Best WWII Air-Force

[Glider]

Its funny Bill cause you don't provide facts yourself, all you do is quote lines from already biased books on the subject.

Anyways keep on the dodging Bill, you're doing an excellent job at doing so so far.

Soren
In case you are wondering, your silence in deafening and we are waiting for some quotes from your unbiased books. I presume you have some, or you wouldn't know that all the quotes from Bill and the others are biased.

 

[Hop]

What are you doing to explain away the huge number of single engine losses for LuftFlotte Reich in January - May, 1944 timeframe? A time when only the Mustangs and 3 Lightning groups were available over Germany for daylight escort?

Do you have complete figures for Luftwaffe strength and sorties in the time period?

Hooton gives Luftwaffe Reich strength as 562 day fighters at the end of December 1943, and 853 at the end of March 1944. Yet he gives day fighter sorties for Jagdkorps I, which as I understand it included all the day fighters in Luftflotte Reich, as:

Jan 3315
Feb 4242
Mar 3672
Apr 4505
May 3805

To put those figures in perspective, with a similar sized fighter force in the BoB, the RAF flew up to 5,000 sorties a week. They totalled over 15,000 fighter sorties in July, about 17,000 in August, about 14,000 in September.

So, do Jagdkorps I daylight fighter sorties include all Luftflotte Reich day fighter sorties? (Christer Bergstrom gives the same 3672 figure for March as the total for Luftflotte Reich).

If those figures are correct for Luftflotte Reich, why was the Luftwaffe maintaining such a low operational tempo in the face of the US attack? It averages about 5 sorties per fighter per month, or just over 1 a week.

 

[SoD Stitch]

If those figures are correct for Luftflotte Reich, why was the Luftwaffe maintaining such a low operational tempo in the face of the US attack? It averages about 5 sorties per fighter per month, or just over 1 a week.

Lack of petrol? Lack of spare parts? Lack of ammunition? Lack of trained pilots? Bureaucratic mismanagement?

 

[drgondog]

Do you have complete figures for Luftwaffe strength and sorties in the time period?

Hooton gives Luftwaffe Reich strength as 562 day fighters at the end of December 1943, and 853 at the end of March 1944. Yet he gives day fighter sorties for Jagdkorps I, which as I understand it included all the day fighters in Luftflotte Reich, as:

Jan 3315
Feb 4242
Mar 3672
Apr 4505
May 3805

To put those figures in perspective, with a similar sized fighter force in the BoB, the RAF flew up to 5,000 sorties a week. They totalled over 15,000 fighter sorties in July, about 17,000 in August, about 14,000 in September.

So, do Jagdkorps I daylight fighter sorties include all Luftflotte Reich day fighter sorties? (Christer Bergstrom gives the same 3672 figure for March as the total for Luftflotte Reich).

If those figures are correct for Luftflotte Reich, why was the Luftwaffe maintaining such a low operational tempo in the face of the US attack? It averages about 5 sorties per fighter per month, or just over 1 a week.

Hop - I do NOT have complete figures for sorties but LuftFlotte Reich, acording to Dr. Price, had approximately 812 Total, 446 Effective Single Engine Fighters in service on May 31, 1944.

Even though not necessarily a good assumption, using 3805 sorties for May divided by only the Effectives - we have only 8 1/2 sorties per s/e fighter for the month. On the other hand, there weren't that many days that the Luftwaffe chose to intercept in force... and when they did a typical force for a strong reaction was 150-200 fighters - or perhaps 1/3 of the available effectives?

Based on the various statements of Luftwaffe commanders, the senior commanders well knew that they could not win an attrition war with the Allies and chose the strategy of conserving strength by massing for isolated attacks at select points in the bomber stream to a.) minimize losses to US fighters and b.) inflict as much damage as possible to try to break the will of USAAF bomber commanders.

The Oil Campaigns starting in May forced the hand of the LW to resist aggressively against targets like Merseburg, Misburg, Posnan, etc.

In contrast the 355th FG flew 22 missions for May in which perhaps the Luftwaffe was seen 6 times by this one group of six operational P-51 wings at that time. I haven't yet bothered to do a precise sortie search but estimate 900-1000 sorties for this one fighter group in May, 1944.

Regards,

Bill

 

[Soren]

What am I doing to explain away the losses of the LW fighters Bill ??

