A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

You would think that Adolf Galland’s victories won 1940 are well-known but there is a mystery – or is there?

In his own book “Die Ersten und die Letzten” (The First and the Last), first published 1953 in German (in Buenos Aires, Argentina), Galland wrote that on 3 June 1940 he took part in operation “Paula”, a massive bombing operation in the Paris area with fighter escort. Its aim was the destruction or paralysis of the French aircraft industry and of airfields in this area. Galland was Ia, the operations officer of JG 27; normally he was not expected to take part in combat missions like all his comrades, which made him quite envious and frustrated. He flew his Me 109 around Paris: “I was flying with Captain Ankum-Frank” (actually von Ankum-Frank). So it seems that these two pilots were flying just as a pair (German: Rotte), so to speak as free-lancers looking for trouble in an area where a powerful reaction of the French fighters was to be expected (on this day 250 of them were gathered to repel the German attack for the French knew about it in advance).

Galland: “I had just shot down something indefinable [unknown to and never seen before by him], somehow similar to a Curtiss [about 120-140 Curtiss H-75 fighters equipped four French fighter “Groupes de chasse” or GCs] as we met two Morane squadrons. There was a terrific turmoil and there were only the two of us.” Galland shot down two Moranes and did not quite succeed in avoiding a collision with his first victim, bending a propeller blade and the top of the fin, and losing the radio mast, “which was perhaps 60 cm long” (23.6 inches). “This fellow flew well but his plane was inferior to mine.”

The second one was not officially confirmed “because the other Moranes were “bothering” him” and he was not able to witness its crash in spite of a heavy black smoke trail. This one was destroyed all right too as is shown by Paul Martin’s loss list in the book “Invisibles vainqueurs” (Éditions Yves Michelet 1991), page 332, middle of column (3 June): those Moranes which were Galland’s victims had the production numbers 693 and 1022, the first one being flown by Polish pilot sergent Stanislas Popelka, who was killed (buried in Ozoir-la-Ferrière cemetery, East of Paris, not far from Lognes, see below), the second one by French pilot sergent V. Jost, who was seriously wounded when he bailed out and hit the tailplane, and after that again when his parachute was entangled in some high-voltage cables and he fell heavily on the ground.

A few remarks: 1. These “two squadrons of Moranes” were in fact a wild bunch of fighters of this type belonging to GC I/6 based at Lognes-Émerainville airfield about 15 km East of Paris. They had taken off in an emergency, as best they could, the direct warning of a German air attack having come much too late, like everywhere, because the sly Germans were heavily jamming the special radio transmitter (installed on top of the Eiffel tower, 300 m high) which sent the take-off order.

2. The “something indefinable, somehow similar to a Curtiss”, was certainly a Bloch 152. Not one single Curtiss fighter was shot down in the Paris area but at least ten Bloch 152s were - with 6 pilots killed, 3 more badly wounded or burned, or both (totalling 9/10, or 90 %, shot down and killed or badly wounded), and only one pilot unhurt. They, too (GC I/1, II/1, I/8 and II/9), were taking off in an emergency when their airfields were bombed and machine-gunned by German fighters, so that they were sitting ducks during take-off (or even before) and climb. The surviving Bloch 152s belonging to these units scored 6 “certain” victories including three Me 109s (all the wrecks came down on French-held ground).

3. The Moranes, in particular those from GC I/6 fought by Galland, were not quite helpless for sous-lieutenant Raphenne (GC I/6) shot down two Me 109s during this sortie, making this score even in spite of the Me’s superiority in power, speed and climb (but not in armament). Raphenne (5 certain victories) was the last French fighter pilot killed (by Flak) late on 24 June when some Moranes were ordered to strafe German columns on roads (!) near Romans (close to Tournon and Tain-l’Hermirage on the banks of the Rhône, slightly North of Valence, south of Lyon) – this was the last day of the 1940 French Campaign. Raphenne’s Morane was n° 1056.

To sum up, Adolf Galland himself wrote in his book that on 3 June 1940 he had shot down “something somehow similar to a Curtiss” (later erroneously confirmed as a Curtiss but it was a Bloch), then two Moranes, of which one was not confirmed. Most probably he wrote this in 1952 (and it was published 1953). I think we can trust this version for he was aged 40, and 1940 a combat mission close to Paris was something very special to any German soldier, Paris then being quite a legend even to German people. He probably had a glance or two at the Eiffel Tower or at its location if cloud hid it. I consider it extremely unlikely that Galland could have possibly mixed up these 2 (actually 3) victories close to Paris with other victories won on some other day. So in my eyes he did win these victories on 3 June 1940 not on 9 June or else. One “Curtiss” (in fact a Bloch 152) and one Morane were confirmed.

