|
Galland's victories: Reply to Laurent Rizzotti - About translations, in particular of aviation books
QUOTE:
2nd May 2019, 18:55 Laurent Rizzotti Re: A Galland mystery – Galland’s two victories won on 3 June 1940 ________________________________________ (…) 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. I know you mean well but alas what you wrote on translations does not match reality. It would, and this would be very fine indeed, “if” translators really “only (would) translate”, but in almost all instances regrettably this is not the case. For whatever reasons (I can’t elaborate on the causes here for this would take a lot of time and space) so-called “translators”, male and female, almost always write whatever nonsense they happen to stumble on or have in their otherwise empty brains. Of course such people are not translators but bloody incompetent amateurs. Most firms and almost all publishing companies hire them because they accept much lower fares than competent professionals. So almost all translations of any kind talk nonsense. The only excuses are the mostly incredibly low fares for translating (lower than for cleaning the floor, as the French translators’ union used to say) and very short time allowed for doing the job. Also, many “translators” feel they have to “improve” and even “correct” what the author has written. They are so much better than the authors! This is how the English edition (1954) of Galland’s book “The First and the Last” contains a lot of nonsense. Not only was a large part of the chapters dealing with the Spanish civil war deleted – and quite a few English-readers complained about that – but, among many other horrors, you can read this in the English edition (first published 1955 in England by Eyre Methuen Ltd., London; my copy printed 1986 in the USA by Champlin Museum Press in Mesa, Arizona): on page 45 about Galland’s very first victory on May 12, 1940 (a RAF “Hurricane) “He rather clumsily avoided action…”. In German it was: “He took evasive action which was not particularly skilful…” The poor guy did NOT “avoid action” but took evasive action, which is entirely different. But the rest is much worse: page 47 – Galland describes how he chased a French Potez 63.11 and adds: “Der Heckschütze war ausgefallen.” (The rear gunner had been put out of action.) English “translation” : “I had (…) shot away part of his tail.” So the rear gunner became part of the tail. Very interesting. page 47 too: “I pulled at my brakes like mad.” “Pulled”? page 50: “I bent a blade of my airscrew and my undercarriage on his wing.” In German it was: “I bent (…) and my fin on his right wing” (RIGHT wing and FIN not undercarriage). Replacing the fin with the undercarriage really is a great feat. page 52 (bottom of page): “On August 1st, when Marshal Kesselring pinned the Knight’s Cross on my tunic after my seventeenth kill (…)”. A Knight’s Cross pinned on the tunic, no comment. Do you prefer the old French edition “Jusqu’au bout sur nos Messerschmitt” (publisher was Robert Laffont 1954)? Virtually everything is wrong or invented by the so-called “translator”. It’s almost necessary to correct every single word so I can give you but a few examples: Page 8, 2nd line: Westerholt became “Westerholz”. He couldn’t care less. Same nonsense on page 9, 2nd paragr., 1st line. Page 12, end of 1st paragr. : “ a small car” has become “an Opel”. End of page 17: one hour in custody became “three hours”. Page 59, end of 1st paragr.: “a small (private) tourism aircraft” was in fact a Fw 58 “Weihe” – a light, twin-engined aircraft. It was shot down by German fighters with a German general (Jafü) inside. The “translation” of the rest of this story is appalling: I am not brave enough to discuss it here. Pure inventions, nonsense etc. like in the WHOLE BOOK. In this French “translation”, the fin of Galland’s Me 109 was not damaged any more on June 3, 1940. Of course, like everybody else including those who made the film “The Battle of Britain” (and Galland was one of the experts having helped with this work), this “translator” wrote that Galland asked Göring for an “escadrille” (or “Staffel” (12 fighters), or “squadron”) of “Spitfires”. As he reported 1953 at the latest in his own book, Galland asked for “Spitfires” for his Geschwader (wing, escadre), which means a complement of 124 fighters not 12 or 16 (in the RAF, or later 20). Sorry, I have to hurry up. I’ll just add that Galland described in great detail, in this same book, how he was shot down on 21 June 1941 and very nearly died in his burning and diving 109. He can’t jettison the damaged transparent roof of his cockpit, which becomes a jammed “ejection seat” and his parachute becomes “my second parachute”, as if any fighter pilot in the world had been carrying TWO parachutes! At the very end of the book we learn highly interesting things: the airport of Munich-Riem becomes “Riehm” twice because the “translator” didn’t like the real name, and this place (which was part of Munich) is to be found “in the suburbs of Salzburg”, which is approximately 100 km (60 miles) to the East. Big suburbs I have to say. This “translation” does not mention with one single word that Galland was wounded in a knee on 26 April, which made him unable to fly and made his capture by American troops possible. So we believe that he was on Salzburg airfield when the 60 Me 262s of his beloved JV 44 were blown up by their German owners (a certain concentration of the jet fighters had taken place in the last few days). To replace himself he had chosen Heinz Bär (say “Bair”) as the new CO of this unit. Galland was not there – he was still in hospital, certainly much to his chagrin. Terrible translations are to be found everywhere, not only in aviation literature. The most interesting German book of Mr. Karl-Heinz Frieser on the 1940 French Campaign with the title “Blitzkrieg-Legende - Der Westfeldzug 1940” (released 1995, 4th edition in the meantime) was massacred by some female nitwit who did not even know that tanks have turrets not towers and that big guns do not fire "coups de feu" (shots from light weapons like rifles). This "translation" is incredibly poor and misleading (poor historians!). Some people disagree with Frieser but this is not the point. I read both the German and the French editions. The French one is absolutely terrible: artillery pieces and antitank guns fire “shots” (coups de feu, in French shots by small arms), a heavy French tank B1bis (the by far heaviest tank in Europe except the USSR) becomes “un char minuscule” (minute, tiny like a sparrow is “minuscule” as compared with an eagle). Tanks have a “tour” (tower) instead of a “tourelle” (turret). The 41,000 (or possibly 43,000) wheeled vehicles of “grouping Kleist” engaged in the decisive battle of Sedan (May 12-14, 1940) become 41,000 cycles (like bicycles and the like). This so-called “translation” is a masterpiece and very typical. Buyer, reader, beware! Translated books are a permanent fraud. Check first. Galland and his German