# The Luftwaffe Expertens' Opinions



## Butters (Mar 29, 2009)

I was reading an interview with Johannes Steinhoff and was surprised to hear him express the opinion that the most dangerous Allied fighter was the P-38 Lightning. 


In most accounts I've read, Luftwaffe fighter pilots have been rather dismissive of the P-38. Most seem to consider the Spit to have been the most dangerous adversary, with the Mustang coming in as a close second.

It would be interesting to see some quotes from other Experten in regards to this controversial subject. After all, they ought'a know...


Interview With World War II Luftwaffe Eagle Johannes Steinhoff » HistoryNet

JL


----------



## Erich (Mar 29, 2009)

because in the earlier war years when Steinhoff flew seriously all he really came up against was the US P-38

the most feared or should say pain the the neck of LW pilots was the P-51


----------



## BombTaxi (Mar 29, 2009)

As Erich pointed out, much will depend on the era of the war in which a particular pilot was most active. Pliots who ceased active flying prior to 1942 would probably find the Spit most lethal as they would not have encountered few American fighters other than the Martlet, P-39 and Mustang in RAF service. On the other hand, if they had seen action on the Russian front as well, there is a chance they might have found a Russian type most deadly, although I'm not sure what type that would be.

Of course, later in the war, it is likely that pilots involved in Defence of the Reich units would find the P-51 their toughest adversary, although again I'm not sure what the Eastern front equivalent would be. La-7 maybe?


----------



## Butters (Mar 29, 2009)

I'm not arguing that Steinhoff is correct. I'm just interested in what the members of the Luftwaffe experten thought.

That aside, the fact that Steinhoff participated in the Battle of France, BoB, commanded JG 77 in the MTO during '43 (Where both the RAF and USAAF operated Mustangs), and later flew jets against the 8th AF, seems to indicate that he had experience fighting against a wide array of Allied fighters. Seems like pretty 'serious flying' to me...

JL


----------



## drgondog (Mar 29, 2009)

Butters said:


> I'm not arguing that Steinhoff is correct. I'm just interested in what the members of the Luftwaffe experten thought.
> 
> That aside, the fact that Steinhoff participated in the Battle of France, BoB, commanded JG 77 in the MTO during '43 (Where both the RAF and USAAF operated Mustangs), and later flew jets against the 8th AF, seems to indicate that he had experience fighting against a wide array of Allied fighters. Seems like pretty 'serious flying' to me...
> 
> JL


Most of Steinhoff's experience against Mustangs were P-51A/Mk I and A-36 which flew almost exclusively in armed Recce and fighter bomber role. The P-38J should be slightly better than the P-51A, particularly at altitudes above 15,000 feet

He really didn't encounter P-51B/D until he was flying the Me 262.

Macky Steinhoff was a very fine fighter pilot.


----------



## MacArther (Mar 29, 2009)

That is interesting....Did he say where he was fighting against the P-38s that he considered them dangerous (i.e. what theater of war, what altitude, etc.)? Also, did he give reasons why he considered the P-38 the most dangerous? Make no mistake, I like the P-38, but even I know that its showing was less than stellar against the Luftwaffe.


----------



## TheMustangRider (Mar 29, 2009)

One thing that in my opinion should be taken in consideration is that potentially during the last days of the war when he was flying the Me-262, he never had a taste of the P-51B/D Mustang in a one-on-one combat given the fact that Me-262s used their superior speed to go through escort fighters, hit the bombers and then get away.


----------



## GrauGeist (Mar 29, 2009)

TheMustangRider said:


> One thing that in my opinion should be taken in consideration is that potentially during the last days of the war when he was flying the Me-262, he never had a taste of the P-51B/D Mustang in a one-on-one combat given the fact that Me-262s used their superior speed to go through escort fighters, hit the bombers and then get away.



Me262s rarely stood and fought as a fighter as it wasn't agile in tight turns, putting it at a disadvantage against the P-51 and comparable prop fighters.

Another critical factor would be it's slow "spool-up" time on the engines, meaning you had to be conservative on the throttle or suffer an engine failure. That would put the Me262, again, at a disadvantage in a turning fight where the throttle becomes a useful tool.