What’s more, he confirmed this version 1985 in the new, unshortened, very accurate French edition of his book, “Les premiers et les derniers” : the list of his 14 first victories (won during the French Campaign, 10 May-24 June 1940), supplied by himself to his French publisher, contains this version for June 3 with such details, like precise times (for example 15.55 hrs) and places (“13 km from Meaux” – a city east of Paris), that can only have been found in his own logbook or other wartime-documents (like his own combat reports and victory confirmations by RLM). Galland was very anxious to have a book published which was as accurate as possible (this is how he corrected the passage about his all-important first two victories on May 12: the “Hurricanes” he shot down were not Belgian but British (he got a third one later on the same day). He checked the French translation of his book very exactly including chapter 9 “Pilote de chasse (Fighter pilot) pendant la Campagne de France”, in which he described how he shot down two Moranes in great detail. About the second one, which was not confirmed, he added: “It would have been my thirteenth” (victory).

But this is not the end of it. 1996 the first “authorized biography” of Adolf Galland was published by David Baker. This had not been previously possible or permitted by Galland. The title of this book reads:

ADOLF GALLAND
The Authorized Biography

Unfortunately I was able to read it only once, and alas very quickly, up till now. This was 1996 or 1997. I remember a good and very interesting book with many new things which were not known before numerous secret documents were released, for example on Galland’s attempt, in the last few days of WW II, to join US forces with his entire unit, Jagdverband 44 (JV 44), equipped with Me 262 jets. (This attempt failed.) Had even one single SS-man heard of this, the SS would have killed Galland immediately as a “traitor”, no matter how well and bravely he had fought for Germany for over 7 years including one very active year in Spain.

In this book released 1996, too, the Galland version of 2 (3) victories is repeated on page 82 (chapter 8). Galland died in February of this same year but of course the text, in particular of the first chapters, was written and edited long before this happened.

There is even a fourth book, released 1990 in the USA (Toliver-Constable version) and 1992 in Germany. The latter is the Galland version because the Toliver-Constable version was simply terrible, full of errors, and a not-too-pleased Galland himself had to correct and edit the whole book; he is the actual author of “ADOLF GALLAND – Biographie” (published in German). By the way, this shows how seriously he looked at the contents of “Galland-books”, for he rewrote this one entirely while lying in a hospital bed after heavy heart surgery. He was very exact as usual and he did not change his version of the events on June 3, 1940. This German book was translated into English and became a large volume containing numerous photographs and documents.

To sum up, Galland reported his 2 (3) victories on 3 June 1940 during the German operation “Paula” in the PARIS area in no less than FOUR books released 1953, 1985, 1992 and 1996. Contrary to his first victories (May 12) on “Belgian” Hurricanes which actually were British he never changed his version until he was about to die (he was very ill).

We can find the same version in the English “translation” of Galland’s book (The First and the Last), on pages 50-51, but this “translator” changed the fin of Galland’s 109 into its undercarriage. I call this supreme aerobatics!
I guess Adolf Galland knew best what he did, or did not do, on this date, shooting down a Bloch 152 (confirmed as a Curtiss) and two Morane 406s (one not being confirmed but French sources confirm it beyond any doubt).

In the meantime a very different version has appeared in several books and probably in articles too, possibly emulating each other – otherwise quite good or even excellent books. According to their authors Galland did not score at all on June 3 and exactly the same two confirmed victories were won by… captain Werner Mölders! This is fully possible for on this day the French engaged Morane 406s, Bloch 152s, Curtiss H-75s and the deadly Dewoitine 520s of GC I/3, which German fighter pilots almost always misidentified as “Moranes”. At the time Mölders claimed victories on two misidentified Allied fighters: one “French Curtiss and one British Spitfire” (sic). No Spitfire took part in this particular fighting but D.520s did so most probably Mölders shot down one Bloch 152 and one D.520. Mölders’ version from 1940 can be found on page 132 of his book “Mölders und seine Männer” (and his men), released 1941 and signed by his cousin Fritz von Forell, who posed as the author because Mölders wanted to dodge the official propaganda, which he couldn’t stand, and censorship.

