Need assistance: Role of the Luftwaffe/Germany in the Battle of Britain?

[FalkeEins]

Originally Posted by John Vasco

And the reason a lot of German authors dismiss the BoB as a minor thing is because their cherished Luftwaffe actually got their arse kicked..

John, Nick

between you & me you're probably right & I'm certainly with you 100% on Harris... but I'm interested in the other side's views too though, especially as Prien & Roba (to take two examples) haven't been translated and their views haven't rippled into our collective consciousness (or even that of the average enthusiasts). We've all grown up a bit since histories like 'The Narrow Margin' were published. The 'mythology' of the BoB has probably gone too far; I think even Bungay acknowledges that; there was no 'narrow margin', it wasn't even close...that's all I'm pointing out..

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by FalkeEins

John, Nick

between you & me you're probably right & I'm certainly with you 100% on Harris... but I'm interested in the other side's views too though, especially as Prien & Roba (to take two examples) haven't been translated and their views haven't rippled into our collective consciousness (or even that of the average enthusiasts). We've all grown up a bit since histories like 'The Narrow Margin' were published. The 'mythology' of the BoB has probably gone too far; I think even Bungay acknowledges that; there was no 'narrow margin', it wasn't even close...that's all I'm pointing out..

I agree with what you say here. I have been fortunate enough to have delved into the other side quite a bit, and what I have written in previous posts merely reflects this. The point I make about 'their cherished Luftwaffe' is akin to my defending jibes made against Everton by Liverpool supporters, if that analogy may be applied.

I'll tell you what, the original poster should be delighted with the discussion that has taken place in this thread. If they can't feed off this, they can't feed off anything...

[Brian Bines]

I thought the situation was the German Army were told to invade, they said fine providing the invasion fleet (barges) can be protected from the British Navy, the German Naval Staff said after Norway we cant keep the British off unless the Luftwaffe controls the air . Goering said leave it to me and we all know the phases destroy the RAF over the Channel convoys, attack their airfields bomb London etc. At the time most people in the UK thought there would be an invasion which would have happened if the Luftwaffe had knocked out the RAF by August
In the end it looks like Hitler thought Britain could be left isolated while he went ahead with his main plan eastward expansion. It must not be forgotten that even with the strength of the US behind it the Normandy landings were touch and go. So the chance of Britain on its own mounting an invasion circa 1940 to Fortress Europe was a no go, making it look like an economical risk to Hitler to leave the UK isolated.

[Franek Grabowski]

Well, there is always something called deception. If Germans were to convince Britons they want to invade them, they needed to do something more than to say about invasion. Wehrmacht had nothing to do, anyway, so some exercises would not cause any harm. Equipment necessary for an invasion may have been used elsewhere, so development was not as senseless as it may seem. Increased radio traffic was important as well. Germans were not that stupid not to know that there are spies around.
Whatever were intentions, and the actual role of the Soviet Union, the fact is that some authors claim that the Battle of Britain never occurred.
I have an insight into the Battle from pilot's perspective, and not strategic one, and based on that, this was not another ordinary period. For those men it was desperate struggle to counter enemy, and many of them never again flew so intense missions.
That said, attempts to revision history were undertaken much earlier, but now they are just utterly arrogant. And I do not mean natural increase of our knowledge, and reduction of propaganda's influence.

[George Hopp]

I thought the situation was the German Army were told to invade, they said fine providing the invasion fleet (barges) can be protected from the British Navy, the German Naval Staff said after Norway we cant keep the British off unless the Luftwaffe controls the air . Goering said leave it to me and we all know the phases destoy the RAF over the Channel convoys, attack their airfields bomb London etc. At the time most people in the UK thought there would be an invasion which would have happened if the Luftwaffe had knocked out the RAF by August
In the end it looks like Hitler thought Britain could be left isolated while he went ahead with his main plan eastward expansion. It must not be forgotten that even with the strength of the US behind it the Normandy landings were touch and go. So the chance of Britain on its own mounting an invasion circa 1940 to Fortress Europe was a no go, making it look like an economical risk to Hitler to leave the UK isolated.

Sounds good, Brian!

[Birgir Thorisson]

Sligthtly off topic here but...

I followed the path offered here previously, and picked up Williamson Murray´s book.
Looking at his tables on German losses in 1940, I was struck by one category of losses; destroyed on operations, but NOT due to enemy action.
What is this? It is not the so-called "operational losses" because that is a seperate category. So what is going on? This is by the way, the main cause of losses of Bf-109. Can anyone clarify what kind of bookkeeping is going on there. My first thought was 109s running out of fuel over the channel, but the category is large for the BofF.



Birgir Thorisson

[PeterVerney]

I would guess that the 109, with its horrible narrow track undercart, was a wonderful swinger. It would possibly have more than its fair share of landing accidents, especially with a tired, possibly wounded, or inexperienced pilot.
Anybody with experience of flying one care to comment?

[FalkeEins]

..very unforgiving a/c on takeoff especially, no matter whether the pilot was a novice or a seasoned ace (Major Walter Hoeckner I./JG4, veered off the runway & crashed on takeoff, 25 August 1944 - 68 victories!). IIRC 109 takeoff & landing accidents accounted for around huge numbers of machines (30-40 /month ?)

as for running out of fuel and ditching in the Channel - instances were surprisingly rare during the BoB. One JG 2 pilot had his engine seize over England and glided all the way home (cf. Mombeeck, 'In the skies of France')

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by FalkeEins

… as for running out of fuel and ditching in the Channel - instances were surprisingly rare during the BoB.

Now there's a "Myth of the Battle of Britain"! Whole Gruppen ditching etc.

[Kutscha]

Taking off in the 109 was relatively easy. If one watches videos, it can be seen the track was curved. Now landing was another matter. Again the 109 was relatively easy to land, some say docile, but the problem was when the wheels touched the ground due to the toe out of the wheels.

Over at the Allabloutwarfar board someone did a study comparing the Fw190 and the 109, iirc with JG26, and a/c accidents. What was surprising was the Fw190 had worse stats than the 109.

Btw, the Spitfire had a narrower track than that of the 109.