publishers were infuriated and very bitter when they read the so-called French “translation” of "Les premiers et les derniers" (1954) with the changed title of “Jusqu’au bout sur nos Messerschmitt” – a mouthful – and probably all the other “translations” or most of them; as we just saw the English “translation” is hardly better. This made them very suspicious and very careful about more recent translations, which were checked very carefully and had to be accepted before being printed and sold. (This procedure is applied very rarely, which is a great pity.) Galland, in particular, scrutinized translations very carefully – possibly with the help of numerous German fighter pilots who had survived the war. He was extremely satisfied with "Les premiers et les derniers" (1985-1992) and he wrote this to his new French translator-publisher in no uncertain terms. This is why I counted 5 different books not 3 containing Galland’s story of his two victories won on June 3, 1940, for there is no doubt at all that he checked these translations very exactly. He confirmed this story at least 5 times including 1995 or 1996 (he passed away in February 1996, aged almost 84). This started 1953 (aged 41) and I am convinced that he knew what he was talking about. He never changed or corrected this story 1953-1996 contrary to some other ones in the same book (the 3 non-Belgian RAF “Hurricanes” he got on May 12 and more). More on this: http://yves-michelet.over-blog.com/ Choose the chapters "Adolf Galland" etc. and (ON PAGE 2) "Mais enfin, qui diable…" (Who the hell is that Michelet fellow…). In both chapters numerous photographs of Galland etc. See also "Photos d'avions" (Aircraft photographs) - some gems there. I found it interesting. |
Re: Galland's victories: Reply to Laurent Rizzotti - About translations, in particular of aviation books
Fascinating insight into the mistakes translator's can make.
|
Re: Galland's victories: Reply to Laurent Rizzotti - About translations, in particular of aviation books
Perhaps it should be emphasized that an "amateur" translator can do very good work. E.g. Raimo Malkamäki and Hannu Valtonen have done excellent translations from German to Finnish due to being very familiar with correct terminology due to their hobby, yet both are "amateurs" (=they do not make living as translators).
|
Good translators
Oh yes, I certainly believe you. Sadly the fact remains that in most cases… (see the few examples I quoted - I could go on like this for weeks or months). Think that countless books, articles etc. have been translated - including the Bible… Oh no, I'd rather not think of this.
|
Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Please don’t close this all too quickly and don’t move it to « Books and magazines » for the central point of this post is not a book - even though I mention one - but the date of 2 victories won by Galland. It is a historical point if you take Galland’s career and fame into account.
Displaying a degree of bravery hitherto unknown in world history just as well as my proverbial modesty I dived into a huge mountain of moving boxes containing mainly books and the like (NOT only on WW II) and using the last amount of energy in my body I managed to successfully unearth an interesting book: FIGHTER GENERAL The Life of Adolf Galland THE OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHY Col. Raymond F. Toliver, USAF (Ret.) & Trevor J. Constable Foreword by General James H. Doolittle, USAF (Ret.) Published 1999 by Schiffer Publishing Company Atglen, PA (PA is short for Pennsylvania) On page 4 there is a very modest piece of information, almost hidden among many others: (Pages 1-6 are not numbered but the numbered pages start with N° 7 : “Foreword” by Gen. Doolitle) The original German language edition of this book was published by Verlag Herbig GmbH, Munich (MY red bold characters) Indeed, Herbig was Galland’s German publisher after Schneekluth in Darmstadt. So the original of this Toliver-Constable American book is German. Who translated it into American? Certainly not T and C. The translator is not named; regrettably this happens very often. On page 42 (2nd half) we find some short explanations on operation Paula against French aero-industry and airfields in the Paris area, including Galland’s victories on 2 Moranes (no Curtiss mentioned – and it was a Bloch 152). The date of “Paula” is not mentioned (they probably forgot it, possibly at the printers’) but everybody knows it was June 3, 1940. The original edition being German (1992) and written, or re-written, by Galland (I know this for sure; my source is extremely reliable), there is no doubt that he once more “claimed” (or confirmed) two confirmed victories on June 3. That settles it: he won 2 victories on French fighters on June 3, 1940. The 3rd one was not confirmed but nowadays it is perfectly confirmed by French sources such as Fr. Air Force archive and Paul Martin’s books, the 2nd one of which was published by the late CJE. A lot of guys use to look at the archive of the former enemy to check on victory claims, and rightly so. Why should this not be done in this particular case? I really wonder why, this is really strange… As I pointed out several times in the preceding Galland-thread he was very exact, and very exacting, about the precise details published in his books. Prior to the publication of the 2nd French edition (entirely comprehensive – 2.5 times longer than the preceding “translation” - and not ridiculous*, at last) he sent the new French publisher a whole list of corrections and additions. He was adamant that every change had to be made exactly as he had written it but he changed nothing about “Paula”. This cannot be coincidental, quite on the contrary: he also sent a list of his victories in May and June 1940. In spite of the quick closing of the first Galland-thread in a hurry people continued to read it up to this day: today at 17.30 hrs it had been visited 1,717 times, to which we can add 397 for the thread on poor translations of aviation books (in particular Galland’s), hidden under “Books and magazines”, totalling 2,114 visits at 17.30 hrs and still going strong. This could be TOCH-record for such a short-lived thread plus such a special one (translations) with the exception of very specialised threads which interest many people, like details on Me 109s, EOE, Luftwaffe paints etc., most of these giant threads having been here for years or at least for months. TOCH-readers voted within a few days – not with their feet but with their clicks. * An ejection seat and two parachutes in a Me 109 in June 1941, Munich-“Riehm” (read Riem, twice) a suburb of Salzburg (distance is about 100 km or 60 miles), and on and on… Riem was, and still is, a part of München (Munich). I lived in Munich for 8 years, I ought to know. MORE on Galland, his book, various aircraft, exciting photographs, etc. in several parts of this blog: yves-michelet.over-blog.com/ |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Ah, my friend Yves.