A large part of my documents is still buried in some moving boxes but I think several authors “give” Galland no victory on June 3 but two on some other day(s) like June 9. Some authors ignore any Galland-victory on June 3 but do not explain how he reached his final total of 14 confirmed victories (for May-June 1940) on June 14 without the two victories which simply have vanished. In this version there is a gap of two and Galland’s final score in June would be 12 not 14. The 2 confirmed victories from June 3 he reported four times from 1952 to 1996 were his 11th and 12th. Without them his final score of 14 cannot be explained.

By now (2019) everybody knows, or ought to know, that Adolf Galland was not a phoney but “a honest claimer”. This makes me believe even more strongly that his version of events on June 3, 1940, is the only correct one. I can’t see any reason why Galland could have been wrong on this or even could have invented the whole story so stubbornly, giving his version in no less than four different books, the second one being the French translation (released 1985) of his own book, a translation scrutinized very thoroughly and very exactly by a very exacting Galland and by his German publishers too.

WHO THE HELL ARE WE ANYWAY to pretend to be able to correct Galland's own account of two of his own victories? He was there, we were not. Most of us had'nt even been borne yet.

In “The JG 26 War Diary”, volume one 1939-1942, Don Caldwell mentions that Galland was ordered on June 6 to join JG 26 to become the new CO (Gruppenkommandeur) of III. Gruppe, “…having gained twelve air victories since the start of the Western campaign.” These twelve victories obviously include those from June 3 even though Don Caldwell doesn’t mention this.

Jochen Prien’s JFV (purple series), volume 3 dealing with the 1940 Norwegian and French campaigns, mentions no Galland-victory on June 3 either but on some other day, possibly June 9.

In “The Battle of France Then and Now” (BFTN) Peter Cornwell mentions no victory for Galland on June 3 but two MS 406s (Moranes) of GC I/6 s/d by Mölders, both over Ozoir-la-Ferrière. So these two victories confirmed to Mölders match exactly Galland’s own story over two Moranes shot down there. I consider it impossible that both Galland (JG 27) and Mölders (JG 53) were flying exactly at the same place on June 3. As already mentioned I believe Galland's version, which he published no less than four times 1953, 1985, 1992 and 1996. Mölders most probably shot down other French fighters at some other place.

Still in BFTN, author PC reports a victory won by Galland on June 9 (only one) over a Curtiss H-75 of GC III/2 and on June 14 one Blenheim, possibly two, for his last victory(ies) in June 1940. See page 469, bottom of 2nd column (the two last AC in this column).

I don’t remember Hans Ring’s version in J. Prien’s JFV volume 3, have to unearth my copy of this book (archaeology).

According to some authors Galland was ordered on June 6 to take over III./JG 26 and arrived there on the same day. Other authors report his arrival on June 9… Don Caldwell: “According to his logbook Galland flew his first mission with the Third Gruppe (III./JG 26) on this date” (June 11 not 9), an uneventful late-evening escort sortie (…).”

I have to say, that whole business really is much ado about two victories but it involves the two German fighter pilots who probably are the most famous ones.

Who knows more?

Adolf Galland's victories - a mystery – Nobody, nothing?
 

Sorry to ask again but certainly some people know something on these elusive victories. Is it a secret?

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

Hello rof120,

to your statement "Some authors ignore any Galland-victory on June 3 but do not explain how he reached his final total of 14 confirmed victories (for May-June 1940) on June 14 without the two victories which simply have vanished. In this version there is a gap of two and Galland’s final score in June would be 12 not 14. The 2 confirmed victories from June 3 he reported four times from 1952 to 1996 were his 11th and 12th. Without them his final score of 14 cannot be explained."

According to JFV Vol. 3 on 14 June 1940 Hptm Galland had reached 14 victories.

Stab/JG 27
12 May 40 three Hurricanes (1 - 3)
16 May 40 Spitfire (4)
19 May 40 two Potez 63 (5 and 6)
20 May 40 Potez 63 (7)
29 May 40 two Blenheims (8 and 9)
2 June 40 Spitfire (10)
9 June 40 Curtiss (11) and Morane 406 (12)

Kommandeur III./JG 26 (11 to 25 June 1940)
14 June 40 Blenheim (13) and Defiant (14)

I can see no gap of two victories and no victories simply have vanished.

Regards
Leo

A. Galland mystery – 3 June 1940 - Yes but...
 

Prien & Ring published this all right, which I mentioned (more or less).

