The Greatest Fighter Pilot of WWII... Finalized....
- Thread starter lesofprimus
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hello there, I´m new here, too.
My favourite Pilots of the war were those defending their country against the intruders, like the British in the BOB, the Russians, just to call some... But of all nations, the LW impressed me most. Sure, first i hated Göring too, saying bad words about the LW-Pilots in Defense, like those stationed in Italy, or those in the Reichsverteidigung duty... BUT i read a lot and must admit, that there were enough Pilots who gave every day their best doing their duty and got not the success demanded by their leaders. It was a hard job, but a man who can surpass these fears and mental problems could really achieve success. Many could not and were called cowards, probably i could no do better in thei place... But there were cowards amoung those who fought and gave much, gave all they had and propably lost their life. Those Pilots, wo could fight against the Viermots, to breakethrough the escort (or to fly against them) ervery day, do their duty, lead their unit or do the proper job in the unit, those pilots i do admire. They were unselfish. Their life on the ground was not easy at all. But they did it.
Men performing well in the Reichsverteidigung, doind their job well for many years, leading units to success, like
Konrad "Pit" Bauer
Georg-Peter "Schorsch" Eder
Anton "Toni" Hackl
....
Especially Eder is my favourite, flying at the end the 262 scoring at least 14 propably 24 victories, and being wounded in January 45 before the Jet-units could achive their greatest success and action...
But there were others, like
Hans Ehlers
Alwin Doppler
Anton-Rudolf Piffer
Rudolf Engleder
Herbert Huppertz
Josef Wurmheller aso....
Not to forget the newcomers, young Pilots doing their job without having any or great experience in combat, like
Willi Unger 24v in 59 missions, 21 Viermots,
Willi Reschke 27v in 48 missions, 19 Viermots,
Walter Loos 38v in 66 missions, 22 Viermots... aso....
those Pilots got in very few missions their greatest success. In the end they flew many missions on Eastern front, mostly escort and groudattack, too.
ASO
It is hard to say who was the best. Propably nobody could answer this, because people cant be compared really. They can be compared by thei victories, their experience, their lobby and fans (some have none and were good pilots, too, like Buehligen), theis kills per sortie/day/rounds...
On all sides the pilots of all nations did their job very well and some didnt. Thats the point. Nobody has the exactly same conditions (not even physical conditions, since Hartmann, Lang, Marseille... had for example excellent eyesight. Douglas Bader, "Assi" Hahn had not- and Barkhorn and Balthasar had even glasses!)
My favourite Pilots of the war were those defending their country against the intruders, like the British in the BOB, the Russians, just to call some... But of all nations, the LW impressed me most. Sure, first i hated Göring too, saying bad words about the LW-Pilots in Defense, like those stationed in Italy, or those in the Reichsverteidigung duty... BUT i read a lot and must admit, that there were enough Pilots who gave every day their best doing their duty and got not the success demanded by their leaders. It was a hard job, but a man who can surpass these fears and mental problems could really achieve success. Many could not and were called cowards, probably i could no do better in thei place... But there were cowards amoung those who fought and gave much, gave all they had and propably lost their life. Those Pilots, wo could fight against the Viermots, to breakethrough the escort (or to fly against them) ervery day, do their duty, lead their unit or do the proper job in the unit, those pilots i do admire. They were unselfish. Their life on the ground was not easy at all. But they did it.
Men performing well in the Reichsverteidigung, doind their job well for many years, leading units to success, like
Konrad "Pit" Bauer
Georg-Peter "Schorsch" Eder
Anton "Toni" Hackl
....
Especially Eder is my favourite, flying at the end the 262 scoring at least 14 propably 24 victories, and being wounded in January 45 before the Jet-units could achive their greatest success and action...
But there were others, like
Hans Ehlers
Alwin Doppler
Anton-Rudolf Piffer
Rudolf Engleder
Herbert Huppertz
Josef Wurmheller aso....
