1939-45 airpower and professional historians

[FalkeEins]

....there is no controversy over Gisclon's book - and his 1,000 victories - his claims are just ridiculous ! And I must say you don't need to be a 'serious' historian to work that out...just check one date, 6 November 1939 (le combat des '9' contre '27') to see how he grossly inflates French victories..by a factor of two no less. Besides he can't even get his own score right - he maintains that he was an ace, although M. Lorant at the SHD (SHAA) only gives him four victories..

It is obvious that you don't like Gillet because he doesn't say what you want him to say - and it is pointless discussing the subject with you.. how did you put it in your last message - with no sense of irony - amateurs who think they know it all...? I know of no other translator who would add pages of text to a leading fighter pilot's memoir to balance the 'story'

As for Peter Cornwell's latest work - it seems to be based on the latest (French) research for claims from what I can tell - in other words, Gillet's ....that must be difficult for you...

Originally Posted by FalkeEins

....there is no controversy over Gisclon's book - and his 1,000 victories - his claims are just ridiculous ! (...) just check one date, 6 November 1939 (le combat des '9' contre '27') to see how he grossly inflates French victories..by a factor of two no less. Besides he can't even get his own score right - he maintains that he was an ace, although M. Lorant at the SHD (SHAA) only gives him four victories.

Obviously Mr. Anonymous FalkeEins (HawkOne) is a troll who is trying to destroy me again. Have you a name, you hero?

Here he is trolling again instead of contributing something constructive. I'll prove it now but after this I won't give him any reply for with such a charcter it will go on and on and on and on.

Firstly "Jean" Gisclon (actually Justin - I don't know why he felt like changing his first name, certainly not in order to hide behind it) was a very JUNIOR member of the 4th escadrille (12 pilots) of GC II/5 1939 and before : he was a sergent, which is the lowest NCO-rank, and he was, like many other pilots, a very young man. What he wrote about 30 years later no doubt was strongly influenced by his own impressions of the time, which possibly were not quite reliable. This is very common. The combat you mentioned, in France very famous (it was celebrated even in the mass media of the time), was fought by his own unit, GC II/5, but he didn't take part in this mission, which means that this time his CO Capitaine Reyné hadn't ordered him to taker part. In his first book he reported "ten victories, of which eight were certain".

Remember that Gisclon's book was published 1967 (41 years ago!), that it was some sort of a pioneer's work at the time and he didn't enjoy all the documents, knowledge and HINDSIGHT we now enjoy. At least HE was a fighter pilot and fought the powerful, very dangerous nazi enemy. It's easy to criticise others, hidden behind a pseudo. What outstanding historical work did you publish you nameless "Hawk"?

The fight which took place on November 6 was very vicious and involved 9 French fighters ("Curtiss") and alledgedly 27 Me 109 Ds but I never saw any clear indication of this number from the German side - I would like to; yes this is a question to all German readers. It could have been anything from 16 to 32 or more even though in theory 29 was possible too but not very likely because normally (except in the case of engine toruble etc.) they flew in 4s (Schwärme of 4). Gisclon wrote that the fighting "lasted for over 20 minutes", which is very long. Of course when the young French pilots came back they were extremely excited. There is no doubt that they had shot down, or hit, at least five 109s. In such circumstances it was very easy to shoot down the same E/A several times or to make many other errors resulting in overclaim. According to the very recently-published French book "Les Curtiss H-75 de l'Armée de l'Air", by Lionel Persyn, the unit - GC II/5 - filed official claims for 5 "victoires sûres" and 5 "victoires probables". Jochen Prien/Gerhard Stemmer/Peter Rodeike/Hans Ring mentioned four Me 109 D-1s "100 % destroyed", one "70 % destroyed" (considered destroyed) and three "damaged less than 10 %" (belly-landings in the countryside etc.). Four of the destroyed 109s fell on French territory, one (Uffz. Hennings) on German territory. This totals 8 but as we know Luftwaffe documents are not always entirely comprehensive and this would not be the first time that they would minimise their own losses, in particular after such a terrible licking (Göring summoned Hptmn Gentzen to his HQ to report on the same day!). This disaster had important consequences for this unit, JGr. 102. Even 5 destroyed and 3 heavily damaged, as compared to the French claims, filed by inexperienced French pilots (inexperienced in actual combat involving shooting in anger), is not really an enormous difference but I wouldn't be surprised at all if some day we discovered that 10 Me 109s were destroyed all right plus 5 damaged! In any case, even according to J. Prien et al, 8 were shot down including 5 which were destroyed. See Prien's volume N° 2 of his purple series, page 526. To be fair it has to be added that Lt Houzé, who brilliantly had led this mission in spite of a very unfavourable initial tactical situation (the German fighters being higher etc. and their pilots having won a lot of combat experience over Poland), had had half a dozen 109s constantly on his tail and he had to belly-land his fighter, riddled with bullets, on his own airfield at Toul. So the score reads at least 5 + 3 to 1. Two of the German flight leaders (Staffelkapitäne) were killed, two other pilots were taken prisoners by French troops. Uffz. Hennings made a belly-landing (70 % damage) on German territory and was badly wounded. Let us also remember that all involved pilots were aged about 20-28. Today you're almost considered a child a this age (which is mighty exaggerated)...

Only four victories were confirmed by French HQ with four "probables", which matches the German losses very exactly. What are you complaining about, you troll?


[qutote]It is obvious that you don't like Gillet because he doesn't say what you want him to say[/quote]

- You're right for once! What I want him to say is the truth - as far as it can be known - and at least publish no bullshit : the latter is fully possible, there is no excuse. Sadly he does the latter systematically, he seems to enjoy bullshit like others, and he, too, enjoys libelling and insulting those who do the job.

You have unmasked yourself as a troll. Don't expect any more replies from me.

[CJE]

What outstanding historical work did you publish you nameless "Hawk"?

And what about yours?

Originally Posted by CJE

What outstanding historical work did you publish you nameless "Hawk"?

And what about yours?

Reply : And what about yours Mr. CJE?