MARSEILLE his last kill

[Franek Grabowski]

Originally Posted by Boandlgramer

good to know, you have no prejudices.
who are these soviet lovers, and who these german lovers ?
are there polish lovers too ?

;P
Of course, and US ones and British ones and worsest, French ones. ;>

[Franek Grabowski]

Originally Posted by david Cotton

Regarding the German Pilots getting high scores due to the poor aircraft they met early one. I can understand this and would agree that some pilots would of gained high scores at this time. However, not all the high scoreres were around at this time. For example Hartmann and Lipfert did not get to the front until 1943.

Up until the end of the war Soviet aircraft were inferior to the German ones. This is a long living myth of Soviet propaganda that their aircraft were any good.

I would also agree that the best German fighter pilots were not better that the best Allied pilots. I agree with the sentiment that German pilots had more oportunity for combat.

At the beggining of the war the German pilots would of been more experienced in combat than the allied pilots. But I would of thougt that the pilots leaving the training schools were about the same. During the BoB the new British Fighter pilots (10 hours on fighters) would of been cannon fodder, but by being there they drew the Germans off the better pilots.

Quality of pilots varied depending on training system. Germans lost, among other reasons, due to their poor training system. Also, I would like to see a log book of a RAF pilot with 10 or so hours on fighters before being send to a fighting unit. I indeed saw some, but pilots were then send to Scotland, Ireland or Wales to gain some 50 hours of flying time.

Latter in the war, German pilots could not be trained well for lack of fuel and mustangs roaming over Germany. The allies could train up their pilots in safty and put them into combat with a lot more flying experience. Therefore, not only were there more allied pilots, but avarage allied pilot was better trained than the German Pilot he was likly to meet.

Not exactly. Up until Normandy pilots could have been trained in safety but it was at the time it turned out the training was not proper. Germans were unable to fly and fight in large formations and had a lot of problems with blind flying. It is well worth to read interrogation reports of pilots downed at the time.

However, I would not say pilots like Marselle were over rated because they fought with loaded dice, so to speak. I think it is all part of being a good fighter pilot, getting into a position where you are pretty certain that you will make the kill and survive.

He could choose terms of combat and this was a substantial advantage. As long as he flew 'by the book', he was safe.

If i was to draw a comparison, I would say that Marselle and George Beurling seem to have the same ability when it comes to shooting. They seem to of got the art of defection shooting right. Both these pilots also seem to of got into dog fights as oposed to ambushing their victims from above. Their ability to defection shoot ment that the dogfight normally did not last long

I cannot tell about Beurling but I understand in case of Marseille it was a matter of surprisingly getting really close, so with limited deflection shooting.

[Franek Grabowski]

[quote=david Cotton]Hello
I understand where you are comming from. However, I would of thougt that combat fategue would start to arode the advantage of greater combat experence.

I read some where that only one USAAF 8th airforce pilot, with over 15 kills, was lost in air to air combat. This was Ralph Hofer. A lot of the German high scorers were lost in air to air combat against pilots who did not have the same combat hours as them.

According to recent research, Kid was downed by Flak when straffing an airfield. Anyway, be careful with your statement. I do not know how many missions Hoffer flew and what was the time but if Preddy had some 150 missions, I suppose this would be from 450 to 750 hrs of combat flying. Having in mind that the sorties of the German aces were much shorter than 5 hrs trips to Germany, possibly an average of 45 min., those 1000 sorties will result with some 750 hrs of combat flying.

I admit that some of these aces would of been shotdown by planes they did not even see, so no real duel would of taken place. However some of the pilots did have running battles and they lost.

Well, having eyes around the head is a principle. But indeed a lot of pilots were downed in more less ordinary dog-fights.

I supose that if your plane is supirior and you are a good flyer, this may out weigh the more experienced pilot in a lesser plane.

Well, the technical difference must be quite substantial, otherwise experienced pilot should be able not to get downed but, of course his chances of achieving success are much smaller.

[Christer Bergström]

Speaking about people being overrated. . .

I think Gollob is quite overrated.





I mean the Polish Gollob. In my hometown Eskilstuna, yesterday 2 August. See:

http://www.speedwayworld.tv/en/swc/a4872

[George Hopp]

I thought "Besserwisser" could be translated as "know it all." It's an interesting thread.

[david Cotton]

Hello

Thanks for reading my post in detail. Your opinions certainly gave me much to consider.



Regarding Soviet aircraft quality. I think the YAK 3 and YAK9 could be considered competitive. They certainly narrowed the difference in performance that had existed around 1941 and 1942.



Regarding BoB pilots. A pilot with 50 hours would still be more hunted than hunter. I don’t think the Germans were having to commit low trained fighter pilots into the battle. However, I may be wrong there. I will pop up Hawking museum and have a chat with the guys up there as well.