Not to forget the newcomers, young Pilots doing their job without having any or great experience in combat, like
Willi Unger 24v in 59 missions, 21 Viermots,
Willi Reschke 27v in 48 missions, 19 Viermots,
Walter Loos 38v in 66 missions, 22 Viermots... aso....
those Pilots got in very few missions their greatest success. In the end they flew many missions on Eastern front, mostly escort and groudattack, too.
ASO
It is hard to say who was the best. Propably nobody could answer this, because people cant be compared really. They can be compared by thei victories, their experience, their lobby and fans (some have none and were good pilots, too, like Buehligen), theis kills per sortie/day/rounds...
On all sides the pilots of all nations did their job very well and some didnt. Thats the point. Nobody has the exactly same conditions (not even physical conditions, since Hartmann, Lang, Marseille... had for example excellent eyesight. Douglas Bader, "Assi" Hahn had not- and Barkhorn and Balthasar had even glasses!)
- Thread starter
- #163
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Welcome...
I will have to agree with u concerning Konrad Bauer, one hellofa pilot, and an excellent leader to boot...
BTW, some of Loos victories are in question...
I will have to agree with u concerning Konrad Bauer, one hellofa pilot, and an excellent leader to boot...
BTW, some of Loos victories are in question...
lesofprimus said:
I believe off the top of my head Bauer shot down something like 30-35 bombers, thats impressive, he was a brave man. After all my reading about German pilots taking on the those USA bomber boxes, I would sooner take on the fighters any day than fly in at those bomber boxes. It had to be very unnerving sliding down in your seat as you get with in range of the bombers and see tracers flying by and hitting your plane and still head in and press your attack knowing anyone of those shots could end your life. IMHO those men who attacked the bomber boxes were the bravest men of them all. Whether you lived or died depended alot on sheer luck.
I just bought a book this weekend about Luftwaffe aces in the western front. What is interesting, and I had heard these conclusions before were that:
1. If USAAF pilots had been allowed to fly as many missions as Luftwaffe pilots thier scores could have been theoretically as high as the highest Luftwaffe pilots.
2. USAAF pilots were just as good and thier equipment as good as the Luftwaffe in 39-41 when the Luftwaffe was still fighting a wholly offensive campaign. By 1943 the USAAF was on the attack role while the Luftwaffe was on the defensive.
So, it sort of backs up (not proves) that Gabreski, Yeager, Mahurin and so on were just as good both in skill and equipment as the Galland brothers, Priller, and so on and so forth. So many of you may say so what? What is your point?
My point is that also while the different comabatants may have had great individual pilots, the system that put out these pilots was also important. And I know it can be argued that as the war progressed and "safe" airspace diminished over Germany, Italy, and Japan it was still amazing that on a industrial level the USAAF and the GAF were still able to produce quality pilots. I want to stress that if USAAF pilots had flown the same amount of missions as GAF pilots, not only thier scores may have been comparable but also for sure there would have been as many aces in the USAAF than there was in the GAF.
:{)
1. If USAAF pilots had been allowed to fly as many missions as Luftwaffe pilots thier scores could have been theoretically as high as the highest Luftwaffe pilots.
2. USAAF pilots were just as good and thier equipment as good as the Luftwaffe in 39-41 when the Luftwaffe was still fighting a wholly offensive campaign. By 1943 the USAAF was on the attack role while the Luftwaffe was on the defensive.
So, it sort of backs up (not proves) that Gabreski, Yeager, Mahurin and so on were just as good both in skill and equipment as the Galland brothers, Priller, and so on and so forth. So many of you may say so what? What is your point?
My point is that also while the different comabatants may have had great individual pilots, the system that put out these pilots was also important. And I know it can be argued that as the war progressed and "safe" airspace diminished over Germany, Italy, and Japan it was still amazing that on a industrial level the USAAF and the GAF were still able to produce quality pilots. I want to stress that if USAAF pilots had flown the same amount of missions as GAF pilots, not only thier scores may have been comparable but also for sure there would have been as many aces in the USAAF than there was in the GAF.