If only I had not banned him... |
If only...
… you'd have been a lot more clever my friend.
All right, you were very young and didn't think of it. Perhaps God will forgive you? |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Yves
No idea how many books the two individuals Toliver/Constable wrote named Fighter General The life of Adolf Galland, but my edition is from 1990 and was published by AmPress Publishing Inc. Since you obviously hold your 1999 Schiffer book in high esteem I have to confess I do the absolute opposite regarding my 1990 version. It is unfortunately a very typical book written by two typical American authors. At least looking in the book I have, do you really think Adolf Galland would have resorted to novel like drama with actual conversations inserted? I also doubt very much Galland needed anyone to ghost write his own story 36 years after he had written his own book, and I doubt even more he would resort to such cheap "tricks". Anyway both you and the two authors obviously share the same admiration for the late General. I don't have the "original" German edition published in 1992, but since you for some reason believe this 1992 edition outrank the year 1990 edition, perhaps we should compare the two books, line by line, so we can be certain the German book is not a translation? Since my 1990 issue does not have any date for his claims during Operation Paula (the date mentioned is only when Dunkirk fell, June 4th and it looks like the authors believe Op Paula began sometime after that date....), I presume the German issue did correct that fault, right?... Hopefully they also corrected all the other faults in the book which the authors must have added from Galland's original script... Looking at your blog, you obviously met Galland at least once, so I take it you have checked his log book (or other documentation) and can confirm you have seen the date in his papers! Perhaps you were even allowed to photograph it? Since Galland obviously must have had at least some documents back in 1954 to remember exactly what he did on June 3rd (and not 9th) I suggest you produce what you have to make you so sure his stated date is correct, otherwise we can go on forever, believing either in Galland or the main Luftwaffe researchers who all insist the date was June 9th. At this point, I'm afraid, all you do is to repeat the same thing over and over again without producing any evidence, except the original version of Galland's book from 1954. Cheers Stig |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
ROF 120,
Same topic AGAIN? What's the new point now? According to you Galland had 2 victories on the 3rd June...but what about his Abschüssmeldung(s) for that particular day? Was he flying alone or with a Rottenflieger? What about this wingman saying or mission report? What is your "reliable source"? Your interview with Galland? His Flugbuch do proves those 2 claims? Was it signed by his Gruppenkommandeur or Kommodore testifying it is ok? Do show us more evidences please...Any of the French pilots survived? Did they written reports of their combats and identified what shot them down? Am a bit confused here...are you trying to sell your book via this Fórum or your Blog (or the book you translated and added information on your Blog) ? It seems so...every time you points to your site or Blog, or book....seems a bit strange. I mean it is amazing to share with others the work of years, very nice indeed...once...but on every thread I do not know. Again I do sumarize up in just one phrase: what is really amazing in life is that…”you reap what you sow”. Again: NO ONE here is competing to be the leading expert on LW, RAF, USAAF, Galland, J E Johnson or whatever other theme... Adriano Silva Baumgartner, ASV 00.344 |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Reply to Stig
SORRY for the green grinning head. I don't want it but can't delete it. SJ: No idea how many books the two individuals Toliver/Constable wrote named Fighter General The life of Adolf Galland, but my edition is from 1990 and was published by AmPress Publishing Inc. -Just det Stig, det är riktigt… er, sorry: Exactly Stig, this is correct. The book you mentioned was precisely what Galland couldn't stand because it was full of errors and he felt compelled to re-write it entirely. His new version was released 1992, the authors remaining the same (apparently), probably because of some contract(s) and legal factors. Same thing for the 1999 sequel. SJ: Since you obviously hold your 1999 Schiffer book in high esteem rof120: Inte alls, icke. Sorry: Not at all. I just mentioned its existence. SJ: I have to confess I do the absolute opposite regarding my 1990 version. It is unfortunately a very typical book written by two typical American authors. At least looking in the book I have, do you really think Adolf Galland would have resorted to novel like drama with actual conversations inserted? I also doubt very much Galland needed anyone to ghost write his own story 36 years after he had written his own book, and I doubt even more he would resort to such cheap "tricks". - Regrettably I never saw this 1990 book. IIRC it disappeared quickly and you could not purchase a copy. Add the fact that I learned of it belatedly, too late. So I can't have any opinion on it but the fact that Galland rewrote it entirely speaks for itself. SJ: Anyway both you and the two authors obviously share the same admiration for the late General. - My admiration is purely rational. Galland is NOT "my hero", the man I like and admire most. I highly respect his bravery and his feats, that's all. I like his humour including when he is at the receiving end of his own humour or mockery, which often is considered the highest quality of humour (I agree). His very high position within the Luftwaffe doesn't impress me (not others either). I feel if he had been allowed to fight all the way until Nazi Germany was defeated he probably would have been killed in action for he was clearly too combat-eager and too aggressive, which sooner or later would have cost his life, rather sooner, as the events on June 21, 1941 clearly show. He very nearly was killed and on two occasions during this day. He simply could have been killed outright in his cockpit by cannon-fire. Only luck kept him alive. SJ: I don't have the "original" German edition published in 1992, but since you for some reason believe this 1992 edition outrank the year 1990 edition, perhaps we should compare the two books, line by line, so we can be certain the German book is not a translation? - I don't have the 1990 T-C book and I would feel such an effort wouldn't make any sense - without wanting to antagonize you - for I am positive that Galland didn't like the 1990 version at all, which is why he re-wrote it entirely in a hospital bed after heavy heart surgery. I think the 1992 German editon is still available (officially the authors are T-C), on the Internet in any case. Publishers are Herbig. But if you have a copy each of both the 1990 