davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
The ground pounder version does not seem unrealistic in that I am sure they thought of all ground attack aircraft were devils and the "fork-tail" or "split-tail" could have easily been adjectives for a P-38.
P-38 German Name
- Thread starter GregP
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
As the average soldier couldnt tell the difference between a Spitfire and a B52 I cant really believe a soldier created the name unless as davparlr said it was a generic name.
I think you're wrong.
I've never fought the Germans , and I have no idea what the "average" German soldier's aircraft recognition were, but I have been up against the NVA, and VC.
They seemed to be able to tell the difference between the aircraft they had a chance to fight it out with, and which ones they'd better hide from.
If these usually poorly educated rice farmers could tell the difference, I'd think the German soldiers would at least be equal.
Even if your face is buried in the dirt, you can still tell the difference between a twin engine aircraft and a single engine, And the P-38 had one of the most easily IDed aircraft flying in WW2.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Several years ago, I had a nice conversation with a gentleman that started his tour of Europe at Normandy.
He shared a good deal of memories and one of those, was the dread of the German Tiger. Anytime they heard or saw something armored coming up, they immediately called it a Tiger, even if it wasn't.
Finding this interesting, I asked a friend who was also there, with the 82nd Airborn, and he agreed that many of the guys loathed the Tiger and had a tendancy to call any enemy armor a Tiger.
This may not have been a widespread habit and could have been something confined to a smaller group of guys or perhaps something that the later arrivals missed out on, but goes to show that there were catch-words or nick-names applied to certain things or situations.
He shared a good deal of memories and one of those, was the dread of the German Tiger. Anytime they heard or saw something armored coming up, they immediately called it a Tiger, even if it wasn't.
Finding this interesting, I asked a friend who was also there, with the 82nd Airborn, and he agreed that many of the guys loathed the Tiger and had a tendancy to call any enemy armor a Tiger.
This may not have been a widespread habit and could have been something confined to a smaller group of guys or perhaps something that the later arrivals missed out on, but goes to show that there were catch-words or nick-names applied to certain things or situations.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
I dont have your experience but time and time again the military has found that aircraft recognition is very poor. Not surprising really even pilots who should surely know what they were attacking or being attacked by regulary got it wrong.
That's true, but mistaking a P-38 for anything else takes aircraft misidentification to a whole different level.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
- Thread starter
- #28
GregP
Major
If you want to know how good we are, there is a thread not too far down where we were invited to identify some 54 aircraft by their outlines. We didn't do so well ...
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
nice Dave.
Erich
the old Sage
I have never heard truly any Lw pilot/crew call a P-38 other than a Lightning. maybe LW paras on the ground during a strafe but not one LW fighter pilot. also the P-51 was called Mustang and the P-47 was called Thunderbolt.
- Thread starter
- #31
GregP
Major
I know the Germans called the Ilyushin Il-2 a "Cementer" because they were so difficult to shoot down. There are some well known combat reports from the Russian Front where the term was used. I sort of assumed they had their own names for the planes from those combat reports. Then again, the Allied side called a 109 a "109," so it's not surprising in the least to hear the Germans called our planes by their real designations.
I think we used code names for the Japanese, and later Soviet, planes because most of our guys couldn't pronounce the Japanese names and also because getting hard intelligence from Japan was WAY more difficult than from Germany. No GI would pass for a Japanese native except for a Japanese, and we didn't trust the Japanese Americans enough to let them do that. Our Japanese soldiers fought in Europe. So it is likely we used the code names in lieu of real designations somewhat at least due to not having the designations. Of course, if you came across a crashed plane, the data plate would solve that dilemma. By later in the war we probably DID know the real names, but the code names were continued since there was no point in retraining the field people.
I think we used code names for the Japanese, and later Soviet, planes because most of our guys couldn't pronounce the Japanese names and also because getting hard intelligence from Japan was WAY more difficult than from Germany. No GI would pass for a Japanese native except for a Japanese, and we didn't trust the Japanese Americans enough to let them do that. Our Japanese soldiers fought in Europe. So it is likely we used the code names in lieu of real designations somewhat at least due to not having the designations. Of course, if you came across a crashed plane, the data plate would solve that dilemma. By later in the war we probably DID know the real names, but the code names were continued since there was no point in retraining the field people.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The Allies gave an identification system to Japanese aircraft because the Japanese used a naming system that was confusing to the Allies. They would use the application and the Imperial year it was introduced into service. You could actually have several aircraft that had the same year of service number but different applications.