Adding to that, would be the fuel consumption of the Me262, which was just short of terrible. At cruising speed, the Me262 had enough fuel for an 80 minute flight, however in combat, it's flight time would be down to around 30 minutes if the throttles were near 90%+. Getting tangled up in a "furball" would bleed off precious minutes of flight time...especially if the fight occured late in it's flight.

That's not to say that the Me262 never did "brawl"...and the business end of a '262 was something you would not want pointing at you...but it was rare.

The Me262's strengths were it's speed and cannon, so diving through an escort to deliver a lethal burst of 30 mm into a bomber was where it belonged.


----------



## Erich (Mar 29, 2009)

Gents

to be perfectly truthful Stein did not get that much jet travel time, he got canned after a long drawn out battle while as CO of JG 7, then the wait before he was in JV 44, flew 2 missions or so before his almost lethal toasting off the grass field, then he was out of the war ...........


----------



## MikeGazdik (Mar 29, 2009)

Thanks for the link to the interview, the whole article is a nice read.

When he spoke of the Lightning, he said it was great in the attack. Basically what I get from what he is saying, don't get yourself in the gunsights of the P-38. He also mentioned getting hit by one from long range. I think his respect for the plane is the concentrated firepower.

The P-38 was its own worst enemy in the ETO. Teething problems that were not solved before the Mustang was ready.


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Mar 30, 2009)

i guess there was a reason why the germand called the P-38 the forktailed devil


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Mar 30, 2009)

Junkers88A1 said:


> i guess there was a reason why the germand called the P-38 the forktailed devil


That was a myth created by the author Martin Cadin


----------



## lesofprimus (Mar 30, 2009)

Yes it was............


----------



## HoHun (Mar 31, 2009)

Hi Junkers,

>i guess there was a reason why the germand called the P-38 the forktailed devil

I have never found any actualy evidence of that, and I know that "Gabelschwanzteufel" is a rather awkward word for my North German tongue.

I'm pretty sure that had it really been a historical nickname, it would have been eroded into the considerably less intimidating "Gabi" (a traditional girl's name) rather quickly 

On the topic of experts' opinions: Priller's "J. G. 26" mentions that one of the difficulties the Jagdflieger had was that spotting an enemy formation as dots on the horizon, they never knew what Allied type they'd meet, making it difficult to adapt tactically. The Allies had only to reckon with either Messerschmitts or Focke-Wulfs, leaving less tactical uncertainty to them.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Erich (Mar 31, 2009)

I have never heard any former LW crewman call the P-38 anything other than Lightning.

same for the P-51 it was simply called Mustang


----------



## GrauGeist (Mar 31, 2009)

I remember as a kid, my Uncles (WWII Pacific vets) mentioning the P-38 as the Fork-Tailed Devil, a Japanese reference. Whistling Death was the Japanese name for the Corsair.

Perhaps this Martin Cadin person picked that up from the Japanese and ran with it?


----------



## Kurfürst (Mar 31, 2009)

As a matter of interest, Hungarian pilots appear to have nicked the P-38 as the 'ladder' , but Lightning, Thunderbolt, Mustang were equally common, the type designations were almost never used (ie. like P-51, B-24).


----------



## Njaco (Mar 31, 2009)

I agree Kurfurst, I think even the German pilots went with the nicknames rather than proper designations. I believe B-17s were referred to as "Boeings" along with the common Veirmot.


----------



## mhuxt (Mar 31, 2009)

lesofprimus said:


> Yes it was............




I wouldn't be quite so sure - August 1945 Pilot's Manual for the P-38 makes the same Gabel yadda yadda claim.


----------



## Erich (Mar 31, 2009)

bomber pulk and or fat cars were also used to describe US bombers and it's formations by LW crews. Viermots was used in official write-ups and docs


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 31, 2009)

mhuxt said:


> I wouldn't be quite so sure - August 1945 Pilot's Manual for the P-38 makes the same Gabel yadda yadda claim.



Propoganda maybe...?

It has been disclaimed over and over. The Fork Tailed Devil is a myth.


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Mar 31, 2009)

ok. i guess you are right !


