Murray's "Strategy for Defeat' is available on line.
http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil/digital/pdf/book/Murray_Strategy_For_Defeat.pdf
http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil/digital/pdf/book/Murray_Strategy_For_Defeat.pdf
The Bf 109 aka ME-109 landing gear myth research thread.
- Thread starter Lighthunmust
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You might want to look at this P-40, http://don-caldwell.we.bs/jg26/thtrlosses.htm
LW a/c
Sept-Dec 1943: West - 56.4%, East - 43.6%
Jan-May 1944: West - 57.3%, East - 42.7%
June-Oct 1944: West - 53.5%, East - 46.5%
LW fighters
Sept-Dec 1943: West - 78.1%, East - 21.9%
Jan-May 1944: West - 78.4%, East - 21.6%
June-Oct 1944: West - 75.7%, East - 24.3%
drgondog
Major
The debate isn't about 'total Allied air strength - it is about the Order of Battle of USAAF daylight Strategic Forces arrayed against LuftFlotte Reich single engine and twin engine day fighters. It is about the numerical superiority of the LW Fighter arm against the USAAF long range escorts during the big air battles over Germany from December 1943 through May 31. It is about the numbers of German fighters destroyed by US long range escorts (P-38 and P-51) in that timeframe in the air - as well as on the ground from Brunswick to Posnan to Brux to Munich.
There were no more US/RAF fighters involved east of Munster/Dummer Lake/Frankfurt
It is absolutely true that the number of bombers that the LW defended against was huge. It is absolutely true that many times the LW deployed far more fighters into a volume of space than the defending US fighter escorts - and were severely punished by the US escorts - despite the overwhelming local superiority of the LW in the volume of engagement.
It is absolutely true that the LW Fighter arm picked where they chose to engage the US forces in most cases. It is equally true that the German fighter arm was succcessful at punishing the B-17s and B-24s, and at least 10 times between February 20th and May 12, achieved destruction of 8-10% of the attacking bomber force.
It is also absolutely true that the Ost Front did NOT have the majority of the German Fighter Force during that period and did not even come close until the last several months of the war.
Produce your sources if you believe otherwise?
there was no overwhelming local superiority of the Luftwaffe at anytime in the west between Dec./43 and May/44,
and June/44 ~ until the end of the war. yes I know you said against fighters, not bombers. picking and choosing
single aspects of the whole. interesting. make the #'s work anyway they can eh?
so becouse as certain USAAF fighter wing associated with a bomber group means what? that it was the only fighers
escorting that particular bomber group? I don't think so.
anyways, how can one seriously consider overwhelming #'s on the Luftwaffe part. 28 USAAF fighters, 300 bombers.
show me one instance where the Luftwaffe deployed 329 fighters to intercept. an advantage of 1, let alone say
429 fighters, an overwhelming advantage of 101 (just an example). 300(B-17s) x 10 guns is 3000guns + tight flying formations. not including
fighters. oh yah.. advantage Luftwaffe
one can't pick and choose on how to play the numbers.
and June/44 ~ until the end of the war. yes I know you said against fighters, not bombers. picking and choosing
single aspects of the whole. interesting. make the #'s work anyway they can eh?
so becouse as certain USAAF fighter wing associated with a bomber group means what? that it was the only fighers
escorting that particular bomber group? I don't think so.
anyways, how can one seriously consider overwhelming #'s on the Luftwaffe part. 28 USAAF fighters, 300 bombers.
show me one instance where the Luftwaffe deployed 329 fighters to intercept. an advantage of 1, let alone say
429 fighters, an overwhelming advantage of 101 (just an example). 300(B-17s) x 10 guns is 3000guns + tight flying formations. not including
fighters. oh yah.. advantage Luftwaffe
one can't pick and choose on how to play the numbers.
Last edited:
Njaco has told you all to quit with the childish name calling and insults. This goes for all sides.
At the moment I am in Normandy and just checking in for a few minutes from my hotel. The next time I log in, if I see insults, childish name calling and just stupidity going on, offenders will be removed from the forum. It is getting really tiresome and I am done with it! The stupidity being done by both sides of the argument is ruining this thread, and I will not have that.
In short, think before you post. If you would not want someone talking to you that way, then don't say it either.
This is the final warning, for everyone...
At the moment I am in Normandy and just checking in for a few minutes from my hotel. The next time I log in, if I see insults, childish name calling and just stupidity going on, offenders will be removed from the forum. It is getting really tiresome and I am done with it! The stupidity being done by both sides of the argument is ruining this thread, and I will not have that.