The fact remains that Galland himself published a different version FIVE TIMES. I wrote "four times" at first but there is a fifth book: the American edition of Galland's 1992 German book, large size, with the title "Fighter General" (released 1999), probably with "Adolf Galland" in the title too (I'll check on this). You can be sure that Galland checked the whole translation very thoroughly - including about June 3, 1940.

May I repeat. or mention, that Galland himself sent the list of his victories won in May-June 1940 to his French publisher (Yves Michelet) and to Donald Caldwell as well, possibly to other persons too. This list mentions the 2 victories on June 3 not on June 9. I feel we should rely on the fighter pilot who won these victories himself rather than on people mentioning him in a victory list 50 years later without explaining this difference.

(30 minutes later:) Found on the Internet:
Fighter general : the life of Adolf Galland : the official biography
Auteur :
Raymond F Toliver; Trevor J Constable
Éditeur: (French for Publishers)
Atglen, PA : Schiffer Pub., ©1999.

Actually the real author is Adolf Galland himself. My copy of this book is not available at the moment but I have no doubt that this book, too, mentions both victoris won on June 3 not June 9.

A Galland mystery – 60 years later not 50
 

Sorry for my typo: some authors (3-4 of them?) changed Galland's victory list heavily after about 60 years (sixty) not 50. All of them were probably not even borne 1940 (J. Prien certainly not - he was borne decades later) when Galland claimed 3 victories on French fighters on June 3, 1940 not on June 9, of which one Morane was not officially confirmed but French sources do confirm it (which is a significant difference to Mölders' score on the same day - no third claim filed by him).

So Galland told us the same story in no less than five (5) different books, possibly more. I repeat: who are we to "correct" him? He was a very precise and very exacting man.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

Dear Mr. rof120,

since you addressed me personally in your post I will answer your question albeit with considerable reservation which comes from the tone of your postings.

1 My birth date is 8 May 1952, hence exactly seven years after the end of the war in Europe or twelve years after the claims in question were made. If for you that means decades, well … However, what does my date of birth matter in this context at all?

2 The list of claims made by Adolf Galland including those in May / June 1940 was compiled by Hans Ring and Winfried Bock, and is based on official documents. IIRC Galland's Flugbuch was also checked and exploited. There is not a trace of two claims made on 3 June 1940.

You seem to be an ardent believer in the publications of Adolf Galland. I would strongly recommend that you try a more dinstanced and un-biased approach to his oeuvre which would show you that there are in fact quite a lot of - to put it mildly - inaccuracies in Galland's presentation of his exploits in WWII. Take a look at the introduction of JFV 4/I ( Purple Series ) and you will see what I mean.

Regards

Jochen Prien

Galland mystery – cont'd
 

Sorry but I just worked for 2 hours on a detailed reply… which vanished. This is really frustrating. I have to give up for the moment. Sigh.

I didn't attack you viciously, I stated facts.

I'll be back in detail asap. Please note: Galland was not unfallible, I am not either and neither are you. We are just human beings and this is not a terrible attack on you.

Your victory lists in JFV volume 3 include hundreds of "P-36s, Bloch 150s, Morane 405s - all these are erroneous (in hundreds of instances) - plus "Moranes" and even "Spitfires" instead of D.520s. I am not being mean to you, I like your books, but you see, as far as errors are concerned you're hardly better than Galland…


More later. I'll write first OFFline...

Re: Galland mystery – cont'd
 

What I have put in bold is a disgraceful thing to say about the most reputable Luftwaffe researcher and author in the world.


What you perhaps don't understand is that authors will replicate the mistaken identity claims made in good faith at the time, and will oftentimes point out the errors. In the Battle of Britain, for example, RAF pilots were claiming Heinkel 113s, and Luftwaffe pilots were claiming Curtiss'. For the Croydon raid on 15th August 1940 RAF combat reports stated attacks on Do 17s when it was in fact Bf 110s.


I think you should start to display a little more understanding, and no veiled insults towards another member.

Re: Galland mystery – cont'd
 

Dear Mr rof120,


I did not say that you attacked me viciously, and you may be stating facts, which according to my knowledge are wrong.

I will not enter into any lengthy discussion with you about the two Galland claims in question in particular or about the credibility of Galland's publications in general.

I never claimed to be unfallible but I can see no factual basis for your comparison between my publications and those of Galland.


As for the victory lists in the JFV series - they just show what was reported by the respective units which quite often did not reflect the correct type of enemy a/c. Yet, the claims lists are not about what I'm making of it but what was actually reported. Think about it.


