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

"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

Subject: Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?
From: "Henry Bibb"
Date: 2/11/04 4:06 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: t


"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


Mine eyes are dim I cannot see,
I do not have my E6-B with me,
In the valley of the Ruhr.

(old WW II ditty)



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

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

Subject: Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?
From: Lyle
Date: 2/11/04 7:17 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

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


Flak is always another thing



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Henry Bibb wrote:

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"?

Seems like the answer to that might depend on whether you were
flying in the bomber, or armchair quarterbacking in the 21st century...

sigh
Here we go again.


SMH

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.

In article ,
says...
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

Interesting web site and explains why they did use them. But it does not
answer the question put forward by Stephen Harding. Were these tactics
correct?



This question had been answered not so long ago that I'd thought there'd at
least be an FAQ somewhere ?

Please.


Richard.





--
A department of the government runs itself. In that it is run for its
employees benefit first.


Observations of Bernard - No 43

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.

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