and 1999 English editions you can make this comparison easily, this is your private pleasure. Var inte arg Stig, jag skojar bara (Don't be angry, just joking.) SJ: Since my 1990 issue does not have any date for his claims during Operation Paula (the date mentioned is only when Dunkirk fell, June 4th and it looks like the authors believe Op Paula began sometime after that date....), I presume the German issue did correct that fault, right?... - Nope, too bad. "Operation Paula" is mentioned four times in the two last paragraphs of page 66, Galland's participation is mentioned too with the usual details on collision damage suffered by his 109. It is fully possible that Galland simply forgot to add the missing date - June 3 - or grumpily considered it was unnecessary to add it for everybody knows anyway. We should not forget that he recently had had heart surgery… Rewriting a whole, complex book under such circumstances could be his greatest exploit ever but especially then the oversight of a missing date could easily happen. In any case his victories during Operation "Paula" are more or less mentioned here too, one of them very clearly, explicitely. SJ: Hopefully they also corrected all the other faults in the book which the authors must have added from Galland's original script… - Script and talks. I suspect that they did not record what he was saying but wrote, later, from memory, mixing up various things and forgetting others. SJ: Looking at your blog, you obviously met Galland at least once, so I take it you have checked his log book (or other documentation) and can confirm you have seen the date in his papers! Perhaps you were even allowed to photograph it? Since Galland obviously must have had at least some documents back in 1954 to remember exactly what he did on June 3rd (and not 9th) I suggest you produce what you have to make you so sure his stated date is correct, otherwise we can go on forever, believing either in Galland or the main Luftwaffe researchers who all insist the date was June 9th. - Unfortunately I never even as much as saw his logbook nor other relevant documents. At the time - in the 1980s, which is 30-40 years ago - such things were not as eagerly sought-after as they are today. If they had been there is no doubt that I would have asked to see them and that permission would have been granted to me. I never even thought of it. I had no reason to have any doubts. SJ: At this point, I'm afraid, all you do is to repeat the same thing over and over again without producing any evidence, except the original version of Galland's book from 1954. - Not quite. I started this new thread because I had unearthed my copy of the last Galland-book in English signed by T-C but written by Galland. This was a NEW element in my demonstration. To sum up, let us say that Galland gave his version (victories on June 3, 1940) in the first edition of his first book and that he never changed this version but confirmed it in writing several times. It can't be coincidental because, for example 1985, he drew up the list of his 14 first victories with details of time and location, had this list typed and checked it for typos after it was typed. What do we need more as evidence? Millions of statements made by historians have about one thousand times less solid evidence. Sorry guys, I have to pause for a while now. Lots of paperwork. Tax office wants to eat me. I'm very scared. PS: when I started the first thread on Galland's victories I genuinely hoped that somebody, or several ones, would shed light on this question but I was wrong. I have been owning the corresponding books for about 15-20 years. "Cheers Stig" |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Dear Yves
Not sure why you imply you are Swedish fluent. Has it anything to do with the topic or are you just trying to show off? Neither do I understand why you call me variously with SJ, ST and JP nor why you sign your message with "Cheers Stig" You say you have no admiration as such for Galland. Well starting three different messages with basically the same topic, to prove Galland claimed two victories on June 3rd instead of June 9th is perhaps more to be sorted under obsession than admiration, but let us not delve into psychology since it would be to stray outside the topic itself. The interesting point is that you for some reason seems to have every issue of every major translation made by Galland's books. Just so I am not missing something can you please scan two perhaps even three pages from the 1992 German edition of the T-C book so I can personally satisfy myself it is completely re-written by Galland. Perhaps you also have something in writing which confirm that? Quite frankly I have never come across anyone before who collects every translation made of a book by any individual. Obsession? Sorry, we should leave that out of the picture.... Am I correct in interpreting your answer that only the German edition of "Fighter General" is edited/re-written by Galland and that the 1999 Schiffer edition is simply a re-print of the 1990 original AmPress edition? Since you have mentioned the Schiffer book at least twice in your three messages I must wonder in such a case why you never mentioned the original book from 1990 called "Fighter General"? This re-writing done by Galland is intriguing. It is quite unusual, I think, since I have never come across that before. That books are edited when translated, yes indeed, but that usually is by footnotes. Changing any text would in fact be a legal issue, so I take it the German publisher do have some kind of legal document saying the two American authors agreed to that? Since you must have seen that, I take it you have some kind of copy (or can produce one), so we all can see that? Even more interesting to me is that the main topic of your messages (the two claims from June 3rd) was not edited into the 1992 German edition. That could hardly have been any problem for Galland, since after all, all he needed to do was to look in his first book, it is all there! It is interesting you state you have actually no evidence of any of Galland's victories, but you obviously have a list written (by him ?) in 1985, presumably giving all his claims and not only his first 14? Whatever, can we have a scan of that please? So far I have never seen a claim list made out by the late General himself, so it would be very interesting for everyone here on TOCH to see it. Finally I have to direct my apologies to all TOCH members for being so wordy, but I am fascinated by the whole situation. Yves, so far you have not produced a single evidence that Galland was correct. Everything you bring up could easily be dismissed as heresay. Don't you think it is time you produce something useful, both for me (as a strict amateur) and for all others, some at least who can be called semi-professionals? I am sure they are as interested as I am. Cheers Stig |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
The 1992 book published by Herbig Verlag is still available.
