[Marius]

Franek,


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marius
in the origin combat report Skalski mentioned about one aircraft he shot at and then saw it crash on the ground. The second crash (of a second plane) was added in next report 1941 (!!). If you have found the second crash in original Polish documents from September 1939 so please tell me where you did

You have not seen the original report, have you? Skalski's report, written in haste, lacks a very important sentence - fate of the enemy aircraft, either it crashed or not. There are more period documents confirming that Skalski was credited with two kills, so the second kill must have been reported to crash. It is not my problem that you cannot understand that.

Pawlak published Skalski`s origin report (Samotne zalogi, page 82. Look also Lotnictwo 5/05). In the report there is only one crash of a German aircraft - certainly Bf 110 of Müllenheim-Rehberg, also attacked by Lesniewski. The other attacked aircraft flew away in formation and Skalski couldn`t chase it. Will you deny it?

Quote:
German propaganda booklet isn`t more important. I used such sources only then if they agreed with original German documents, that`s all. I sorted out books with propaganda only. You know that, because I wrote about this point in my book.
I was clear - you consider German propaganda more valuable than Polish documents.

Sorry, but I don`t understand. Why do you think this? Page number please.

Quote:
Perhaps you will find more Polish documents (perhaps, have you seen German documents?), but most of them were created even years after the campaign. As you confirm original Polish documents were lost during evacuation so what are you talking about?
I am curious how you came to such a conclusion having not researched Polish archives? There is a number of original 1939 Polish documents and diaries, this suplemented by hundreds of reports which were written following arrival to France. There is plenty to choose.

Franek, one of Skalski`s report was written in 1941 (!!), as many others too. You are writing about Polish documents written in France (earliest October/November 1939). That is right. And therefore you confirm that most of the origin Polish documents were going lost!

Quote:
Next point:
Where did I write that Polish pilots were poorly trained cowards and murderes? Could you give an example with page number etc. from by books?
Have not you read your own articles and books?!

This is not the answer to my question! Please give the page number.

Quote:
Yes I know what book Jim is speaking about. In this book too Cynk maintains Polish fighters destroyed 100 German aircraft (Cynk does not mean "claims", but lost aircraft by the Germans - that`s a big difference!). But concerning "paraphrasing", it makes a big difference when you are writing about losses you can find in many sources (even books). Cynk couldn`t do that, because there exist no books on this topic (I mean Luftwaffe in Poland comparable to my books). I used all Polish publications since 1947. My intention was to fill the German action with known Polish details. On the other hand it wasn`t my intention to describe Polish action and then fill it with German details... If I understand you correctly, you mean that all Polish autors are liars and I should visit the Sikorski Institute to verify what they wrote?!
That is another point. You have used everything written since 1947. Actually Polish archives were practically unavailable for the Polish authors up until 1990s. How do you expect the books to be completelly reliable?

So you confirm that Polish authors wrote fairy-tales? Great...
Did you find something that is contradictory to my research? Source? Document? Please give more details.

Quote:
On 2 September a parachute was observed and that is right. The only pilot who parachuted was Ofw. Weng of Müllenheim-Rehberg`s aircraft (I./ZG 1).
I asked you in vain, what is the evidence Weng ever parachuted? How can you be so sure, if in the same article you claim that you cannot verify losses of KG3?

My dear! Even the GQM records are relating about one man parachuted of I./ZG 1 (in the origin FSA what means Fallschirmabsprung - bale out). Also Hans Weng survived the war and reported later about his baling out and captivity in Poland (see for example one of the Jägerblatt issues).
I cleared my mistake with KG 3 later in my answer to J.B.Cynk. In the meanwhile I have found the archive documents of Prof.Trenel (BA/MA Freiburg), who confirms that there were no engagemnets between KG 3 and Polish fighters on 2.9.

Quote:
There is no evidence of other German aircraft lost in this battle. Not in archives, not in personal losses, nowhere. And where are the other observerd victories and where is the evidence for that? Please give me more details.
I wrote it clear. One of the airmen of the bomber aircraft was reported to bail out.

What bomber type? Who reported this? What is the name of the airman? What unit?

Quote:
Concerning the 4 September battle; isn`t Pniak the only one who reported something about 2-engined aircraft?
No.

Okay. Who else reported about two-engined aircraft? Source, page number?


