Lent papers - a question

[Franek Grabowski]

Marius

But it is most probably. If you have better informations so please give them to us.

There is no evidence that 114 EM met enemy aircraft. Ferić also described the patrol and had not mention any combats. Fullstop.

Franek, nothing fits perfectly in your story. I think you are making a pretty show again here.

We shall see.

1.The author was never quoting the account or memories of Lt. Reither. So we do not know what Reither said or didn`t said.

The one does not need to provide a quote to provide views of someone.

2.The author never wrote it was a single Polish fighter. He wrote the aircraft was downed by Polish fighter, that`s a big difference and you know it.

In Polish there is no need to add a numeral. If there is a mention of a fighter it does mean a fighter and not fighters.

3.The author means the Dornier was probably shot down by a pilot of dyon III/3 (Nowak). But Nowak shot down a Dornier of I./StG 76 in a completely different area. No word about Wroblewski.

The author was apparently not awared of Wróblewski's account.

4.The author never looked at any German document.

Did not need to.

5.Even J.B.Cynk (Polskie lotnictwo mysliwskie...) is not confirming the date 13.9. and he is right. Look to the airfields where and when the unit was transferring to in those days. And look where Wroblewski started his mission. It was surely earlier than on 13.9.

Wróblewski wrote: "My only probably shot down aircraft was Heinkel He 111 on 13 September. It was this way - Łuszczów. We arrived previous day, in that constant travel through Poland, from Ostrożec. (...) At the time of lunch, when there was nobody by aircraft, I make a decision. I will fly - no doubt I will catch something, this is a time of daily bombing.
Take off - I fly over Lublin. (...)"
According to other documents and accounts, 111 EM indeed moved to Łuszczów from Ostrożec on 12 September but according to some documents, the same evening moved to nearby Jabłonna. Some aircraft may have actually remained at Łuszczów and move on the next day. Cynk assumed, as clearly stated in his book, that Wróblewski actually intercepted He 111 of KG55 but this is his misinterpretation.

6.What lone pilot attacked (mainly) the Do 17Z 3Z+KM? It was surely Wroblewski. The KTB`s report is confirming the whole observations of Wroblewski as he attacked. Wroblewski thought he hit the bomber because it changed course or accelerated and so on. According to the German document the pilot of the Dornier was flying higher, then he changed the course and so on - to allow the gunner taking the fighter under fire. Indeed both accounts very similar.

Wróblewski: "(...) I am catching the last aircraft. I am closing to about 80-100m. Nobody is shooting from the aircraft as yet. I already see contrails from the neighbouring ones. They are shooting. Finally I open fire. I am firing two bursts - o happinness - smoke is emmitting from the starboard engine and Heinkel is slopping on the right. With most curiousity I am looking what will happen. I see how Heinkel, smoking badly and shalowly diving, went forward - likely applied full power. I am still shooting but the distance is much greater. I am still shooting and I am following the wounded escaping Heinkel into the middle of the formation. (...) And Heinkel went, perhaps dying, but my despair is great - only a probable..."
I see no confirmation of your comments.

7.Wroblewski himself never reported about a confirmed victory, only a probable. The uncritical J.Pawlak (Polskie eskadry...) even added Wroblewski only one "damaged". Bajan`s commission victory list: completely nothing.

As I have noted previously, you have no idea about Bajan' commission. At the time corrections were supplied, Wróblewski was already dead.

8.Kowalczyk wrote later the Polish pair did not contacted the enemy, because he wrote down only what he remembered. And that`s the problem with most Polish "documents" - we better should say memories - written after the Polish campaign. There is no serious comparison to German war diaries of the units.

It seems memories were sometimes better than the documents.

9.We do not know any other mission flown by Polish fighters on this day. But we can assume there weren`t other missions flown, because Polish fighter units were constantly on the move in those days and almost completely without fuel.

Indeed and it is noted by Wróblewski himself.

The dates of missions, losses and victories in German war diaries are highly accurate. You cannot place the date at 13.9. because somebody remembered after many years it was 13.9.

Wróblewski remembered it already in 1939, when he was filing the account. 13 is not an ordinary date. IIRC Reither also remembered it 13 September. It is further confirmed by Luftwaffe loss list, that mentions one Do 17E lost on 13 September due to fighters, although in Sandomierz area, which is some 80 kms SW Lublin - no Polish claims there.
Accuracy of diaries? Sorry!

So you furtheron mean your story fits perfectly?

