The most effective air force in WW2

[dead-cat]

probably depends on the type.
AFAIK B17C could carry 4800lbs while the He111 H6 could carry 2800kg of bombs (which amounts about 5600lbs, if i'm not mistaken)

taken from here

but i'm no aircraft specialist, so if anyone has more reliable data, i stand corrected.

[dragos]

The bombload of 12,800lb is given for B-17G while the 4,400lb is given for He111H3

[Victor]

QUOTE

What is \"less accurate\"? Bombing Switzerland or Sweden by mistake?

That actually happened.

QUOTE

Could you point me to a believable source for this? I thought most air forces frowned on this, but that it really depended on the pilots. There can always be a gap between the theory and the reality.

On 21 April 1944, adj. av. Spiridon Matei from the 58th Fighter Squadron/7th Fighter Group was shot down near Ramnicul Valcea by 31st Fighter Group's P-51s. He bailed out, but was shot in the parachute.

[Dénes]

There were more than one occasion when American pilots shot on Rumanian pilots descending on their parachutes.
One can find same reports from Hungarian sources as well (not to mention German).

Col. Dénes

[Dénes]

QUOTE

On 21 April 1944, adj. av. Spiridon Matei from the 58th Fighter Squadron/7th Fighter Group was shot down near Ramnicul Valcea by 31st Fighter Group's P-51s. He bailed out, but was shot in the parachute.

I have a note in my loss files that he was shot down by Lightnings.
BTW, do you have the tail number of his I.A.R. 80/81?

Col. Dénes

[mabadesc]

I've been watching this thread from its inception and have been quite amused and sympathetic with Victor's repeated attempts to prove his point through objective statements, only to be shut down by completely irrelevant, subjective arguments which have nothing to do with Air Force "EFFICIENCY".

Victor came up with simple, objective, and to-the-point arguments, all relevant to the USAAF/RAF's efficiency in WWII.
It seems, however, that some people cannot put aside their dislike/hatred/envy of the US even for one moment. Their dislike of the US is so great that they simply will not concede that the US was the best at anything, never, ever, period. If you bring objective arguments that they have no answer to (like Victor did), they will just change the topic or come up with irrelevant criticism.

I knew this was going to happen in this thread as soon as someone would mention the USAAF as being the most efficient airforce in WWII, and surely enough, that's how it happened.

So, in conclusion, here is the summary of this thread:

The Luftwaffe was the most efficient WWII airforce at all levels and at all types of missions.
(Even though the USAAF had the best fighter of the war (P-51) and the best strategic bombers of the war (B-17, B-24), and even though they could conduct any type of mission, including large-scope strategic ones, which the Luftwaffe could not)

Why was the Luftwaffe the most efficient WWII airforce? Simple: it's because their pilots exhibited chivalry and would not shoot at parachuting pilots with the same frequency the allies did.

How can you argue with this line of thinking? These are rock-solid, relevant arguments in establishing efficiency. :roll:

[dead-cat]

QUOTE

Why was the Luftwaffe the most efficient WWII airforce? Simple: it's because their pilots exhibited chivalry and would not shoot at parachuting pilots with the same frequency the allies did.

would you please bother to quote who exactly claimed that?

Jeff said something about the Luftwaffe not displaying chivalry to which i pointed out an obviously frequent USAAF custom of shooting at bailed out pilots. the conclusion that, because the luftwaffe command did not encourage such a beaviour, the luftwaffe is the most efficient air force is entirely yours.

QUOTE

Even though the USAAF had the best fighter of the war (P-51)

i'd say it's the Me262.
there is another category: night fighter
but when discussing the best fighters (more than just from a technological point of view) the quality of the pilot is even more relevant. and since german pilots flew on average more missions they gained more experience than most allied pilots. hence the high(er) numbers of aerial victories.

[Victor]

Mabadesc, there is no need to flame things, so calm down.

[i16stealth]

QUOTE

Why was the Luftwaffe the most efficient WWII airforce?  Simple:  it's because their pilots exhibited chivalry and would not shoot at parachuting pilots with the same frequency the allies did.

The Soviets didn't shoot also.

[Victor]

Not exactly. See the case of lt. Mihail Oncioiu here: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/viewtopic.php?p=757

[Victor]

QUOTE

but when discussing the best fighters (more than just from a technological point of view) the quality of the pilot is even more relevant. and since german pilots flew on average more missions they gained more experience than most allied pilots. hence the high(er) numbers of aerial victories.

The average pilot quality, especially towards the end of the war, was higher on the USAAF side, than on the Luftwaffe side. I believe it was Pierre Closterman who said that the Luftwaffe had 20% superb pilots and 80% future victims, or something like that. The American system relied more on large numbers of good pilots (hence the over 1250 aces) than on fewer superb Experten.

[C-2]

All nations participating pilots ,some were shooting at parachutes :cry: :cry:

[cipiamon]

QUOTE

the Germans had some of the most successful pilots, given their number of victories, but we must take into account the fact that they stayed in combat for the longest time and had the biggest number of sorties.

I heard that before and i don't agree whit it, it's logic for me that they also have the most high ratio of surviving, so they were better pilots

From all non-propagandistic material i read it was not the quality of the pilots who matter in the end but he quantity, you can't win a battle when is 17:1.

[Huck]

Among the major airforces, LW was definitely the most efficient. The very best pilots using the very best material. Lethal to the last day (in the west), in spite of TR dissarray.

A better use of resources might have led to a different outcome, but the chances were slim. What was expected to happen, happened. LW was better than any of its enemies, but not good enough to defeat them all.

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

Among the major airforces, LW was definitely the most efficient.

The Luftwaffe was definitely a formidable tactical force (though not nearly as much in '44 and '45).

However, what were its strategic capabilities?