Luftwaffe Myths

[Ruy Horta]

As the host I'd like to make a couple of comments.

Unfortunately much of this first attempt carries the hallmark of troll activity.

1. new member
2. anonymous (with a provoking name "killed lawyers")
3. calling out the community
4. presenting a "challenge"

The post isn't a question nor an effort to gather information, it is in fact a challenge. The question for us is to judge if it is worth the interest and time to answer. If YOU are genuine enough to warrant more than a raised eyebrow.

My instinct tells me that I'll probably have to ban you within a week or a month at most, but you deserve a chance like everyone does who participates in this community.

Lesson One, the Luftwaffe is more than just Jagdwaffe claims and Hartmann.

Lesson Two, distrust all propaganda from both sides of the Hill

Lesson Three, look at the war across the board, at each theatre at each stage, separate and in context of the whole.

Lesson Four, don't assume that the success formula for one combattant is automatically the same for all the others (dogma).

Final Lesson for now, don't assume anything about this forum. It is a community as varied as you'll come across, but with a higher number of experienced (research, writing, publishing) contributors and even a couple of WW2 veterans.

So "Killed Lawyers" lets see how you fare in this community. You've already lost a friend with the manner of your entry.

[piero]

I agree totally with Mr. Horta

piero

[Kildlawyrs]

Mr. Hurta:

My apologies sir If I have some how offended you. Such was not my intention. I had heard of the 12 O Clock High forum, and thought that this would be a good place to exchange ideas. I did not intend to "challenge" any one or even to throw down a gauntlet. Rather my aim was to listen to what others might have to say about this topic. I thought that it would be an intereting and legitimate discussion point here, but perhaps I am unfamiliar with how this forum works. If so, I would be grateful if you could enlighten me; believe me, I am not looking for a fight.

My anoymous name is a take on William Shakespeare and is not "Killed Lawyers". Since I had seen other members posting here anonymously, I was under the impression that this was in fact an accepted practice. I have no problem in posting my actual name if that is what is required.

Again, my humble apologies if I am unfamiliar with how things are done on this forum. From what I have seen, it seems like a rather knowledgable lot of players. Perhaps I can learn something while contributing something in return.

[Oxby R]

Gentlemen – just a couple of thoughts. I think someone needs to highlight the fact that concepts like 'performance' and 'operational effectiveness' can be measured in ways other than simplistic one-on-one 'kills'. Seems many people are afflicted by this unhealthy interest in focussing on the 'micro' picture - i.e. the ‘kills’ made exclusively by individual fighter pilots - whilst often negating the immense contribution (and courage) of many other types of aircrew working together in teams. The bomber crews in particular - for my money I think deserve more exposure. They endured a far riskier existence and a higher chop rate at all stages of the war. And how many of them are remembered as heroes - aside of the Dambusters, I mean ?

For myself I can only speak about the nightfighter war with any authority. Here it was not so much a case of who was the better pilot - or even who was the more skilful flier. It was more complex than that. The aerial war at night used new technology, and radar of course to detect and locate the enemy. It became a case of who could creep up on whom without being detected and position oneself in such a way to be able to deliver a sudden and devastating blow. Less a case of chivalry - more a case of 'legitimate murder'. To be successful required good AI equipment, an aircraft with decent cannon - and a flight crew prepared to work together. Here it was again usually the teamwork, communication and co-operation between pilot and nav/rad and GCI which produced results. But for public consumption - it's just not that sexy a story, is it ? Neither is all this talk of 'top scoring pilots' and whether the figures stack up. It's kid's stuff really. Of course some of the figures will have been ‘adjusted’ upwards for reasons of propaganda - such as the perceived need to produce a hero on the home front when the war was progressing badly. People will always need to have something to believe in particularly when things all around seem to be falling apart. So, from a completely apolitical & neutral stance, I can quite understand why the Nazi regime needing to produce heroes in the same way as Britain needed nightfighter heroes such as John Cunningham in 1941. But gentlemen, contrary to rumour Cunningham’s eyesight was not improved substantially by eating vast quantities of carrots. Nor was he personally responsible for the little fabrication about carrots enhancing night vision– no, that was down to the British Government. Perfectly harmless you might say...

What is not perfectly harmless is a discussion which centres on ‘overstated or exaggerated kills’. What’s the point ? Doesn’t it make you feel just a little uncomfortable, even if they were ‘the enemy’ at that time ? Why should that be, I wonder? Maybe we feel uncomfortable with this, because most of the individuals involved are no longer with us - and are not here to answer for themselves. Whatever side they fought on, maybe it’s a little late in the day to point fingers, and destroy reputations of individuals when the regime they fought for may have played a significant role in the production of that so-called ‘war hero’ anyway.

Again, just my two pennith ! atb richard