Yes, everything fits perfectly. The problem is that you are inventing history instead of researching it. That is why I find your research not trustworthy.
I find further discussion with you a waste of time.
Bye

[Marius]

Franek,

I`am sorry, but you are really using the loss list of the Generalquartiermeister to confirm your story?! This document isn`t a war diary. It is a simple inaccurate loss list of the High Command with many gaps and errors.
The loss of the Do 17 of KG 77 was indeed noted there a day later (as many others). This conclusion is logical because all other documents are stating the 12.9.; the war diary of KG 77 (most accurate document!) as well as for example the loss lists of Luftflottenkommando 4. I quote:

Verlustmeldung vom 12.9.39.
...
A2., 1. Uffz Meyer to Bergte II./KG 77 F, 2. Ltn.Reither II./KG 77 B, 3. Uffz. Bergs II./KG 77 BF. Weiteres noch nicht bekannt.

BA/MA Freiburg, RL 7/460

I don`t know what your problem is, but you will never confirm that a German document could be more accurate than Polish (in this case even many documents). And after that you will never confirm that your story could be wrong. It seems to be a kind of war against Germans. Or Polish honour is forbidding it or the hell knows what it is.

Furthermore I was asking you for the Polish fighter unit which flew the sortie against the German formation, because you are doing as you would had a better information here. But apparently you haven`t. It is just bla, bla, bla...
But the best argument is that the author of the Polish article had no need to look at any German document (!). Very good Franek. I cannot discuss on on a such primitive level.
I quit.

Marius

[Franek Grabowski]

Marius

I`am sorry, but you are really using the loss list of the Generalquartiermeister to confirm your story?! This document isn`t a war diary. It is a simple inaccurate loss list of the High Command with many gaps and errors.

Perhaps not everything was erroneous.

The loss of the Do 17 of KG 77 was indeed noted there a day later (as many others). This conclusion is logical because all other documents are stating the 12.9.; the war diary of KG 77 (most accurate document!) as well as for example the loss lists of Luftflottenkommando 4. I quote:
Verlustmeldung vom 12.9.39.
...
A2., 1. Uffz Meyer to Bergte II./KG 77 F, 2. Ltn.Reither II./KG 77 B, 3. Uffz. Bergs II./KG 77 BF. Weiteres noch nicht bekannt.
BA/MA Freiburg, RL 7/460

Independent accounts of Reither and Wróblewski, GQ loss list all indicating 13 September. I find this a little bit weird coincidence.

I don`t know what your problem is, but you will never confirm that a German document could be more accurate than Polish (in this case even many documents).

I know.

And after that you will never confirm that your story could be wrong. It seems to be a kind of war against Germans. Or Polish honour is forbidding it or the hell knows what it is.

I have not invented story of Wróblewski (coming from Ferić's diary at PISM, London and quoted by Cynk) nor Reither (published in SP magazine). You have invented a combat of 114 EM by manipulating narrative based on Kowalczyk's diary (PISM/Cynk). If pointing your errors is a war or anti-Germanism, then yes, please.

Furthermore I was asking you for the Polish fighter unit which flew the sortie against the German formation, because you are doing as you would had a better information here. But apparently you haven`t. It is just bla, bla, bla...

I know better - there is no information of any Polish unit engaging German aircraft in Lublin area at the time! I CANNOT PROVIDE A PROOF FOR SOMETHING THAT DID NOT HAPPEN!

But the best argument is that the author of the Polish article had no need to look at any German document (!). Very good Franek. I cannot discuss on on a such primitive level.

Well, an explanation for other readers.
The article, published in early 1990s, was about friendship between Reither and Czapliński (or Czaplicki?), OC for Lublin district. The article (as I remember, I have read it a few years ago) did not contain first hand accounts but described the events from the third person's view. It was described that Reither was downed by a fighter in Lublin area on 13 (IIRC) September, taken POW and brought to Czapliński. He provided them with escort and send to a prison or somewhere like that. When POWs left the building a mob appeared and wanted to lynch them - it was just after the German raid. Then Czapliński appeared and made a speach, that such behaviour is inapropriate to say the least and that Poles are civilised nation that seeks no revenge and does care about POWs. People went away and the German crew was escorted to prison.
Post-war Reither contacted Czapliński and expressed him his gratitude for saving his life. They remained in touch until Czapliński's death, and then Reither corresponded with a son of Czapliński, presumably until he passed away a few years ago.
I do not remember the date but I remember that it struck me that Reither's account fitted perfectly to Wróblewski's one, so I am certain it was 13 September.
I do not see a slightest point of using any bloody German documents in such an article.

I quit.

Bye

[John Beaman]

OK, you guys have done it again. I am locking this thread.

In spite of the good contributions both of you have made in the past and certainly have the potential to do in the future, This Board is not the place for these meaningless personal attacks on each other's information and/or beliefs. This is a waste of everyone's time and Board space. I do not care what gripes either of you have with the other, but TAKE IT OFF THIS BOARD.

If I see one more thread started by either of you that contains even a hint of a personal attack, I will request that Ruy ban you from the Board for 60 days.