Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: humble on October 01, 2005, 01:21:14 PM
-
not propaganda for answers. Any time we get locked in to these various threads on the merits of specific planes I'm amazed at the pure garbage that comes out. The truth is easy to find...all you need to do is look for it. Best tank....easy. No question that the "Panther" was easily the dominant main battle tank on any front. All you need to do is look at the comments from numerous sources in all armies. So why did the westren allies manage to "win" the tank battle in the WTO....simple they had a dedicated combat recovery capability the germans didnt (regardless of whats been said elsewhere).
If you want the truth with regard to the "109" denbate you need to look no farther then the WTO from Jan 1, 1942 till Dec 31, 1943.
Why, well there was no ground war, only an airwar. The allied and german airforces sat seperated by only a small sliver of water. From GB the allies began to launch numerous raids against both occuppied europe and germany itself. These raids escalated from tactical incursions to true strategic bombing. History shows us three things......
1st) The LW was unable to stop the bombing campaign (although it did inflict significant losses)
2nd) The LW as a general rule was unable to successfully challenge the allied fighter cover.
3rd) The LW was unable to mount any siginificant offensive actions over england. To the best of my knowledge no allied bomber formations were hit on the ground on in their "staging grounds" ever during this time frame {german night fighters excluded}
So historically the 109 (and LW as a whole were unable to meet the military definition of an air superiority fighter) at any point from Jan 1, 1942 thru the end of the war on the western front.
-
If you want the truth with regard to the "109" denbate you need to look no farther then the WTO from Jan 1, 1942 till Dec 31, 1943.
Guess what, the most numerous Lw fighter in the WTO in that timeframe wasn't the 109... talking about garbage
:rolleyes:
-
Much or WWII was a numbers game.
The M4 Sherman was a rolling coffin. The strength of allied tanks was the numbers put out. The M4 couldn't stand up to the German tanks 1 v 1. Very often 3 or 4 Shermans were lost trying to take out 1 Panzer. Thing was the Panzers were harder, took longer, and more expensive to make. The M4 was cheap to make and could be made quickly.
As to the Air War... pretty much the same thing. Numbers...........
1000 plane flights of bombers. Escorted by large numbers of fighters.
Hmmmm... the allies put up flights of bombers that out numbered the available fighters sent out to stop them.
ATTRITION................
-
Originally posted by humble
LOL sums it up really..
:aok
-
"Humble", not only is the name an oxymoron with regard to his demeanor, but it is also an apt description of his intellect and historical acuity.
-
Originally posted by humble
All you need to do is look at the comments from numerous sources in all armies.
Don't make me agree with Otto.
Or are you trolling?
-
Originally posted by Furball
LOL sums it up really..
:aok
Don't agree with him until you've read most of the "Super vs. Uber" thread...
He's way off base and telling people (people that pretty much know there stuff) they're full of it and that the US planes were the bestest in the world and the LW planes were junk in 1939, etc etc. So "Humble" saying to them to do some research is kind of laughable.
I got nothing agin ya, Humble, but you're wrong when comparing US to LW.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
ROFL see what you mean.
Clicked on page 4, read the first few lines, something about P51's being a better interceptor than the 109... and closed the page.
-
Whatever this thread is going to turn into, im going staying away from it! Life is too short.
Have fun.
:rofl
-
1st) The LW was unable to stop the bombing campaign (although it did inflict significant losses)
Wow,
I think most people in this thread have hit this on the mark, a troll.
If the heavy RAF attacks on German urban centers occasioned much frustration for the British, the American daylight attacks threatened total disaster for the U.S. Eighth Air Force. As mentioned, the heavily-armed B-17 Flying Fortresses also flew in very close formations to one another and supplied protection from the Luftwaffe via massed defensive firepower. But their attrition became frightful and losses continued to rise dangerously. This tendency reached a climax in mid- and late 1943 at the time of the massive American attack on the ball bearing plants at Schweinfurt. In the course of six days during that year the U.S. lost 148 Boeing B-17s -- a veritable massacre and a loss too great for the Americans to bear, by any reasonable calculation. Daylight bombing had to be suspended for several months thereafter. To the British proponents of nighttime area bombardment, the slaughter of the American Flying Fortresses was conclusive evidence that they had followed the proper course of action; they urged that the remaining U.S. air power (plus the cornucopia of newly produced aircraft from America's safe factories) be subsumed under RAF guidance for missions at night.
Yes, the Luftwaffe halted unescorted daylight bombing.
But the U.S. air armada in England was neither equipped nor trained for such a transformation. Notwithstanding their recent calamities, the Americans defiantly believed that their English brothers were still on the wrong track. Senior American officials in London and Washington looked for a way out of their tribulations. What was needed was a superior U.S. fighter aircraft of sufficient long range to escort the B-17s and other bombers to their targets and eventually sweep the skies of German interceptors. The solution was found in January 1944 in the form of the North American P-51D Mustang aircraft. When the United States resumed day bombardment raids in February 1944, the momentum swung sharply away from the Germans.
http://www.390th.org/research/Stories/offensive.htm
2nd) The LW as a general rule was unable to successfully challenge the allied fighter cover.
Wrong. Luftwaffe fighters were strictly forbidden from offensively attacking escorts. Their target was the bombers. Galland unsuccessfully argued for a two week period of targeting escort fighters. Hitler and Goering forbid it.
The LW was unable to mount any siginificant offensive actions over england.
Wrong. The failed German strategy was to be defensive in the West until the Soviet Union was defeated. You confuse capability with intent.
For much, but certainly not all, of the Western Campaign after the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe left only two fight wings in the west. That is roughly 250 fighters at full strength.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/LWJul42.html#Jul42
Just like the British in the Battle of Britian, the Germans used radar to enact an effective defense. They held air superiority over Europe until Operation Argument.
The Luftwaffe held air superiority over Europe until February 1944.
Although still capable of the stoutest kind of local resistance on occasion, the enemy now refused to commit himself to a policy of full-scale opposition to the daylight bombing campaign. He would send up only token resistance to some missions and then concentrate as large a force as in earlier months against a particular operation. At other times the GAF would try no more than to gain a local superiority by sending overwhelming numbers against one unit, especially a unit that had in some way become separated from its fellows or was left without adequate escort.46 In short the policy was one of conservation of strength and it conceded to the Allies the vital point of air superiority.
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/III/AAF-III-2.html
The Germans failed to prevent or plan for the build up of allied air forces. Their strategic shortsightedness cost them heavily.
ATTRITION................
Won the air war.
All the best,
Crumpp
-
Nice writeup Crumpp.