Eagle Days: Life and Death for the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain

[John Vasco]

WW2TV is a payment channel. I'll try to watch, but I'm not paying to watch youtube...

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by John Vasco

WW2TV is a payment channel. I'll try to watch, but I'm not paying to watch youtube...

Is it? I've watched loads of them and never paid — I don't watch it live, so maybe that's the difference?

[Siko54]

I’ve watched it live and never paid, I am not sure that is correct John unless something has changed recently. Find out tonight I guess!

[John Vasco]

I clicked on the vid and it came up with a pay screen. That's all.

I'll look in, if I can, and see what is said.

[John Vasco]

This is what the blurb about the book said:
Eagle Days transforms the Luftwaffe's historical role during the RAF's 'Finest Hour' from a cartoonish antagonist to a multidimensional, flawed-yet-formidable opponent. The narrative contains not just the voices of the air crews who conducted the fighting, but uniquely never-before-translated primary source material of other contemporary eyewitnesses, (Luftwaffe's paratroopers, anti-aircraft gunners and air signalmen). Eagle Days will offer all fans of this period a refreshing, comprehensive and exciting new account of the Luftwaffe's real experiences during the Battle of Britain.

I've just spent 75 minutes listening to a general chat between the author and the two presenters, with about 4-5 questions in total from the 'chat' stream. All 'cosy' questions.

Not a single second about the in-depth content of the book, and what is new therein. She talked about the different phases of the BoB (which we all know anyway), and even got it wrong when she said fighter-bombers appeared in the later part of the BoB!

I'll buy the book to see if there is anything new in there. But I want 75 minutes of my life back! Draw your own conclusions from my last sentence...

[Nick Beale]

I watched it over breakfast this morning and my reaction is somewhat more generous than John's, but not to the extent of immediately putting in an order for the book. Dr. Taylor evidently speaks German and has gone into some interesting sources in Germany. It sounded as if she'd used ADI(K) prisoner interrogations but I'll be interested to see if she's also exploited the SRA reports (covertly recorded conversations) which are the Germans "in their own words".

The discussion was, for me, too much about fighters. Stephen Bungay (who did get a mention) made the valuable point way back that the whole issue for the RAF was to bring down bombers. She spoke sense about the Ju 87 force (which, incidentally was the only Luftwaffe arm bigger at the end of the Battle than it had been at the start). There was acknowledgement that the Luftwaffe was fighting a integrated defensive system.

Galland of course featured in the discussion, but I wouldn't trust his perspective. I've come to view The First and the Last as an exercise in positioning for the post-war era, both for himself and the "old guard" of the Jagdwaffe. Yes, he was there but in that book he was, in modern terms, promoting a brand.

(P.S. John: re your point about the Jabos — I think she was quoting Galland rather than saying that was her view, but I could be wrong about that).

I'll be interested to see how far the book recognises what a dire state the Luftwaffe was in at the end of the French campaign and the work needed to re-establish its serviceability; to upgrade and get established on French bases; fit more armour, bullet-resistant glass and defensive guns to the bombers; and find enough lifejackets and dinghies for the coming overwater operations. They had a lot of work to do to get ready for a new campaign.

[Chris Goss]

My concern are these new sources. Like John V, Peter Cornwall and The like, over the past 40+ years I contacted primary sources like veterans and there are none left so what else has she turned up? Likewise flak and fallschirmjäger- what exactly was their influence in the battle per se?

[John Vasco]

Nick: I don't believe she spoke sense about the Ju 87 force. We know that after the combats of 16th & 18th August that the Ju 87s were not used in force again, but she said they were not used because of the distance to London. What? Between 18th August and 7th September, as you know Nick, the Luftwaffe hammered at airfields, and they were well within the range of the Ju 87 had those units been based at the Pas de Calais.
As you say, the discussion was too much about the Bf 109.
I concur with your view re Galland. His post-war 'k' report (of which I have a complete copy) was the basis of his book, and was very much as you say.
I couldn't believe the mention of paratroopers and AA units. Yeah, paratroopers may come into play once any kind of invasion was attempted, but with regard to the aerial fighting over England, paratroopers had nothing to do with that. Ditto for Luftwaffe AA units.
She talked about the mental state of Luftwaffe crews. Did not the mental strain also apply to RAF fighter pilots also? Of course it did - she actually referenced the famous photo of Brian Lane. Nothing new there, and I was told stories from Luftwaffe veterans regarding this matter that I would never publish.
She also mentioned the initial bombing of Germany in 1940, and the fear of the population. What has that got to do with the Battle taking place over southern England? Absolutely nothing.
She closed by taking a swipe at Luftwaffe aircrew, and derided the fact that those who had interviewed them post-war looked on them with a certain amount of affection, as being just ordinary people. Her inference was that they were not. Her PhD was on 'The Luftwaffe and National Socialism in the Third Reich', so one might conclude here that her view was not entirely objective. I do not know whether she ever interviewed any Luftwaffe veterans - I suspect not. The likes of myself, Peter Cornwell, Chris Goss, Andy Saunders, and a whole host of others met and interviewed them, and I believe did not view them as a host of raging Nazis. She may hold that opinion of them; I certainly do not. They had a passion for flying. By dint of age and place of birth they flew for the Luftwaffe. That is all as far as I am concerned.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by John Vasco

Nick: I don't believe she spoke sense about the Ju 87 force. We know that after the combats of 16th & 18th August that the Ju 87s were not used in force again, but she said they were not used because of the distance to London. What?

To reinforce your point, here's some numbers I picked up from Bundesarchiv RL 2-IV/13: Deutsche Kampf- und Seeflugzeuge.- Leistungsvergleich (Sept.1939–Sept.1944)

Eindringtiefe (radius of action)
Bf 109 E = 200–250 km
Bf 110 C-1 = 400 km
Ju 87 B-1 = 250 km (with 500 kg bombload)
He 111 H-1 = 1000 km (1000 kg)
He 111 P = 960 km (1000 kg)
Do 17 Z-1 = 610 km (500 kg)
Do 17 Z-2, Z-3 = 330 km (1000 kg)
Ju 88 A-1 = 1000 km (1000 kg)

In other words, the Ju 87 could reach any target a Bf 109 could.

[richdlc]

I can’t add much to this except to say that Victoria is lovely, I’ve met her. She did a piece for Axis Wings, and she’s passionate. Like every historian though she’s always learning new information all the time, so might her opinions change over time? I don’t know.
And this might be a sweeping statement but I think men are much more anal about the minutiae than women. Don’t shoot me down in flames for saying that!