Great book by the way. My wife got it a few for me for my birthday a few years ago.
German B-24 infiltrating US B-24 formations?
- Thread starter B-17engineer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Great book by the way. My wife got it a few for me for my birthday a few years ago.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
You would think that the LW pilots of these captured aircraft would have left plenty of details of their activities when trying to infiltrate the bomber streams.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Don't think so Hollywood tactical. Keep in mind that an Allied bomber mission was over Axis held territory many hours and not but a few of those times under actual flak and fighter attack. So coordinating a Luftwaffe special forces type interception with a deceptive airplane is not that far fetched. It's not like US bombers were attacked from entry to egress of German held geographical boundaries. It's certainly possible.
- Thread starter
- #25
B-17engineer
Colonel
Erich the date of the incident I spoke of in the OP was November 26th, 1943
- Thread starter
- #26
B-17engineer
Colonel
I do think, it's not right to say something like this NEVER happened. Sure it may not have been protocol but at some point or another it may have happened
Göring admitted to using Allied transport planes to drop Spies in the Balkans
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I didn't say it never happened, I only questioned if it ever did. I have never come across any reputable facts or data saying it occurred. I would think a pilot that pulled something like this off or anybody associated with it would have bragged about it after the war - I sure as heck would have.
In regards to the use of captured aircraft as transports or to drop spies behind the lines is well documented to have occurred.
- Thread starter
- #28
B-17engineer
Colonel
Göring said it never happened but he had no way of knowing each and every thing Luftwaffe units did
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
RAF 100 group used B17s so possibly it was an RAF plane. No. 100 Group RAF - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
In Stahl's book 'KG 200', covering, and describing in some detail, his time with that unit, there is no mention of these type of flights with the captured aircraft at their disposal. That's not to say it didn't happen - there have been accounts from both USAAF and also RAF escorts, where it was thought a B-17 or B-24 was 'tailing' a formation, at some distance.
A Ju 88 was sometimes seen to 'stand off' from a bomber formation, reporting back altitude, weather and any course changes, but whether this was also done with captured aircraft is open to speculation - and why use a big, un-familiar, 'foreign' type, when types such as the Ju88, Bf110 etc could do the job?
A Ju 88 was sometimes seen to 'stand off' from a bomber formation, reporting back altitude, weather and any course changes, but whether this was also done with captured aircraft is open to speculation - and why use a big, un-familiar, 'foreign' type, when types such as the Ju88, Bf110 etc could do the job?
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I also read that. Though, I think it was third hand account, McGovern "had heard of it".
However, in "the diary of a tail gunner" by John Gabey exists a first person account of a tail gunner seeing an "odd B-17".
That last source is online and I advice all of you to read this diary. Just a few pages.
The History Place - Personal Histories: Diary of a Tail Gunner by John Gabay
Kris
The KG 200 reports came from one PoW and are not corroborated by anybody else who served with the unit.
Nobody in their right mind would fly a solitary US bomber, in spurious US markings, over Germany at a time when there were genuine "enemy" formations in the vicinity. That bomber will have to fly alone to find the Americans and again when it leaves the formation making itself a prime target for Luftwaffe fighters, particularly as it falls out of formation. Forcing a bomber out of formation was a primary aim of Luftwaffe fighters resulting in a credit (2 points) for a "Herausschuss" precisely because it rendered that bomber vulnerable and much easier to destroy. Only one further point was scored for downing a heavy bomber already forced out of formation.
Some idiot is going to mimic that manoeuvre voluntarily by leaving the bomber stream!
I don't buy it. I've never heard a reliable and corroborated report of such activity from a Luftwaffe source (certainly not documented) and given the propensity of all airmen to misidentify their own as well as enemy aircraft I'd be very sceptical of reports from American airmen, no matter how genuine they might be.
German Flak units had a habit (just like our own AAA) of shooting at anything that flew overhead. Imagine flying a genuine enemy aircraft over such trigger happy soldiers. It's why all captured enemy aircraft were painted with large areas of yellow on the lower surfaces. It offered some measure of protection.
Our idiotic/heroic pilot, having miraculously eluded the Luftwaffe in his bomber, complete with US markings, is now going to approach and land at a Luftwaffe airfield. I hope his radio works, someone is on the same wavelength and and they know that he is coming. All the "colours of the day" fired out of the window are not going to save him. It's just to risky to have been attempted without some pressing reason.
We should not forget that the Luftwaffe had their own high flying and modified Me 410s to track the formations from the air, not to mention radar etc.
Can anyone give a good reason why the Luftwaffe would attempt such a suicidal ploy?
Cheers
Steve
Nobody in their right mind would fly a solitary US bomber, in spurious US markings, over Germany at a time when there were genuine "enemy" formations in the vicinity. That bomber will have to fly alone to find the Americans and again when it leaves the formation making itself a prime target for Luftwaffe fighters, particularly as it falls out of formation. Forcing a bomber out of formation was a primary aim of Luftwaffe fighters resulting in a credit (2 points) for a "Herausschuss" precisely because it rendered that bomber vulnerable and much easier to destroy. Only one further point was scored for downing a heavy bomber already forced out of formation.
