Aviation myths that will not die

[stona]

Whilst I agree with the posts above I don't think that Galland should be singled out. He was not alone in his post war attempts to distance himself from the now defeated Nazi regime, nor in the general shellacking of Goering. It is the general acceptance of this and the resulting denigration of other leaders, not just Goering, to which I object. Anyone who knows me, even online, will know that I am no Nazi apologist, but I do endeavour to support a realistic version of history, one that does not pander to such 'myths'.
Cheers
Steve

 

[Hiromachi]

Oh no, many actual men responsible for failures tried to place a blame on those who were already dead or about to be executed (like Goering), since dead cant talk. I had some good time reading memoirs of Goering, including last interviews with him during Trials. It was a very different story then what one would hear from post war opinions from specific Luftwaffe veterans.

 

[pbehn]

Hurricanes in the BoB attacked bombers while Spitfires engaged the 109s.

 

[stona]

Hurricanes in the BoB attacked bombers while Spitfires engaged the 109s.

This was an intention but in reality squadrons were tasked to raids according to their geographical position and operational status. The primary target for all aircraft of Fighter Command was always the bombers.
Cheers
Steve

 

[pbehn]

This was an intention but in reality squadrons were tasked to raids according to their geographical position and operational status. The primary target for all aircraft of Fighter Command was always the bombers.
Cheers
Steve

The priority was to parry and repel the raid, it was only late in the BoB that some squadrons were paired. I dont think it was ever really an intention more an aspiration or a hope since the Spitfire was a better adversary for the 109.

 

[Timppa]

Dubious claim concerning the P-63:

By a 1943 agreement, P-63s were disallowed for Soviet use against Germany and were supposed to be concentrated in the Soviet Far East for an eventual attack on Japan.

I have not found any credible source for this. Nor does it make any sense.
There are obvious logistical reasons, but I doubt there was any "agreement".

 

[Shortround6]

The vast majority of the P-63s were ferried to Russia by flying through Alaska. Don't know if this helped fuel the story.

 

[stona]

I would wonder why such an agreement would have been made? I'm not aware of any other WW2 arms deals in which the end user had to agree not to use the weapon(s) in any particular geographic area.
Cheers
Steve

 

[michaelmaltby]

As part of the Yalta conference the Americans got a commitment from Stalin to declare war on Japan within 90 days of peace with Germany .... as a consequence of that agreement Lend Lease supplies such as tanks and AC were specified for the Japan offensive (August Storm) by the USA and were shipped into Pacific Russian ports expressly for that campaign. Western Europe held by the Soviets wasn't stripped of any military resources except Engineering and Medical units ... all the rest were mustered east of the Urals. So possibly this Yalta understanding has led to the P-63 myth.

 

[stona]

As part of the Yalta conference the Americans got a commitment from Stalin to declare war on Japan within 90 days of peace with Germany .... as a consequence of that agreement Lend Lease supplies such as tanks and AC were specified for the Japan offensive (August Storm) by the USA and were shipped into Pacific Russian ports expressly for that campaign.

Well at least they were delivered thousands of miles from the Western Front!
I don't believe for a second that it would have stopped the Soviets using it elsewhere had they wanted to. The American idea that they could specify where it be used seems to demonstrate a rather naive appreciation of Stalin and his regime.
Cheers
Steve

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... The American idea that they could specify where it be used seems to demonstrate a rather naive appreciation of Stalin and his regime."

That was the case, IIRC.