----------



## HoHun (Mar 31, 2009)

Hi Mhuxt,

>I wouldn't be quite so sure - August 1945 Pilot's Manual for the P-38 makes the same Gabel yadda yadda claim.

That's quite interesting. Maybe this is evidence that Caidin did not personally invent this story?

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Macchi (Mar 31, 2009)

Thanks for posting the interview, appreciated. 

Here's a list of American fighter aces from WWII, with 20 or more kills to their credit (there are slight tally differences on different sites, I don't mean for this to become a disagreement of personal kill totals, I just picked one source). I looked up the U.S. pilots, their victory totals, aircraft used and branch of service. I've broken down the aircraft used into two categories: A) early war production fighter planes (P-38, P-39, P-40, F4F Wildcat) and B) late war production fighter planes consisting of the P-38, P-47, P-51, F4U Corsair, F4F Hellcat. There's always an exception, with a Hurricane and a couple of Spitfires in the mix. 

Name • Victories • Aircraft • Branch
*
Maj. Richard I. Bong • 40 • P-38 • USAAF
Maj. Thomas B. McGuire • 38 • P-38 • USAAF
Capt. David McCampbell • 34 • F6F Hellcat • U.S. Navy
Maj. Francis S. Gabreski • 28 • P-47 • USAAF
Maj. Robert S. Johnson • 27 • P-47 • USAAF
Col. Charles H. MacDonald • 27 • P-38 • USAAF
Maj. George E. Preddy • 26.83 • (P-40) P-51 • USAAF
Maj. Joseph J. Foss • 26 • (F4F Wildcat) F4U Corsair • U.S. Marine Corps
1st Lt. Robert M. Hanson • 25 • F4U Corsair • U.S. Marine Corps
W/Cmdr. Lance C. Wade • 25 • (Hurricane, Spitfire) • RAF
Maj. Gregory Boyington • 24 • (P-40) F4U Corsair • U.S. Marine Corps
Lt. Col. John C. Meyer • 24 • P-47, P-51 • USAAF
Lt. Cecil E. Harris • 23 • (F4F Wildcat) F6F Hellcat • U.S. Navy
Lt. Eugene A. Valencia • 23 • F6F Hellcat • U.S. Navy
Col. David C. Schilling • 22.5 • P-47 • USAAF
Col. Gerald R. Johnson • 22 • (P-39, P-40) P-38 • USAAF
Col. Neel E. Kearby • 22 • P-47 • USAAF
Maj. Jay T. Robbins • 22 • (P-39) P-38 • USAAF
Capt. Dominic S. Gentile • 22 • (Spitfire) P-47, P-51 • USAAF
Capt. Fred J. Christensen • 21.5 • P-47 • USAAF
Maj. Raymond S. Wetmore • 21.25 • P-51 • USAAF
Capt. Kenneth Walsh • 21 • F4U Corsair • U.S. Marine Corps
Capt. John J. Voll • 21 • P-51 • USAAF
Lt. Col. Walker M. Mahurin • 20.83 • P-47, P-51 • USAAF
Capt. Donald N. Aldrich • 20 • F4U Corsair • U.S. Marine Corps 
Col. Thomas J. Lynch • 20 • (P-39) P-38 • USAAF
Lt. Col. Robert Westbrook • 20 • (P-40) P-38 • USAAF

The idea was to count up how often each late war U.S. production fighter was used among the top American aces. There are 27 names here, but I'll remove Lance Wade from the equation as he flew with the RAF using British aircraft. I've bracketed the early war production planes (P-39, P-40, F4F Wildcat, and the British aircraft) and am not counting those. If a pilot used two different late model fighters (Meyer, Gentile and Mahurin for example), then I've counted each type with a 1/2 point. Not including Wade, of the remaining 26 aces:

P-38 is listed: 7 times
P-47 is listed: 6-1/2 times
F4U is listed: 5 times
P-51 is listed: 4-1/2 times
F6F is listed: 3 times

Just to note, the P-38 holds three of the top six spots, with 105 kills of the 194 destroyed by the top six aces. 