In short, think before you post. If you would not want someone talking to you that way, then don't say it either.
This is the final warning, for everyone...
parsifal
Colonel
P-40 what is the source of these numbers so we can at least have a look at them. is ther an online source that you could post a link to that we could see perhaps. Obviously there are those among us that dont agree with you, so its time for you to direct us to where you seee these numbers and figures and words.
Perhaps we should do the same, although quite a bit has already been posted I see
Perhaps we should do the same, although quite a bit has already been posted I see
google " the big week", "Operation Overlord", some wikipedia entries, books would be "Gunther Rall's: A memoir", although a bit later, but gives a excellent overview of the Luftwaffe, "Bodenplatte: The Luftwaffe's Last Hope", anything by said/written by "Adolf Galland", especially his arguments with the FATMAN Hitler. theres lots of excellent sources now other then 40 year old books. hope this helps, becouse I really don't feel like scanning tons of pages.
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
I believe you have a lot more reading to do to catch up to some of the folks you are disputing, some of these folks have spent more time researching this stuff then you've been alive
Mustang nut
Banned
- 200
- Jun 14, 2011
there was no overwhelming local superiority of the Luftwaffe at anytime in the west between Dec./43 and May/44,
and June/44 ~ until the end of the war. yes I know you said against fighters, not bombers. picking and choosing
single aspects of the whole. interesting. make the #'s work anyway they can eh?
so becouse as certain USAAF fighter wing associated with a bomber group means what? that it was the only fighers
escorting that particular bomber group? I don't think so.
anyways, how can one seriously consider overwhelming #'s on the Luftwaffe part. 28 USAAF fighters, 300 bombers.
show me one instance where the Luftwaffe deployed 329 fighters to intercept. an advantage of 1, let alone say
429 fighters, an overwhelming advantage of 101 (just an example). 300(B-17s) x 10 guns is 3000guns + tight flying formations. not including
fighters. oh yah.. advantage Luftwaffe
The figures quoted by others about "the west" must be taken as true IMHO. Consider what the west is though. It stretches from France up to Norway down to Italy and of course Germany, I dont know if Poland is considered east or west for this purpose. I doubt if a 109 could cover a front of more than 100 miles for a successful interception, maybe others could clarify. To cover all the areas the LW had to cover even the numbers they had were spread thin.
On the other side a formation of B17s was vulnerable but not completely helpless to cope with return fire the LW armoured their fighters which detracted from their performance against escorts. To shoot down a bomber you give the escorts a relatively easy job.
In Aircraft production Germany just started to pass Britain in 1943 so I dont think there is any doubt that with the USA USSR and Commonwealth production they were outnumbered from 1940 onwards, that isnt to say at times they didnt have local superiority in numbers and control of the air.
This was certainly the case in Britain a squadron had a number of aircraft and a number of pilots, it was recognised that not all aircraft would be serviceable and pilots needed some rest, from memory during the BoB a squadron of 12 planes actually should have had 16 planes and pilots to be at establishment strength. For much of the battle 13 group itself was a reserve. Even during the height of the BoB about 30% of qualified pilots wernt flying but were training others or on ground staff.
I'm not going to take the time to type out ever last little tibit that I looked at. also, what does my age have to do with anything?
more brilliant minds then mine thought for the longest time that the earth was flat, and the sun revolved around the earth.
I think France was the western front. right up to the German Border. Italy was part of the MTO,
Greater Germany was Homeland. East Prussia, Austria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Hungary, Romania, etc
was the East. Cant remember the Scandinavian countries TO name. Kannel front maybe? dang
memory lol.
Glider
Captain
I would need to know a bit more about the paper. I have never seen anything like that before in the folders that I have seen
drgondog
Major
Let us take one example - 1st BD 239 B-17s, 42 P-51s 355th FG, 47 P-51's 357th FG attacking Erding Af, Landsberg and Oberpfaffenhofen around Munich. Summary 89 Mustangs, 239 B-17s.
Luftwaffe order of Battle - all of JG3, Strumstaffel 1, I. and IV/JG27, I/JG301, III/JG26, III/ZG26, I/JG5 plus elements of Edo/Kmdo. According to Caldwell and Prien the LW had approximately 240 s/e and 25 t/e fighters attacking from Ulm to Augsburg to Erding to Se Munich to sw Munich to Landsberg and Oberpfaffenhofen from 1305 to 1430.