https://www.abebooks.co.uk/book-sear...vor-constable/ Usual disclaimer, Ed |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Quote:
Abschuss (not Abschüss) -meldungen. In German handwriting they mostly (or always?) add a bent stroke above an ordinary u. It can look like an ü then but it's still an u (without Umlaut). I don't think that these documents survived the war - like most other ones. Galland's wingman was captain von Ankum-Frank (G. forgot the "von"), as I clearly wrote in my first post (closed thread) "A Galland-mystery…", right now on page 3 here. It seems hat A-F (II./JG 27) didn't win any victory on this occasion. He was KIA (date unknown to me) having won 3 (found in the history ("Dokumentation") of JG 27 by Ring and Girbig, Motorbuch Verlag). Mission report etc.? You know better than that. Everybody knows that most documents were destroyed at the end of WW II according to a nazi order. Surviving documents are few and far between. AB: "What is your "reliable source"? - I will not disclose the identity of this source. Perhaps I'll be able to ask for permission to do so but I don't know when. The fact remains that this source really is extremely reliable. What proves this? My word and I'm not going to argue with anybody on this. (…) His Flugbuch do proves those 2 claims? - Never seen, as I already stated. AB: Any of the French pilots survived? - See my first post, today on page 3. French sergent Jost. AB: Did they write reports of their combats and identify what shot them down? - Again, you know better than that. It was very rare that the victims knew who or which aircraft had shot them down. In most cases they were either killed or wounded and they had other concerns, like baling out (in this case too), than carefully looking at the insignia and other markings on the enemy fighter. The more so when their victor had come from behind (the most frequent situation) and remained unseen by the victim. Possibly Galland's second Morane was the victim of a beam attack - in this case it was even more impossible to identify a particular aircraft showing itself from the front. In almost all air battles enemy pilots didn't care about markings etc.: they had other concerns. Of course if they had known that Adriano Baumgartner would ask 79 years later they certainly would have obliged and carefully have made notices in their notebook and with their cameras shot several photographs of their victors before leaving their burning aircraft. Why didn't you, or your father, tell them? Now I'm asking the same kind of questions as you do. AB: Am a bit confused here...are you trying to sell your book via this Fórum or your Blog (or the book you translated and added information on your Blog) ? It seems so...every time you points to your site or Blog, or book....seems a bit strange. -What is strange here apart from you? I have nothing to sell even if asked nicely. Look better at all the other posts and threads. Innumerable guys here make publicity for their books (I don't mind at all, quite on the contrary) or ask for help or information for these books. In many instances some book-title is part of their signature at the bottom of each post. Same thing for blog-URLs. I found quite a few really useful. I consider it useful to many persons at TOCH that I give this URL where they can find innumerable informations, details and photographs on aviation in general, on Galland and other airmen, on various aircraft, on combat tactics etc. (some of the rubrics, or columns, have no connection to aviation). "EVEN" if all the texts are in French. AB: Again: NO ONE here is competing to be the leading expert on LW, RAF, USAAF, Galland, J E Johnson or whatever other theme... - Correct. I never even thought of "competing" in this way. I'm certainly not a leading expert on anything and I'm not trying to be. Now I'm quite a bit tired of this… Alles Gute. |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Dear Moderators, we all have been tired indeed, but do allow me just this last answer.