:{)
- Thread starter
- #166
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Thats a freakin huge joke right??? What American fighter aircraft in 1940 could effectivly combat the Bf-109???
Nope, not even theoretically... The Luftwaffe was not producing as many aircraft per month as the Americans and Russians were producing in a week.... Its a simple math equation...
Erich
the old Sage
think of mulit fronts in the war that the Luftw was fighting, the US on the other hand was not.
Walter Loos...........discount probably about half of his kills. Bauers are also speculative in some fashion as well
Walter Loos...........discount probably about half of his kills. Bauers are also speculative in some fashion as well
Jabberwocky
Staff Sergeant
CurzonDax said:
I've got to disagree on this point here.
Firstly, USAAF pilots didn't have anywhere near the combat expertise and hardening that the LuftWaffe pilots did. Early experiance in the Spainish Civil War and the battles of Poland, Norway, France and Britain turned the LuftWaffe into the most battle-hardened fighting force in the world, with the Finnish and Japanese a short second.
If you put two pilots with the same training in the same plane and one of them has much more combat experiance, who are you going to think has a better chance of surviving a fight?
Secondly USAAF single seaters weren't as good as their German counterparts, at least until the deployment of the P-38F in Nth Africa in late 1942. Faced with a 109/190 combination, the P-40 and P-39 that made up the bulk of USAAF fighter strength until mid 1943 look a little sickly.
However, USAAF bombers were superior to their LuftWaffe adversaries. The LuftWaffe had nothing to match the B-17 and B-24. USAAF medium bombers such as the A-20, B-24 and B-26 aquitted themselves admirably in early service.
I have to disagree also. While I think the USAAF Pilots by 1943 were just as good as most Luftwaffe pilots. They recieved excellent training and had good equipment as well. I do not see really anyone catching up with the high aces that did occur from the Luftwaffe, for reasons stated by the others here.
I dont think that it had something to do with the "experience" of the spanish civil war, poland, aso.... (think about the experience of the other Nations, which were gathered in the wars before WWII http://users.accesscomm.ca/magnusfamily/between.htm )
-there were enough Legion condor-returners who were not that "good" and successful like well trained newcomers. Tactics were developed and gathering experience with the equipment, headquarters, supply aso... Germany didnt fought against themselves in Spain- their opponents had at least the same chance to enlarge their experience!
If a pilot has to fight till the war´s end he flies in another style like a pilot knowing be send home after a while. So did the Germans, Italians, Russians... the others had not to return to combat after an injury, holiday, instruction duties...
All in all its the man´s fighting/surviving will -not always the experience. So THE greatest Pilot can be out of each country, it doesnt count the experience that much, nor the amount ou kills... (i dont mean with "experience" how well trained a pilot is and how many how good he handles the machine- in this context the pilot xy has to be average on the controlls of an aircraft)
Bong was already in f-school an artist while flying, just like Hartmann, Meimberg, Marseille, Lacey... but they had it.
Pingel, Schöpfel, Johnson (RAF) aso, were excellent, but no real killers...
Oh, man, i lost the point with whom i started. so ill stop here.
-there were enough Legion condor-returners who were not that "good" and successful like well trained newcomers. Tactics were developed and gathering experience with the equipment, headquarters, supply aso... Germany didnt fought against themselves in Spain- their opponents had at least the same chance to enlarge their experience!
If a pilot has to fight till the war´s end he flies in another style like a pilot knowing be send home after a while. So did the Germans, Italians, Russians... the others had not to return to combat after an injury, holiday, instruction duties...
All in all its the man´s fighting/surviving will -not always the experience. So THE greatest Pilot can be out of each country, it doesnt count the experience that much, nor the amount ou kills... (i dont mean with "experience" how well trained a pilot is and how many how good he handles the machine- in this context the pilot xy has to be average on the controlls of an aircraft)
Bong was already in f-school an artist while flying, just like Hartmann, Meimberg, Marseille, Lacey... but they had it.