To quote the interviewer speaking with Steinhoff, "Of all the Allied fighters you encountered, which was the most difficult to handle _with a good pilot at the controls_?" Every WWII fighter had it's strengths and weaknesses, as they've been discussed in innumberable threads here... turning radius this, dive speed that, altitude performance here, firepower there, etc. The Lightning was no different, being better at some things, limited in others. Pilot competence was one part of the interviewer's question. Steinhoff's answer seems to take that into account, and perhaps he saw (experienced) some of the dangers a Lighting brought to a fight when it was in the hands of a skilled pilot. Quoting Wiki on the P-38 "Clustering all the armament in the nose was unlike most other U.S. aircraft which used wing-mounted guns with trajectories set up to crisscross at one or more points in a "convergence zone." Guns mounted in the nose did not suffer from having their useful ranges limited by pattern convergence, meaning good pilots could shoot much farther. A Lightning could reliably hit targets at any range up to 1,000*yards (910*m), whereas other fighters had to pick a single convergence range between 100 and 250*yards (230*m). The clustered weapons had a "buzz saw" effect on any target at the receiving end, making the aircraft effective for strafing as well."


"Good pilots could shoot much farther." Steinhoff mentions being shot down from long range by a P-38 in 1944, and I would think he had no defense against that. The Me-262 wasn't the war's perfect fighter, taking into account it's limited range, short engine life, sluggish acceleration and average handling. But with it's high top speed and clustered nose cannon it was certainly a dangerous plane with a capable pilot at the controls. If you were flying a P-47 this very moment in WWII, and you and a good German pilot spotted each other from a mile away, would you rather the German be in a Bf-109 or a Me-262? I think this is part of the context of Steinhoff's answer. Aside from the P-38s handling and speed (which he compliments) the P-38 had an extended firing range. Put that advantage into the hands of a good pilot.... 

For the fork-tailed devil discussion, I mentioned that nickname once to a German friend of mine about 20 years ago. His father had been a soldier in the Wehrmacht, and the father had told him they called the P-38 "man jaeger" (man hunter). The reason being, was that pilots of some P-38s would strafe individual soldiers caught out in the open, even if it were a single man crossing a field. I imagine they would because of their armament being in the nose without a convergence pattern. They wouldn't have to wait for the right range to pick off an individual man, just make sure they had him in line. My friend's father considered the P-38 as the last plane he wanted to see strafing his position.


----------



## Colin1 (Mar 31, 2009)

Macchi said:


> Lt. Col. Walker M. Mahurin • 20.83 • P-47, P-51 • USAAF


Two decimal places?
How do you get to .83 of a kill?


----------



## Juha (Mar 31, 2009)

Colin, how about 5/6.

Juha


----------



## Colin1 (Mar 31, 2009)

Juha said:


> Colin, how about 5/6


Or a tad over 4/5...
Presumably then, a kill shared amongst 6 (or 5) aircraft


----------



## Juha (Mar 31, 2009)

Hello Macchi
the problem is that all USAAF numbered AFs were not equally strict when they accepted kills. IMHO 5th AF was more lax than for ex 8th FC.

Juha


----------



## Juha (Mar 31, 2009)

Hello Colin
that is my guess.

Juha


----------



## renrich (Mar 31, 2009)

Those top two P38 aces were in the PTO where it probably was easier going than in the ETO. The kills of Joe Foss were all, I think, with the F4F4 and under horrible conditions at Guadalcanal and against early war IJN pilots. That has to add a lot of luster to his record.


----------



## Macchi (Mar 31, 2009)

Juha said:


> Hello Macchi
> the problem is that all USAAF numbered AFs were not equally strict when they accepted kills. IMHO 5th AF was more lax than for ex 8th FC.


As I said, I didn't want this to be sidetracked into a discussion about kill totals (or percentage points of kill totals). I wasn't around during the war, I wasn't in charge of tracking kills or keeping historical count. I'm going by what's out there, and whether some pilots should have their numbers raised or lowered by a few isn't my focus with this topic. 

