A 'what if' question RE: LW vs 8th AF

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Jens

I would also support the oppinion, that introduction of P-51 wasn't that decisive, since many german planes were shot down by P-47. This includes great bundle of Experten like Rall.

But i don't think that 8th AF had a chance only with bombers. Losses in Schweinfurt where much higherthan 60 due damages. If Luftwaffe had used 1944 equipment and tactics like Mk-108 and Sturmgruppen with long-range fighter escort, the losses of four-engined bomber would be much to high.

I would disagree. Within a very short time from first combat ops in December 1943, through May 1944 the limited strength of P-51s destroyed more German aircraft in the air than all the P-47 credits for all the 8th and 9th AF Thundebolts for all the combat sorties of P-47s in the ETO.

As to P-47s shooting down experten like Rall - true. Rall ventured into the range of P-47s on May 12 and was shot down after he cornered Hub Zemke and nearly shot him down - around Frankfurt - just inside P-47 range. Note all the experten (and experienced fighter pilots) shot down from Frankfurt to Posnan and Brux and Schweinfurt by Mustangs as well as eliminating the Me 110 and Me 410 from truly effective sorties against bombers. The initial value of the Mustang is that it killed a LOT of LW experienced fighter pilots based in LF Reich which were pulled in from Ost and Sud fronts as reinforcement against 8th AF campaing against strategic targets.

Note also that most of the air to air Jug kills in the west during 1943 were primarily Luftflotte 3 with JG2 and JG26 as well as western Germany based units of Mitte and then Reich. They weren't touching German pilots based in Central, Eastern and Southern Germany and particularly after the LW adopted the tactics of waiting to hit the bombers after they were out of P-47 escort range.

In fact, the P-51B IMO completely neutralized the LW ability to a.) effectively resist 8th AF incursions anywhere in Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia and b.) contest air superiority over Normandy, and c.) regroup/re-train and re-deply more experienced fighter pilots.

The numbers for ETO/USAAF ONLY 1942-May, 1945 - 8th and 9th AF
Spitfire 15.0
P38 452.0
P-47 2,658.4
P-51 4,179.2
P-61 128.0

The 'crossover' point for the transisition from P-47 to P-51 as dominant ETO fighter occurred from Big Week to Big B, February 20, 1944 through March 8, 1944.

Between Feb 20 and Feb 29 the Jug (all 8th and 9th AF P-47s combined) outscored the Mustang 140 to 64.5. From March 1 through March 8 the Mustangs (4 FG's, one with two days experience (355th), two with one and three weeks experience (357/4th) and one with three months (354FG) - outscored all 11 P-47 Groups (56, 78, 352, 353, 355(six days), 356, 358, 359, 361, 362, 365) - 108 to 86.
By the end of March the tally for P-51s during March was 254 to 176 for the Jugs. April was 322 to 85 - Mustang over P-47.

This does not include aircraft destroyed on the Ground by the P-51 in that period. From January through May the P-51 destroyed. count was 529 to 164.5 for the Jug.

All in - 8th and 9th AF combined Jan 1 through May 31 leading up to control of the air over Normandy beaches
P-47 Destroyed 764.5 air and 164.5 ground. The P-51 destroyed 1142.3 air and 529 ground.

As to the thread - I do believe Daylight Strategic bombing was on a very short leash until the decision was made that the number one objective for the 8th and 9th AF was to eliminate LW resistance over the Normandy campaign - and even then the initiation of re-targeting deep strategic targets didn't occur until two P-38 and one P-51 Group was operational in January 1944.

[RT]

Iran will probably air-burst a 25-megaton radio active sodium bomb at an altitude of 600 meters over central Paris. Peaceniks should be thankful that the U.S.A. is willing to spend its national wealth and the blood of its youth to keep the passive and complacent infidels of the world safe.


