Defensive battle

[Tankworks]

I read the question as which AIR BATTLE (no sea or ground forces involved in the actual fighting other than AAA) and we all seem to be talking about extended CAMPAIGNS. Would not the LW driving the 8th AF from the daylight skys over Germany count as winning a BATTLE although eventualy losing the CAMPAIGN? So, I would put Midway up there as winning a battle, the BoB and Malta had its ups and downs along with most extended periods of warfare. Anyway, just my take on the question.

 

[davebender]

Two Luftwaffe Jagdgeschwader successfully defended NW France from thousands of RAF aircraft based in England. The BOB in reverse except it lasted 10 times as long and the defenders were greatly outnumbered.

 

[stona]

??? Color me puzzled. How so? Weren't the pilots of Finland's air force flying missions in defense of their territory. Not disagreeing (at this stage) just curious at what seems to me to be very much an air defence battle.

I just mean that it wasn't the crucial element of the winter war. Malta and the BoB were air defence battles (or campaigns if you like) in the sense that air power and the establishment of air superiority were the principle factors in the confrontation.

I don't mean that the Finnish pilots didn't fight a defensive battle,they certainly did,but it was only an element of the whole campaign and I would suggest not the most important,nor was it decisive. I've never "crunched" the numbers on this particular episode,maybe someone can prove me wrong,it won't be the first time

I apply the same qualification to the Arab-Israeli war of 1948. There were relatively very few aircraft involved and they did not play a decisive role.

The RAF played a decisive role in the defense of Malta. Without that contribution the island would certainly have fallen. The Royal Navy obviously had a role to play too.
The consequences of the loss of Malta for operations in the Mediterranean Theatre we can only guess at but they would have been significant.

Cheers

Steve

 

[oldcrowcv63]

I just mean that it wasn't the crucial element of the winter war. Malta and the BoB were air defence battles (or campaigns if you like) in the sense that air power and the establishment of air superiority were the principle factors in the confrontation.

I don't mean that the Finnish pilots didn't fight a defensive battle,they certainly did, but it was only an element of the whole campaign and I would suggest not the most important,nor was it decisive. I've never "crunched" the numbers on this particular episode,maybe someone can prove me wrong,it won't be the first time

Ahhh... Dawn breaks over marble head.. Thanks Steve.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

??? Color me puzzled. How so? Weren't the pilots of Finland's air force flying missions in defense of their territory. Not disagreeing (at this stage) just curious at what seems to me to be very much an air defence battle.

Maybe because it did not involve the RAF and the fight was not over England...



Just kidding, no one should get their panties in a bunch. I knew what you meant Stona, it was only a joke.

 

[Njaco]

I read the question as which AIR BATTLE (no sea or ground forces involved in the actual fighting other than AAA) and we all seem to be talking about extended CAMPAIGNS. Would not the LW driving the 8th AF from the daylight skys over Germany count as winning a BATTLE although eventualy losing the CAMPAIGN? So, I would put Midway up there as winning a battle, the BoB and Malta had its ups and downs along with most extended periods of warfare. Anyway, just my take on the question.

Not quite. If you were posting say August 17, 1943 or October 14, 1943, that would be a battle. The whole would be a campaign.

Would the effort put forth by the Allies for Bodenplatte be considered?

 

[stona]

Maybe because it did not involve the RAF and the fight was not over England...



Just kidding, no one should get their panties in a bunch. I knew what you meant Stona, it was only a joke.

I know !

In the light of some posts re the difference between a battle and campaign I would like to suggest that the Luftwaffe,at least the nightfighters and Flak, won what the RAF call the Battle of Berlin.

The RAF official history unequivocally calls it a defeat.

"In an operational sense the Battle of Berlin was more than a failure, it was a defeat".

Well over 1,000 bombers lost and more than 7,000 expensively trained aircrew killed or PoW.

The problem is of course that ultimately the Luftwaffe lost the campaign. It doesn't matter if you win every other battle in a conflict if you lose the decisive one.

Cheers
Steve

 

[Timppa]

I read the question as which AIR BATTLE (no sea or ground forces involved in the actual fighting other than AAA) and we all seem to be talking about extended CAMPAIGNS.

With this definition I have two more contenders:

1. Second Schweinfurt raid, which forced the USAAF to cease bombing raids beyond the range of their escort fighters (AFAIK).

2. "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". Depleted the remaining IJNAF.

 

[bobbysocks]

i was going to say the marianas islands....but bodenplatte comes to mind as well. the reich's last major air offensive..

