SmithWhat date?
Dave, I have this image in my PC … no idea where I got it from.
Photo of Bader and a number of other aircraft lined up, allegedly on Sep 15, 1945. Note coding on Bader’s aircraft. Some of the onlookers may be pilots mentioned above?
cheers D
SmithClaims generally
This probably goes without saying but anyway … there is always a gap between claims and reality. The key contributing factors are the pace and uncertainty of battle and the individual.
In my many readings I have encountered the proposition that; Luftwaffe claims are generally more reliable as they insisted on a confimation process … someone else had to witness the claim (during battle or after the fact, eg. a downed aircraft at given location) to allow it to be confimed. But the RAF didn’t implement a similar additional level of confirmation, considering that accepting claims was good for morale. BoB tallies in particular were often widly astray notwithstanding the relative simplicity of counting downed EAs. Am I in the ball park here or out on a limb?
If, as mentioned above, JEJ’s claims were in the presence of and arguably witnessed by a wing man, they should tend to be more accurate a la the Lutfwaffe experience.
Don
SmithJG-26
Klaus Mietusch features significantly in Donald Caldwell’s books on JG-26, I particularly commend the “photographic history” and the two part “war diary”. Get them, you will enjoy them.
You might also like to (search first and then) enquire at the 12 O’Clock High forum.
Here is a search on his name at that forum.
cheers D
SmithWell said!
But there are reasons for accuracy.
I have a personal interest in knowing who shot down my Uncle (closure) so have become pedantic about that (and interested in Luftwaffe claim technique and accuracy).
Others have similar Historical research imperatives … with related and valid need for accuracy.
But this is a public place, people with axes to grind come here, debaters debate here. That’s perfectly OK, freedom of speech and all that.
All that said … your point is bang on.
SmithYasukuni Shrine & Museum
I unreservedly recommend a visit to the Ysukuni Shrine and its attached Museum.
The shrine is extraordinary, as is the museum.
Lots of interesting artifacts as this website notes, but more than the completely different take on everything is an absolute mind game.
Brilliant place. Allow a few hours. D
SmithYasukuni Shrine
Smith.
Would you mind expanding a little on the comment “the completely different take on everything is an absolute mind game”? I suspect as much but it would be interesting to hear your view on their view, as it were.
Regards,
kev35
Hi Kev
It’s difficult to put in a few words but I’ll have a crack at it. As I’m sure you know, the shrine is an environment that reveres (and hosts the spirits of) those who have died in warfare. Reveres is too little a word, but I can’t pull a better one out of my head right now. We have war memorials of course, and remember those who will forever remain young etc., but Yasukuni Shrine takes this concept to another level.
We remember and respect the dead (and those who fought without dying) and we have, here and there, War Memorial Museums. We also have many military and/or technology oriented museums. Typically they contain, for the visitor’s edification and education, all sorts of machines, medals, uniforms etc. that one can peruse and get a sense of what “things” were used by those who fought.
Amongst a few other things, the Museum at Yasukuni presents actual artifacts (aircraft, weapons, shredded uniforms etc.) that were used by those who have died. We might find that disrespectful, here it is the opposite. There is a pile of twisted metal that is the remains of a kamikaze aircraft. There is the extraordinary huge cannon that was one of the built in defence guns at Okinawa. It is huge, and it it is pitted and mangled and smashed. It was one of the last guns firing by (some regiment who’s name escapes me) until it was hammered into submission and all those defenders were dead. Looking at it, and imagining the hell that put it into the condition it is in, took my breath away.
One gets (I got) sucked in to the sheer intensity of battle and you get a sense of the depth of respect for the dead being “lived” at the shrine. I understand why no Japanese leader could fail to go to the shrine at appropriate occasions, notwithstanding the international negativity about those actions.
There is also the remarkable alternate view of Kamikaze that is the Special Attack section at the shrine. I wrote something about that elsewhere here … ah, here it is, this post of this thread.
It is a very very moving place. I was lucky enough to be there on a day at which some sort of remembrance was underway, I sat and watched a NO “play” being enacted, etc. My Japanese was only sufficient to order food and say thank you (at various levels) so I don’t know what was going on … but …
My advice … when you get a chance, go there. You will never forget it.
regards Don
I wonder if perhaps some of WWI battlefields would have similar impact?
SmithNot really a part, but aviation has adapted the distinctly maritime ”starboard” and” port”. For English speakers it might not sound very maritime, but “starboard” comes from the Norse word “stýriborð” (in modern Danish it’s called Styrbord), meaning the steering side: styr is steering and bord is the side of a ship – Vikings used to steer their longboats from the right hand side, not from the middle like a rudder.