Well let me repeat what I've being saying all along:

1.) The LW was low on fuel
2.) The LW was low on trained pilots
3.) The dedicated LW fighters were always massively out-numbered
4.) The LW interceptors weren't there to fight off fighters, they were there to take down the biggest thread, the bombers. It was the bombers which were pounding the German industry, not the fighters, therefore taking down the bombers was the no.1 priority - hence the losses caused by Allied escorts. Most of the interceptors were shot down attacking the bombers.
5.) The interceptors were heavily armed and therefore didn't stand much chance if caught by the escorts.

Now despite all of this the LW still managed a decent kill/ loss ratio, and as you can see JG-26 did very well under the tight circumstances.

I also really suggest you read Willi Reschkes book on JG-301 JG-302.

 

[drgondog]

What am I doing to explain away the losses of the LW fighters Bill ??

Well let me repeat what I've being saying all along:

1.) The LW was low on fuel
2.) The LW was low on trained pilots
3.) The dedicated LW fighters were always massively out-numbered
4.) The LW interceptors weren't there to fight off fighters, they were there to take down the biggest thread, the bombers. It was the bombers which were pounding the German industry, not the fighters, therefore taking down the bombers was the no.1 priority - hence the losses caused by Allied escorts. Most of the interceptors were shot down attacking the bombers.
5.) The interceptors were heavily armed and therefore didn't stand much chance if caught by the escorts.

Now despite all of this the LW still managed a decent kill/ loss ratio, and as you can see JG-26 did very well under the tight circumstances.

I also really suggest you read Willi Reschkes book on JG-301 JG-302.

ROFLMAO - When they had fuel and were in the air, in the presence of Mustangs, in the period we are discussing - and, they got pounded.

If they didn't stand a chance - why not?

Prove your thesis that LuftReich s/e fighters were outnumbered by USAAF MUstangs - you haven't come close yet for the 1/1/44-5/31/44 timeframe

JG26 has very little to do in this discussion as they were not fighting the Mustangs over Germany - they were fighting the RAF and USAAF fighters over lowlands and France with JG2 - LuftReich is the force we are talking about - stay on topic Soren

 

[syscom3]

Soren, these are the number of P38 and P51 groups available at the end of each of the following months. And remember, the 8th AF had three bomb divisions that would attack multiple targets and the P38's and P51's often had to split up to cover them all. Many times the LW had local superiority, yet failed to defeat the AAF fighters.

Jan 1944: two P38 one P51

Feb 1944: two P38 two P51

March 1944: three P38 five P51

April 1944: three P38 six P51

May 1944: four P38 seven P51

 

[Soren]

ROFLMAO - When they had fuel and were in the air, in the presence of Mustangs, in the period we are discussing - and, they got pounded.

LoL, pounded ??! Sure what'ever Bill, I guess those 200 + USAAF personnel shot out of the sky that day were all kamikazes right ?

I repeat Bill, the dedicated LW fighters were out-numbered big time ! And the interceptors although present in higher numbers were, I repeat, after the bombers NOT the escorts !!

If they didn't stand a chance - why not?

Tell me Bill how much of a drop in performance to you think the extra armament caused alone ??? The reason I'm asking is cause I know you're clueless.

And to top that off the majority of the interceptors were carrying the ETC-501 rack, which alone robbed allot of performance.

Prove your thesis that LuftReich s/e fighters were outnumbered by USAAF MUstangs - you haven't come close yet for the 1/1/44-5/31/44 timeframe

Wait a minute are you claiming that you've proven me wrong ?! Let me remind you that you haven't provided a single shred of evidence to support your theory that the Mustangs weren't present in far greater numbers than the dedicated fighters of the LW !

JG26 has very little to do in this discussion as they were not fighting the Mustangs over Germany - they were fighting the RAF and USAAF fighters over lowlands and France with JG2 - LuftReich is the force we are talking about - stay on topic Soren

LoL, stay on topic ?? Bill you're the one who brought up the JG-26 remember

But ofcourse I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss the JG-26, the fact that it out-fought the Allied fighters on an individual basis hurts your case.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Wait a minute are you claiming that you've proven me wrong ?! Let me remind you that you haven't provided a single shred of evidence to support your theory that the Mustangs weren't present in far greater numbers than the dedicated fighters of the LW !

I am trying not to take sides here but please do me a favor.

I would like you to post facts as well. I want you to post:

a. Sources (that are not biased to either side)
b. Diagrams, Charts, Actual Loss Reports
c. Mission Reports (from both sides)

Why do I ask this?

Because this is getting stupid. You keep asking Bill for the same things that I asked you above but you dont post them either.