 

[parsifal]

The soviets made their first undertakings to attack Japan at the Teheran Conference in 1943, well before any deliveries of the p-63.
Stalin promised to enter the war in the Pacific after the German defeat in Europe in return for the Allies ' promise to open the Second Front. The allies were enthusiastic for Soviet support. The chinese had proven to be incapable of dealing with the massive Japanese army and the allies simply lacked the strength to tackle the IJA head on. The "island hopping" strategy was working, and the allies knew that the strangulation of Japan could work, in a military sense against any rational opponent, but the Japanese were anything but rational opponents. Their willingness to die to the last man for the emperor, made them a formidable and intractable opponent. At the time of Tehran, no-one could rely on the Chinese, no one could rely on the b-29, no-one could rely on the atomic bomb. The allies were aware of Japanese plans to initiate Kamikaze attacks, and the expectation was at that time that this would inflict heavy losses on the Allied fleets. The allies were just not in a position to start dictating about how the Soviets might use one type of aircraft being sent to them, es[ecioally when the Soviets were getting so much out of it

 

[Milosh]

47% of Lend/Lease was delivered to the Soviet Far East.

As part of the Yalta conference the Americans got a commitment from Stalin to declare war on Japan within 90 days of peace with Germany .... as a consequence of that agreement Lend Lease supplies such as tanks and AC were specified for the Japan offensive (August Storm) by the USA and were shipped into Pacific Russian ports expressly for that campaign. Western Europe held by the Soviets wasn't stripped of any military resources except Engineering and Medical units ... all the rest were mustered east of the Urals. So possibly this Yalta understanding has led to the P-63 myth.

Engines of the Red Army in WW2 - Routes Overview

 

[michaelmaltby]

The figures tell the story, don't they?

 

[wuzak]

Another myth is that the B-17 and B-24 were the biggest, or nearly the biggest, destroyers of enemy aircraft in the air for the Allies.

 

[GrauGeist]

I do not know about the first two, but my old NAZI Landlord sure did say " der Gabelschwanz-Teufel " a lot and think it was most dangerous plane we had.

Your NAZI landlord probably read too many of Cadin's books, because "Forktail Devil" wasn't a German nickname, it was coined by Americans.

And my non-Nazi German friend of the family, who was a former Luftwaffe pilot, referred to them simply as "Lightning" and they were of the least concern to the Luftwaffe pilots. He also referred to the P-51 as a "Mustang" and had a great deal of respect for it. The P-47, was called a "Thunderbolt" and he said he was always very aprehensive of them. I should also add, for the benefit of my friends across the pond, that he also thought highly of the Spitfire, both in looks and performance.

On the otherhand, my Uncle Jimmy, who DID fly them in the PTO, called it a "Forktail Devil".

 

[MiTasol]

I know what you mean....However when famous WWII Authors promote the same "facts" its hard to get the truth out. This is an excerpt from Dr. Alfred Price's book 'Fighter Aircraft' I wonder what his sources were?

Obviously it was not the late 1960's UKCAA's Airworthiness directive controlling engine overhaul lives.
For several years it had the Allison at 600 hrs and the Merlin at 300 hours.

If anyone in the UK has access to any archives it would be worth the time to dig that document out. I stopped my subscription in 1970 and, like every other responsible LAME (the British Commonwealth equivalent of A&P) destroyed my out of date pubs.

 

[GrauGeist]

400 mph aircraft speed as certified? Racing planes had done that a decade or so earlier..
400 mph fighter plane? By manufacturers estimate/testing, or by mil-spec acceptance/service tests?

Although not accepted for service, wasn't the He 100 reputedly capable of 400 mph in mil-spec trim?
What about the MiG 3? Or Typhoon? Would the official service acceptance tests for these have predated P-38/F4U?

The He100 was never "mil-spec" since it was German designed and built. If you mean "made to RLM specifications", just say it.
As far as a record holder, yes, the He100V8 set a record of 463.9mph with a very special 2,700hp DB601 that had a life-span of 30 minutes. He100V3 and He100V8 were stripped down, modified and nothing like their military counterparts.

As it happens, the He100's world speed record didn't last, Messerschmitt's Me209 broke and held the world speed record for thirty years.

 

[wuzak]

Britain took the air-speed record shortly after the war.

With a jet. The Me 209 held the air speed record for piston engined aircraft for 30 years.

 

[wuzak]

And Mil-Spec is a type of standard - like BS, SAE, ISO, AS, DIN, JIS.