[Mirek Wawrzynski]

John
It is a matter of disagreement on issues of presentation of history, specifically the presentation of data and information and on this basis the formation of knowledge about the air war.

Gave a good example of Manson, I know his book about the Battle of Britain, as well as others: the Hawker Hurricane and Avro Lancaster. The overall consensus at the time of 30-40 years ago these books were very good, after 30 years longer. Sam is in these books, various faults, when I wrote various articles about foreign hurricanes (Belgium, Finland, Yugoslavia, Romania, Russia). You can not do yourself a book that there are no errors or omissions. From my own experience I know that the text you have written 5, 10 years ago, contains inaccuracies and errors. There are new information, memories, develop. Knowledge is the update. It is the norm.

If I take a book on air war over the Polish, written by Jerzy B. Cynk "Polish Air Force Fighter in Battle in September," (text in Polish), then at the end of a large book (of similar size to Manson's book about the battle of Britain), is a summary of "Evaluation of the Luftwaffe Combat Operations." Cynk provides, inter alia, that the LW has implemented over the Polish approximately 33,000 sorties. German crew dropped about 19,600 tons (over Poland and the West, the aggregated data, which fell over the Polish minimum of 19,000 tons of bombs?). It also gives flight crew personal loss: killed - 189, injured - 126 and missing - 224 (p. 411-417). Are given the loss of equipment and irreversible damage too.

For works of Marius Emmerlinga (three studies on: fighters, bombers and dive bombers), it is not given such a simple summary of data. Do not expect the author to do, for example, a list that made the JG 77 sorties and KG 3 had done it 346 and for StG 2 such flights were about 1233 (?). In some regiments it is possible to determine if the other is not. But it is possible to make such summary for each branches of LW.

I believe that if someone spent some time in the archive, it's about his work demonstrates the ability to draw conclusions and write a summary.

In three books Marius no such thing. I believe that he lacks the skills to write summaries, he as the author can not do this and so, not everyone has such powers, but it goes very well write "phone book" (please do not treat this as a negative determination, and as a statement) - which It is also useful. To write a "telephone book" and have put a lot of effort and work.

I, as a reader of his books, do not know about the overall effort of the Luftwaffe over the Polish crew. Such data in the summary is not - they are only general data loss in the equipment, there is no data the number of flights, number of tasks, the number of bombs dropped (in general) and the list of loss: killed, wounded and missing in action.

I do not know whether more flights carried over the Polish example, Me 109 and Me 110? Also, I do not know if, for example, the crew performed the sorties of bombers, and on this occasion dropped bombs?
However, I know the book Marius Emmerling, that he stands next to the archive and strongly supports a Federal Archives and the walls of the building that he spent investigating the fight against the Luftwaffe over Poland 15 and more years.
After so many years by now should have definite ideas, examined archives, that such information should be general in its publications, and what is not. Are given for this other very detailed information about the flight time, number of crew, etc., allocated to days or even hours, or "phone book". Such a presentation of history has its great advantages but also disadvantages. If you want to compare the effort of the Polish crew Lufwaffe a better book is a work of Cynk (he also had some historical data German).

And for that matter.

Sincerely,
Mirek Wawrzyński