When someone asks you for them you tell them not to change the subject. All they are asking you to do is please prove yourself and show the facts that you claim to be posting.

Come on now guys!

 

[Glider]

What am I doing to explain away the losses of the LW fighters Bill ??

Well let me repeat what I've being saying all along:

1.) The LW was low on fuel.

In the third quarter of 1943 when the air battle over Germany was effectively lost Germany DIDN'T have a shortage of fuel. .

2.) The LW was low on trained pilots.

Wrong again. In 1943 the number of German pilots being trained increased from 1662 new fighter pilots in 1942 to 3276 new fighter pilots in 1943

3.) The dedicated LW fighters were always massively out-numbered.

Wrong again. The earlier postings proved that in Europe and over Germany in the third quarter of 1943 the LW a large number of pilots/planes easily outnumbering the small no of long range fighters available to the USAAF.

4.) The LW interceptors weren't there to fight off fighters, they were there to take down the biggest thread, the bombers. It was the bombers which were pounding the German industry, not the fighters, therefore taking down the bombers was the no.1 priority - hence the losses caused by Allied escorts. Most of the interceptors were shot down attacking the bombers.

The LW fighters were to deal with the threat that they failed indicates that their fighters were not up to the job

5.) The interceptors were heavily armed and therefore didn't stand much chance if caught by the escorts..

That the German fighters had to be upgunned (in particular the 109) to deal with the American bombers leaving themselves vulnerable to the escort fighters indicates that their fighters were not up to the job.

 

[drgondog]

I repeat Bill, the dedicated LW fighters were out-numbered big time ! And the interceptors although present in higher numbers were, I repeat, after the bombers NOT the escorts !!

Yes the prime mission was to avoid fighters if possible and defend when not possible

Tell me Bill how much of a drop in performance to you think the extra armament caused alone ??? The reason I'm asking is cause I know you're clueless.

Are we name calling again Soren? I am unconcerned about how much performance the extra armament caused Soren. The thesis is fighter against fighter, pilot against pilot in a period in which the Luftwaffe had local superiority over Mustangs and Lightnings

And to top that off the majority of the interceptors were carrying the ETC-501 rack, which alone robbed allot of performance.

Just for the sake of getting you into a limited research mode, show sources and facts to prove that all of (or the %) of III./JG26, I./JG3, II./JG3, III./JG3, IV./JG3, III./JG27 and IV./JG27 were carrying ETC-501 racks over Munich on April 24.

Wait a minute are you claiming that you've proven me wrong ?! Let me remind you that you haven't provided a single shred of evidence to support your theory that the Mustangs weren't present in far greater numbers than the dedicated fighters of the LW !

Only about ten times - citing the dates that the 354th, the 357th, the 4th, the 355th, the 352nd went Operational between January 11, 1944 through April 10, 1944. The 339th went Operational on April 30. I cited the average Effectives per mission for each of these groups to actually achieve target escorts over targets in Luft Reich theatre of operations.

I cited Dr. Price's tables for Total and Effective for LuftFlotte Reich to give you some clues on the daily available comparisons

LoL, stay on topic ?? Bill you're the one who brought up the JG-26 remember

Go back and read the posts. I cited JG26 because in fact III./JG26 was one of the Gruppe's concentrated over Munich on April 24, 1944. If you had asked me where they normally were I would have informed you that as part of LuftFlotte 3, they were in Belgium, Holland and France along with JG2 - but not this day as the controllers moved them to Regensburg area.

But of course I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss the JG-26, the fact that it out-fought the Allied fighters on an individual basis hurts your case.

Doesn't 'hurt' anything. JG26 was a very tough opponent - this isn't about 'weak' or 'tough'.

This is about simple facts that Mustangs more often than not, met superior numbers of German fighters over the assigned targets from January 11, 1944 and May 31, 1944 and thrashed them.

I can only speculate that you a.) can't do the math, or b.) don't want to do the math.

Here 'tis.

Average TO&E for Mustang Groups in 1st half 1944 = 64 Mustangs
Average Mission Strength at Take Off = 48 (three squadrons of 16)
Average number of Effectives = 36 in Jan-Mar, 46 April - May by using Spares

Number of Mustang Groups in USAAF

Jan 1944 = 1, the 354th FG 9th AF
Feb 1944 = 3, the 363rd FG 9th AF, 357th FG 8th AF
Mar 1944 = 5, the 4th (26Feb) and the 355th (28Feb)
Apr 1944 = 6, the 352nd (10th Apr)
May 1944 = 8, the 339th (30 Apr), 361st (12 May)

Now, multiply 36 x number of Groups for Jan-Mar to get number of Mustangs over the target in LuftFlotte Reich.