So, in this example the LW ratio of fighters to the entire Task force was say 265/(239+89) = .81. the ratio of LW fighters to 8th AF fighters was 265/89 = 3:1. The two Mustang fighter groups were awarded credits for 30 Me 109s, 10 Me 110's, 1 Fw 190, 1 Ju 88 and lost 6 Mustangs in air to air combat. At no time did the Mustangs engage in greater force than 8 ship sections, and in most case four ship flights against the German fighters.
The known losses to the Mustangs, for which I have pilot, unit, type of aircraft and in most cases werk no = 31 Me 109s, 9 Me 110's, 1 Fw 190 and 1 Ju 88. The awards to 8th AF FC (355th and 357th) were 30 Me 109s, 2 Fw 190s, 1 Ju 88 and 10 Me 110's -----> a total overclaim for 8th AF FC of 1 Me 110, 1 Fw 190 and underclaim 1 Me 109.
The GAF accounted for 27 B-17s lost from the 1st TF - of which 9 claimed sanctuary in Switzerland, 2 were shot down by flak over France, 1 Ditched. Of the 24 destroyed in the air around Munich or sought sanctuary, 13 were LW fighters, 7 were LW Flak and 4 were combined flak/fighter.
Parse the data anyway you wish. Spin the results anyway you choose. The LW Fighter arm skillfully placed over 250 fighters in the same volumes of air for which there only 89 Mustangs - but could only destroy 24 bombers (including the limp offs to Switzerland) and 6 Mustangs for the loss of 32 single engine fighters, 10 T/E fighters.
Tell me again about no local superiority and that 8th AF achieved victory only with overwhelming numbers. I will answer you with facts, so far you talk generalties without local tactical awareness.
Get your own examples and we'll talk.. and BTW look up the LW Order of Battle over Misburg for November 26, 1944 versus 90 B-24s and 42 Mustangs of the 355th and 2SF against all of JG301, most of JG1 and parts of JG6
Luftwaffe order of Battle - all of JG3, Strumstaffel 1, I. and IV/JG27, I/JG301, III/JG26, III/ZG26, I/JG5 plus elements of Edo/Kmdo. According to Caldwell and Prien the LW had approximately 240 s/e and 25 t/e fighters attacking from Ulm to Augsburg to Erding to Se Munich to sw Munich to Landsberg and Oberpfaffenhofen from 1305 to 1430.
So, in this example the LW ratio of fighters to the entire Task force was say 265/(239+89) = .81. the ratio of LW fighters to 8th AF fighters was 265/89 = 3:1. The two Mustang fighter groups were awarded credits for 30 Me 109s, 10 Me 110's, 1 Fw 190, 1 Ju 88 and lost 6 Mustangs in air to air combat. At no time did the Mustangs engage in greater force than 8 ship sections, and in most case four ship flights against the German fighters.
The known losses to the Mustangs, for which I have pilot, unit, type of aircraft and in most cases werk no = 31 Me 109s, 9 Me 110's, 1 Fw 190 and 1 Ju 88. The awards to 8th AF FC (355th and 357th) were 30 Me 109s, 2 Fw 190s, 1 Ju 88 and 10 Me 110's -----> a total overclaim for 8th AF FC of 1 Me 110, 1 Fw 190 and underclaim 1 Me 109.
The GAF accounted for 27 B-17s lost from the 1st TF - of which 9 claimed sanctuary in Switzerland, 2 were shot down by flak over France, 1 Ditched. Of the 24 destroyed in the air around Munich or sought sanctuary, 13 were LW fighters, 7 were LW Flak and 4 were combined flak/fighter.
Parse the data anyway you wish. Spin the results anyway you choose. The LW Fighter arm skillfully placed over 250 fighters in the same volumes of air for which there only 89 Mustangs - but could only destroy 24 bombers (including the limp offs to Switzerland) and 6 Mustangs for the loss of 32 single engine fighters, 10 T/E fighters.
Tell me again about no local superiority and that 8th AF achieved victory only with overwhelming numbers. I will answer you with facts, so far you talk generalties without local tactical awareness.
Get your own examples and we'll talk.. and BTW look up the LW Order of Battle over Misburg for November 26, 1944 versus 90 B-24s and 42 Mustangs of the 355th and 2SF against all of JG301, most of JG1 and parts of JG6
drgondog
Major
I can't tell whether you simply can't visualize a 100 mile bomber stream branching toward mutiple targets, with one of three Bomb Divisions (each BD with up to 12-13 Bomb Groups of 36+ bombers) going in a different direction at some point short of a target cluster ...??
So take one BD headed for Lutkendorf, Halle, Bernburg and Merseburg to bomb all four targets, along with their long range escorts. And the second BD branches for Berlin with their escorts. And the 3rd bomb division heads for Munich. Sat for speculation sake that the bomber stream and fighter escort headed, together, to Kassel before splitting into three separate forces and reduced each bomber stream into three 30+ mile streams.