Steinhoff made an interesting comment about the P-38, and since he was there and I wasn't, I did a little background to see why he might have made the comment he did. I've always appreciated the beauty of the P-38, but have never given it serious enough credit for the capabilities it had. In the latter part of the war its engine reliability and tail compressibility problems had been solved. It was almost the first "jet" in terms of running into certain design limitations in the face of higher and higher speeds. That it was the only American fighter to be produced from Pearl Harbor until VJ Day says even more about how good the original design was. 

I'm kinda looking at the P-38 again the way I did when I first discovered it as a kid.


----------



## Kurfürst (Mar 31, 2009)

Erich said:


> bomber pulk and or fat cars were also used to describe US bombers and it's formations by LW crews. Viermots was used in official write-ups and docs



The other common LW nick for the heavies - Möbelwagen, or furniture van - was also used by Hungarians (bútorszállító). Probably got the terminus technicus from their LW collegues.


----------



## mhuxt (Mar 31, 2009)

HoHun said:


> Hi Mhuxt,
> 
> >I wouldn't be quite so sure - August 1945 Pilot's Manual for the P-38 makes the same Gabel yadda yadda claim.
> 
> ...




That's my guess, though on checking the pilot's notes again I see the term used is "Forked Devil". Date of publication is 1 August 1945.


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

I know the germans had lots of nicknames on aircrafts..including their own..
like the Ju 88 was named "Die-Drei Finger 88 " ( three fingers 88 )
The He 111 was named the "der 111 spaten" the 111 spade
and the Do 17 was named the "der Fliegende bleistift "
Ju 52 ( die Kasten Ju ) the Ju box ??

sorces Deutche, Italieniche, Britische-Amerikanische und sowjetische Kriegsflugzeuge 1942 RLM ( recognitionbook for german, italien, english-american and soviet combataircrafts )

and the handley pag hamden is called " Die kaulquappen-hamden " whatever that means..and the B-17 is named the "Fortress 1 "

to bad the P-38 lighning is not present..as that would have given some light on the matter
and they call the B-17 the


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

the last line was lost..the B-17 was called

"Fortress 1"

not Boing as stated earlier in this thread


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

Oh Guttorm.. There is a name for the Lightning!
They was called "Gabelschwanzteufel"
Means "fork tail devil"


For the P-47 Thunderbolt was the Nick
"Trunkenbold"
means "drunkard"


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

And another one...
(not so friendly... sorry british friends!)
The Hurricane was called
"Hurenkahn"
means 
"bitch hooker"


----------



## drgondog (Apr 2, 2009)

Junkers88A1 said:


> the last line was lost..the B-17 was called
> 
> "Fortress 1"
> 
> not Boing as stated earlier in this thread



The Fortress I was the B-17C/D which only flew briefly with RAF


----------



## HoHun (Apr 2, 2009)

Hi Junkers,

>I know the germans had lots of nicknames on aircrafts..including their own..
like the Ju 88 was named "Die-Drei Finger 88 " ( three fingers 88 )

These were official reporting names, including obvious visual characteristics into some (not all) aircraft's designations to facilitate recognition and reporting. The Me 109E was to be recorded as "square 109" according to an earlier manual, while the Me 109F was to be called "round 109".

>and the handley pag hamden is called " Die kaulquappen-hamden " whatever that means..

"The Tadpole Hampden", a reference to the fuselage shape.

>to bad the P-38 lighning is not present..as that would have given some light on the matter

Too bad I have misplaced my copy of that booklet, which might be a later edition - I'm sure the P-38 was in there. The reporting name was "zweischwänzige Lightning" if I recall correctly, "two-tailed Lightning".

Sounds, well, not completely different from "fork-tailed devil" 

(By the way, these official RLM booklets show that the Me 109 was referred to as "Me 109". This should come as a blow to those who think only "Bf 109" is the correct designation. Likewise, "Me 109" was also used in the RLM's official propaganda magazine "Der Adler".)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

you are right Ho hun as some here says the fork tail devil is a myth..but if the official name was called "two tail lighning" i am sure some germans easily changed that on airfields to fork tailed devil  Gabelschwanzteufel
and you are right that the Me 109 is the correct term during the war..my book says the same


----------



## Erich (Apr 2, 2009)

LW fighter pilots called it simply..............Lightning. Every pilot I have interviewed if they fought against it or not called it this. the P-47 was called the Thunderbolt, the P-51, the Mustang. Simple because it is.

the B-17 was called the Fortress


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

Abot the Lightning..
Sorry... be sure the called her "Gabelschwanzteufel" !
I was myself member of the German Airforce for many years and had close contact to Luftwaffenmembers of WW2.. Also a uncle of me was in the Luftwaffe and they ALL called the Lightning by this name...