Regards


Jochen Prien

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

rof120,

I guess me and the other members would like to see (for selling) one of your books published, correcting the list of Adolf Galland victories....maybe fully cross-checked and pin-pointed, with references to his Logbook and AIR 27 files or other RAF Logbooks...

Do agree with you that we are all Human beings...and that some pilots, in the heat of the combat, may have "erroneously" claimed a Spitfire whilst actually this was a Boulton-Paul Defiant Mark I....This happened? Surely....We can blame them? Nope...we were not there....you see, the weather, what you believe you saw, etc...the list is huge.

Now, we do have here, as Members of this Fórum and Board, writers who have "been on the game" since we were kids...or not even born (for some)...Some of those, did really have MET and INTERVIEWED personally some of the Aces they do describe or write about in their books...

It takes time (believe me) to write a book like those you have quoted...

Instead of "hitting" NAMES (authors), why we couldn't have another approach on this Board? Why not trying to rebuild history (like some new authors are doing magnificently) with DATA, and references too? If you can do better than the already acclaimed writers, please do show us your work?

Recently a French Historian (whose age I do not know) published a magnficent work and site about ONE particular Day in Air War. This was really fantastic work, fully cross-checked and illustred.

And how sure are we, analyzing those combats of May 1940, of WHO claimed WHAT with so many claims around the same área, and in the same frame of time? For instance, the cases of two airmen of the same Flight shooting at the same enemy plane is quite common in both sides or French sides too...and some times, the victory was "granted" to both....so who shot down who? It is not 100% feasible of matching...

Even some night-fighter claims of the Nachtjagd were (I guess) not fully 100% matched yet....consider the re-working of Dr. Boithen years after his first work was published...How many years he have been researching this theme?

At first I did not wished to take part on the Thread, but guess that we are all here to learn and share (opinions). I do hope you will (maybe) apologize for the wrong way the thread started and maybe point out your findings regarding the claims you found were wrongly attributed to Galland.

Wish you and all members a nice day.

A. B.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

As Jochen say, I think that anything written in Germany during the 1950s about WWII should be taken as a first-person point of view, but certainly not as a 100% accurate history book. At this date, Galland had probably very few WWI-era documents available to support his writing, so much was probably done by memory. And to remember all exact dates a dozen years after the event would be impressive. It's a common occurence in witness stories to mix events that were close in time, so Galland could have mixed the Paula operation (that was an unique operation during the campaign) and another air battle on 9 June.

On the other had, Prien and co have gathered many sources that have become available since Galland wrote his books.

On a side note, I am not sure that speaking of translation of Galland's books as "separate sources" is valid: in most cases, the translator only translates, there is no new research or update done.

Last point, according to the JFV book, JG German pilots claimed 36 victories between 1430 and 1530 hrs in the area of operation Paula, to which 8-9 kills by ZG 26 could be added according to the files by Tony Wood, and not counting 7 kills by II./JG 2 for French fighters with no time in the Epernay area. 18 French fighters were lost, so almost 3 claims were made for each loss. In this case, identifying who shot down who seems difficult for me, and adding possibly or probably to any identification seems the right thing to do in my humble opinion.

By the way, I found some weeks ago a webpage I saved 20-15 years ago, with what was then considered to be Galland's claim list. A dozen at least of the claims had no date, or a date with question mark, and it was from a website about the Luftwaffe and the guy doing it did it best with the sources then available. I think that the collective work of the JFV series led by Mr Prien is now the most accurate victory list available, and it points missing claims and unclear dates when needed. And Mr Prien did not hesitate to correct the claims he wrote about in his former books on JG 53 for example, as new sources allow such corrections.

Galland mystery 1940
 

Really sorry gentlemen but I MUST attend some urgent business. I'll try to make it quick.

Have to leave now but please take notice of this: I did NOT insult anybody. I am not the type and I have no reason. An opinion is not an insult even if it dares differ from yours. Some people seem to really enjoy using this word. Well, this is their private pleasure, which does not make it true.

I'll be back as soon as possible (1-2-3 days?) with some new, quite convincing arguments - arguments not insults - or so I hope.


Be good in the meantime.

