[rof120]

Originally Posted by Jochen Prien

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

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.