US probably to busy to find a blind chinese, in a dark cave, a moonless night at the moment , would be quite better for us to open some umbrella

R.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by RT

Iran will probably air-burst a 25-megaton radio active sodium bomb at an altitude of 600 meters over central Paris. Peaceniks should be thankful that the U.S.A. is willing to spend its national wealth and the blood of its youth to keep the passive and complacent infidels of the world safe.


US probably to busy to find a blind chinese, in a dark cave, a moonless night at the moment , would be quite better for us to open some umbrella

R.

R - I suspect being a long time friend and ally of the US is not a great place for any nation to be these days.. this sordid affair in China illustrates how 'flexible' our priciples are these days.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Larry deZeng

Iran will probably air-burst a 25-megaton radio active sodium bomb at an altitude of 600 meters over central Paris. Peaceniks should be thankful that the U.S.A. is willing to spend its national wealth and the blood of its youth to keep the passive and complacent infidels of the world safe.

L.

Off topic with a bleedin' vengeance, wouldn't you say, Larry?

Let alone that you're assuming (a) Iran will one day have such a weapon; (b) a method of getting it to a point above Paris; and (c) any reason/desire to do so. And surely you can't be suggesting that France's nukes are no deterrent to conjectural Iranian nuclear aggression? If they aren't then why should you imagine that America's are?

[Larry deZeng]

Really, Nick.

You should go back and read the entire thread focusing in particular on RT's two remarks, especially the first one he made on 19 February 2007 at 11:05, and concurrently consider some of RT's past postings here on 12 O'Clock High with their - and I am being very considerate here - less than favorable American flavor. For someone who bristles rather easily when unjustified mud is slung at the Brits, I would think you might afford the same consideration to others.

Larry

[Nokose]

Did the Luftwaffe every use there bombers to try to strike the 8th AF on the airfields in England to eliminate them? It seems even night raids would have taken out some of the bombers on the ground. They had to know the locations of the bases for the bombers and fighters. Killing civilians was a terrible waste of effort.

[mars]

That was out of Luftwaffe's ability, range limit of their bombers, lack of any large numbers of heavy bombers even close to the quality and number of the British night heavy bombers, navigation problem, the excellent British night air defense system, that simply would not do

[RT]

The whole problem, is at which point nd which time we consider the things , 200 years ago no way to be US-frendly or just because brit-foe ??, 150 years it would be better to give some hand to the people South like the brits were ready to ??,100 years ago no way to be ... so much debts, 50 years ago one not really different history, today US probably find more way to be 'friend ' with China as with Europe China is considered at equal level Europe some good dog ,

R

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Larry deZeng

Really, Nick.

You should go back and read the entire thread focusing in particular on RT's two remarks ... For someone who bristles rather easily when unjustified mud is slung at the Brits, I would think you might afford the same consideration to others.

Larry

Fair point, there's a history of nonsense scattered hereabouts but in this thread I was just hoping (a) to suggest that logic goes out the window where nuclear "strategy" is concerned and (b) to get the thread back on its more interesting original track. I'm sorry if I come across as patriotically oversensitive. For the record, you can say what you like about the British as far as I'm concerned, I'm English — there's a difference!

[Larry deZeng]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Fair point, there's a history of nonsense scattered hereabouts but in this thread I was just hoping (a) to suggest that logic goes out the window where nuclear "strategy" is concerned and (b) to get the thread back on its more interesting original track. I'm sorry if I come across as patriotically oversensitive. For the record, you can say what you like about the British as far as I'm concerned, I'm English — there's a difference!

You are taking far too much of the blame, Nick. I am admittedly hyper-sensitive when it comes to my country. Nationalism and patriotism, along with most other "-isms", are generally thought to be very bad and the very concept behind the EU was to do away with them. So I am an old dinosaur, pardon the redundancy, but I can't help it and I see unwarranted slights and perceived anti-Americanisms more readily than others.

But I agree: all of these is WAY off topic and I apologize for taking part in it. I would reply to RT's remark above, but I can't understand what he's saying.

L.