The NATO names for Soviet, Warsaw Pact and Chinese aircraft were based around the ability to quickly identify (and memorize, if needed) the aircraft to the corresponding codename. Single syllable = prop, multiple syllable = jet
The NATO names for Soviet, Warsaw Pact and Chinese aircraft were based around the ability to quickly identify (and memorize, if needed) the aircraft to the corresponding codename. Single syllable = prop, multiple syllable = jet
- Thread starter
- #33
GregP
Major
I'm up on the systems of both Japanese and Soviet code names.
They were both useful, after a fashion, but of questionable necessity. It isn't that much harder to memorize the real designations tha it is the code names.
They were both useful, after a fashion, but of questionable necessity. It isn't that much harder to memorize the real designations tha it is the code names.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Well, the war department thought so...
For example, the Japanese had 14 different Type97 aircraft in service at one point or another...so if a spotter yelled out "I see a Type 97!!" how well do you think that would have gone over?
The Japanese naming conventions were far different than the Western school of thought.
For example, the Japanese had 14 different Type97 aircraft in service at one point or another...so if a spotter yelled out "I see a Type 97!!" how well do you think that would have gone over?
The Japanese naming conventions were far different than the Western school of thought.
They still do. Russian fighters all begin with an F (Fishbed, Flogger, Fulcrum, Flanker) and bombers begin with a B (Bear, Blackjack, Badger) and C for Cargo (Candid, Condor) etc...
They had to keep it simple for the fighter pilots...
Cheers,
Biff
Last edited by a moderator:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Not only pilots, but ground identification, espionage and related purposes...
It's easy to break it down, too:
Bear: Bomber, one syllable = Prop, Backfire: Bomber, multiple syllable = Jet
Fin: Fighter (Lavochkin La-7, in this case), one syllable = Prop, Fulcrum: Fighter, multiple syllable = Jet
F - Fighters, B - Bombers, C - Commercial/Cargo, H - Helicopter, M - Misc.
The Allied codes for Japanese aircraft was structured a little differently. Typically, a fighter had a male name, where female names were given to other types, like bombers and flying boats. Gliders were named after birds, trainers named after trees and transports given female names that started with a T.
- Thread starter
- #37
GregP
Major
I bet every fighter pilot in the world knows what a MiG-21 is. I'd rather hear that than "Fishbed at 11 o'clock high!"
Any jet fighter pilot worh hsi salt knows what and Su-27 and a MiG-29 is, too.
As I said, I am up on the code names and systems, I just don't particularly like them ... though "Backfire" would probably be shorther than "Tu-160."
When I say "Su-27," I tend to say the letters, as in "S ... U ... 27." Probably just me who does that. The Russians, on the other had, pronounce the two letters "Su", and they would identify it as "Sue 27." Direct and simple. I doubt anyone in the West could snap identify an Su-27 from and Su-33 or Su-35 from any great distance, but anything in the Su-27 family would SURELY get your attention if you are an F-15 pilot, as would a MiG-29. Both are serrious threats when competently flown. Ask anyone in the US who attended Cope India a few years back. There are reasons for it and we know them all, but you wouldn't take either threat lightly if confronted by one or more of the unfriendly variety.
Any jet fighter pilot worh hsi salt knows what and Su-27 and a MiG-29 is, too.
As I said, I am up on the code names and systems, I just don't particularly like them ... though "Backfire" would probably be shorther than "Tu-160."
When I say "Su-27," I tend to say the letters, as in "S ... U ... 27." Probably just me who does that. The Russians, on the other had, pronounce the two letters "Su", and they would identify it as "Sue 27." Direct and simple. I doubt anyone in the West could snap identify an Su-27 from and Su-33 or Su-35 from any great distance, but anything in the Su-27 family would SURELY get your attention if you are an F-15 pilot, as would a MiG-29. Both are serrious threats when competently flown. Ask anyone in the US who attended Cope India a few years back. There are reasons for it and we know them all, but you wouldn't take either threat lightly if confronted by one or more of the unfriendly variety.
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
"Bogies Ten O'Clock," end of story as far as RT...
In the heat of battle I don't think you could care less if it's a MiG-21, Su 27 or a wombat.
Biff?
In the heat of battle I don't think you could care less if it's a MiG-21, Su 27 or a wombat.
Biff?
Last edited:
Augsburg Eagle
Airman 1st Class
So much for:
It´s from the German book about the Me 163 from the author Mano Ziegler.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #40
GregP
Major
The P-38's surely did a LOT more damage to the Luftwaffe than the rockets and jets did to us. They DID cause a lot of consternation.
That being said, the jets were the new era. Rockets were a dead end for combat aircraft.
That being said, the jets were the new era. Rockets were a dead end for combat aircraft.