Bye.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

You should tone down your way of writing quite a bit. You offended 2 esthablised writers in 1 go. These are not some kids with a book or two or who have read a wiki page of sorts. No. Very very much no. So count your blessings mr Prien et all are even bothered to reply. Make sure to present your arguments polite and factfull. I think not many will take you very serious otherwise. I have hard time doing this reading your posts as it is now.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

The "tone of my posting* is not objectionable in any way. Writing that you are younger than Galland is not an insult, only a fact. You were not borne "decadeS" after June 3, 1940 and what Galland stubbornly reported 5 times from 1953 through 1999 but only ONE decade and two years, all right, good for you. I have no objection. I hope you'll admit that you did not witness Galland's air battles of 1940 so he knew better than you do (and than I do too). What does your date of birth matter? It does matter a huge lot since you can know these events only from reading various texts (books, articles, official documents IF they survived ("IF", brother"), from hearsay. The risk of being influenced much stronger by your contemporaries than by the 1940-45 fighter pilots who did the fighting and often the dying is very high if you're not very cautious. I'll give you a very simple example, not a complex one because this would lead us much too far and need a lot of precious working time: perhaps you, too, noticed that most French aviation enthusiasts write Mölders like this: "Moëlders" with corresponding French pronunciation. Heinz Bär becomes "Bar", too. These errors have almost become the only legal, acceptable version of their names (in France). So people influence each other not only with correct facts but with errors too, especially when time is in short supply. Here at TOCH you often can read that once published an error is eagerly and frequently reproduced in later publications until it becomes the truth.

2 The list of claims made by Adolf Galland including those in May / June 1940 was compiled by Hans Ring and Winfried Bock, and is based on official documents. IIRC Galland's Flugbuch was also checked and exploited.

- OK, I decided to believe you on this. So what? Of all the people around YOU know best that very often official documents contain some wrong informations and details, and that this has various causes: no time to do the paperwork immediately; often it's done days and even weeks later - from dwindling memories only. Or the clerks didn't get it right and wrote something else than the correct version etc.

JP: There is not a trace of two claims made on 3 June 1940.

- Which proves… what?

I have to say, your logic is a bit surprising "to say the least". There is not a trace of two claims made on 3 June 1940? Does it prove that these victories were NOT won? No trace? What about 5 different books, spread all over the world with a total number of copies probably near 4 or even 5-6 million. "The First and the Last" sold over 3 million copies in the whole world, most copies in German or in English. These books all contain Galland's version, which I dare consider much more reliable than yours. I know, I'm terrible.

You don't react at all on my remark that to any German person Paris was something extra special (it is still today) and a fighter pilot having flown there on June 3, 1940, certainly was able to remember accurately what he did on this day and during this sortie. Today's authors like you seem to swap Galland's and Mölders' victories on June 3 but this is not the case because Mölders claimed one Curtiss (which in fact was a Bloch 152) and a Spitfire (impossible in this region and on this day - must have been a Dewoitine 520 for Mölders knew the Morane well already: he had shot down six of them starting in March 1940 and certainly seen many more in flight, probably dozens). Mölders did not claim a third victory on this day but Galland did (one "Curtiss" which was a Bloch 152 and two Moranes). Galland gave precise details on when and where his victims crashed (please read it again in his first book). Most interesting is the fact that French sources, as I already mentioned, confirm the destructon of both Moranes at the very place where Galland not Mölders claimed them. According to French loss lists not one single other Morane was lost on this day (but (at least) two Dewoitine 520s from crack unit GC I/3 were). Mölders claimed no Morane but Galland very clearly claimed two and he was right. You seem to know everything better than both Mölders and Galland. Congratulations.

JP: "You seem to be an ardent believer in the publications of Adolf Galland."

- Not at all. I simply know that everybody can make an error, including myself (this makes me very cautious) as well as the unfallible Prien & Ring - this is just human. I know that Galland made, among others, an enormous error in his first book: he wrote that Japan invaded Midway, which is exactly the reverse of what happened in the very famous Battle of Midway (Japan intended to invade Midway but lost all four aircraft carriers deployed for this, and a few other ships too - six months only after the disgusting Japanese aggression at Pearl Harbor). Probably almost nobody noticed this error in Germany. Of course in the USA every kid knows the correct version. I was annoyed, too, because in his whole book Galland almost never gave the precise dates, certainly because he had no relevant documents at the time, but there is an exception: operation "Cerberus-Donnerkeil", the escape from Brest of two mighty German warships which sailed… towards Germany in the Channel between France and England, remarkably protected against British air attacks by Galland's fighter organisation and deployment (February 1941). I noticed a few other errors on other points but this is unimportant now.

JP: "I would strongly recommend that you try a more distanced and un-biased approach to his oeuvre which would show you that there are in fact quite a lot of - to put it mildly - inaccuracies in Galland's presentation of his exploits in WWII."