Pingel, Schöpfel, Johnson (RAF) aso, were excellent, but no real killers...
Oh, man, i lost the point with whom i started. so ill stop here.
Alrighty, EVERYONE obvoiously read my post wrong. What I was saying was that by the time the USAAF was in force over Europe, late 43-45, thier equipment and Training was just as good as the Luftwaffe was in 39-41.
But going back to missions vs. victories. The Average US ace had about 20-25 victories before they were yanked from frontline service. Bong for example was the exeption not the rule. But I think Rudi and I we are saying the same thing, experience is not the norm. Look how many Luftwaffe aces with 50+ kills DID NOT fight in Spain. Many of the US aces were already gifted pilots and some were already fighting before Pearl. Look at the AVG boys, was it Gabreski that fought in Spain?, the Eagle Squadron.
So experience in actual combat can not be a meter. Look at Bong, Yeager, Mahurin, McGuire, Blackburn, Foss and so on and so forth. None of these men had any combat experience and many of these men had 20+ kills and in some cases, for example, Foss and Blackburn, in Wildcats fighting Zeros/Zekes and 109s (Blackburn baptism of fire was TORCH) became aces or started on the path, fighting with inferior equipment against much better equiped and just as skilled adversaries.
Sooooo, I will concede the point that USAAF aces would have been hard pressed to get to the 100+ level even without getting yanked at the end of thier tours, but it is very concievable that many if they would have been left in could have had 50, 60, or even 70+. Guys like Bong, McGuire could have had up to 100 by the wars end if Bong had not been yanked or McGuire Killed.
:{)
But going back to missions vs. victories. The Average US ace had about 20-25 victories before they were yanked from frontline service. Bong for example was the exeption not the rule. But I think Rudi and I we are saying the same thing, experience is not the norm. Look how many Luftwaffe aces with 50+ kills DID NOT fight in Spain. Many of the US aces were already gifted pilots and some were already fighting before Pearl. Look at the AVG boys, was it Gabreski that fought in Spain?, the Eagle Squadron.
So experience in actual combat can not be a meter. Look at Bong, Yeager, Mahurin, McGuire, Blackburn, Foss and so on and so forth. None of these men had any combat experience and many of these men had 20+ kills and in some cases, for example, Foss and Blackburn, in Wildcats fighting Zeros/Zekes and 109s (Blackburn baptism of fire was TORCH) became aces or started on the path, fighting with inferior equipment against much better equiped and just as skilled adversaries.
Sooooo, I will concede the point that USAAF aces would have been hard pressed to get to the 100+ level even without getting yanked at the end of thier tours, but it is very concievable that many if they would have been left in could have had 50, 60, or even 70+. Guys like Bong, McGuire could have had up to 100 by the wars end if Bong had not been yanked or McGuire Killed.
:{)
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Remeber, the 5th AF guys in the pacific might of had more - I once read that Bong and Mcguire might had close to 50 kills, but many went unconfirmed....
Erich
the old Sage
we will never actually know about Luftwaffe claims vs kills, I noted many times on the forums that there was no action to confimr via the luftw hierarchy in November 44 till wars end so many records are lost or are subjective to a very big (?). unconfirmed oh yes I believe many for the day fighter force and even the night fighter force as well.
just as Rudel tank kills are infalted in my eyes so are several noted Luftwaffe aces that come to mind, Dahl, Loos, Rudoffer, Welter, etc ......... suppose the same could be said of several RAF and US pilot too, Frenchman Closterman is another
just as Rudel tank kills are infalted in my eyes so are several noted Luftwaffe aces that come to mind, Dahl, Loos, Rudoffer, Welter, etc ......... suppose the same could be said of several RAF and US pilot too, Frenchman Closterman is another
- Thread starter
- #175
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
After all the reading I've done over the last 30 years or so, and all the combat reports and stats I've seen, there is hardly a day or mission where the Allied reported losses match the German claims, and vice versa....
