Air Forces Comparison-Which was the best one?

Gregoire,

>I am enclined to believe that for ww1 the best
>air force in general was the best army cooperation
>air force

Excellent point which gets lost in who scored the most victories. Which aviation arm did you think had the most efficient army co-operation forces?




cam

Droops you make a good point, German Rumplers at certain periods did not worry too much about being intercepted as they could fly over all allied scouts.

That freed up the germans scouts from lots of escort duty and allowed more hunter units.

The allies almost seem as if they wanted their two-seater crews to die sometimes...

[Billy_Bishop]

Certainly, the GAF was well staffed, and effecently run. But for sheer stubbornness I have to go with the RFC/RNAS/RAF.

They consistantly fought for control of the skies, and more often than not, had it. Sure, the GAF would, on occasion gain local control in one area. But they could never keep control.

Besides which, no one could over claim like the RFC pilots could.

VBR,

Al

[GrzeM]

Bolecke was the best in theory.
MvR was the best in practice.

In my opinion Voss was better fighter PILOT than MvR, and under good commander he wouldn't die like he died.
But maybe I'm wrong.
Boelcke was best in theory of fight, but also in practicall commanding!
G.

[Gregvan]

Dear GrzeM:

Pardon me, but perhaps I didn't understand your statement. There's little doubt that Voss was a better pilot than Richthofen, but what do you mean ( no offense) by "under a good commander he wouldn't have died like he died ". ? At the time, Voss was commander of Jasta 10 himself; his superior as commander of JG I was Richthofen, of course as leader of JG I, but on the day of Voss' death MvR was on leave and Oblt. Kurt Döring was acting CO of the Geschwader. However, I don't think any superior officer could have prevented Voss from being killed as he was - it was Voss' own incredible courage and recklessness. In the recent Vol. 16 No. 2 of "Over the Front" was a superb article on Friedrich Ruedenberg, who flew in Jasta 10 under Voss' command. He says, "Militarily he [Voss] had the weakness of being an absolute loner. Often he separated from his Staffel over the front, and he did not train us very systematically." It seems Voss in the Fokker F.I would out-climb any escorting Albatros or Pfalz of his unit and leave them behind. Ruedenberg wrote of the 23rd of September: "In the evening we flew again to the front with Voss; again he left us - never to return. In the morning he had shot down an Englishman on our side and when filling in the report form had placed his own name in the line for the victim's name; he realized this and corrected it. At night we received news from our first line about an aerial fight between one German and six Englishman, the German crashed." You can debate this until the end of time, but in my opinion Voss recklessly took on a bit more than he could handle that day. He was a terrific pilot, but Richthofen was far superior as a commander, leader and motivator.

Just my two cents' worth - just wanted to share a little information. Thanks.

Greg VanWyngarden

[EdStevens]

Just to play devil's advocate, one could argue that the war was won on the ground, not in the air. If you asked the ground troops which side won, I'm betting they would say the Allies. It was Allied aircraft which were seen most often over the trenches, directing artillery fire onto German positions and doing counter-battery work. It was Allied aircraft which pioneered and most effectively used trench-strafing during the vast majority of the war. It was Allied fighters which were most visible over the Front--and indeed well behind it. Many reports from German ground troops support the idea that they did not see their own air force as a visible or effective presence.

The defensive tactics of the Germans were not ultimately successful in a strategic sense. Although they suffered terrible losses, the aggressive strategy of the Allies in seeking air superiority ultimately was effective.

In terms of the success of individual pilots, I agree that the defensive strategy of the Germans provided a distinct advantage. Picking your battles, often in superior numbers and firepower (I'm thinking particularly of two guns vs. one for the latter) and fighting over your own territory provide both tactical and scoring (irrefutable evidence and witnesses) advantages. How many potential "Allied Richthofens" were lost simply because they were forced down or had mechanical problems while far behind enemy lines?

[leo]

One saw more allied planes simply because on the Western Front the Allies outnumbered the Germans by at least two to one.

Cam and Ed are onto the essential points of what needs to be evaluated - the air arms were there to serve the armies and the fighter pilots were small beans unless they were either (a) downing enemy observeration and related aircraft (b) protecting their own observation and related aircraft or © engaged in direct ground attack. All the rest was show biz - Gary Condit compared to Osamin bin Laden.

Arguing that a numerical advantage somehow results in "points lost" to the stronger force during such evaluations is an odd argument to make in weighing an air force, which presumably should be measured in its effectiveness in doing a job. If an air force had no aerial opposition (a.k.a. in Afganistan) would that mean it was beneath consideration, not to be assessed as professional in outlook and action ?

The most effective "air force" of the First Great Unpleasantness may not even be a specific air force but the array of those aerial resources used in Palestine in 1917-1918. The most effective heavy bomber force may have been the Italians (a raid on Vienna, even with leaflets, produced stunning results in undermining morale). The most effective lighter-than-air "air force" was probably the Royal Navy.

[leo]

Cross and Cockade, in its latest edition, has a very interesting article concerning the work of the German Observers and Spotters in WWI.

[Billy_Bishop]

One saw more allied planes simply because on the Western Front the Allies outnumbered the Germans by at least two to one.

Considering the manpower availability, I don't understand why the Germans didn't field a larger Air Force. I think they could have done it. And they certainly had the capability to produce enough aircraft as well.

Yes, the Entente forces outnumbered the Germans, but the Entente forces were also more aggressive as well.

VBR,

Al Lowe