You don't know but "my approach" IS ALWAYS distanced and unbiased. Precisely. This is what obviously enrages and infuriates some people (not all people) who are not able - contrary to myself - to take part in a discussion without getting immediately overheated, yelling at me so to speak and speaking of "insults" and the like where there is nothing of this kind. They simply hate it to be confronted with strong logical arguments not intuition, fantasy and the like. I purchased quite a few of your books (about twenty from famous gem Gabi in München: JG 3, 11, 27, 53 and more as well as several JFV volumes - I can't afford the expense and the time of purchasing them all because I am working on several books myself with different subjects). I don't regret to have purchased about 20 of your books but please publish a corrected version of JG 53 (the printers printed the wrong text instead of your corrected version so YOU are not responsible for that).

Some people accused me wrongly of having "insulted" others but I must say, the way you sue poor Galland is not really friendly, not objective either, and obviously you HATE him. Clearly you find him terrible (this word is very strong in the English language). I don't know what he did to you or to one of your relatives during the war. Did he refuse to give you an interview? Did he reject your vision of certain events? Do you think Galland alone is responsible for the death of your father, or uncle, or whoever? (I'd be very sorry, honest, but alas people die in wars, for example my father, who was an aircrew and a major.)

JP: "Take a look at the introduction of JFV 4/I ( Purple Series )"

- OK, I'll read it again.

Sorry, have to leave now, I'm late.

More some other time, soon I hope.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

The fact that you write that means it is. I have no interest in this subject whatsoever. I do not care if Adolph Galland claimed he was at Kittyhawk and shot down the Wright Brothers. But repeating something 5 times does not make it true. The truth is, nobody knows for sure. Researchers are making their best guesses based on the sparse evidence and very unreliable eye witness reports available. And they work very hard at it, whether you agree with their conclusions or not. This is an academic exercise. You have made it personal, and not in a nice way. It does not help your cause. You may be right, but nobody is going to give you credit because of the way you present your case. If someone objects to your posting, for whatever reason, apologize and try to reword it in a less offensive way.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

As a moderator here, I think it is.

And a complete irrelevance in a thread that you chose to title as a "historical question to experts". If you ask a "historical question" you can hardly be unaware that historians need not have lived through the events they describe to contribute the elucidation of those events. Does my being six months older than Jochen Prien, and born slightly nearer the war make me a better historian of that conflict? Clearly it does not, any more than my being born that much nearer to the Battle of Cannae would, were we concerned with the Punic Wars. Should not a historian be judged on the quality of his or her work?

And, as must surely be obvious, it is through documentation that one can bring together information from multiple sources that could not have been combined in time of war. What is more, contemporary documentation relies less on fallible memory than do memoirs written years after the events in question. The evaluation of multiple sources is a cornerstone of good historical scholarship, is it not?

Just as personal memoirs are seldom wholly accurate in detail or dispassionate in tone. They are compiled—wholly or partially—from memories and impressions, many are written to glorify the author and/or to exonerate him/her from blame. Again, an important aspect of historical and scientific enquiry is the identification of potential sources of bias.

That documentary support for certain aspects of Galland's postwar memoirs is lacking. That, in terms of historical enquiry, is a matter of some importance.

So "sales = reliability"? Would you say, for example, that "The First and the Last" offers an accurate, objective and proportionate account of JV 44?

Let us use your own criterion. As far as I know you were not there flying alongside (or against) Galland, so what does your "certainty" rely on?

I confess that this was not apparent to me from your post.

Again, your gratitude that Herr Prien confined his response to "strong logical arguments" does not exactly shine through in your post.

This inference cannot in my view be justified in the basis of anything in the post to which you are responding. It is quite possible to argue the merits of a particular victory claim with courtesy and without making imputations as to the character of another party and I would ask that you please do so in future.

A Galland mystery
 

Just a quickie - am in a hurry. Thanks for your explanations even though you're mostly wrong. Strange Indeed. Now please look:

J. Prien wrote to me: "...there are in fact quite a lot of - to put it mildly - inaccuracies in Galland's presentation of his exploits in WWII."

