Best WWII Air-Force

[davparlr]

Even the Germans were glad to see the unarmed warbird that held off the Russians for 10 months and delivered the first cold war victory. A hero under-appreciated.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by davparlr

Even the Germans were glad to see the unarmed warbird that held off the Russians for 10 months and delivered the first cold war victory. A hero under-appreciated.

one helluva airplane - and Curtis Lemay's only peacetime statement

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Soren

Adler,

Note who Renrich thinks your comment was directed at

I dont care who he thinks it was directed it. I was talking to Bill...

[Hunter368]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Exactly. There is more than just being technically the best. Just having quality does not cut it.

While I believe believe the Germans were ahead of there time in many areas and made many advanced and superior aircraft, I would never kid myself and argue that everything German was better. If it were that way, Germany would have won the war.

The single largest factor I think that won the war for the Allies was = numbers.

Look at USA and Russia as leading examples.

I am not saying they did not produce fine machines, they did, but the numbers game won them the war more then any other factor IMO.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Hunter368

The single largest factor I think that won the war for the Allies was = numbers.

Look at USA and Russia as leading examples.

I am not saying they did not produce fine machines, they did, but the numbers game won them the war more then any other factor IMO.

Agreed 100 percent. I have never claimed anything different.

I just get tired of the everything the allies built was inferior to what the Germans built thing that goes around...

[Hunter368]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Agreed 100 percent. I have never claimed anything different.

I just get tired of the everything the allies built was inferior to what the Germans built thing that goes around...

I agree with you but I think you would agree that there are those on both sides of the fence on this site. Those who think USA built everything perfectly and those who think Germany did like wise. Both are wrong, sometimes a person just has to walk away and let people think what they want.

I am not saying or suggesting that you do this I am just giving you my opinion and beliefs on the matter.

I know at times is is hard to walk away, I have argued with Syscom many times on such things. Some people just can get to you when you are having a bad day......and then it goes from there. I turn a blind eye as much as I can to such behavior no matter who is doing it.

Soren certainly is not the only one guilty of being one sided at times here. Perhaps he believes he has to be to offset those who believe the USA did everything right in WW2.

Oh well, it will never change. PS I voted the USA best AF by the way. LOL


Hmmmm my 2000th post, hero cookie for me today!

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Hunter368

I agree with you but I think you would agree that there are those on both sides of the fence on this site. Those who think USA built everything perfectly and those who think Germany did like wise. Both are wrong, sometimes a person just has to walk away and let people think what they want.

Agreed...

Lets get back on topic though. I think I have derailed this eneogh.

[Marcel]

Originally Posted by Hunter368

I agree with you but I think you would agree that there are those on both sides of the fence on this site. Those who think USA built everything perfectly and those who think Germany did like wise. Both are wrong, sometimes a person just has to walk away and let people think what they want.

Good post and exactly what I thought.

[plan_D]

Back on topic,

Single machines were not important in making a great air force - a mixture of aircraft types and the ability to perform all tasks required to win the war are what make a good air force.

I've said it before; the USAAF is 1st because they achieved everything in every theatre they fought in. The RAF is second because they never had a strategic campaign in the CBI. The Luftwaffe is third because it had no strategic arm, but achieved greater tactical superiority and flexibility than the VVS and IJAAF.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by plan_D

Back on topic,

Single machines were not important in making a great air force - a mixture of aircraft types and the ability to perform all tasks required to win the war are what make a good air force.

I've said it before; the USAAF is 1st because they achieved everything in every theatre they fought in. The RAF is second because they never had a strategic campaign in the CBI. The Luftwaffe is third because it had no strategic arm, but achieved greater tactical superiority and flexibility than the VVS and IJAAF.

Excellent Summary Plan_D.. I also do think the relative positioning was most certainly a function of time with the 'early days' led by LW, 'middle period' by RAF and 'last phase' by USAAF.

[plan_D]

That is true. In terms of years the Luftwaffe was No.1 from '39 - '41; the RAF was No.1 from '42 - '43 and the USAAF was No.1 '44 - '45. The RAF strategic arm really came to the front in '42. And I think the USAAF didn't truely step far and ahead in the ETO until '44, maybe very late '43.

In the PTO/CBI the IJAAF was number one (obviously not including the USN and IJN air power) 'til about '43, I reckon.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by plan_D

That is true. In terms of years the Luftwaffe was No.1 from '39 - '41; the RAF was No.1 from '42 - '43 and the USAAF was No.1 '44 - '45. The RAF strategic arm really came to the front in '42. And I think the USAAF didn't truely step far and ahead in the ETO until '44, maybe very late '43.

In the PTO/CBI the IJAAF was number one (obviously not including the USN and IJN air power) 'til about '43, I reckon.

I tend to lump in all arms that project force via aircraft as Airpower whether by naval supplied island bases, carriers, land bases, etc... which is why the Brits and then the Yanks surpassed the Japanese, then the LW as the war unfolded. That is a key reason I considered that Britain surpassed Germany in 1942 from a depth and reach position of strength.

The AAF and USN were mostly defensive in Pacific, even Midway, through Solomon Island Campaigns - and CBI until late 1942. After that, combined with RAF and ANZAC airpower, started hounding Japan everywhere except Formosa and Okinawa and Japan.

I guess it was B-29 strikes from China that the war (somewhat ineffectively) was finally moved to mainland in 1944.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by drgondog

I tend to lump in all arms that project force via aircraft as Airpower whether by naval supplied island bases, carriers, land bases, etc... which is why the Brits and then the Yanks surpassed the Japanese, then the LW as the war unfolded. That is a key reason I considered that Britain surpassed Germany in 1942 from a depth and reach position of strength.

The AAF and USN were mostly defensive in Pacific, even Midway, through Solomon Island Campaigns - and CBI until late 1942. After that, combined with RAF and ANZAC airpower, started hounding Japan everywhere except Formosa and Okinawa and Japan.

I guess it was B-29 strikes from China that the war (somewhat ineffectively) was finally moved to mainland in 1944.

For the Pacific, after middle 1943, the AAF and USN were growing exponentially stronger as each month went by, untill by the end of the year, it essentially was a AAF/USN airwar. The domination of the US in the airwar was complete, whether it was AAF/USN air groups or aircraft supplied to the allied units.

[Barrett]

Did anybody nominate the US Navy?

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Barrett

Did anybody nominate the US Navy?

The USN was incorporated into the rankings of the AAF.