Now take January 1944. No P-47s or Spitfires passed Munster. For the mission suggested above there are two P-38 Groups and one P-51 Group available - one FG per 30 mile stream of Bombers. The fighter group took off with 48-52 fighters and lost several which had to return due to mechanical issues - average in those early days ~ 35% -------> leaving say 32 P-51s for their escort assignment.
Now look at the German controllers - they can choose to send say JG11 and JG1 after the Berlin attacking force, and allocate equal sized forces to each of the other two thrusts, or they might draw JG1, JG3, JG11 and JG27 plus ZG26 to converge on the Halle force and attck southeast of Kassel.
For sure there will be overwhelming numbers of German fighters concentration on that force -defended by a reduced sized US escort fighter force of ~ 32 Mustangs (or P-38s). The LOCAL air superiority of the German Air Force over the American Fighter force is unquestionable is it not. Further that scenario, when there were no long range escorts (i.e. Schweinfurt 8/17, 10/14/1943) resulted in the LW fighter arm inflicting damage to 8th AF that they could not sustain... so the LW succeeded enormously even if the number of fighters attacking the total force of bombers was less than 1:1.. but you must realize that the attacking fighters even in this illustration was not along 60-100 mile stream - it was against two or three bomb groups - one at a time and LOCAL air superiority in that volume was still with the attacking force of LW s/e and t/e fighters.
Fast forward to March 15th. Now there could be two 8th AF FG escorting say 200+ bombers from one BD against 200+ fighters attacking one bomb group at a time - and for sure only one of the two fighter groups (of say 40 P-51s) would be close enough to provide resistance. And this is best case because there are only 5 long range escort FG's to escort three separate bomb divisions - and have to be split among all three.
Fast forward to April 15, for one Task Force of 300 bombers there will be two each for the three BD .
Fast forward to May 15, for one task force of 300 bombers, there were up to three Fighter groups as seven combined P-38/P-51 groups flying 70+% effectives... which meant that at any point the LW chose to concentrate the LuftFlotte Reich resources he could put 250 fighters into a volume that at best could be met head on by One FG of say 40 Mustangs with two more that could get there in five to ten minutes.
That is the tactical scenario over Germany from December 1, 1943 through July 1944.
yes, I can visulaize a 100mile wide/long bomber stream, very well. the Luftwaffe spread itself over that stream. not always though mind you.
just like not all 200+ bomber formations broke up. they stayed in the tight formations. not always, but sometimes.
I think you are seriously under estimating the strength of the USAAF fighter forces. read all you can on Operation Overlord and Allied quest for air superiority.
the number of Luftwaffe a/c your quoting is not from official German records, I can promise you that. there more likey taking from allied pilot accounts of
estimated enemy a/c numbers. three things one needs to know before hand
1. planes on hand for any givin groupe
2. planes combat ready for any given groupe.
3. pilots on hand for any given groupe.
just becouse US reports say thay for instance 7./JG11 had 40 a/c, it could mean that as little as 10 were ready.
in the sky, who knows how many single a/c were numbered twice, or three times maybe.
Luftwaffe records and LW pilots accounts are in my book, far more reliable. and thats what I go by.
one more thing... not all of the German a/c was on the west front. I can't stress that enough. the Luftwaffe had
no clear advantage during Dec./43 through July/44. It was just not possible. except for, and I'll concede this fact,
a very few isolated pockets.
just like not all 200+ bomber formations broke up. they stayed in the tight formations. not always, but sometimes.
I think you are seriously under estimating the strength of the USAAF fighter forces. read all you can on Operation Overlord and Allied quest for air superiority.
the number of Luftwaffe a/c your quoting is not from official German records, I can promise you that. there more likey taking from allied pilot accounts of
estimated enemy a/c numbers. three things one needs to know before hand
1. planes on hand for any givin groupe
2. planes combat ready for any given groupe.
3. pilots on hand for any given groupe.
just becouse US reports say thay for instance 7./JG11 had 40 a/c, it could mean that as little as 10 were ready.
in the sky, who knows how many single a/c were numbered twice, or three times maybe.
Luftwaffe records and LW pilots accounts are in my book, far more reliable. and thats what I go by.
one more thing... not all of the German a/c was on the west front. I can't stress that enough. the Luftwaffe had
no clear advantage during Dec./43 through July/44. It was just not possible. except for, and I'll concede this fact,
a very few isolated pockets.