You may call this friendly but I dare disagree. I dare a lot, it's horrible. I am horrible, that's all. But I was thinking more of what J.Prien wrote precisely in the introduction of his volume JFV 4/I. I remember(ed) only the general message and tone (several well-filled pages, a lot of text). JP is not really friendly to Galland "to say the least". Uninformed readers could follow that this Galland fellow was a clot and a nitwit, which I would find is slightly exaggerated. If Galland had been still alive he would have had every chance of winning legal proceedings against Prien for numerous insults and slandering - I think Prien didn't realise how hostile and hateful his comments on Galland were and still are (see at the top here). Experience shows that many people, not Prien only, are not aware at all that what they say or write is heavy slander and can result in very serious trouble in court. That said, I don't know if Galland would have sued Prien (I don't think so). You may find that I use some hard words - this is your private pleasure - but Prien's words against Galland are about 100 times harder and meaner. This, too, is his private pleasure. As far as I'm concerned he may do as he pleases. This does not mean that he's right. Please read the mentioned introduction to JFV 4/1 again and then think again.

The fact remains that Galland was one of the greatest fighter pilots AND FIGHTER LEADERS of WW II and even of the whole of the XXth century (including WW I), taking all countries into account. On the Internet virtually everybody agrees that he was the best, the greatest etc., especially American and British people but others too. This world-wide admiration and commendation must have some good, real reasons. I understand that Galland's JG 26 was considered the best German fighter wing in the BoB and was preferred by bomber crews for protection against British fighters. All this cannot come just by chance.

He had an exceptional career as the fighter general appointed by Göring after Mölders accidental death. (He didn't want this.) So he was not Göring's first choice but Mölders being lost he was the obvious choice, even taking Göring' great sympathy for him (and for Mölders) into account: Göring just liked them very much, but this is not the whole explanation. Galland was simply very good and very clever. Unfallible? Nope.

You might care to have a look at Yves Michelet's (Galland's very exact French translator and publisher) blog: https://admin.over-blog.com/2675016/write/90559430

There is a short summary in English, German and French at the top. This particular part (or chapter) of the blog gives a long account of Galland's life and first book - in French - with numerrous photographs (most of them never published before). He explains, among other things, why Galland is the most famous fighter pilot of the XXth century and most probably of all time.

More some other time.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

rof120,

Instead of person worship I would like to see facts, which are based on original documents. Personal opinions and memories are not sufficiently scientific material to the researcher members of this forum.

Matti

Galland mystery – 3 June 1940 (cont'd)
 

Worship?

All right then - but just to please you. Finnish airmen have a good reputation of markmanship and honesty so…

Here is the list of Galland's 14 first victories, all won in the French Campaign in May-June 1940. This list was written and circulated by Galland himself in the years 1980-95 and possibly at other times too:


N° 1-3 May 12 3 RAF Hurricanes

N° 4 May 16 1 Spitfire 5 km South of Sedan

N° 5-6 May 19 2 Potez 63 (most probably 63.11 recce AC)

N° 7 May 20 1 Potez 63

N° 8-9 May 29 2 Blenheims

N° 10 June 2 1 Spitfire

N° 11-12 June 3 1 Curtiss, 1 Morane

N° 13-14 June 14 1 Blenheim, 1 Defiant

MY REMARKS:

Except for the three Hurricanes Galland always gave the correponding details on time and location, like for N° 8-9 "12.58 and 13.04 hrs 15 km (about 10 miles) north of Gravelines".

N° 4: a Spitfire cannot have been South of Sedan on May 16. Spitfires were not allowed to fly over the continent and they didn't have the range for Sedan anyway. So it was some other fighter, possibly a Dewoitine 520. D.520s were very often misidentified as Spitfires or Moranes but were much better than the latter and did'nt have the typical wings of the Spits.

N° 7: newer sources say it was a LeO 45 not a Potez 63. Both types were twin-engined, twin-fin AC.

N° 11-12: as I already mentioned this "Curtiss" was in fact a Bloch 152 and TWO Moranes are perfectly confirmed by French sources.

N° 14: it seems that it was not a Defiant but a Battle.

In any case this list - without my remarks - was circulated by the former "General der Jagdflieger". This man was not a clown writing nonsense according to his fantasy. This document without any doubt can be considered official.

His victories N° 11 and 12 match not only French losses perfectly but their combination, with the crash locations and times, fits the details of French losses perfectly too: first a Bloch 152 near Senlis, then the two Moranes around Lognes/Ozoir.

I'm tired of this now. Some people enjoy contradicting others in bad faith just for fun (not you Matti - I wouldn't even reply). I don't enjoy being wrongly accused of "insulting" others etc. For me this is the end of this not-too-helpful discussion. Schluss, basta.

Re: A Galland mystery – Historical question to experts including J. Prien: Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940
 

I am closing this thread. It has drifted far from the original purpose and the tone of some of the replies is not acceptable on this forum.