 

[Glider]

The original question was which battle was won by the defenders.

Using that as the basis most nations had at least one air battle that they won, even if they lost the campaign.

 

[Tankworks]

It gets even trickier when you try to eliminate the triple A, the Japanese lost most of their aircraft early on to ship-board AAA (I think the USN lost more to fighters but I admit this is only a perception, not checked out) ) but I think that the Marianas battle comes closer to an air-on-air battle, not sure about Bodenplatte (of course maybe it does not matter to the question?!).

 

[oldcrowcv63]

It gets even trickier when you try to eliminate the triple A, the Japanese lost most of their aircraft early on to ship-board AAA (I think the USN lost more to fighters but I admit this is only a perception, not checked out) ) but I think that the Marianas battle comes closer to an air-on-air battle, not sure about Bodenplatte (of course maybe it does not matter to the question?!).

Tank, I am pretty sure that may be a misconception. If by early on, throughout 1942? IIRC, the introduction of the Prox. Fuse and radar directed guns made a huge difference in the effectiveness of USN AAA and began to overcome the problems plaguing the 1.1 inch Chicago Pianos. A famous quote by John Thach illustrates the effectiveness of IJN and USN AAA from 1941 to ~ August 1942 compared to CAP defense. He said (IIRC), he'd fought in the presence of both USN and IJN AAA and found both (essentially) ineffective. In the heat of battle, AAA was sometimes hyped as more effective than it actually was, mistaking any large splash as a downed enemy aircraft. USN fighters contributed significantly to fleet defense in all the large carrier battles of WW2 (Sometimes more effectively than others). Lundstrom in the second First Team volume estimates, based on IJN and USN sources and eye witness accounts, that the effectiveness of AAA approached that of the defending USN CAP. However, early claims of about 100 aircraft shot down outright were overestimates by nearly a factor of 2, in part inflated by the account of the SoDac which claimed 26 for itself (very unlikely). Total IJN A/C losses amounted to 99 from all causes but that total includes aircraft ditched due to battle damage or fuel starvatiton, those that returned as unsalvagable wrecks and aircraft destroyed on the decks of bombed carriers.

 

[Njaco]

Bodenplatte was an offensive operation by the LW that failed miserably - so, from a defensive standpoint, would the Allied effort during Bodenplatte be considered here? I actually think the German AA should get the credit!

I agree on Marianas.

 

[Juha]

Bodenplatte was an offensive operation by the LW that failed miserably - so, from a defensive standpoint, would the Allied effort during Bodenplatte be considered here? I actually think the German AA should get the credit!...

Why? In spite what Galland claimed in his memoirs, just a good case to show that memoirs are usually better take with grain of salt, German Flak shot down only 5% of LW losses during Bodenplatte compared to 47% shot down by Allied AA and 23 % by Allied fighters and 5% either by Allied AA or Allied fighters, 11% were lost to unknown causes and the rest to technical, accidents etc. Source Manhro's and Pütz's Bodenplatte.

Also a clear indication that Allied late war AA was effective when there was enough targets around
Juha

 

[stona]

Indeed,but it is worth saying that most of the allied aerial victories against the Luftwaffe during Bodenplatte were fortuitous. On more than one occasion allied aircraft just happened to be in the right place at the right time. That is not really a planned defensive battle.
Light Flak was considered by all Air Forces operating in the West to be effective and those figures support that contention.
Cheers
Steve

 

[bobbysocks]

Indeed,but it is worth saying that most of the allied aerial victories against the Luftwaffe during Bodenplatte were fortuitous. On more than one occasion allied aircraft just happened to be in the right place at the right time....... Steve

didnt you ever hear the saying, " I would rather be lucky than good!"?? luck, intuition, gut feelings was a deciding factor more than once during the war... actually that would be a good thread...

 

[Njaco]

Why? In spite what Galland claimed in his memoirs, just a good case to show that memoirs are usually better take with grain of salt, German Flak shot down only 5% of LW losses during Bodenplatte compared to 47% shot down by Allied AA and 23 % by Allied fighters and 5% either by Allied AA or Allied fighters, 11% were lost to unknown causes and the rest to technical, accidents etc. Source Manhro's and Pütz's Bodenplatte.

Also a clear indication that Allied late war AA was effective when there was enough targets around
Juha

I was being sarcastic.

I brought up Bodenplatte only in the scope that is was an air-battle which the defenders 'won'.