At the end of March a minimum of 180 Mustangs were flying Target Escort and roughly spilt to cover 35 Bomb Wings.

At the 24 of April (to get you back on track to isolate just that one mission-multiply by 46) to get to 276 Mustangs to cover 40 Bomb Wings

Now, leave LuftFlotte 3 out of the mix and assume they can't be added (that helps you, Soren) so just look at LuftReich. Ease back up to the tables and look at the single engine day fighter losses from 1/1/44- 5/31/44 for just LuftFlotte Reich... or just look for available Fighter Strength for Reich in that period. I showed you the figures for May31.

Some of those losses were due to weather, some to bombers, some to P-38's and some to P-47s on the very extrem west Germany- but by far the most to Mustangs.

Now, Soren. Find an arcane math to show that the total number of MUstang wings fighting the Luftwaffe over Germany in that time frame was more than 200 in March, or 300 at end of April. You can't but try.

Then Soren, show that more than two of those groups were ever able to engage a concentrated LW attack by s/e and t/e fighters.

To prove your thesis of greatly outnumbered you will have to show that the LW NEVER put as many as 10-12 (roughly 1:8) fighters in the same space as the 92 Mustangs in the two groups. You with me so far? And you know that is just plain silly, right?

I just proved to you that the LW concentrated 200-250 s/e fighters, nearly all Me109s with far superior performance above 25,000 feet than the Fw190s, over Munich on 24 April, 1944. I am assuming Me109G6's - you prove otherwise.

Show me Your math, Soren.

 

[Soren]

You have proven squat Bill !

Show me the number of dedicated fighters available to the LW ! All you've shown so far is the total number of fighters involved in the incident, of which the far majority were bomber interceptors.

The Bf-109's involved were std. G-6's yes, and therefore featured no boost, and again most were armed with MG-151/20 gun-pods for obvious reasons.

This is about simple facts that Mustangs more often than not, met superior numbers of German fighters over the assigned targets from January 11, 1944 and May 31, 1944 and thrashed them.

Well the problem is you twist the facts Bill. Yes counting the Mustangs alone they met more German fighters in this incident, however by far the majority of those "fighters" were heavily armed bomber interceptors, there being only a handful of dedicated fighters.

You keep claiming that the Mustangs trashed the LW in this incident, yet the LW blew 200 + USAAF personnel out of the sky that day, so who really got trashed this day ?

The LW interceptors went for the bombers, were engaged by the USAAF escorts, an yet the LW interceptors still managed to hand out more damage than they recieved.

 

[syscom3]

....
You keep claiming that the Mustangs trashed the LW in this incident, yet the LW blew 200 + USAAF personnel out of the sky that day, so who really got trashed this day ?

The LW interceptors went for the bombers, were engaged by the USAAF escorts, an yet the LW interceptors still managed to hand out more damage than they recieved.

The AAF replaced all the lost aircraft in a single days production, and the pilot training programs made good the losses without letup.

WE ultimately won because the AAF made good its losses and the LW couldn't.

Soren, a single battle proves nothing. Look at the losses from a several week long period.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

You have proven squat Bill !

Show me the number of dedicated fighters available to the LW ! All you've shown so far is the total number of fighters involved in the incident, of which the far majority were bomber interceptors.

The Bf-109's involved were std. G-6's yes, and therefore featured no boost, and again most were armed with MG-151/20 gun-pods for obvious reasons.



Well the problem is you twist the facts Bill. Yes counting the Mustangs alone they met more German fighters in this incident, however by far the majority of those "fighters" were heavily armed bomber interceptors, there being only a handful of dedicated fighters.

You keep claiming that the Mustangs trashed the LW in this incident, yet the LW blew 200 + USAAF personnel out of the sky that day, so who really got trashed this day ?

The LW interceptors went for the bombers, were engaged by the USAAF escorts, an yet the LW interceptors still managed to hand out more damage than they recieved.

Then show all your facts Soren. Dont just type them down, show the sources.

 

[Glider]

You have proven squat Bill !

Show me the number of dedicated fighters available to the LW ! All you've shown so far is the total number of fighters involved in the incident, of which the far majority were bomber interceptors.

I think you need to be reminded of a previous posting.