----------



## Erich (Apr 2, 2009)

well I am sorry but we seem to disagree my relatives in the LW even called it lightning. there was no fork tailed devil, again it is brought up in mythical proportions post war even under admission from the author when pressed.

who really cares anyway guys


----------



## HoHun (Apr 2, 2009)

Hi Hesekiel,

>Abot the Lightning..
>Sorry... be sure the called her "Gabelschwanzteufel" !

I don't believe that. I have not even once come across this hypothetical nickname in Luftwaffe pilot's memoirs, squadron histories or anything.

If it had been a universal nickname, there would be some trace in print.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

Well.. believe it or not..
As i say.. i know that from a lot of tales with Luftwaffe Soldiers.
Also my uncle (flown in the KG54) called her so..
I really don´t believe everything i read in books.. i think the tales of the people they experienced that are true..
I can tell you a lot of Nicknames of equipment in the modern Luftwaffe you have never heard before...


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

with all the german nicknames that i have confirmed in the german book from WW2 i am sure they had nicknames for other allied aircrafts as well..
and when heisikel confirms this also i am sure this is more than a myth..and almost all myths has rots in reality.. maybe with small or larger changes.. 
so i think i will go for heisekel and my ww2 documents  but maybe someone just called them by their names and others by nickname  we even do that today in the Air Force..so i think maybe both are right


----------



## HoHun (Apr 2, 2009)

Hi Hesekiel,

>I really don´t believe everything i read in books.. 

Oh, pay attention - I don't believe what I read in the books because if they were right, there'd be something to read in other books that they lack.

>i think the tales of the people they experienced that are true..

Now *that* has long been proven perfectly illusory by the science of history 

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

i belive it when the book is printed in 1942 for luftwaffe crew..and they have callnames.. i dont belive in what books after the war says.. but when documents from WW2 state something i agree..and as heiskel says,his uncle flew the Ju 88 ( this i have seen here on pics he has posted and also pics and documents he has send me peronally for our 88 restoration) and if his uncle mentioned this name on the P-38 i guess there is something in it


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

What ever you say HoHun..
Tell a German it´s father, father in law, uncles were soldiers in WW2 and who was himself a Oberfeldwebel in the Luftwaffe (Bundeswehr) what´s right or wrong..
I like it to learn.... 
But i like to learn by true tells and facts.. rather than learning of books...


----------



## Erich (Apr 2, 2009)

my statements come from at least 35 LW veterans, - pilots, my German friend plus my Familie still living in the Pfalz, not from Books. so again Point out the differences and again WHO CARES !


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

Well.. As Guttorm say...
Maybe some called it so and others so...
Just another example..
The Names of the Positions of a 88 Crew...
"Flugzeugführer", "Beoachter", "Bordfunker" and "Bordschütze".. So far... so good..
Ever heared tis Nicknames the Crew named themself??
"Kutscher", "Holzauge", "Drahtamsel", "Stachelschwein" ???


----------



## HoHun (Apr 2, 2009)

Hi Hesekiel,

>But i like to learn by true tells and facts.. rather than learning of books...

I don't see the difference between a sea story told personally and one printed in a book.

However, "Gabelschwanzteufel" is a very special kind of sea story that has only made it into English books ... how fishy must a sea story get before you smell it?

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Hesekiel (Apr 2, 2009)

Well... my last one about that...
I don´t think my uncle has told me any "fishy sea stories".. He had no reasons to do that....


----------



## HoHun (Apr 2, 2009)

Hi Hesekiel,

>I don´t think my uncle has told me any "fishy sea stories".. He had no reasons to do that....

