P-47 vs. Bf109G and Zero
a._kemal_behlulgil
Hello. I want to ask a question about the performance of Thunderbolt in
two fronts. How well did the Me-109G & K and Zero A6M3 & 5, highly fragile
airplanes, do against the P-47, arguably the most robust single engine
fighter of WWII? I know that both Axis planes, especially Zero, was more
maneuverable than the Jug, but did this compensate the disadvantages of
inferior firepower and fragility?
Thanks in advance,
-Kemal
zeno
Successful T Bolt flying:
Offensively: Boom & zoom. Always attack from a superior energy/alt
position. Don't slow down, don't engage in turn fights. Keep your
speed up. Never get low & slow. Don't waste ammo -- Jug didn't carry a
lot.
Defensively: Dive or extend away to a safe distance, climb to superior
alt, boom & zoom. T Bolt could out dive, & outrun both 109s & zekes,
especially at high alt.
It did fine in the ETO as long as the pilots remembered the above.
Several top scoring US aces in the ETO flew the Jug.
The Jug did't see a whole of action in the PTO. When it did, Japanese
pilots were almost all of inferior quality. Didn't really have the range
for the PTO until the N version.
HTH
zeno
Alan K. Sumrall
A., Kemal, Behlulgil wrote:
>
> Hello. I want to ask a question about the performance of Thunderbolt in
> two fronts. How well did the Me-109G & K and Zero A6M3 & 5, highly fragile
> airplanes, do against the P-47, arguably the most robust single engine
> fighter of WWII? I know that both Axis planes, especially Zero, was more
> maneuverable than the Jug, but did this compensate the disadvantages of
> inferior firepower and fragility?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> -Kemal
>
> A., Kemal, Behlulgil wrote:
> >
> > Hello. I want to ask a question about the performance of Thunderbolt in
> > two fronts. How well did the Me-109G & K and Zero A6M3 & 5, highly fragile
> > airplanes, do against the P-47, arguably the most robust single engine
> > fighter of WWII? I know that both Axis planes, especially Zero, was more
> > maneuverable than the Jug, but did this compensate the disadvantages of
> > inferior firepower and fragility?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > -Kemal
> >
>
> aviation history books, the Zero was clearly meat on the table for the
> 47. Despite improvements the A6M5 was so clearly inferior the the P-47 that comparisons are impossible. I doubt if A6M3's ever met Jugs
but as they were slower than the A6M5 they would have been even more
> outclassed. About the only Japanese plane that had a chance in the air
> against the 47 was the Ki-84 although its relatively indifferent
> armament made it less of a threat than it could have been. The N1K1
> could also have been a good match against the Jug down low. In fairness
> to the Zero, it should have been replaced by mid-1943. Its my understanding that P-47D Razorback's met a lot of Jap opposition in the
Phillipines in 1944, anyone confirm that? I believe that there was a
P-47D ace in the Phillipines with 22 kills but he was supposedly killed
in air to air combat. Can anyone confirm that?
> The 109G fared fairly well against the 47 up to late 1943 and before
> the 109G had to contend with the mission profile of serious bomber
> killing. Before that, the fighter forces were just feeling each other
> out and fought on relatively equal footing. The 109G was
> comparitively light and quick to the 47 and in the hands of a good pilot
> could challenge the P-47 if the 109 did not play the 47's speed and zoom
> game. Unfortunately for the Nazis, the 109 was considered a speed and
> zoom type as this is how it had the success it did with the Spitfires
> and Russian types.
> Way too many experienced pilots were lost to the P-47's before the
> German's figured out they needed to change tactics and by the time they
> did they were forced to ignore the fighters and go only for the large
> formations of B-17's that were developing at an astounding rate.
> Accompaning this was the necessity of overarming the 109G with two tub
> cannons in the wings for bomber interception which was the straw that
> broke the camel's back. The 109 because of its already high wing loading
> had its quickness in manuevering taken away and that is when the
> slaughter started.
> This changed mission assignment and degradation of manuerverability
> played into the P-47's mission profile and flight envelope and they
> owned the 109G by March 1944. By then, the Mustang was edging in and the
> 109 was finished as a significant factor in the war in Europe except as
> a target for American fighters.
> The following 109K was a suitable aircraft that was better able to
> hang in with the 47 but poor pilot quality and virtual total air
> superiority of allied fighters destroyed any pretense of equality with
> the Jug and makes comparisons difficult. Of course, when the 109K and
> G-10 were prolific (they had deleted the wing tub guns to enhance their
> already improved performance), the P-51's were taking over the air
> superiority role also. Fast enough although still poorly armed for
> fighter vs. fighter combat with rugged types such as the 47 but having
> adequate armament against P-51's, the 109K's even then could
> not be utilized to their full potential. 109K's that lacked the tub wing
> guns of either 20MM? and 30MM lost the ability to challenge the U.S.
> bomber fleet also. The Fw-190D faired better though, against both the 47
> and the 51, as it was considerably better balanced in all aspects as
> compared to the relatively heavy 109K and was easier to fly.
> Few will argue that it was the Mustang that finished the Luftwaffe
> off but it was the Thunderbolt that had destroyed the cream of the
> Luftwaffe's pilots before the Mustangs tore through the rest.
> Although 109K's and 109G's stayed active in some capacity for the
> duration until fuel gave out their operations were less than pinpricks
> compared to the immensity of the Allied Air effort.
> While the P-51 was hurting the Japanese in 1945, had the war
> progressed the Japanese would have met the P-47N and that fighter would
> have been totally dominant (more so than even the dominant P-51-in my opinion). In an act of criminal negligence (my opinion but someone out
there might have a resonable explanation) the Air Force chose the
inadequate F-51 (for ground attack) and ignored the superb F-47's which
would have been legendary over Korea with their awesome firepower and
ruggedness.
Just my opinion of course.
> AL
Michael Williamson
> In an act of criminal negligence (my opinion but someone out
> there might have a resonable explanation) the Air Force chose the
> inadequate F-51 (for ground attack) and ignored the superb F-47's which
> would have been legendary over Korea with their awesome firepower and
> ruggedness.
> Just my opinion of course.
>
> > AL
The P-47 ace in the Pacific was Neal Kearby (Kirby?) and he was killed in air to air combat
while flying the P-47.
There were only a small number of P-47s operational in the Pacific throughout almost the
entire war because they did not have nearly the range required to successfully operate offensively.
The P-47N was developed by Republic after the AAF decided to cancel Thunderbolt production
for this specific reason.
The reason the P-47 (and P-38) were not kept on long after the end of the war was almost
purely economical. While the P-51 cost about $60K per copy at the end of the war, and
everyone knows that the P-38 was very costly in comparison ($105k), very few know that the
P-47 was within $1,000 of the cost of a P-38 (1943 for both prices). By 1945, the P-47 cost
83k, and the 38 95k. Both of these were still well above the cost of the P-51, and there were
more P-51s around for parts and such. In either case, the aircraft was not expected to stay
in service for all that long. All three companies (Lockheed, North American, and Republic)
were working on jet fighter designs. Lockheed's had gone into production before the war
ended, cutting back on production of the Lightning, and the upcoming designs would have the
same effect on the other two.
Mike Williamson
41st Electronic Combat Squadron
Scott Thomson
Michael Williamson (spe...@azstarnet.com) wrote:
<snip>
:
: The P-47 ace in the Pacific was Neal Kearby (Kirby?) and he was killed in air to air combat
: while flying the P-47.
:
Anyone who is interested in reading about the P-47 vs. the Japanese should
read a book called Kearby's Thunderbolts: 348 FG by John Stanaway (Phalanx
Pub.)[exact title and ISBN availble on request].
This book goes a long way in dispelling the myth that the mighty Jug could
not compete against Japanese fighters at low altitude. It also gives a
very interesting study of the man who championed the P-47 in the PTO,
Col. Neel Kearby (sp?). He was an extreamly aggressive pilot much like
"Mac" McGuire, and died under somewhat unclear circumstances (he was
seen to bail out, but they did not find his remains until many years
later).
It is said that he and Dick Bong dueled, and rather surprisingly, he
managed a "draw" against him (as told in the book).
The 348 FG was one of the highest scoring groups in the PTO, and got the
vast majority of there kills in the P-47 (they switched to the P-51D in
1945). Kearby himself had 22 kills at the time of his death in 1944,
which (I think) makes him the 3rd highest scoring Jug driver after
Johnson and Gabraski (sp?) in the 56th FG 8th AF ETO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Scott McKay Thomson - OAO Corporation - Second Shift VAX Operations |
| WarBirds: SMT1 <501 FF CO> squadron leadership, planning and training |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan K. Sumrall
Michael Williamson wrote:
>
> > In an act of criminal negligence (my opinion but someone out
> > there might have a resonable explanation) the Air Force chose the
> > inadequate F-51 (for ground attack) and ignored the superb F-47's which
> > would have been legendary over Korea with their awesome firepower and
> > ruggedness.
> > Just my opinion of course.
> >
> > > AL
>
> while flying the P-47.
>
> entire war because they did not have nearly the range required to successfully operate offensively.
> The P-47N was developed by Republic after the AAF decided to cancel Thunderbolt production
> for this specific reason.
>
> The reason the P-47 (and P-38) were not kept on long after the end of the war was almost
> purely economical. While the P-51 cost about $60K per copy at the end of the war, and
> everyone knows that the P-38 was very costly in comparison ($105k), very few know that the
> P-47 was within $1,000 of the cost of a P-38 (1943 for both prices). By 1945, the P-47 cost
> 83k, and the 38 95k. Both of these were still well above the cost of the P-51, and there were
> more P-51s around for parts and such. In either case, the aircraft was not expected to stay
> in service for all that long. All three companies (Lockheed, North American, and Republic)
> were working on jet fighter designs. Lockheed's had gone into production before the war
> ended, cutting back on production of the Lightning, and the upcoming designs would have the
> same effect on the other two.
>
> Mike Williamson
> 41st Electronic Combat Squadron
Correct me if I am wrong. But didn't the F-47 see extensive service
in National Guard Sqaudrons post-war into the fifties as did the F-51?
Also at least one fighter group in Germany, 86th, still had them
(F-47Ds) in 1949 and perhaps there were more. Air Defense Command had
two active F-47N squadrons until 1952 and National Guard squadrons
had F-47's into 1953. I think plenty of F-47D's and N's were available
as well as F-51D's in the U.S. inventory, but the choice was the F-51D.
AL
DHeitm8612
In article <54hsv7$u...@lex.zippo.com>, A. Kemal Behlulgil writes:
>Hello. I want to ask a question about the performance of Thunderbolt in
>two fronts. How well did the Me-109G & K and Zero A6M3 & 5, highly
fragile
>airplanes, do against the P-47, arguably the most robust single engine
>fighter of WWII? I know that both Axis planes, especially Zero, was more
>maneuverable than the Jug, but did this compensate the disadvantages of
>inferior firepower and fragility?
>
>
I believe it was in Airpower or Air Classics about 20+ years ago that a
comparison article was published that was written by the U.S. "ace" Maj.
"Kit" Carson. He evidently flew a P-47, P51, a captures Bf109 and a Fw190
and commented about their performance and handling characteristics. I have
the magazine here somewhere (part of my permanent "archive" <G>).
Keith Heitmann
dheit...@aol.com
Michael Williamson
Alan K. Sumrall wrote:
>
> Correct me if I am wrong. But didn't the F-47 see extensive service
> in National Guard Sqaudrons post-war into the fifties as did the F-51?
> Also at least one fighter group in Germany, 86th, still had them
> (F-47Ds) in 1949 and perhaps there were more. Air Defense Command had
> two active F-47N squadrons until 1952 and National Guard squadrons
> had F-47's into 1953. I think plenty of F-47D's and N's were available
> as well as F-51D's in the U.S. inventory, but the choice was the F-51D.
>
> AL
You are correct in that the F-47 saw Air Guard service into the 50's
(my source says 1955 for the last to be withdrawn). My mistake for
saying it was removed from service quickly.
Charles K. Scott
I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
Is anyone able to confirm or falsify this "fact"?
Corky Scott
Rupert Williams
Welcome to the world of PROPAGANDA!!
Rupert
Alan K. Sumrall
The tragedy was that the elephant was the brother of a circus
aviation legend of the period.
"When I see an elephant fly..."
AL
Chris Manteuffel
Charles...@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott) wrote:
>I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
>that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
>killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
>
>Is anyone able to confirm or falsify this "fact"?
decides that this would make a great story, so he/she invents it. Same
(IMO) with the story about the SR-71 and the (insert scandinavian airforce
of choice here). Makes a great story, so it gets spread.
Chris Manteuffel
Scott Lowther
A couple decades ago, someone by name of B.C.F. Klein copyrighted some
really nice drawings of German projected aircraft; I've seen them here
and there in archives and magazine articles. Can anyone tell me about
him? Did he publish a collection of his stuff? Is he alive and
reachable? Thanks.
Charles K. Scott
In article <327404...@livingston.net>
"Alan K. Sumrall" <a...@livingston.net> writes:
> Rupert Williams wrote:
> >
> > Charles K. Scott wrote:
> > > I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
> > > that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
> > > killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
> > > Is anyone able to confirm or falsify this "fact"?
> >
> > Welcome to the world of PROPAGANDA!!
> >
> > Rupert
>
> The tragedy was that the elephant was the brother of a circus
> aviation legend of the period.
> "When I see an elephant fly..."
> AL
Thanks for the comments guys but can anyone actually refute this
"fact"? Prefereably with a citation or two?
Many thanks, Corky Scott
gilles almeida
Hello
>I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
>that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
>killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
I dont know if very first bomb on Berlin kill an elephant but i'm sure
it was a french bomb ;-)))))
I'have not yet find the exact story but i remember these raids are
made during mai/june 1940 by french navy crew on a Farman 222 Goliath
they have made 4 or 6 raids from west coast of France to Berlin and
drop few bombs (certainly 20 or 100 pounds bombs) with no real effect
(except moral.... but that not works very well it seem !!)
gilles almeida
Reims France
http://www.infonie.fr/public_html/spitfire/index.htm/
CDB100620
Correct name = Neel Kearby. A very likeable guy. Commanded newly formed
348FG in July 1943, equipped with P-47s based at Dobodura. Parked at
northeast side of the field just east of "Warhawk Row" where the P-40s of
49FG were parked. Nobody at 49FG had seen P-47s before and were astounded
by these huge machines. Tails were painted white so they would not be
mistaken for Zeros and Oscars by 49FG boys. Some rear echelon guy thought
that up because no way could anyone mistake a beautiful Oscar or Zero for
the Republic beast. 49FG 9FS P-38 crew chiefs wandered over to look at
the P-47s and were struck dumb by the vast complexity of their elaborate
turbocharged engine plumbing. Everybody was awestruck by P-47's
firepower--eight .50s with 425 rpg. Lots of nails. 348FG took over
standing patrols of the Oro Bay area, freeing P-40s for tactical missions
over Salamaua and Lae.
On Aug. 11, 348FG P-47s patroling Oro Bay were mistaken for Japanese
planes by 49FG 9FS P-38 pilots (so they said; hard to believe). They
bounced them and scattered them six ways from Sunday, while howls of glee
and malevolent laughter were heard over the radio. A series of individual
dogfights broke out between the P-47s and P-38s (nobody exchanged a shot).
End result was that the P-47s couldn't get on the tail of a single P-38
and the P-38s could not be shaken off by the P-47s. Dogfight began at
20,000 ft and went down to wave-top height. An example of the rough fun
of figter pilots. Capt. Johnson of 9FS gave Maj. Kearby two bottles of
gin after landing to calm him down. He was hot and wanted to punch
somebody out, but a few shots of gin mellowed him out. He finally allowed
as how he was glad "the God-damned Japs aren't flying P-38s."
On Oct. 6, Lt Col Kearby (got promoted) led the 348FG on a sweep of Wewak.
They got into one hell of a fight with the Japs right over the airstrip.
Kearby himself shot down seven Jap planes, zooming and booming his Jug for
all it was worth. Gen. Kenney was pleased as punch because he demanded
his fighter jocks be aggressive or else. He personally gave Kearby an
attaboy handshake (may seem unimportant, but Kenney was very well
respected and a word of praise from him was treasured). A few days later
Kearby was awarded the medal of honor.
Despite Kearby's successes with it, P-47 was not looked on with favor in
New Guinea, especially by ex-P-38 pilots assigned to it. It was called
"an engineering nightmare with wings." D-4 models used in NG weighed
something like 13,000 lbs in combat trim and even after burning off fuel
could not effectively maneuver in the heavy, wet air over the NG jungles.
The exhaust from the aft-mounted supercharger vented directly onto the
tailwheel, ruining it and causing many a routine landing to turn into
disaster when the weakened tailwheel tire burst, throwing the plane out of
control. The weight of the plane also caused frequent maingear tire
blow-outs too. Temps were usually 100-degrees plus, which may have helped
reduce tire life. Plane had poor take-off performance (as did that later
Republic pig, the F-84). Common saying was that if the army engineers
built a runway all the way around the world, Republic would build an
airplane that needed every foot of it.
P-47 was great at high altitude, but there wasn't much call for that in
the SWPA. It was a great diver, too. Kearby challenged more than one
P-38 driver to a diving contest, and the P-47, in his hands at least, was
clearly the faster in a dive--which means it was really, really fast,
because the P-38 was very fast in a dive. Kearby used the superior diving
speed of the P-47 to make most of his kills. He liked to take his boys
way, way up in the sky where the Japs couldn't spot them, then, using his
wonderful eyesight, pick out Japs below and fall on them like the wrath of
God, blowing them apart with his eight .50s and zooming back up into the
blue, leaving Japs milling around wondering what the hell happened.
Kearby was killed in a dogfight over Wewak on March 5, 1944. He shouldn't
have gotten into a dogfight in a P-47. He knew that. He did it anyway.
He was trying to beat Rickenbacker's record of 26 victories in World War
One. Gen Kenney had met with top scoring pilots and, despite his desire
for aggressive fighter pilots, urged them to caution, saying the record
would fall to one of them in due course and not to push it. But these
were competitive guys who were keyed up from too much combat flying and
not thinking straight.
By the way, the Japanese pilots in New Guinea were very good, and
Japanese planes were very good, too, if somewhat lightly armed. But it
doesn't take much lead to bring down a plane. A few rounds in the right
place will do it.
Just as the P-38 wasn't quite suitable for northern European operations,
so the P-47 wasn't really suitable for SWPA operations. The USAAF was
lucky to have sufficiently capable aircraft makers to develop planes that
worked well in each theater.
Sure would like to know the exact name of that book on Kearby. Like most
of the Pacific Theater Army pilots, he is forgotten. Damn shame. They
were a great bunch.
Elliot Dent
7FS 49FG
Matthew Saroff
Charles...@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott) wrote:
>I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
>that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
>killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
>
>Is anyone able to confirm or falsify this "fact"?
Hi,
It had been quoted to me that it was the first German
shell to land in Leningrad.
--
Matthew Saroff | Standard Disclaimer: Not only do I speak for
_____ | No one else, I don't even Speak for me. All my
/ o o \ | personalities and the spirits that I channel
______|_____|_____| disavow all knowledge of my activities. ;-)
uuu U uuu |
| In fact, all my personalities and channeled spirits
Saroff wuz here | hate my guts. (Well, maybe with garlic & butter...)
For law enforcment officials monitoring the net: abortion, marijuana, cocaine,
cia,plutonium, ammonium nitrate, militia, dea, nsa, pgp, hacker, assassinate.
Send suggestions for new and interesting words to: msa...@pobox.com.
Check http://www.pobox.com/~msaroff, including The Bad Hair Web Page
Dirk Lorek
--
- Dirk Lorek
- Dalby, Sweden
gilles almeida <spit...@infonie.fr> wrote in article
<555kco$v...@vulcain.infonie.fr>...
> Hello
> >I just recieved a "Fun Facts" sheet that claims, among many things,
> >that the very first bomb dropped by the British on Berlin during WWII
> >killed Berlin's only elephant in their Zoo.
>
> I dont know if very first bomb on Berlin kill an elephant but i'm sure
> it was a french bomb ;-)))))
> I'have not yet find the exact story but i remember these raids are
> made during mai/june 1940 by french navy crew on a Farman 222 Goliath
> they have made 4 or 6 raids from west coast of France to Berlin and
> drop few bombs (certainly 20 or 100 pounds bombs) with no real effect
> (except moral.... but that not works very well it seem !!)
>
Yes, the French were first. To my knowledge it was only 1 Goliath (the
'Jules Verne') and only 1 mission though. The bombs were dropped on a
factory in a Berlin suburb. But the question was about the first
British bombdrop. I know that the Berlin zoo (Tiergarten) was hit on
one occasion, but I'm not that sure that this was in the very first
British raid.
I'm at work now, will be back with more info tomorrow.
Dirk
Mr. Jim B. Mccarthy
Hi Eliot, sounds like the P-47 might have been the answer to our dreams
in Korea in '53 from 2/53 till the truce, 7/27. Trouble was we needed
that firepower after dark, doubt any thing the AF had could help us
then. Truth was airpower was not a big factor in our fire support.
Remember FSCC sending out an occasional USMC F4U during the day to
hit moving enemy infantry but these occasions were few and by the time
the AC arrived the enemy was out of sight so there could never be any
confirmation of success.
During this period the line had been more or less stable for a number
of months and Arty had pretty much surveyed everthing ahead of us and
we relied almost totally on them for support, especially at night. When
things got really tight we called for VT on position and down it came
while we were shrunk down under our pots in the trenches and the
bunkers. It did a good job of stopping or at least slowing down anyone
caught in the open. We also had 55 gal. drums of Napalm ready to roll
down the hill with a thermite grenade in the bung hole with the pin
attached to a lanyard about 150' or so long which we would roll down
the hill at the appropriate time. Artillery Willie Peter rounds also
helped to put the fear of God in them.
I have a great respect and admiration for you guys who could master
those birds and face what you did in WWII. I was an Infantryman and
used to look up and wonder how you managed to fly those things. Later I
got my Commercial, Instrument, MEL and Instructor tickets on the GI
Bill and still wonder how you did it . I had enough trouble flying
straight and level.
Jim McCarthy, ex of Love Co., 31st Inf., 7th Inf Div.
Scott Thomson
The book I mentioned in my previous post about the 348th FG in the PTO.
Title: Kearby's Thunderbolts: 348th Fighter Group in World War II
Author: John Stanaway
ISBN: 0-9625860-3-X
Publisher: Phalanx Pub. Co.
1051 Marie Avenue
St.Paul, MN 55118
Softbound, 8 1/2x 11, 112 pages, 120 b&w photos, 9 color profiles,
15 chapters, 3 maps, complete kill and casuality lists.
Price: $ 24.95 (worth it IMHO)
I got my copy via mail order directly from Phalanx.
If you like P-47's and are interested the 5th AF fighter operations
in the SWPA, this book is *highly* recommended.
- Scott "Jugs, Ponys, and the Philippines, 3 of my favorite things"
Ingemar Berndtsson
I do not know this Klein, but there was another book published 1973 with
the title Warplanes & air battles of WW 2, where you can find some
drawings and short descriptions about german projects. ISBN no is 0 7026
0001 6.
Cheers
Ingemar
alan burnett
Any mention of the Farman 222 should be in the 'ugliest aircraft'
thread!
--
alan burnett
gilles almeida
"
>> I dont know if very first bomb on Berlin kill an elephant but i'm sure
>> it was a french bomb ;-)))))
>> I'have not yet find the exact story but i remember these raids are
>> made during mai/june 1940 by french navy crew on a Farman 222 Goliath
>> they have made 4 or 6 raids from west coast of France to Berlin and
>> drop few bombs (certainly 20 or 100 pounds bombs) with no real effect
>> (except moral.... but that not works very well it seem !!)
>>
>Yes, the French were first. To my knowledge it was only 1 Goliath (the
>'Jules Verne') and only 1 mission though. The bombs were dropped on a
>factory in a Berlin suburb. But the question was about the first
>British bombdrop. I know that the Berlin zoo (Tiergarten) was hit on
>one occasion, but I'm not that sure that this was in the very first
>British raid. I'm at work now, will be back with more info tomorrow.
Ok ok but i must find the book where i've read but i think they have
made more 1 bombing run .. but i'ts not important ;-))
Other funny story during WWII
If i remember well take place few month before D-Day
Germans have made dummy tanks target in wood and placed in a very
nice field in france ..
But french partisans have send info it was a false target to London
and british make a bombing raid on a real target in this area, and one
plane (i think it was Mosquitoes) make a bomb run on dummy target with
wood bomb ;-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Charles K. Scott
In article <55e619$h...@vulcain.infonie.fr>
spit...@infonie.fr (gilles almeida) writes:
> Other funny story during WWII
> If i remember well take place few month before D-Day
> Germans have made dummy tanks target in wood and placed in a very
> nice field in france ..
> But french partisans have send info it was a false target to London
> and british make a bombing raid on a real target in this area, and one
> plane (i think it was Mosquitoes) make a bomb run on dummy target with
> wood bomb ;-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
So the British carry out a bombing mission against a known false target
in the face of some of the heaviest ground fire in the European Theater
as a joke? Hope this was a volunteer mission.
Corky Scott
Carl Theaker
In article <55nktq$2...@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, Charles...@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott) writes:
|> In article <55e619$h...@vulcain.infonie.fr>
|> spit...@infonie.fr (gilles almeida) writes:
|>
|> > Other funny story during WWII
|> > If i remember well take place few month before D-Day
|> > Germans have made dummy tanks target in wood and placed in a very
|> > nice field in france ..
|> > But french partisans have send info it was a false target to London
|> > and british make a bombing raid on a real target in this area, and one
|> > plane (i think it was Mosquitoes) make a bomb run on dummy target with
|> > wood bomb ;-))))))))
read a similar story how early in the war when they were
peering at each other across the channel, the british had
made dummy bunkers along the coast, and the luftwaffe dropped
wood bombs on them, so apparently it is a aerial past time.
carl
Charles K. Scott
In article <55r2l9$d...@dsk92.itg.ti.com>
the...@tsd.itg.ti.com (Carl Theaker) writes:
> read a similar story how early in the war when they were
> peering at each other across the channel, the british had
> made dummy bunkers along the coast, and the luftwaffe dropped
> wood bombs on them, so apparently it is a aerial past time.
>
> carl
Uh oh, sounds similar to the story about German wooden tank mockups
attacked by the British who dropped wooden bombs on them. I'd question
the validity of both stories.
Corky Scott
Phil Miller
On 12 Nov 1996 17:45:01 GMT, Charles...@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
wrote:
>the...@tsd.itg.ti.com (Carl Theaker) writes:
>> read a similar story how early in the war when they were
>> peering at each other across the channel, the british had
>> made dummy bunkers along the coast, and the luftwaffe dropped
>> wood bombs on them, so apparently it is a aerial past time.
>
>attacked by the British who dropped wooden bombs on them. I'd question
>the validity of both stories.
My father went to Vietnam with the Australian Army and when he returned he told
us of how the Americans fired wooden artillery rounds at the doors of VC
bunkers. The story was they would fire 3 wooden rounds then 1 live round. Knock,
knock, knock, door opens, Booom.
I believed this story as a 9 year old, but my opinion has changed ;->
--
Phil
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
'cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.
Monty Python's "Galaxy Song"