If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?
Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where
intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. History seems to say this was precisely the *wrong* thing to be doing! The bombers served as much as "incentive" for the LW to come up to fight, as they were in destroying German war fighting resources. The shift from "sticking with the bombers" to "follow the enemy anywhere and destroy him" seemed to do the trick for the 8th. Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? SMH |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Stephen Harding" wrote in message ... Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. History seems to say this was precisely the *wrong* thing to be doing! The bombers served as much as "incentive" for the LW to come up to fight, as they were in destroying German war fighting resources. The shift from "sticking with the bombers" to "follow the enemy anywhere and destroy him" seemed to do the trick for the 8th. Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? SMH Seems like the answer to that might depend on whether you were flying in the bomber, or armchair quarterbacking in the 21st century... HB |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen
in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? I know more revelevent people will chime in here, but that accolade is not at all hollow. Their tactics meant that they followed the tactical definition of Escort Fighter far more accurately than some of the other groups, who were somewhat famous among bomber crews for failing to show up to cover their assignments. Bomber guys talk with literal dread when they mention missions where the escorts never arrived - the 303rd (?) BG was shredded after one such event and it happened to other heavy bomber groups as well. How could 'provided excellent coverage and defense against all enemy comers' be considered a hollow accolade? v/r Gordon ====(A+C==== USN SAR Donate your memories - write a note on the back and send your old photos to a reputable museum, don't take them with you when you're gone. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Stephen Harding wrote:
Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. Try this page for one; http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasasp...tory/tusk.html This question had been answered not so long ago that I'd thought there'd at least be an FAQ somewhere ? Richard. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?
From: Stephen Harding Date: 2/11/04 4:01 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? Doesn't sound hollow to me. I guess you had to have been there.((:-)) Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?
From: nt (Krztalizer) Date: 2/11/04 4:10 PM Pacific Standard Time Bomber guys talk with literal dread when they mention missions where the escorts never arrived - Yeah. Tell me about it. How could 'provided excellent coverage and defense against all enemy comers' be considered a hollow accolade? Only to those who weren't there. (sigh) Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Stephen Harding" wrote Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. History seems to say this was precisely the *wrong* thing to be doing! The bombers served as much as "incentive" for the LW to come up to fight, as they were in destroying German war fighting resources. The shift from "sticking with the bombers" to "follow the enemy anywhere and destroy him" seemed to do the trick for the 8th. Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? What was the mission they were given? Bomber escort, ground attack, or air superiority? Leaving the bombers exposed leaves them vulnerable to other enemy fighters. They flew their missions they were tasked with, did the job (exceptionally well) and most came home. Pete Son and nephew of Tuskegee Airmen |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Stephen Harding wrote:
Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. History seems to say this was precisely the *wrong* thing to be doing! The bombers served as much as "incentive" for the LW to come up to fight, as they were in destroying German war fighting resources. The shift from "sticking with the bombers" to "follow the enemy anywhere and destroy him" seemed to do the trick for the 8th. Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? 12th AF was in Italy.....13th AF in the Pacific, I believe. George Z. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:06:51 GMT, "Henry Bibb"
wrote: "Stephen Harding" wrote in message ... Saw the Tuskeegee Airmen movie earlier this week where intermission had discussions with a couple fellows who were members of the real thing. Quite interesting. However, they mentioned the oft repeated accolade that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters that they escorted. One reason, according to one of the actual "Airmen", was they *stuck with their charges* rather than follow the German fighters to the ground as the 8th was doing by 1944. History seems to say this was precisely the *wrong* thing to be doing! The bombers served as much as "incentive" for the LW to come up to fight, as they were in destroying German war fighting resources. The shift from "sticking with the bombers" to "follow the enemy anywhere and destroy him" seemed to do the trick for the 8th. Was the 13th (??) AF in Italy, and the Tuskeegee Airmen in particular, following the wrong tactic? Is the reputation of this fine group of fighter pilots somewhat over-embellished with hollow accolade over the issue of "never losing a bomber"? SMH Seems like the answer to that might depend on whether you were flying in the bomber, or armchair quarterbacking in the 21st century... HB i saw the same show, and they clareified that they never lost a bomber to enemy fighters, but flak was another thing |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tactical Air Control Party Airmen Help Ground Forces | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 22nd 04 02:20 AM |
Misawa revamps awards system for airmen | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 2 | December 17th 03 02:28 PM |
Pope Air Force Base airmen honored | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 27th 03 09:50 PM |
Airmen honor POWs, MIAs | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 21st 03 08:49 PM |
STEP program helps advance hundreds of hand-picked airmen | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 09:15 PM |