One Fifty-sixth of a Kill?

[Jack_Hill]

Thank You !
So matt, why do you ?
Fubar, what do you exactly mean ?
I just tried to disrupt a very classic tension situation using HUMOUR.
Thus trying to help returning to a basicly interesting thread.
Sorry my friends, i missed...
"Humour and friendliness should be backbone of humanity"
Do not know who said it, don't know when, but i know who did not,
May 2012.

 

[Matt308]

Sorry Mr. Hill, your humour got lost in the translation. You lost me with mention of long skinny fish, a Lockheed airplane and an ad campaign with 35k of 'something'. I'll concede your intentions were honorable.

 

[GrauGeist]

There are several documented cases were green Luftwaffe pilots bailed of thier aircraft after an Allied fighter aquired thier "6" and scores more went to thier deaths not even knowing what hit them...but personally, I have never heard of a green-horn jumping ship at the sight of "Indians"...

 

[stona]

Well,I know of several combat reports where a Luftwaffe pilot abandoned his aircraft before actually being engaged.

Late war some Luftwaffe fighter formations were very wary of attacking escorted bomber formations. 8th AF intelligence documents include radio intercepts of individual pilots refusing to engage escorted formations,as well as formation leaders giving all sorts of excuses why they cannot manage the interception. They were very much keener to attack unescorted bombers.

I don't know whether the story is true or not but there is nothing in it,from a German perspective,which immiediately discredits it.

I also note that at no point did the poster mention any US bombers,let alone a B-32 as being present at the time of the incident.The story presumably came from one of the P-51 pilots.

An open mind is the historian's friend! It would be interesting to have a date and unit,maybe an "Encounter Report" would exist...somewhere.

Cheers
Steve

 

[Njaco]

We have an open mind. Thats why we question some of the aspects of the story. But to expect everyone to believe it because "this one said that one said" is a bit unfair also.

 

[stona]

We have an open mind. Thats why we question some of the aspects of the story. But to expect everyone to believe it because "this one said that one said" is a bit unfair also.

I absolutely agree,but to dismiss a story out of hand on spurious grounds (the original poster never suggested that there were B-32s present for example) is not keeping an open mind. It's not even reading the original post properly but rather jumping to a premature conclusion.
I don't know whether the incident happened as described or not but there is no reason,that I know of,that it couldn't have. The behaviour of the Luftwaffe pilot is unusual but by no means without precedent,that this sort of thing did happen is a matter of historical record.
Surely that does not make it,as some have written above, "BS".
Stories,and especially war stories,do get embellished in the repetition but I would hesitate to accuse the officer who repeated it of having made it up. There will certainly be a nugget of truth in there somewhere.
Cheers
Steve

 

[Njaco]

....but I would hesitate to accuse the officer who repeated it of having made it up.

I don't believe that was the initial response. Most of us were questioning the facts of the story - not who was telling it.

 

[stona]

The facts do not add-up whatsoever. Again, I say this may be an elder gentlemen whose memory perhaps is not quite so clear as it used to be.

He's also quite wrong about German radio/IFF systems,but that's another topic.

Evanglider also wrote "Hearing a story from a veteran does not necessarily make it true." which is of course correct,but it doesn't make a story untrue either,particularly when the BASIC facts of the story are perfectly feasible.

1 A Luftwaffe pilot bailed out when caught in an unfavourable position by a number of US fighters.
2 Someone made a quip about sharing the victory between all the fighters present.

I doubt that there were 56 fighters present,that is the sort of thing that gets exaggerated in the telling.
I have heard many "war stories" over the past thirty years and have not to my knowledge ever heard one,no matter how superficially fanciful,that didn't have a basis in fact. Exaggerated?embellished? for sure,most "good" stories are,but fantasy? No.

Cheers
Steve

 

[Njaco]

I'm not going to get into a pissing match over what responses were. The fact remains that the member posted a story heard from a 3rd party and we questioned its facts - as ANY historical forum would.

Like this one I heard onetime....

A LW pilot was on a transfer flight to Norway when, for some reason he ran out of fuel. Not seeing anyplace good to set down, he bailed. When his chute opened and pulled him around he noticed a flight of 56 P-51s flying slightly behind him. He was always grateful afterwards for running out of gas.

 

[Matt308]

Other than crude triangulation, tell me where I'm wrong about German IFF being technically capable of making a determination of engagement. The CPE is so large as to make that impossible.

 

[stona]

Other than crude triangulation, tell me where I'm wrong about German IFF being technically capable of making a determination of engagement. The CPE is so large as to make that impossible.

Do some reading on the FuG16ZY system,particularly the Y-Verfahren part of the system.
Cheers
Steve

 

[stona]

I'm not going to get into a pissing match over what responses were. The fact remains that the member posted a story heard from a 3rd party and we questioned its facts - as ANY historical forum would.

My final word.

1 Not really,several people jumped on him for saying that the original source of the story was on a B-32 which couldn't have been in the ETO.

True,but not really challenging the facts of the story as he never said that,they didn't read his post properly. He shouldn't have mentioned the B-32,it is irrelevant and obviously confused some people.

2 Some people didn't believe a Luftwaffe pilot would simply abandon his aircraft without a shot being fired.

They did on occassion,that is a historical fact. Hopefully the detractors are now aware of it.

This isn't a pissing match,I am trying to establish the salient facts which are in my post above and,as I already said,are perfectly believable.

Cheers
Steve

 

[FLYBOYJ]

An open mind is the historian's friend! It would be interesting to have a date and unit,maybe an "Encounter Report" would exist...somewhere.

While I'm not even going to address the inital part of this story, the rest of it (B-32 gunships) turns out to be utter rubbish. It's one thing to keep an open mind, it's another to filter the source.

 

[stona]

While I'm not even going to address the inital part of this story, the rest of it (B-32 gunships) turns out to be utter rubbish. It's one thing to keep an open mind, it's another to filter the source.

The B-32 is a red herring. It is not relevant to the story and the original post never puts one at the incident,in Europe or anywhere else. The mention of the B-32 is only relevant to the man who REPEATED the story. The story is about a formation of P-51s,no bombers of any type are even mentioned.I'm not filtering the source,I'm simply reading the post.

"A formation of 56 USAAF P-51 Mustangs was proceeding into Germany in 1944. Suddenly the US pilots noticed a single BF-109 at about their altitude, proceeding seemingly casually, at right angles to their route of flight, right in front of them."

The man who repeated the story (our B-32 gunner) never suggests that he was present when this happened. The story must have come,originally,from one of the fighter pilots.

Cheers
Steve

 

[Matt308]

Do some reading on the FuG16ZY system,particularly the Y-Verfahren part of the system.
Cheers
Steve

You know what that is a fantastic idea. If you give me 7 days to do the research, I'll give you 7 days at the beach. Fair? Perhaps when you return from your vacation we can discuss this further.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The B-32 is a red herring. It is not relevant to the story and the original post never puts one at the incident,in Europe or anywhere else. The mention of the B-32 is only relevant to the man who REPEATED the story. The story is about a formation of P-51s,no bombers of any type are even mentioned.I'm not filtering the source,I'm simply reading the post.

So am I, and in a SECOND post a story is told about an event that was a figment of one's imagination. After that I question credibility.

Of course still keeping an open mind...