Quote:
Isn`t true that on 2.9. the pilots of III/4 recognized the Bf 110`s as Dornier Do 17?
It is true - similar errors were made a year later, when Me 110 was well known.

Okay. So you mean they didn`t recognized the types of German aircraft one year later in England, but they did it already in France 1939/40 (see above)?
And so your conclusion is III/4 fouhgt on 4.9. with Bf 110 of ZG 1??

Quote:
Isn`t true that on 4.9. they recognized the Bf 109 as Bf 110?
No. They never reported Me 110s! They are reported as Do 17s. You see, in Polish there is a clear difference between one and two.

Okay. See Cynk "Polskie Lotnictwo..." page 247. Bajan`s list on 4.9.:
kpt. Lesniewski 1 Me 110.


Quote:
Other pilots for example of III/2 took Ju 87 for Do 17!
This is only your supposition.

So read about the fighting with Ju 87 on 1 and 2 September between III/2 and I./StG 2.

Quote:
Lesniewski couldn`t have claimed a Bf 110 on 4.9., because two days earlier he recognized this type as Do 17? You can be sure he would claim a Do 17 again!
You know better because you have never seen any original Polish document.

Okay, thank you very much. You are really helpful.

Quote:
Will you say Do 17 and Bf 110 were the same aircraft? I think Lesniewski saw the differences of aircraft he shot at 2.9. and 4.9. very well, but he couldn`t attach the right type, as most Polish fighter pilots at that time.
Combat of Leśniewski was witnessed by Rolski. He identified the enemy type as a Me 110 already in France.

Oh yes... in France, but not in Poland. That is the big difference.

Quote:
So isn`t true that Polish pilots couldn`t recognize German types?
It is apparent the German pilots invented all their victories over polish fighter aircraft because they could not recognise P-11 and P-24.

Surely it was for Germans very difficult to differ P.11 and P.24. They are very similar and the German pilots was told the Poles were flying the newest aicraft. But no way. It makes a bigger difference when you cannot differ fighter from bomber aircraft.

Quote:
The German documents are very reliable; they confirm that on 2.9. I./ZG 1 was engaged. And they confirm that on 4.9. I.(J)/LG 2 was involved. Will you deny these facts? And my last question: what is here ridiculous?! These are very reliable informations.
If the German documents are so reliable, please tell me at what time I.(J)/LG2 claims took place? Can you exclude Leśniewski was downed by eg. I/ZG1?

On 4.9. I.(J)/LG 2 surely fought with III/4. Or could you report another Polish squadron did?
We know I./ZG 1 is a problem. But there is no evidence of downed Bf 110 on this day. In Poland Bf 110`s operated as "Rotte" (two-aircraft formation). Pniak reported about 3 aircraft that were attacking him. Certainly a "Kette" - 3 Ju 87 of III./StG 2, not 3 Bf 110`s. I think Pniak didn`t recognized the aircraft right. Your argumentation is weak. Other sources for twin-engined aircraft?


Quote:
Something more to Pniak. He saw his victims crash on ground!!. The first time on 2.9. and the second time on 4.9. As I researched and wrote in my books and articles this can`t be true. I am most convinced this could be a "black sheep" in the family of fighter pilots.
There is no such quote in Pniak's report. As yet you was unable to identify the enemy of Pniak, so I am very curious how you can exclude any losses? Overclaim happens but the only deliberate false claims I am awared of were made by pilots of JG27.

Oh, you are wrong about Pniak. See Cynk Polskie Lotnictwo... page 182 for 2.9. Pniak reported that his victim - a Dornier - hit the ground.
On 4.9. see page 242. Pniak reported the aircraft he attacked hit the wood. Both reports are origin combat reports written on 4 September!
III./StG 2 had one aircraft totally lost and this one was downed by Lachowicki-Czechowicz. Perhaps Pniak wasn`t a black sheep but only had a big fancy...


Quote:
Franek, you think all Polish accounts even written many years after are only facts, are you sure? You mean (for patriotic purposes?) there can`t be a black sheep in the family, but you are wrong.
Pniak's report has been written just after the combat. The problem is that Polish documents quite often disagree with yours, so you always tend to ignore the former.

I explained many things and gave sources and page numbers. Now it is your turn writing something more logical.

Marius