“Never in the field of human conflict....

[v2]

....was so much owed by so many to so few"

Hi,
I'd like to show you an interesting site about polish pilots in BoB...

http://www.ww2.pl/Battle,of,Britain,175.html

 

[Brunner]

Well, well, well. Indeed very nice site, v2.
Enjoyed it very much.

Witam. Niestety mało jest takich stron, z których możnaby "uczyc" innych polskiego wkładu w zwycięstwo w wojnie.
Dlatego każda jest na wagę złota.

)))

 

[v2]

Cześc Brunner. jak widzisz robię co mogę aby im pokazac, że mamy i tradycje i wkład w światowe lotnictwo. Może razem zdziałamy więcej?

 

[crowdpleaser]

here in holland is an small island called texel, ive been there a few times an 1 time i went 2 a monument for polish pilots killed here over holland with a burial place an a large book with the names, ranks and aicraft the flew.

I never knew the polish pilots were so active because no1 ever says anything about them, i think its an bad think notto remeber these men.

You also never hear any good thing about the germans, its always negative, but these pilots werent al nazi's , the were workless men who needed money for there children.

and also the germans made great areal victories over the year 91939/1940 and futher on in dunkirk and whole france.

these man should be honoured to.

 

[Brunner]

You also never hear any good thing about the germans, its always negative, but these pilots werent al nazi's , the were workless men who needed money for there children.

and also the germans made great areal victories over the year 91939/1940 and futher on in dunkirk and whole france.

these man should be honoured to.[/quote]

You're absolutely right. Unfortunately many people think that being a German soldier during ww2 equals being a nazi.
Sure, in Luftwaffe were many,many outstanding pilots, many of whom really had nothing with the nazi regime.

I can't recall correctly, but in one of the jagdgeschwaders in the western Europe for some time the swastikas were overpainted.

 

[Brunner]

Cześc Brunner. jak widzisz robię co mogę aby im pokazac, że mamy i tradycje i wkład w światowe lotnictwo. Może razem zdziałamy więcej?

Czemu nie! Jak tylko wpadnie w moje łapki coś czym warto zainteresowac innych, to natychmiast to umieszczę.

A tak btw, wesołej reszty Świąt i Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku

 

[cheddar cheese]

You also never hear any good thing about the germans, its always negative, but these pilots werent al nazi's , the were workless men who needed money for there children.

Same with the Italians...Everyone says they suffered Terrible losses in the Battle with the CAI but the figures were pretty good...

Reading a book about it at the moment which is both funny and interesting...Some good figures ill post later...

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

you can't deny they sucked though

 

[cheddar cheese]

I can deny it, The book proves it!

Heres just one of the many funny things...

From the controversial book "Mussolini Aviatore" by Guido Mattioli
"No machine requires so much human concentration of soul and will power as a flying machine to make it work properly. The pilot understands the fullest meaning of the word 'control'. Thus it seems that there is an intimate spiritual link between Fascism and Flying. Every airman is a born Fascist."


On a more serious note the figures for the CAI (Corpo Aerei Italiano) in the Battle Of Britain are...
170 aircraft, consisting of 87 fighters, 78 bombers and 5 strategic reconnaissance planes, and a total of 6,600 personnel of all ranks. the aircraft recorded a total of 1,076 operations in just over 1,800 hours of flight, for the loss of 24 aircraft and 20 men.

 

[plan_D]

What missions were they taking part in? What aircraft did they shoot down? How much trouble did they cause the RAF?

And the Italians were dump, it's a well known fact. I'd like to learn more about the Italians in the war - but ... it, unfortunately, can be put into the simple terms "The Italians should have never joined the war, they were dump"

 

[cheddar cheese]

They were only assigned missions to East Anglia...and cause very little damage at all. In fact I think most of the hits were on dummy airfields

Its not a fact they were crap, its more of a myth than you might think it is...At least thats what ive read so far, i'll soon find out...

 

[plan_D]

Losing little, but causing no damage is hardly a good argument for Italy being a capable nation to wage war.

The Italians were soundly defeated more often than not. I think I'll put my money on the Italians being incapable of combat, rather than being capable of it. The only defence anyone ever has for Italy is that it's industry wasn't capable of sustaining war - which is true, but it doesn't change the fact that Italy was no good.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well that too could be used as an argument for them sucking, you shouldn't join a war if you can't sustain it.........

and CC how many did they shoot down?

 

[cheddar cheese]

No idea...maybe ill find out later...

It wasnt the fact that their industry couldnt sustain it, it was just that the weapons and equipment were poor...As was the Training. They werent cowardly, they just couldnt take on the Allies and their stronger, better more numourous equipment. All the CAI pilots knew that they were doomed, despite Mussolini saying that the British were nearly defeated etc...Mussolini was a fool, its mostly his fault that the Italians were abismal.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well then they're still crap no matter whose fault it is!

 

[plan_D]

That's the only defence anyone has for the Italians - but let me remind you ... they were beaten by Greece!

 

[Gnomey]

That's the only defence anyone has for the Italians - but let me remind you ... they were beaten by Greece!

I think they were also defeated by Albania as well as by a British force a tenth of their size in North Africa and by the (almost defeated) French in the Alps just before France fell. They were crap it was down to everything though training, leadership, Mussolini as well as the fact they could not sustain war.

 

[cheddar cheese]

The British force was 1/3rd their size...

They werent crap though. Their Planes were damned good from 1941, and initially so was their navy, but their tactics of leaving it in port is why they got hammered by the British there.

They could sustain war - Just not at a very high rate. All of their factories suffered severe poundings too, and as a lot of there equipment was manufactured in just one place it hurt them badly.

Their pilots were very capable, but the fact that they had such poor outdated planes when they entered the war was why the losses were so high. Had they had MC.202's from the outset it may well have been different.

Training and Leadership were, really, the only two bad things.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but their tactics of leaving it in port is why they got hammered by the British there

well that still makes the italians bad! that's like saying they won the war if you don't take into account they lost

All of their factories suffered severe poundings too, and as a lot of there equipment was manufactured in just one place it hurt them badly

well that's still makes them a bad warfaring nation! don't produce everything in the same place!

 

[plan_D]

Yes, CC, you're just telling us everything we already knew. Everything you're pointing out is showing us that the Italians were no good at waging war. Italy lost, they were beaten by practically everyone they fought against. That, in itself, is proof enough - they were nowhere capable of fighting ...well, anyone!

They had out-dated planes ... well, if only the Kriegsmarine had the size and scope of ships as the USN did in 1945 - they might have won the battle of the Atlantic ...


The British in Eygpt were out-numbered 6:1 by the Italian forces when Italy invaded. The British counter-attacked, and captured 100,000 Italians, with a loss of 1,200 wounded or killed - hardly a good case for Italy.

And the Italians actually had the right idea by keeping their fleet in Taranto, but it should have been better protected from the air. The idea is known as "fleet in being" - which was a term coined by the Royal Navy in the 17th Century.
It means that while your fleet is still in existance, you divert enemy forces away from other active theatres to watch over yours. Italy knew that a pitched battle against the Royal Navy would be a loss, and the best option they had was use the fleet in being tactic to divert the Royal Navy from the Atlantic and North Sea. But ...the Royal Navy proved naval supremacy once again, and with courage, speed and surprise destroyed the incompetant Italy navy ... During World War I - "fleet in being" was used by most forces since they didn't want their Dreadnoughts destroyed.

You haven't provided any evidence that Italy was capable of waging modern war. They lacked skill, equipment and trained troops...for god sake, Greece beat them!

Oh yeah, and what book are you readin'!? Is it "The Chianti Raiders" by Peter Haining!?