Martinis at 8
Practically Family
- Messages
- 710
- Location
- Houston
Vladimir Berkov said:
This is absolutely correct!
-
The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Geatest designs of WWII
- Thread starter Spitfire
- Start date
This is absolutely correct!
Featured products
-
Alden 403 Moc Toe Boot - Brown Chromexcel - $680 The classic "Indy" style Alden Boot in the classic Horween brown Chromexcel. -
Grant Stone Diesel Boot Dark Olive Chromexcel - #395 Goodyear welted, Horween Chromexcel, classic good looks. -
Himel Bros. - The Ross Mk. 1 Leather Jacket Classic D-pocket motorcycle/aviator style jacket.
DutchIndo
A-List Customer
- Messages
- 484
- Location
- Little Saigon formerly GG Ca
They are called REMFs, Remington Raiders or Pouges
Twitch
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,133
- Location
- City of the Angels
Compensating gunsights were beneficial for aces and green guys alike. We need to go back, away from 2008 and look into the 1930s. Most of the American aces I have talked to were quite familiar with firearms and hunting. They understood lead and deflection. Well so did, at least, the gentlemen hunters in Europe. In many cases proficiency with firearms put meat on the table instead of just polk salad and grits.
During the rise of airpower of the 30s Japan and Germany sought to assemble smaller air forces comprised of only the best of the elite. These pilots were tougher and possessed greater skills than their counteparts anywhere.
In the initial stages of the conflict it was apparent that the specialized training was paying off. It took a while but attrician was the real enemy. Expert pilots could have used stationary crosshairs sights and hit targets. But once these few excellent warriors were gone or diluted with "good" and even "very good" pilots, compensating gunsights were helpful and became nothing more than another technological feature on a modern fighter plane.
The Russians ultimately fielded large numbers of planes but in relative terms there were few aces. But the fact that such huge numbers of planes could be brought to bear in battle more than compensated for whatever lack of skill the Soviet Air Force possessed.
Britian was less awash with airplanes but accepted the fact that "good" pilots had a part to play. The RAF began with the "best of the best" idea too but rapidly needed replacements with no time to train for years during the BoB and shortly thereafter.
The Americans came into it accepting fairly high standards of pilots but that would be relaxed a bit by 1944 too. Their idea was air power not an elite club of expertsm but massive amounts of planes that darkened the skies of the enemy.
A "good" or "very good" pilot could maneuver and place lead on targets. And when you have many hundreds such guys versus a few dozen expert aces an impasse or even route can occur.
It is true that about 89% of all victories were credited to about 11% of all American airmen but the numbers are about the same everywhere.
But the single factor beyond gunsight or aircraft that is most important is aggressiveness. As Urben Drew who shot down 2 Me 262 told me "there are pilots who fly fighter planes and there fighters who are pilots."
If ever there is a single scenario in the war that has repeatedly astounded me it is the fact that 1 or 2 American pilots alone turn into as many as 20-30 enemy aircraft feeling they have a good chance of destroying some of them! This is nothing against any other nationality but I have interviewed and read more accounts from Americans.
All the tech is great but the decicive factor was then and is now pure dogged aggressiveness.
During the rise of airpower of the 30s Japan and Germany sought to assemble smaller air forces comprised of only the best of the elite. These pilots were tougher and possessed greater skills than their counteparts anywhere.
In the initial stages of the conflict it was apparent that the specialized training was paying off. It took a while but attrician was the real enemy. Expert pilots could have used stationary crosshairs sights and hit targets. But once these few excellent warriors were gone or diluted with "good" and even "very good" pilots, compensating gunsights were helpful and became nothing more than another technological feature on a modern fighter plane.
The Russians ultimately fielded large numbers of planes but in relative terms there were few aces. But the fact that such huge numbers of planes could be brought to bear in battle more than compensated for whatever lack of skill the Soviet Air Force possessed.
Britian was less awash with airplanes but accepted the fact that "good" pilots had a part to play. The RAF began with the "best of the best" idea too but rapidly needed replacements with no time to train for years during the BoB and shortly thereafter.
The Americans came into it accepting fairly high standards of pilots but that would be relaxed a bit by 1944 too. Their idea was air power not an elite club of expertsm but massive amounts of planes that darkened the skies of the enemy.
A "good" or "very good" pilot could maneuver and place lead on targets. And when you have many hundreds such guys versus a few dozen expert aces an impasse or even route can occur.
It is true that about 89% of all victories were credited to about 11% of all American airmen but the numbers are about the same everywhere.
But the single factor beyond gunsight or aircraft that is most important is aggressiveness. As Urben Drew who shot down 2 Me 262 told me "there are pilots who fly fighter planes and there fighters who are pilots."
If ever there is a single scenario in the war that has repeatedly astounded me it is the fact that 1 or 2 American pilots alone turn into as many as 20-30 enemy aircraft feeling they have a good chance of destroying some of them! This is nothing against any other nationality but I have interviewed and read more accounts from Americans.
All the tech is great but the decicive factor was then and is now pure dogged aggressiveness.
dhermann1
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 9,154
- Location
- Da Bronx, NY, USA
I've always read and heard that the great aces were good pilots and great marksmen.
BellyTank
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 7,061
Alan Eardley said:
Sorry Alan.
Typo- "submachine guns".
B
T
Chas
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,715
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
dhermann1 said:
Yep. It was also ultimately the war-winning weapon in the Battle Of The Atlantic. When the 10cm sets came out, the U-Boats were dead meat. The 10cm set could even pick up a periscope in good weather.
dhermann1 said:
Not all of the aces were. Billy Bishop was a terrible flyer, but an excellent shot. A number of other aces were indifferent flyers but superior tacticians or marksmen.
More impressive WW2 weapon designs heretofore unmentioned:
The 88.
The MG 42
M1 Garand. The best individual small arm of the war.
I always did like the Leigh Light as well. A shocker! "ALAAARRM!!"
Some of my favorites include:
The V2 Rocket:
This is pretty much the granddaddy of modern warfare. The first long range missile!
The Messerschmitt Me 262
Another step into the future from Germany with the first fighter jet. The Allies would have been completely outclassed aviation wise had Hitler used them to their potential.
The Type IXc U-Boat:
Although technically a WWI origin, WWII's Type IXc has a special place in my heart from growing up in Chicago with the U-505 so easily accessible.
The M-41 Field Jacket
An epic piece of US Army history first appeared in WWII: the field jacket. I personally love my own M-43, I wear it every chance I get.
US Army Paratrooper boots:
Again, another revolution in military design with the first modern combat boot. All the boots that came before it had leggings of some fashion or were jackboot styled. These were the first fully lace up combat boot.
The V2 Rocket:
This is pretty much the granddaddy of modern warfare. The first long range missile!
The Messerschmitt Me 262
Another step into the future from Germany with the first fighter jet. The Allies would have been completely outclassed aviation wise had Hitler used them to their potential.
The Type IXc U-Boat:
Although technically a WWI origin, WWII's Type IXc has a special place in my heart from growing up in Chicago with the U-505 so easily accessible.
The M-41 Field Jacket
An epic piece of US Army history first appeared in WWII: the field jacket. I personally love my own M-43, I wear it every chance I get.
US Army Paratrooper boots:
Again, another revolution in military design with the first modern combat boot. All the boots that came before it had leggings of some fashion or were jackboot styled. These were the first fully lace up combat boot.
Similar threads