Historians have long recognized that even with the best intentions of all involved, you're going to end up with a distorted picture if you don't cross-check "oral history" with sources that are less flexible than the human memory.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------



## Junkers88A1 (Apr 2, 2009)

what i think is funny i all this is that i have worked with german aircrafts for 12 years..doing restoration and salvage..and meet lots and lots of veterans from both sides..and also many many hitorians and scholars..and the fun thing is that we know so little.. and a little wide openminded view is important as everything si not like we think..i have put many a scholar and cand.mag..doctors in history and so called experts in place showing them artefacts and complete aircrfats that is everything else than what it should be acording to historybook..documents and even original WW2 documents.. it was war..it was humans involved ..and we will never know all that happened..so if something hasent surface it doesent men it dident happen..and even our 88 that has been in a timecapsule for 64 years are "wrong" acording to some "experts".. so who is wrong and what is right.. and if this author found out soemthing little knowna nd used it he could be right..doesent ahev to be a fish story ! just like our 88 is painted 02 underneath and not hellblau..and it should be hellblau.. so i look at this with a open mind and agree with you all but i also know that we will never know what was said and happened during WW2 between soldiers.. some we know..some is a "myth" but myths do have a origin in reality.. and some is not correct..


----------



## HoHun (Apr 3, 2009)

Hi Junkers,

>and even our 88 that has been in a timecapsule for 64 years are "wrong" acording to some "experts".. 

A recovered aircraft wreck is hard evidence and can be used to revise concepts stemming from other sources for hard evidence (and if it were only "some 'experts'", their evidence might not have been that hard to begin with).

Oral tradition 60 years after the fact is not hard evidence, and that Hesekiel claims "all" Luftwaffe people called the P-38 "Gabelschwanzteufel" name while Erich claims "all" of them called them "Lightning" shows the problem with oral tradition (even considering that both "all" sets are not identical).

The "Gabelschwanzteufel" story is fishy for a lot of reasons: It first appears in print in English publications, it never comes up in contemporary German publications, it appears completely unknown to a large number of Luftwaffe people, it fits exactly the scheme of "let's make up awesome names for our equipment and ascribe them to the enemy to show everyone how terrifying our weapons are", and it fits very badly in the human psychology scheme of using harmless terms to describe unpleasant things.

Online Etymology Dictionary

>>Languages usually don't borrow words from abroad for central life experiences, but "die" words are an exception, since they are often hidden or changed euphemistically out of superstitious dread<<

Just look at the Il-2 that certainly threatened the lives of a lot more Germans than the P-38 - it was not called "Landser's Cruel Death", but "concrete bomber". That's the way human minds work. "Gabelschwanzteufel" is clearly the product of an Allied propaganda worker - even if it had been invented in Germany, it did not have the qualities to establish itself as a popular nickname. And if it ever had established itself, the same principle of substitution - along with verbal economy - would quickly have caused the awe-inspiring "Gabelschwanzteufel" to mutate into the harmless "Gabi" in everyday use. That there is no record of this happening even in those sources that propagate the "Gabelschwanzteufel" is another hint that the story is not just a little fishy.

Not to mention that the bloody tail doesn't actually fork - "Gabelschwanz" is in fact well-established terminology for the tails of swallows and the red kite ("Rotmilan" in German, but commonly called "Gabelweihe" = 'fork harrier'). This is further evidence that this name was made up by someone not entirely familiar with the German language who had heard the term "Gabelschwanz", but lacked the context and mis-applied it.

All the hints I see point towards "Gabelschwanzteufel" being a Allied-invented myth, and "my uncle said so" has no merit at all because retro-projection of something one has read or heard second-hand after the fact into something genuinely perceived as authentic memory is a well-known effect in oral tradition.

If someone would want to prove the "Gabelschwanzteufel" myth to be fact, the way to do it would be to read the Third Reich "Sicherheitsdienst" (SD) reports from informers among the populace. They carefully kept track of whatever they heard, and have for example preserved many anti-Nazi jokes for posterity. Reporting a "defeatist" appelation like "Gabelschwanzteufel" would have been right in their line of work! Howver, given all the above, it's probably not worth the effort as the odds that it's an Allied invention are pretty close to certainty.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)


----------