There are a few rare instances where the information is verified on both sides, but this was the exception to the rule...
In other words, EVERYONE inflated kill totals, and some even downgraded their losses...
There are a few rare instances where the information is verified on both sides, but this was the exception to the rule...
In other words, EVERYONE inflated kill totals, and some even downgraded their losses...
Some archelogical and first hand reports have downgraded Allied scores in the last decade. If one looks at recent books on the air war in the Pacific Boyington is no longer the top USMC ace, Foss is or Lamphier is now pretty much accepted not to be the pilot who killed Yamamoto. (In fact this historical reversal made him a very bitter man). Even in WWI, which this event was on one of the first episodes of Battlefield Detectives, the exhumed Richtofen's body and using very CSI/Grissom type stuff they were able to prove that Snoopy... I mean Brown did not kill the Red Baron but the Austrailian AA crew.
Still it can be argued that USAAF/USN/USMC claims were probably more accurate than others because of the use of gun camaras. Not saying that this was 100% accurate but it helped. I know the japanese did not have them and I know it existed in the Luftwaffe, but was it standard equipment?
:{)
Still it can be argued that USAAF/USN/USMC claims were probably more accurate than others because of the use of gun camaras. Not saying that this was 100% accurate but it helped. I know the japanese did not have them and I know it existed in the Luftwaffe, but was it standard equipment?
:{)
i saw these guncamera films. they say mostly nothing. Sorry.
Very often a victim was shot down by more than one pilot, not nowing, that he had to share his kill in his account...
So was the deal with the German kills in hot spots: especially in RLV (Reichsluftverteidigung) they were mostly not able to watch their victim´s crash because of altitude, subsequent fight, wild melee of aircraft in the air.
In Sturmangriff of Sturmgruppe, for example you cannot say exactly if the bomber you shot at went really down, or tried first to seperate from other burning aircraft, or get back the control of the aircraft after the attack... in this time another attacker could shoot at the same Viermot... so there are double claims... not very much, but almost always some (I think 10-30 % but i did not red these number in books, just my own conclusion...). The same problem with the attack from ahead into the B-17/24 formation: wen the whole Gruppe rushes trough the fromation, who could after say exactly that his victim was enough hit to fall... mostly the newcomers made some no-real-claim. Fighting and shooting in smaller numbers, or not in fromtion (at least Rotte) was much easier to count the kills especially when one is on the winner-side. But not always. Non-experience was propably the main factor why in the BOB on both sides were made so many false claims... they just did not knew wehn an aircraft got enough damadge...
I red that in the average the Luftwaffe-claims had no more than 10% false claims...
The RAF always overclaimed in the first half of the war... in the last six months it seems to me that they were very accurate in claims, especially in the very last months they underclaimed.
Those whom i believe most in claims are
Luftwaffe
UdssR
USAF
RAF
..
Italy
Japan
...
FAF and Romanian AF and some more i dont have enough information to make a decission, but i think they were almost as accurate as those first four mentioned
But i also think the more experienced a pilot is and the more he fought and shot against the enemy, the more accurate are the claims... but not always (Dahl)
Very often a victim was shot down by more than one pilot, not nowing, that he had to share his kill in his account...
So was the deal with the German kills in hot spots: especially in RLV (Reichsluftverteidigung) they were mostly not able to watch their victim´s crash because of altitude, subsequent fight, wild melee of aircraft in the air.
