[Jim Oxley]

Much has been made in history books of the experience gained by the Luftwaffe in Spain as a major contributing factor to it's early successes at the start of WWII. Along the lines of a cadre of battle experienced flyers leading a highly skilled peace-time trained air force. And is often used by historians to account for it's amazing success over many air forces in the early stages of the War.

Yet there were a number of countries who possessed an equal amount of battle experience. Italy's Regia Aeronautica fought in Spain for a similar period to that of the Luftwaffe and in Abbasynia. Japan, fought several air wars, in China and against the Russians in the Khalkin-Gol regin of Mongolia. Yet Italy's performance at the start of WWII was quite mediocre; and Japan, although gaining several resounding successes early on, drew many wrong conclusions on air fighting and suffered for it later in the War.

Now Russia had the most air fighting experience of any country - Allied or Axis - bar none. It fought an air war during the Russian revolution and it's aftermath (The Red and the White) up to 1920. It was heavily involved in the Spaniah Civil War for it's duration (sending many VVS frontline Squadron personnel into combat); the VVS provided equipment and personel to China in it's fight against Japan; in late 1937 it had it's first direct border war with Japan along the Amur River; another in July (to September) 1938 near Lake Khasan, 80 miles south west of Vladivostok; and the very serious confrontation in the Khalkin-Gol battles in 1939 (May to October). And shortly after that the VVS was heavily involved in the border war with Finland from November 1939 to March 1940.

So what was it about the Germans that allowed them to draw the correct conclusions to their experience in Spain; whereas Italy, Japan and Russia fail (who all had equal battle experience) failed to do so?