Regarding German Pilot training. Were they really trained that bad? I mean Hartmen, limpfert , Knoke were all products of the war time training. JG26 and JG2 held the RAF in check until the USAAF came on the scene. Was the lack of instrument and night flying really that critical ?



I would agree that there was safe ( as it could be) for the Germans up till January 1944 ish. It must have been a surprise to find allied fighters in what you would of thought was a safe area. Allied fighters could fly from the western front to the eastern front.



However, I think you are right, this would of only really had a real effect once allied fighters were reaming over all German territory. By then the war was already lost.



I would surmise that it was simply to few pilots being trained. The numbers were probably just adequate until the USSAF joined the battle.



Regarding Marselle tactics. I did not think that he was renown for getting up close for the no deflection shot. There is a lot of risk from flying debris when you come in close from behind. I think this was a Hartman tactic and he got downed a few times from debris if I remember right. I still of the opinion that Marselle was deadly because of his deflection shooting.



Regarding Hofer. If he did get shot down by flack, then that makes non of the top aces in the Eighth lost in air to air combat.



Regarding Different planes. I am thinking on the lines of say Preddy v Hartmann. Preddy may not have the same combat hours but the mustang would of given him an edge that may have equalled the fight.



Regards

David

[Franek Grabowski]

Hello

Regarding Soviet aircraft quality. I think the YAK 3 and YAK9 could be considered competitive. They certainly narrowed the difference in performance that had existed around 1941 and 1942.

Yak-3, often considered the best of the breed, when tested post-war in Yugoslavia, was found to be more-less equal to Spitfire V trop. Not a great achievement for a 1944 aircraft, I think.

Regarding BoB pilots. A pilot with 50 hours would still be more hunted than hunter. I don’t think the Germans were having to commit low trained fighter pilots into the battle. However, I may be wrong there. I will pop up Hawking museum and have a chat with the guys up there as well.

It was the effect of the RAF expansion. Germans were prepared to a war and trained enough people for the start. I am not sure of flight time though.

Regarding German Pilot training. Were they really trained that bad? I mean Hartmen, limpfert , Knoke were all products of the war time training. JG26 and JG2 held the RAF in check until the USAAF came on the scene. Was the lack of instrument and night flying really that critical ?

Please, note that German pilots underwent through additional training at the unit, whil Allied pilots arrived there as a competent personnel. This makes the difference.
Also, it was not so one sided combat before the arrival of the Americans but the subject needs some further research.
Finally, instrument training was critical during the Normandy campaign. Weather was very poor and several airmen failed to find their airfields, not to mention targets! This resulted with serious losses without enemy action. The risk was further increased, because they were unable to keep formation and got dispersed, this resulting with more losses.

I would surmise that it was simply to few pilots being trained. The numbers were probably just adequate until the USSAF joined the battle.

That was also a problem. Actually, there were less of worser airmen trained, so this must led to catastrophe.

Regarding Marselle tactics. I did not think that he was renown for getting up close for the no deflection shot. There is a lot of risk from flying debris when you come in close from behind. I think this was a Hartman tactic and he got downed a few times from debris if I remember right. I still of the opinion that Marselle was deadly because of his deflection shooting.

Perhaps I have confused something. Anyway, German airmen were not thaught of deflection shooting!

Regarding Hofer. If he did get shot down by flack, then that makes non of the top aces in the Eighth lost in air to air combat.

Yes, it looks so but it seems nothing that extraordinary.

Regarding Different planes. I am thinking on the lines of say Preddy v Hartmann. Preddy may not have the same combat hours but the mustang would of given him an edge that may have equalled the fight.

On of the Polish aces said, that wins the pilot with a stronger will. Hartmann was downed by P-51s but I do not think quality of the latter was crucial.

Best wishes

[david Cotton]

Hello



Regarding Quality of YAK3. I am surprised that the YAK3 only performed as per Spitfire V trop . I have read, in a book by Bill Gunston, that the Luftwaffe issued a general directive to avoid combat below 5000M with the YAK3. I think that most Russian front combat was at low level, as it was a primarily a ground attack air force.



I have the YAK3 with a top speed of 404 MPH and later 447MPH, which is not bad. I do not have any stats on speeds at heights. It would be interesting to see how the YAK 3 performance compared with its opponents at low levels.



Regarding Pilot Training. Yes I remember reading that often Bomber Pilots were used to guide German Fighters to the target. However, I always thought this was very late in the war. I assume that instrument training was initially given and then was stopped at some point. When was this ?

The reason I think it was initially given, is because I have read German fighter pilot report where the pilot talks of using instruments in bad weather. One of these was a report by Marselle.



Regarding the one sided combat before the arrival of America. Agreed. However, the JG2 and JG26 seemed to be able to cope with the British. I have read that post was research has indicated a kill ratio of 3:1 in favour of the Germans. This was once the British went onto the offensive. On the Dieppe raid the Germans still managed to inflict a 2:1 kill ratio in their favour. I still think that only once the USA got up and running the Germans started to loose the numbers game with regard to replacement pilots.