 

[drgondog]

You have proven squat Bill !

Show me the number of dedicated fighters available to the LW ! All you've shown so far is the total number of fighters involved in the incident, of which the far majority were bomber interceptors.

Here is a quote you must have overlooked (again) from a couple of posts back "Hop - I do NOT have complete figures for sorties but LuftFlotte Reich, acording to Dr. Price, had approximately 812 Total, 446 Effective Single Engine Fighters in service on May 31, 1944.

Even though not necessarily a good assumption, using 3805 sorties for May divided by only the Effectives - we have only 8 1/2 sorties per s/e fighter for the month. On the other hand, there weren't that many days that the Luftwaffe chose to intercept in force... and when they did a typical force for a strong reaction was 150-200 fighters - or perhaps 1/3 of the available effectives?"


Soren, That is about the third time I quoted Day Single Engine Fighter Strength for LuftFlotte Reich.. per Dr Alfred Price from The Luftwaffe Data Book and those May numbers are probably conservative relative to April 24 Day Fighter totals for the Daily Strength in April as the Luftwaffe Day Fighters took huge losses in April and particularly May when they had to come up and protect the Petroleum Industry, so I would expect late May to be less than late April?

The Bf-109's involved were std. G-6's yes, and therefore featured no boost, and again most were armed with MG-151/20 gun-pods for obvious reasons.

This may be the 10th time I (we) have asked you to produce Facts. List YOUR source for what equipment JG3, JG27 and III./JG26 were flying on 24 April? Prien would be a good place to start if I may make a suggestion?

Interesting side note. Hptn Staiger who led III./JG26 reported that his 30 Me109s were 'opposed by an extremely large escort of more than several hundred aircraft' - when in fact just the two groups, 355 and 357 (approx 93 P-51s) were escorting 5 Combat Wings over 50 miles long. See page 234 of Caldwell's JG26 book for reference.

Staiger's statement of "several Hundred escorts" would have exceeded ALL of the available Mustang units in the entire USAAF on that date and the 4th, 352nd, 354th and 363rd FG were busy guarding the 2nd and 3rd Bomb Divisions elsewhere...

Staiger's statement is fairly common for personal recollections re: overclaiming the numbers the individual pilots remembered.. and perhaps you should reflect on this as you re-read personal accounts rather than perform independent research?

Well the problem is you twist the facts Bill. Yes counting the Mustangs alone they met more German fighters in this incident, however by far the majority of those "fighters" were heavily armed bomber interceptors, there being only a handful of dedicated fighters.

Soren, Soren, Soren - stay on topic or Thesis. The thesis is that "the Luftwaffe Day Fighters often outnumbered the escorting Mustangs over the target" or conversely to your oft stated beliefs, the LW "was always outnumbered by 8 to 1 or even more" dire odds.

Follow me closely because you might be making progress with the statement above in admitting numerical superiority.. but you have yet to establish that the Me109G6 is not to be considered a German Single Engine Day Fighter?

You keep claiming that the Mustangs trashed the LW in this incident, yet the LW blew 200 + USAAF personnel out of the sky that day, so who really got trashed this day ?

The two Mustang Groups shot down 32 Me109G6's, 1 Fw190A7, 10 Me110Gs for the loss of 4 Mustangs to Me109s and 2 to mid air collisions with Me110 debris. I don't wish to mis use the English language and I tip my hat to you for your command of it, so...What does it take to meet Your standard for 'trashed' in the context for air to air battles and victory ratios between me109s and P-51s? I'll try to remember next time

The LW interceptors went for the bombers, were engaged by the USAAF escorts, an yet the LW interceptors still managed to hand out more damage than they recieved.

Yes, on this day the 8th AF lost a lot more airmen KIA, WIA and POW than the LW over Munich - because of the skill of a female controller and the courage and tenacity of the LW pilots. But don't focus on how well they did against the bombers. It has long been agreed and proven that 8th AF could not continue taking huge losses, or continue daylight bombing over Germany, unescorted. Stick to the thesis.

This day would have two more days in which the LW would claw down 10% of the attacking bombers - 29 April and 12 May. These are the last days when the LW could take a toll on more than one or two Groups of American heavy bombers

Now, back on the thesis regarding the role of the Mustang in engaging and shooting down the LW Fighters independent of odds over German territory during daylight? The above ratio is approximately USAAF 5 to LW one for Mustangs over Me110s and USAAF 11 to LW one for Mustangs over Me109G6's. See the debate thesis above Soren. LW records admit to 60 a/c lost or more than 60% damaged, make no mention of a/c crash landed (but less than 60% damaged)

I don't want you (or me) to get hung up over 24 April - I can find worse cases for the LW than this.