In Sturmangriff of Sturmgruppe, for example you cannot say exactly if the bomber you shot at went really down, or tried first to seperate from other burning aircraft, or get back the control of the aircraft after the attack... in this time another attacker could shoot at the same Viermot... so there are double claims... not very much, but almost always some (I think 10-30 % but i did not red these number in books, just my own conclusion...). The same problem with the attack from ahead into the B-17/24 formation: wen the whole Gruppe rushes trough the fromation, who could after say exactly that his victim was enough hit to fall... mostly the newcomers made some no-real-claim. Fighting and shooting in smaller numbers, or not in fromtion (at least Rotte) was much easier to count the kills especially when one is on the winner-side. But not always. Non-experience was propably the main factor why in the BOB on both sides were made so many false claims... they just did not knew wehn an aircraft got enough damadge...
I red that in the average the Luftwaffe-claims had no more than 10% false claims...
The RAF always overclaimed in the first half of the war... in the last six months it seems to me that they were very accurate in claims, especially in the very last months they underclaimed.
Those whom i believe most in claims are
Luftwaffe
UdssR
USAF
RAF
..
Italy
Japan
...
FAF and Romanian AF and some more i dont have enough information to make a decission, but i think they were almost as accurate as those first four mentioned
But i also think the more experienced a pilot is and the more he fought and shot against the enemy, the more accurate are the claims... but not always (Dahl)
Erich
the old Sage
you better do some more reading on SturmFw angriff Rudi, it is very plausible for individual pilots to take down a specific bomber, it is recorded in their flubuchs and Geschwader histories besides the gun-cams.
sorry I just do not agree with your statements, Sturmfw's were to pick only one bomber per push through a pulk of bombers before setting up again for another attack hopefully by staffel strength. I've got too many vet interviews to say otherwise besides my friendship with several that are still alive
sorry I just do not agree with your statements, Sturmfw's were to pick only one bomber per push through a pulk of bombers before setting up again for another attack hopefully by staffel strength. I've got too many vet interviews to say otherwise besides my friendship with several that are still alive
ahh, and missions do not always say about the skill, friend!
Many many allied fighters had flown hundrets of missions, too.
Ok, then enemy contact- wehn e.c. was made, there was a difference between skill and the ability to shoot at the enemy. Many very good pilots had to made their job behind the leader, propably never to get in a good shooting position. You have to be made a higher rank to be leader of a Rotte or Schwarm aso like in RLV, or you have to get some hundrets of sorties and fights to get the leadership... In RLV in the attack from ahead each pilot had his position in formation and had to shoot at the part of the Viermot he got: the wing, between the motors, between two aircraft´s wingtips, like in I/JG11... But in other units they same in in lines, so everybody had theoretically a chance, like in IV/JG 3 untill they were made Stumgruppe... then, in RLV in summer 44 each man was needed, so everybody sperated with the "Pauke Pauke" and attacked be himself... more kills were made, but more chaos...
But in average, one had to serve a long time, to get the chance to be the boss... so was with other nations, too. But not all.
If one is the leader, the possibility to make a kill was higher, so not always the talented dudes got their chance... some exceptions, but no time to tell.
good night.
Many many allied fighters had flown hundrets of missions, too.
Ok, then enemy contact- wehn e.c. was made, there was a difference between skill and the ability to shoot at the enemy. Many very good pilots had to made their job behind the leader, propably never to get in a good shooting position. You have to be made a higher rank to be leader of a Rotte or Schwarm aso like in RLV, or you have to get some hundrets of sorties and fights to get the leadership... In RLV in the attack from ahead each pilot had his position in formation and had to shoot at the part of the Viermot he got: the wing, between the motors, between two aircraft´s wingtips, like in I/JG11... But in other units they same in in lines, so everybody had theoretically a chance, like in IV/JG 3 untill they were made Stumgruppe... then, in RLV in summer 44 each man was needed, so everybody sperated with the "Pauke Pauke" and attacked be himself... more kills were made, but more chaos...
But in average, one had to serve a long time, to get the chance to be the boss... so was with other nations, too. But not all.
If one is the leader, the possibility to make a kill was higher, so not always the talented dudes got their chance... some exceptions, but no time to tell.
good night.
102first_hussars
Tech Sergeant
You forgot to put Buzz Beurling up there, he is at least one of the greatest.
