with the Spit IX, he pumped up his chest and thumped it with his fist.
:aok