Just for Your benefit, Soren - pick as many examples that you care to choose for engagements in which the LW fighters trashed USAAF fighters (or RAF) if you choose.. but cite the references please so we can compare notes? See how many engagements in which the LW destroyed say, more than 7 Mustangs or Thunderbolts or Lightnings in one fight.

I actually know of several, particularly during the Normandy campaign where many fights took place on the deck, but there are less than five such examples for the 8th AF.

 

[Stupid]

Heres what I'll say, not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone, but heres what I know.

By late 1944 there were aces like Eric Hartman and Adolf Galland still alive, but alot of the other pilots were new and unexperienced, and the LW planes were in poor condition. In early 1944, the LW had already been suffering losses in Italy and the Eastern Front. Speaking of the 'Oste Front', the LW in operation Barborossa did a fantastic job, they were outnumbered immensely and managed to destroy at least half of the Russian aircraft. What didn't help the Russians is the fact that alot of there aircraft were obselete compared to the newer BF-109 models, and also compared to German pilots, Russian pilots sucked. The Russian pilots who did survive the initial attack would either become good pilots and aces or die. The advantage of numbers helped the Russians survive. Around them middle of the war they changed tactics and became actually good, and by that time had better planes then the LW as well.

On that one thing, 200 bombers, if they were B-17's, would be 2,000 people KIA, or who became POW's, on the scale of humanity then the Americans were decimated.
When a P-51 and a BF-109 met it would all depend on the pilot. but the P-51 had an obvious advantage. With the VVS (and other Russian air forces such as the PVO), RAF (including Canadians and others) and the USAAF all against the Luftwaffe, they (the LW) were fighting a desperate battle along with the rest of Germany, like fighting a pack of Coyotes with a toothpick. It would have been hard for the LW to have any great victory over the Allies.

 

[str8jax]

Any one watch dogfights on the history channel ? I know its not scientific but several of the fights shown are with 15 to 20 german fighters jumping 4 or 5 p47s or mustangs. I have yet to see one yet where its 15 U.S. against 4 german. from what i understand the luftwaffe was putting every fighter they had in the air in large hunting groups trying to stop the onslaught. It however only resulted in more german loses. They even tried Kamikaze type attacks against the bombers trying to stop them.

 

[drgondog]

Any one watch dogfights on the history channel ? I know its not scientific but several of the fights shown are with 15 to 20 german fighters jumping 4 or 5 p47s or mustangs. I have yet to see one yet where its 15 U.S. against 4 german. from what i understand the luftwaffe was putting every fighter they had in the air in large hunting groups trying to stop the onslaught. It however only resulted in more german loses. They even tried Kamikaze type attacks against the bombers trying to stop them.

While I have enjoyed many of the History Channel reproductions, I have noticed a lot of errors - The actual accounts of what happened are`pretty accurate but the HC makes a lot of bold claims w/o research - notably matching up Egon Mayer to Bob Johnson's 'Bad Day'... as Mayer was KIA eight months later and wrote no account that I am aware of that matches the encounter from Johnson'd POV - It can't be proved or disproved.

Another thing that is amusing about the otherwise excellent graphics is that frequently the control surfaces are in exactly opposite the required position for a roll... i.e sometimes they have a left aileron up/right down for a right roll.

As to the odds part, there is no great interest or drama in outcome for the example of 12 Mustangs or Jugs bouncing 12 Ju 52's for example..

Regards,

Bill

 

[str8jax]

While I have enjoyed many of the History Channel reproductions, I have noticed a lot of errors - The actual accounts of what happened are`pretty accurate but the HC makes a lot of bold claims w/o research - notably matching up Egon Mayer to Bob Johnson's 'Bad Day'... as Mayer was KIA eight months later and wrote no account that I am aware of that matches the encounter from Johnson'd POV - It can't be proved or disproved.

Another thing that is amusing about the otherwise excellent graphics is that frequently the control surfaces are in exactly opposite the required position for a roll... i.e sometimes they have a left aileron up/right down for a right roll.

As to the odds part, there is no great interest or drama in outcome for the example of 12 Mustangs or Jugs bouncing 12 Ju 52's for example..

Regards,

Bill

point taken, and im going to watch the ailerons next time and see if i can catch that ive never noticed lol