Regarding Deflection Shooting. Marselle’s early combat career was not that good. However, he seemed to understand where he was deficient and worked on those area. It would seem that defection shooting in Marselles case was self taught.



Regarding P51. I am not sure If I agree here. The better performance allows an expert pilot to have more options. Adversely, a lower performance must reduce the number of tactics he can use. For me the P51 was the plane that destroyed the Luftwaffe in the west.



Regarding Hofer. I find it interesting that the German Airforce did not shoot down any of the renown Eigth Airforce aces. Maybe it was because the German Pilots were trying to get to the bombers and were more interested in avoiding the escort.



I have also read that the Luftwaffe tactic of waiting for the fighters to turn back allowed Allied Fighter Pilots to gain experience. If they had hit the bombers early and taken on the fighter escort the fledgling pilots may never had the chance to get good.



Nice talking with you

David

[Franek Grabowski]

Hello

Originally Posted by david Cotton

Regarding Quality of YAK3. I am surprised that the YAK3 only performed as per Spitfire V trop . I have read, in a book by Bill Gunston, that the Luftwaffe issued a general directive to avoid combat below 5000M with the YAK3. I think that most Russian front combat was at low level, as it was a primarily a ground attack air force.

Soviets had no aircraft able to efficiently fly higher than 5-6000m, hence German successes and low level combats. The mentioned directive remains a kind of a myth - nobody seen it but a lot of people mention it. It seems that it was ordinary tactical instruction suggesting to avoid dog-fight but not combat, however.

I have the YAK3 with a top speed of 404 MPH and later 447MPH, which is not bad. I do not have any stats on speeds at heights. It would be interesting to see how the YAK 3 performance compared with its opponents at low levels.

Speed curves for low level (first stage of supercharger) are quite similar for Spitfire V, Spitfire IX, Me 109G or Yak-3. Speed is not the only parameter though. Soviet aircraft lacked range, automatics, good radio, sometimes armament. Some researchers, willingly or not, do unfair comparisons of Soviet aircraft with limited load with western aircraft with full load - be awared. It is worth to note here that Soviet report on combat with P-38s in the late 1944 mentions Yak-9s were less manouverable than P-38s in dog fight but superior in vertical manouvers.

Regarding Pilot Training. Yes I remember reading that often Bomber Pilots were used to guide German Fighters to the target. However, I always thought this was very late in the war. I assume that instrument training was initially given and then was stopped at some point. When was this ?

Well, yes, later in the war but the problem appeared earlier than the sollution.

The reason I think it was initially given, is because I have read German fighter pilot report where the pilot talks of using instruments in bad weather. One of these was a report by Marselle.

I have not seen any such report.

Regarding the one sided combat before the arrival of America. Agreed. However, the JG2 and JG26 seemed to be able to cope with the British. I have read that post was research has indicated a kill ratio of 3:1 in favour of the Germans. This was once the British went onto the offensive. On the Dieppe raid the Germans still managed to inflict a 2:1 kill ratio in their favour. I still think that only once the USA got up and running the Germans started to loose the numbers game with regard to replacement pilots.

I think British offensive is a subject to be researched, together with involved ratios. Also the reason of German loss is a little more complicated than the US presence only.

Regarding Deflection Shooting. Marselle’s early combat career was not that good. However, he seemed to understand where he was deficient and worked on those area. It would seem that defection shooting in Marselles case was self taught.

I do not know.

Regarding P51. I am not sure If I agree here. The better performance allows an expert pilot to have more options. Adversely, a lower performance must reduce the number of tactics he can use. For me the P51 was the plane that destroyed the Luftwaffe in the west.

Yes, but it was primarily due to its superior range allowing to patrol over enemy airfields.

Regarding Hofer. I find it interesting that the German Airforce did not shoot down any of the renown Eigth Airforce aces. Maybe it was because the German Pilots were trying to get to the bombers and were more interested in avoiding the escort.

Or because many of them build their victory scores when the Luftwaffe was no threat anymore.

I have also read that the Luftwaffe tactic of waiting for the fighters to turn back allowed Allied Fighter Pilots to gain experience. If they had hit the bombers early and taken on the fighter escort the fledgling pilots may never had the chance to get good.

On the other hand Allies would inflict losses on the Germans - that was the reason they waited.

Best wishes

[Nick Beale]

Two things:

1. In all the excitement, did anyone ever actually come up with an answer to the original question in this thread?

2. The discussions about skill and experience seemed to be passing over combat fatigue/stress. People can only take so much. For very good reasons, the RAF and USAAF flew operational tours; the Luftwaffe kept people in action until death, injury or promotion supervened. Read Robert Forsyth's "JV 44, The Galland Circus" and you come away with the feeling that some of the "greats" were burned out by 1945.