Red Stars – Black Cross’s Ally over Poland. Soviet Aviation over East Part of Poland in IX, X 1939, a New Book

[Franek Grabowski]

Nobody denies that both RWD-8 and PWS-26 were primary trainers, something like Tiger Moth and Avro Tutor, respectively. To claim that those 1930s aircraft were essentially WWI designs sounds ridiculous to say the least, however.
Nonetheless you have not answered a very simple question - should be sorties like liaison, reconnaissance and attacking ground targets, all under enemy fire, considered combat missions, and if not, why?

[Vitellius]

Certainly attacking ground targets under enemy fire is a combat action. However combat action carried out by non-combat planes is very odd especially they possessed flight characteristic fairly close to World War I planes.

It is not ridiculous that someone sent those pilots for death like kamikaze...

[lingodog]

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

should be sorties like liaison, reconnaissance and attacking ground targets, all under enemy fire, considered combat missions, and if not, why?

If you are in an aircraft that is, or is likely to be, under attack by enemy aircraft or ground fire whilst fulfilling an authorised duty you are undertaking a combat mission (IMHO).

[Mirek Wawrzynski]

Vitellius. That is full sad truth about poor Polish Aviation crushed by Luftwaffe in a week. Luftwaffe did not need any "Red Stars" ally to successfully accomplish its job!

Yes, LW had easily finished Polish Lotnictwo Wojskowe without any VVS RKKA support, it is true and obvious for over >60 years, but as I see till now not for you? Wow!

Where are you come from? From Mars? I think so.

LW did the same next in 1940 with other air forces finishing them very fast too over: Denmark, Norway, Holland, Belgium, and France but not over GB, in 1941 you can add Yugoslavian and Greece. This is so obvious, that I can not understand your claims to this topic?

Probably you are not educated in general political history or you have big gap in your maid about this part of history?

Hitler had needed only Stalin agreement and pact to begin WW II.

Stalin had used this situation and get as much as possible from Hitler in 1939-41: ½ Poland, all Baltic countries, some Finland + Romania in 1940 too. This was the main reason of Soviet “help” in Hitler’s war.
Soviet used then also own aviation over: Poland and Baltic countries, over Finland, and Romania too. It was normal modern war. Probably you are not aware this? I think so!

Better for you to read some political history books before you had begun such empty and directly trolling talking.

PS.
PWS-26 was twice attacked by I-16s, also was fired by Germans ground troops too.
On 1 X 39 the landing place was bombed by Soviet light bombers, which had damaged 2x RWD-8 – not flyable later.

Of course for you it would be not any case to talking about any kind of air war or even combat mission. Very Funny attitude but it is very stupid one as for me.

Regards,
mw

[Franek Grabowski]

Well, if everyone agrees those were combat missions, then how about those flown by unarmed Cubs and Austers? And were the latter like WWI planes?
This was as much the same kind of sorties. The fact is that they were much more dangerous, but those men, finding those aircraft, volunteered for them. That is the nature of war, that it requires risk and sacrifice.

[Ruy Horta]

If you discuss unarmed Cubs and Austers you might as well look at the definition of combat rules by the forces operating them, instead of simply making up our own rules. Most combattants had elaborate systems defining what a constituted combat mission (or its equivalent with or without encountering any enemy forces).

However once you fire at or throw bombs at the enemy the point is mute, regardless if you are flying the most modern or obsolete aircraft in the sky.

[lingodog]

Originally Posted by Ruy Horta

If you discuss unarmed Cubs and Austers you might as well look at the definition of combat rules by the forces operating them, instead of simply making up our own rules. Most combattants had elaborate systems defining what a constituted combat mission (or its equivalent with or without encountering any enemy forces).

However once you fire at or throw bombs at the enemy the point is mute, regardless if you are flying the most modern or obsolete aircraft in the sky.

Sorry Ruy, can't agree with you here. Don't forget that an unarmed machine can correct artillery fall of shot, or radio observations during reconnaissance that brings in strike aircraft. The pilot of an unarmed, unescorted light plane is at considerable risk. I doubt he would consider that a moot point.

[Vitellius]

Some word of explanation is needed here!

Now I fully understand why Poles had to flight combat missions with unarmed or WWI-style planes. That is obvious taken into account their air forces and air defense system were destroyed by Luftwaffe in a first week of fighting. After 7th September Poles were able to shoot down only about 1,5 German combat plane daily on average!

So I do not understand what is this book about??? There were practically no Polish air units capable to fight Soviet air forces in 17th September because deplorable remnants of Polish military aviation escaped to Romania that day!

[Franek Grabowski]

Oh, British rules constituted combat sortie in quite a straightforward way, and those were later reapplied for Polish AF.

[Franek Grabowski]

If your point is trolling, then look for another forum. Luftwaffe turned up unable to defeat much weaker Polish air force. The latter, awaited supplies of modern aircraft, that had to arrive via Rumanian ports. Polish airmen were send there to take them over, but the situation prevented it.
The book is about Soviet Air Forces operations over Poland in 1939. Soviet Union was at the time Germany's ally. I think it is obvious from the title of the thread.