I do promiss this is my last post here for quite a time... __ Dear Yves (ROF 120) Just to quote or share a saying from a book from my Country: “Your heart speaks so loud that I can not hear what you say". Most of us are already fathers or grandfathers here and; apparently, from what I see on some of your threads on this Forum and the information that cames from your blog, you seems to have been very well Educated (fluent in several languages, etc.). In spite of that, on your first thread about Galland’s claims you did not apologized for a well known German writer and member of this Forum/Board. You also did not apologized for the other members either, the way the thread started. You had the opportunity to do so. Quoting your last message: “Why didn't you, or your father, tell them?” We do not need to go this low as civilized persons, do we? I do guess (supposition) that we all here on this Forum do have the same passion for Aeronautical and Military History. That’s what links us, in spite of our social, economical, cultural, ethnical, religious, birthday dates, Historical knowledge, backgrounds and differences. I do believe that my previous thread was questioning Historical evidences that could or should have supported your theory for those two claims of one of the greatest Aviators of History. Period. As far as I see or even re-reading what I posted, I have not: a) offended you personally; b) offended or mentioned any member of your Family directly. Do you see, my late father passed away some years ago. He was my greatest friend and Example in life. He concluded his Ph.D in France, enabling us, as Family to live (4 years), to know and to visit your country, from North to South; which we consider one of the greatest experiences we had in life, as Human Beings. It is a lovely country indeed and we do love it as ours. I remember meeting (like you met Galland) a former Eichenlaubträger (I may made some mistakes in German, sorry…my knowledge of this Language is near zero indeed as you pointed on your answer). He remembered me a combat against a Short Stirling that he shot down on a precise date he informed me, at night. He clearly remembered the tail separating from the fuselage of this British four-engined bomber and everything falling out. Well, he showed me the Bomber Command War Diaries (Middlebrook work) informing that “his” claim was not there, on the date he said he claimed it. This extensive book was deeply researched cross-checked with the ORB(s) and several archives. So, there was NO Stirling loss that night… His own memory of this combat was so clear to me…but after some 51 years after the end of WW2, was his memory so clear regarding the precise date of this combat? For some of us who fly or flew, both as civilian or military pilots, can we remember our 10th solo flight precisely? How many landings had we done on that 10th solo? What about the wind? We may remember the 1st solo, surely…it is something one do never forget in one’s life…but what we did on the 10th solo…after some 23 years, personally I don’t. Unless one’s do write a Diary (like Mouchotte for instance), we may remember precise events (maybe without dates), not a fully career in crescent order. What I want to express here Yves is that: Even if you interviewed him (Galland or his Wingman), or reviewed with Galland himself all his list of victories, during your visit in Germany; Galland’s memory, after thousands of combats and flights; circa of 100 hundred plus victories could have been affected by the time…One’s tend to mix events or things, if we do not have notes, a Logbook on our side, or additional data on our side. Please do let me share with you this passage from an Academic Historian. Not being a professional translator, I indeed humbly used online translation for that purpose. It may contain mistakes and am sorry for that. The British and American born can correct me, or this sentence below, if it contains mistakes: "Historical knowledge is necessarily based on testimonies or documents: "Pas de documents, pas d'Histoire". Now, in order to give them credit, I must prove three things: 1. That the documents communicate to me a certain event: it is the examination of reality 2. That the witness has been in favorable conditions to know the truth of the communicated fact: it is the question of the competence of the source 3. That the witness has no reason to lie: it is the question of the sincerity of the source. "(Van Den Besselaar, p.44 - 1974) So, Yves, without documents, we will go nowhere regarding those Galland’s claims. Maybe you managed to interview the French pilot who survived or Galland’s wingman….do not know. Why your secret source is so secret that you can not share it here? Yes, I knew that some of the LW archives were either buried or destroyed (this Gruppenkommandeur I met twice, back in 1996, told me he ordered his Gruppe Archives to be buried to not fall in Allied hands). I wrongly thought that, maybe, General Galland had the chance to save some documents that you could have had the chance or opportunity either to photograph or scan or see; like one of his Abschussmeldungen (thanks for correcting me) or you could have found a French Air Force combat report supporting your theory for the 3rd June 1940, etc… This is why I, like other members of the Forum asked for documents or evidences previously. Wish you and yours a nice week, in health and peace. Most humble and sincerely yours, Adriano Silva Baumgartner, ASV 00.344 |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Well said, Adriano
Don't abandon the Forum Cheers Brian |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
Adriano,
I agree with Brian - please do not leave the forum. |
Reply to all
Unfortunately time is in very short supply to me right now. I hope you don’t mind my replying to all of you in one single post.
============== Stig Jarlevik 17th May 2019, 00:23 Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940…… ________________________________________ Dear Yves Not sure why you imply you are Swedish fluent. - Yes I am but… Has it anything to do with the topic - Nothing. or are you just trying to show off? - Inte det heller – oh, sorry, not this either. I’m not the type to show off – believe it or not. My Swedish words were just meant as a harmless little joke (call it a poor joke or stupid if you like) and I feel they didn’t harm anybody. OK, maybe I was a fool but lots of people here insert German or French words in their posts – for the same reasons I think. Here is a sample: Wir greifen schon an! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxOCksQUKbI Danke schön, Dank schön ich bin ganz comfortable! I guess you know who adds these two German sentences at the end of each post. It has been bothering me for many years and I find it silly but well, if this author likes them it’s OK for me. You can see, too, that other people than myself add some URLs (we can see this very often). Neither do I understand why you call me variously with SJ, ST and JP - Boy o boy, you’re perfectly right. I guess I was much more tired than I had bargained for (I was very tired as a matter of fact – even if you don’t believe it I am only human). I feel the various abbreviations I wrongly used for your name are evidence enough. Sorry: I apologise for these terrible errors. I know I’m silly but SJ is also the abbreviation for the Swedish State Railways: SJ = Statens Järnvägar. So you’re an iron man (järn is iron; I know you know but the other guys don’t). Now I’m scared (and silly, I know). nor why you sign your message with "Cheers Stig" - I didn’t sign like this, I left your own signature where it was for I had quoted you profusely (a great honor for you). OK, maybe I was wrong – and tired. SJ: You say you have no admiration as such for Galland. - I would not quite say that. I do admire Galland for his great skills – mainly as a pilot – his cleverness and for his courage, his bravery in battle in the face of extremely dangerous enemies AND in the face of Hitler and Göring themselves. He was quite outspoken when he met them, which hardly anybody else dared be (one of the others was tank general Guderian). Eventually Göring wanted him shot as a scapegoat (in the stupid hope of concealing he was no good for his god, Hitler) and Galland escaped execution quite narrowly because Lützow (others say Speer – perhaps both) had intervened by Hitler himself in the middle of the night, which was something absolutely unique for he had forbidden this and his generals didn’t dare wake him up even when the Allied landings in Normandy had begun! SJ: Well starting three different messages with basically the same topic (…). - The reasons for 2 more posts are obvious enough. No need to explain again. SJ: The interesting point is that you for some reason seem to have every issue of every major translation made by Galland's books. - Just have a look at the Internet – search for Adolf Galland, in English only. In thousands of instances Galland is called “the greatest fighter pilot of WW II, the greatest fighter leader, the most important man in this respect”, etc. and so on. I am not trying to follow the mainstream or the huge herd of sheep. No but this makes clear how important (to WW II and to air fighting) and how INTERESTING Galland was. I purchased countless books on WW II and on air war or technology in German, English and French and I am still doing this. It has been going on for decades. No wonder I purchased several books on Galland or written by him during such a long period. I have my own reasons for being interested in a few of their translations (if any) too. It’s my own private privilege and pleasure. I feel I need not explain every single move I make. This would be overstretching readers’ patience. SJ: Just so I am not missing something can you please scan two perhaps even three pages from the 1992 German edition of the T-C book so I can personally satisfy myself it is completely re-written by Galland. - Sorry but this is unrealistic. How can you be satisfied (= certain; I am adding this mainly for French readers in order to avoid misunderstandings) that 3 pages were re-written by Galland? They were but I can’t see how this text proves it. Remember that the German book still is signed by Toliver and Constable – officially. So contrary to “The First and the Last” it doesn’t say “I…” but “he…” (“he” is Galland, seen by T-C). SJ: Perhaps you also have something in writing which confirm that? - Nothing but you can easily have a confirmation: just ask Galland’s German publishing company, which is Herbig in München (Munich). I think they don’t consider this a secret any more after 27 years or so have elapsed. Just email them and ask. I’m interested in learning what they’ll answer to you. SJ: Quite frankly I have never come across anyone before who collects every translation made of a book by any individual. - This is a wild overclaiming, much the same as when RAF pilots claimed 35 victories for 3 actual ones… I purchased the 1992 edition because I knew it had been re-written by Galland so I wanted to have an up-to-date version of his (auto)biography. A lot of things were still secret 1953 when his first book was released. In the meantime lots of archive documents had become open in Germany as well as in the UK and the USA. Obsession? Sorry, we should leave that out of the picture.... - But you don’t. Anyway, I am not obsessed by Galland nor by anything else. Remember: all this fuss started when I quite innocently asked if someone – possibly J. Prien – could explain the discrepancies between June 3 and June 6, 9, 14 or whatever. I was very surprised by a storm of criticism and vicious attacks. I had just asked a question. Perhaps some people feel that this question endangers their infallible stories written by infallible persons and they don’t want to change anything for fear of looking foolish. I don’t know. As far as I’m concerned I am always glad and grateful when someone corrects an error I made: this makes it possible for me to improve what I know, think or write. SJ: Am I correct in interpreting your answer that only the German edition of "Fighter General" is edited/re-written by Galland and that the 1999 Schiffer edition is simply a re-print of the 1990 original AmPress edition? - No. You didn’t get it. The 1999 edition is an American translation of the 1992 German text. This is exactly what I wrote about Schiffer’s edition (it’s printed in the book itself on page 4, as I already explained). How many times do you want me to repeat the same information? Then you can wail, weep and cry because my posts are much too long. I don’t know how we can explain any complex questions in 3 words. SJ: Since you have mentioned the Schiffer book at least twice in your three messages I must wonder in such a case why you never mentioned the original book from 1990 called "Fighter General"? - Look again. SJ: It is interesting you state you have actually no evidence of any of Galland's victories, but you obviously have a list written (by him ?) in 1985, presumably giving all his claims and not only his first 14? - Only 14. Whatever, can we have a scan of that please? - As soon as I succeed in unearthing it from my 100 moving boxes. The Galland-boxes were marked by myself. Just be a little patient (I have a few other concerns and duties). SJ: Yves, so far you have not produced a single evidence that Galland was correct. - Oh yes I have but strangely several guys here seem not to know how to read. How often do I have to repeat it? Some people criticize me for repeating myself, which I feel is wrong, but then they ask me to do so! 1. The two (in fact 3) Galland victories on June 3, 1940 were described in detail (except the first one, the “Curtiss” which was a Bloch 152) by Galland himself. He was not a fool, not an old man either, talking nonsense: his age was 41-42. He was entirely reorganizing (almost creating) and modernizing the Argentine Air Force. This story in his own book is historical evidence. The former German general of all fighter forces knew what he was talking about. This description of an air battle perhaps would not be sufficient (I feel it is) but 2. It is simply impossible that a 1940 German soldier could be wrong about the precise day on which he fought very close to Paris ( flying at 5,000-7,000 m, even 3,000, was almost the same as flying over Paris) because Paris was a legend to any German person. What’s more he shot down three (3) French fighters during this single sortie. This doesn’t happen every day except for phoneys like Wick and Balthasar, who repeatedly claimed 3 and even 4 enemy fighters s/d in the same sortie (over France and over England). So Galland certainly remembered this particular sortie to Paris with 3 victories perfectly well. THIS EXCEPTIONAL, UNIQUE DAY COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE MIXED UP WITH ANOTHER DAY. 3. Galland actually collided with his first victim, damaging the propeller and the fin of his 109 and losing the radio antenna mast. This, too, can’t be mixed up with some other mission