“Port” is a bit more obscure. It comes from “larboard”, which is the docking side of the ship (you can’t dock a longboat at starboard, as the oar will get in the way). It was later changed to the simple “port”, as starboard and larboard sounds too much alike.
Fascinating … thank you Mondariz
SmithSchräge Musik
Going back to Schräge Musik for a moment (Don, did you “pull” your supplementary thread cos I can’t find it?), a number of questions have occurred to me as a result of reading posts in this thread, and from skimming thru parts of my library in search of definitive answers.
These are mostly to do with Bomber Command’s ignorance of Schräge Musik.
JDK has implied (and I’ve seen other comments supporting the idea) that Bomber Command was unaware of S.M. until the war’s end. Martin Middlebrook, whose books I rate highly, has stated that it took Bomber Command “many months” to realise what was going on – this suggests that S.M. was understood well before the war’s end, given that it started to be used in 1943.
I wonder what the truth is? None of my books is able to provide the answer. I find it hard to accept that no-one in Bomber Command could envisage something along the lines of upward firing guns, given that every heavy bomber in it’s inventory had just that capability with it’s turrets. And had everyone forgotten about one of the RAFs early answers to the shooting down of bombers at night – the Defiant, with guns capable of firing (almost) vertically?
Even if the exact installation details of S.M. eluded them, surely they could have considered the proposition that JU88s were being fitted with turrets capable of firing upwards?
And as the Germans were pushed back from Belgium, France and Holland, we must have discovered wrecked and abandoned night fighters by the score – surely there were some clues to be gleaned from these?
I’ve dragged this old thread out of its dusty closet for a couple of reasons …
1. I found out yesterday that my Uncle was in all probability killed by Schräge Musik.
2. A recent thread on Scarecrows touched on this, readers might find this thread interesting too.
3. I came across an amazing link today. 682Al was bang-on with his comments above.
Look at THIS. A Schräge Musik equipped Bf110 G-4/R-3 found and reported on by American forces in September 1944.
Who says it wasn’t known about? Spot of inter-service rivalry and the keeping of secrets?
cheers Don
SmithLEMB link
1000 pardons everyone … I’ve just discovered you’ll need a login/ID at LEMB to view that link.
Short of lifting the content of the thread (and I won’t do that), you’ll have to register and login to view it.
Suffice to say the content is fascinating. It features a copy of a US intelligence report on a captured Schräge Musik equipped Bf110 G-4/R-3 found abandoned in September 1944.
Was this information not passed on to the RAF? Or was it, but not acted upon?
Either way IMO it was a disgrace.
SmithSome background
Thanks TwinOtter and Trumper
Here are a couple of other threads that will give you some context.
This thread … has a brief insight into my step-Uncle Lloyd English. At the time of creating that thread I had good intentions of putting a lot of info on line, alas I simply haven’t had the time, and to be honest my inclination was ebbed and flowed. You need an obsession to get into this.
Another thread … refers again to Lloyd and his two friends Les and Eric. The three of them went through training together and were inseparable. They were all killed.
At the end of the second thread I refer to a puzzle I’ve had for years regarding the location (and it follows the time) he was shot down. Theo Boiten (author of the Nachtjagd War Diaries) has matched Peter Ehrhardt’s claim to the loss. That is at the first location (i.e. as also identified by Martin Middlebrook). I am in contact with Theo to put my mind at rest (that I have been barking up the wrong tree so to speak).
I will post more here as I find out more about Lt Ehrhardt.
TO … I’ll send you a PM shortly.
Cheers D
Smithbad link?
Scott
I clicked on that and got a bad link. Not sure yet if that’s my (workplace) settings but perhaps you might like to check.
And BTW, is Parchim amongst the airfields photographed?
Tks, D
SmithI must say I do like P47’s … they have so much “presence”. And firing up a big radial, well what can you say?
SmithThanks Dsgjones. I’ve just listened to the Dan Snow link (Vaughan-Thomas). Fascinating to my Kiwi ears to listen to the heavy RP accent. Don’t tend to hear that nowadays. Plus of course the jargon: “wizard prang” etc. A time capsule.
SmithWatched those videos … they’re excellent, very informative and, I found, compelling viewing.
Smith… and for the brilliant job in encouraging the public to remember the bravery of our brave men and women in WWII.
In no way denigrating this sentiment, I wonder if that is the case? Absolutely yes here on this forum and in any other similar setting where anoraks (self deprecating) and service men or women gather. But the man or woman in the street; do they look at the Lancaster, or a Spitfire or Hurricane and think of the humanity of it all? I certainly hope so and would imagine direct descendants of those involved probably do. But how many people simply see an old aeroplane and think “that’s cool”?
Sign In