Did all 265 German fighter attack same time? I very heavy doubt they would that skillfull... very difficult to achieve. Planes take off different base, different time, they do not arrive at same time, even difficult to make them meet and join in one point.
Mustangs were concentrated on the other hand.. this is advantage, even if smaller force.. you take great effort to emphasize: only 8 Mustangs or four attack at one time. You are right of course, because it is important detail. But at same time, it seems you assume the German arrived in big single blob of 250+ fighter.. or at least do not give details much. I am sorry if I misunderstood, but it reads so.
You did not give date so I guess first half 1944. Februar? So I have to look up bases more difficult.
I/JG 3 likely near Magdeburg, in Sachsen-Anhalt
II/JG 3 in Northern German, in triangle of Berlin-Hamburg-Lübeck
III / JG 3, Bavaria.. West of München.
IV / JG either North German like II Gruppe or Western German border (Venlo)
III/JG 26 was in Belgium.
I/JG 27 in Austria, Wagram.
IV/JG 27 in West Hungary or Zagreb/Balkans I believe..
I./JG 301 in Bavaria, near Münich...
I/JG 5 a little more North more, near Nürnberg.
III/ ZG 26 near Hannover
That's where they took off. These are bases of units, hundreds of kilometers away.
Are you saying Bf 109G from Belgium, Austria, Balkans, Bavaria from München and Nürnberg, Magdeburg etc., all managed to converge and attack at same time 89 Mustangs? Sorry, I so much unbelieve that there is not words.. if true the Germans were masters of air defence coordination. Far better than British who could not do same in 1940 with much more closer space and airfields where fighters were stations.. at best, 2-3 Squadrons in Big Wings. 250 attack at same time? Never..
BTW all unit of them Bf 109G. And people all say how poor range was, and how limiting factor was in defence operation.. above example operation shows how false. 109G can Belgium, Austria, Balkans, Bavaria from München and Nürnberg if you example is true.
So please never never never again like hear this board claim again about how short range was disadvantage for 109G.. this is also example of people ask for in last discussion, parsifal, shortrund and I think, Juha. Here is example for them.. so I think myth really rested now. You also.
Did all 250 fighter attack once? Or in groups of 10, 30, 50 etc. against 89 Mustangs? Because if they attack in piece - "over 250 fighters in the same volumes of air for which there only 89 Mustangs" is great misleading. Especiallyas one German Gruppe come from Belgium, and another take off to intercept from Hungary... while Mustangs are all there all the time.
Okay. I tell. Please comment on US made graph. Tell no overwhelming numbers... perhaps not local.. not all time.. but general, in most case, it is true.
Maybe a few of you will find this document interesting. Translated german documents by a Lt Col of the USAF on the german perspective of the battle of Britain including the german sources of his document.
View attachment Battle of Britain A german perspective.pdf
View attachment Battle of Britain A german perspective.pdf
Sorry to argue... LOL, really do not mean to be trouble. But if you read this paper - what makes the perspective "German"? The title? It is a study write by US colonel.. based on sources mostly British. Hardly German.. the only German source he quotes is Klee, but only a few times.. otherwise: lot of quote of Irving, Murray, Macfarland, Lee, Mason, Wood and Dempster.. even British Air Ministry. All British, except Murray, who had a cold war propaganda in his mind.. sorry, I think he quotes Bekker once.. but that is not very good book. IMHO, no offense meant for author.
Why not read actual German perspective - can you find Karl Klee study? That IS German perspective.
Find here:
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-051.pdf
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-052.pdf
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-055.pdf
VERY long read.. also difficult to read.. but extreme interesting. There is actual view on what was going on in heads in German HQ.. not like post-war historians, typical British, "imagine" it how it should have gone..!
PS. I sorry could not answer to everyone.. but I like parsifal did more serious approach to discussion.. I read his post of clearance.. so will try to answer, but I have also work to do etc.
There are 920 fighter plane (109 type) servicable, 917 pilots to fly them.. what about it?
Why not read actual German perspective - can you find Karl Klee study? That IS German perspective.
Find here:
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-051.pdf
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-052.pdf
http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090518-055.pdf
VERY long read.. also difficult to read.. but extreme interesting. There is actual view on what was going on in heads in German HQ.. not like post-war historians, typical British, "imagine" it how it should have gone..!
PS. I sorry could not answer to everyone.. but I like parsifal did more serious approach to discussion.. I read his post of clearance.. so will try to answer, but I have also work to do etc.
There are 920 fighter plane (109 type) servicable, 917 pilots to fly them.. what about it?
Last edited:
