Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

The Luftwaffe

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Grand Falcon Railroad (U3267675) on Tuesday, 16th May 2006

  Hi all,
  
  How would you go about judging the success of the Luftwaffe in relation to (A) the other airforces around the world at the time, (B) how the organisation fared during WW2 and (Ci) its legacy in relation to now and finally (Cii) its immidiate legacy after WW2.
  
  B) at the time prior to 1943 the Luftwaffe was an excellent tactical airforce with no real depth to go about accheiving strategic goals - the BoB showed that you cant defeat a nation with medium bombers and the Luftwaffe at the time was really a CAP airforce - or ground support force. By 1943 the early mk. aicraft like the Ju-87 was obsolete and the Luftwaffe was trying to redevelop itself although it has of course modern types like the Fw.190D and Me262 amongst others it realises that in effect its doomed. The Luftwaffe by the end of the war had rejected for services nearly as many types of aircraft as it had accepted for service.
  
  A) The Luftwaffe before 1939 was just the best airforce with regards to its equipment although Japan had of course the most experienced pilots.
  
  But like all threads all views considered
  
  

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Tuesday, 16th May 2006

  IMO, "Strategic Bombing" was the most waisted effort in WWII. Even though the allies were able to place 1,000 bombers per day over Germany, at no time did any of those raids place any plant out of production more than three days.
  
  The German air force did a fantastic job of shooting down allied bombers. It is just the U.S. outproduced them badly. In 1943 the U.S. produced 50,000 aircraft of all types. I don't know any nation that could have fought off that massive production very long.

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Grand Falcon Railroad (U3267675) on Tuesday, 16th May 2006

  The luftwaffe though to be fair did do a better job of daylight targetted bombing against strategic targets when it attacked RAF airfields - wasn't desinged for or capable of blitzing UKL cities.

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Aldebaran (U3969750) on Tuesday, 16th May 2006

  Hello newcf15
  One thing thing that I thought to chuck into the ring was to mention that the Luftwaffe was rather let down by some of its very senior officers. Goerings lack of care is very well known and Udet was out of place, according to all accounts, as the Head of Technical Development, leading to his suicide. The service was also rife with jealousy and personal hate campaigns. These had serious consequencies. For instance, when the time came for the replacement of the Bf109, there simply was nothing available (the early Fw190's lacked high altitude performance) and the trusty 109 had to soldier on. The Fw190D was an excellent performer - but that was later. On the credit side, there were excellent officers, for example Galland, who knew their job and had the trust of their men. However, as is so often the case, they were stifled by politcal meddling and outragious intregue.

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by Grand Falcon Railroad (U3267675) on Tuesday, 16th May 2006

  Hi there,
  
  that's too true - the Luftwaffe in the early years 39-41 was excellent IMO. Struggled between late'41-mid'44 (with regards to kit (as well as fuel)) and then got some great hi-tech kit late on the war when it was too late.
  
  For example - Me-110 was obsolete by 1941 but reinvented as anightfigther by 1942 but its replacement the Me-210/410 was rubbish and the perceived need for a twin-engine "heavy fighter" was removed.
  
  The Do-17/He-111 medium bomber type was obsolete by 1942 and the He-177 was although innovative also rubbish - result no really effective heavy bomber.
  
  The Ju-88 was effectivly redesigned to make an effective night-fighter and soldiered on as a medium bomber until the end of the war.
  
  You are of course correct with regards to the Fw-190 and especially the excellent D version - worldclass for its day.
  
  The Me-109 by the end of the war was rather poor although by all accounts the K version was effective as a bomber-interceptor rather than fighter.
  
  So far as I know no really effective types were used as replacements for the Ju-87 and Fw-200 either.
  
  Although we have to salute the excellent Me-262 and the unsung and under built He-219 Uhl - a twin engined nightfighter.

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by DocMike15 (U3167117) on Thursday, 18th May 2006

  The strange thing about the Luftwaffe is that as it got better at shooting things down, its very foundations were gradually crumbling. By 1944, Goring was stripping the Luftwaffe of personnel to fight on the ground. There were no replacements for many obselete types, yet vast resources were wasted on hight tech projects (the number of jet fighter projects were enormous). The allied bomber offensive was ultimaty a mistake (although it certainly had an effect), but it was just another thing for the Luftwaffe to do when it was ill-equiped for the task. If to that you add the failure of the training programme, the Luftwaffe is failing by early 1942. Milch and Speer merely helped slow the decline, rather than reverse it. Against that of course, you have the Ar234, the Me262 and the Fw-190 (particlarly the D - the long-nosed series were probably the best high-altitude prop fightes of the war). Anf course the 'experten' - but even this can be seen as a weakness, when you think of the strain they must have been under to continue to put such pilots in the front line, rather than rotate them.

  Link to this forum: The Luftwaffe

  Report message6

Back to top