on some other day. 4. You believe nothing which comes from France do you (all)? I stressed that Galland’s two victories on Moranes from GC I/6 are perfectly confirmed by French sources. Even the crash places match informations of French origin so you can follow Galland’s flight path on a map of the Paris region. I have got such a map. 5. Galland confirmed this version several times including in a list of his 14 first victories he drew up and circulated 1985 (and perhaps in other years too). He had no reason to confirm this version if it was wrong. It did not change anything in his score as compared with victories won on other days but not on June 3. He did correct errors systematically and he was not ashamed at all (there was no reason). Quite on the contrary YOU (all) IGNORE EVERY ARGUMENT THAT PROVES YOU WRONG. Repeat: proves you wrong. See points 1-5 above, they do prove it, period. SJ: Everything you bring up could easily be dismissed as hearsay. - Please do, this is your private pleasure. Dismiss, I could not care less. I suspect we have the origin of all this “scepticism” here: some people enjoy to look “important”, “clever” and “well-informed” when they stubbornly claim that obviously correct information is wrong and conversely. They also enjoy to systematically contradict others. Now some highly distinguished people are going to scream that my tone is not acceptable, “forgetting” in which tone I am being criticized and contradicted here. SJ: Don't you think it is time you produce something useful (…) - Sigh and re-sigh! I did just that including in this very post and before. This is where it ends. I don’t find it funny. TOCHs readers actually seem to be interested in the information and details published by myself, probably by the discussion too. 655 views since May 15 at 20.32 hours (in less than 3 days) is not too bad for my uninteresting explanations – and this is still going strong once more. I feel the number of visits is a good criterion because so many people cannot be completely wrong on such a straightforward discussion: did Galland win 2 victories on June 3, 1940 or was it on another day? I reject the false “explanation” according to which people rush to look at an argument for they enjoy a dispute. This “explanation” is a bit too simple. ============================== #11 17th May 2019, 20:53 Adriano Baumgartner (…) (…) you did not apologize for a well known German writer and member of this Forum/Board. - I just re-read what I wrote and I don’t see why I ought to apologise. I insulted nobody. I just remarked that Prien’s version differs from Galland’s. This is simply a fact. Read it gain. What is it here at TOCH? We already know “it’s not a bloody democracy” but what is it, a bloody dictatorship in which nobody has the right to say otherwise than the Few Great and Clever Ones? Nonsense. If they fear that my remarks could jeopardize the sales of their books this is an error, they can’t. So be reassured, no loss of turnover caused by me. AB: Quoting your last message: “Why didn't you, or your father, tell them?” We do not need to go this low as civilized persons, do we? - You don’t notice when someone is joking do you. All right, I was joking. I never meant to insult your father either or anybody else at that. I do guess (supposition) that we all here on this Forum do have the same passion for Aeronautical and Military History. That’s what links us, in spite of our social, economical, cultural, ethnical, religious, birthday dates, Historical knowledge, backgrounds and differences. AB: As far as I see or even re-reading what I posted, I have not: a) offended you personally; - I NEVER CLAIMED THAT b) offended or mentioned any member of your Family directly. I NEVER CLAIMED THAT EITHER. AB: Do you see, my late father passed away some years ago. He was my greatest friend and Example in life. He concluded his Ph.D in France, enabling us, as Family to live (4 years), to know and to visit your country, from North to South; which we consider one of the greatest experiences we had in life, as Human Beings. It is a lovely country indeed and we do love it as ours. - I find this extremely fine. (……) AB: What I want to express here Yves is that: Even if you interviewed him (Galland or his Wingman), or reviewed with Galland himself all his list of victories, during your visit in Germany; Galland’s memory, after thousands of combats and flights; circa of 100 hundred plus victories could have been affected by the time…One’s tend to mix events or things, if we do not have notes, a Logbook on our side, or additional data on our side. - Galland most probably HAD. I never asked him if he was able to prove what he had written for I was trying to be polite. AB: So, Yves, without documents, we will go nowhere regarding those Galland’s claims. - There ARE some documents: possibly Galland’s logbook and victory reports, I don’t know. Certainly the French loss reports with time and places matching what Galland published in his book many years before it was possible to scrutinize the French documents. See also my reply (above) to Stig Jarlevik. AB: Maybe you managed to interview the French pilot who survived or Galland’s wingman….do not know. - I never thought of that. I never imagined that some people would systematically reject all arguments and evidence I could produce (which I did). In my eyes I have proved Galland’s version correct. AB: Why your secret source is so secret that you can not share it here? - As I mentioned several times Galland was very ill at the time. He was lying in a hospital bed after heart surgery (one more – he had undergone at least 4 already, namely in the year 1984). Believe it or not, here we are entering an area of very personal, very private and sensitive things and feelings. Some people are very sensitive in such matters even after decades have elapsed (like myself, like millions of other people, about my father, who was murdered by some enemy soldiers when the war was almost over. At the same place a man riding his bicycle was shot dead by a soldier who wanted to get his bicycle in order to flee faster but the victim was deaf, didn’t hear anything like “Halt!” and the like behind him.). So my source can only be a member of Galland’s family or a member of the (numerous) medical team, or possibly one or several old fighter pilots. If I say who my source is this person, or these persons, could react with great indignation and be furious (and rightly so) so I want to ask first if I may reveal it. (…) or you could have found a French Air Force combat report supporting your theory for the 3rd June 1940, etc… - I did mention French sources several times. Look again. Wish you and yours a nice week, in health and peace. - Same to you (…) ASV 00.344 – what is this? ========================= Message to everybody it may concern (on discretion): About the source I refuse to reveal without having asked this “source” before: The English, the German and the French languages, and probably all other languages, have a few expressions which are relevant here: Privacy – Discretion – Decency – Good manners – Respect (of privacy) When one of your close friends or relatives is very ill and had surgery (like Adolf Galland 1992) you prefer the mentioned rules of behaviour to be observed. THE END |
Re: Galland’s victories on June 3, 1940 (Paris area) – A new element
This thread is going nowhere at great length, so I’m closing it down.
|
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:34. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net