Some idiot is going to mimic that manoeuvre voluntarily by leaving the bomber stream!
I don't buy it. I've never heard a reliable and corroborated report of such activity from a Luftwaffe source (certainly not documented) and given the propensity of all airmen to misidentify their own as well as enemy aircraft I'd be very sceptical of reports from American airmen, no matter how genuine they might be.
German Flak units had a habit (just like our own AAA) of shooting at anything that flew overhead. Imagine flying a genuine enemy aircraft over such trigger happy soldiers. It's why all captured enemy aircraft were painted with large areas of yellow on the lower surfaces. It offered some measure of protection.
Our idiotic/heroic pilot, having miraculously eluded the Luftwaffe in his bomber, complete with US markings, is now going to approach and land at a Luftwaffe airfield. I hope his radio works, someone is on the same wavelength and and they know that he is coming. All the "colours of the day" fired out of the window are not going to save him. It's just to risky to have been attempted without some pressing reason.
We should not forget that the Luftwaffe had their own high flying and modified Me 410s to track the formations from the air, not to mention radar etc.
Can anyone give a good reason why the Luftwaffe would attempt such a suicidal ploy?
Cheers
Steve
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Believe what you want - there is more than enough proof and ample evidence that at least in 1943 the LW did play around with infiltrating captured aircraft and some of the KG 200 captured aircraft were left in their original markings (or later had original markings applied). Erich called it out perfectly, I doubt this was actively or purposely done by 1944, but some of these pilot reports do justify this.
You say "Nobody in their right mind would fly a solitary US bomber, in spurious US markings, over Germany at a time when there were genuine "enemy" formations in the vicinity." Well no one in their right mind would fly a manned V-1 on a suicide mission or fly a -109 dragging cables into B-17 or B-24 formations so they could be tangled up in the props? How about flying into bomber streams and firing upward firing mortars into B-17 and B-24 formations? How about Wilde Sau missions?
A sole KG 200 member made this claim and was disputed by other members and some historians - I wonder why? I'd like to know this person's role within KG 200 and those who might dispute the claims. Here's some info about the unit's B-17s and their use...
Luftwaffe Resource Group - B-17 Flying Fortress
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #34
B-17engineer
Colonel
Well I think (pure speculation) the rationale would be....maybe we can report course, altitude, formation, and weather changes without being harassed if we use an aircraft that would 'fit in' so to speak.
Erich
the old Sage
~ Harrison getting back to the olive drab Mustangs in LW markings the Lw test unit Zirkus Rosarius tested the P-51B's that they captured and they were left in dark colors but with LW markings the spinners were white. the unit was not allowed to operate in the defensive role but was a traveling circus of mixed captured types going from one Lw defensive airfield to another using their said A/C for teaching principles to all pilots of Reich defense. Mock combats at low altitude were performed and of course much films were recorded on just where and how - ha ha a mustang or heavy bomber could be encountered best.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Sometimes aircrews cannot safely egress the aircraft (altitude). Additionally for the sake of survival, it is sometimes easier to land the aircraft rather than trying to bail out. Jumping out of an aircraft unplanned is not a good thing and many times could result in injury or death. Personally, I would only jump from an airplane in the event of fire or major structural failure (providing I had a parachute).
They could do that without recourse to such nonsensical tactics as infiltrating the bomber stream.
A manned V-1 never happened offensively, though supposedly some were flown. I'm not sure that Hanna Reitsch would come under a heading of reliable witnesses. There were plenty of volunteers for manned missions, at least according to more than one SS source.
None of the others are suicidal and at least stood a chance of inflicting some damage. Desperate times breed desperate measures. I notice even those who believe that US marked aircraft were used to infiltrate the bomber stream for some undisclosed reason don't report that these "wolves in sheeps' clothing" actually attempted to inflict any damage.
My question stands, why would you carry out such a risky mission for no tangible advantage?
The other question is not why historians and other members of KG 200 are disputing one man's claims but why is he making such unsupported claims? I'm reminded of the Mexican taxidermist who created an "alien" using principally parts of a Marmoset simply to raise his own profile. There are still people who swear that they saw his concoction alive
Cheers
Steve
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #39
B-17engineer
Colonel
Thanks Erich!
I've thought this too but when you think of how risky parachuting was/could be landing it makes sense in some cases
Here's what I think; For an observation role/testing using a captured allied aircraft would make a lot of sense
Using it for a combat role would be silly because if you get shot down or don't properly know how to fly it (fuel transfers etc. etc.) you'd have wasted a perfectly good piece of technology you could use to your benefit
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Desperate times breed desperate measures.
