• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

"Red Tails"

PRB

PRB

Administrator
Staff member
Watched the movie for the first time, since it was on the “Dish”. It was an ok movie, but one thing caught my attention. In the movie, the implication is that the remarkable record this group had with respect to bombers lost while on escort missions was due to their decision to “stick with the bombers” rather than go off chasing Me-109s, presumably at the expense of the bombers.

I'm sure Hollywood screwed this point up, or at least over simplified it, but I haven't read anything specifically on the Red Tails in WW-II, so can't say what “new tactics” they may have employed. We do know that this debate over the most effective way to conduct a bomber escort mission was a heated one in the early years of the war, with fighter pilots generally believing that staying glued to the bombers was a horrible idea, and bomber pilots thinking otherwise. I've read accounts of RAF fighter pilots commenting that the German tactic of sticking with the bombers made their job, shooting down bombers, easier, which would seem to settle the matter. I've also read in histories of the 8TH AF that it wasn't until the fighters were “turned loose” to chase after German fighters, that we really began to have an effect on the German fighter forces.

So what's the consensus here on this? I haven't read about the 8TH and 15TH bomber offensive over Europe in many years, having had my nose buried in Pacific War history for some time. I've always thought the USAAF learned “as a whole”, during the war, that “sticking with the bombers” was bad tactics.

- Paul
 
PRB,....you bring up some excellent points,...pro and con about sticking with the bombers. I'm hardly qualified to give an opinion one way or another since my nose is buried too in books pertaining to the PTO. However,...I do know one thing,....when Jimmy Doolittle took over the 8th,....he gave the fighters to right to take off the gloves and go after the 109's and 190's. It seemed to work.
 
If you read Jimmy Doolittle's biography I Could Never Be So Lucky Again he says in Chapter 15 that when he took over command of the 8th Air Force that he was responsible for changing the philosophy from protect the bombers, to go on the offense & destroy the Germans both in the air & on the ground. I've also heard credit given to Hub Zemke for developing the "fan" tactic, & also to Eisenhower making it a priority to win air superiority before D-Day.

Since the High Command sets the policy that the lower levels follow this would have allowed the fighters to fight as they preferred. It doesn't explain however why Doolittle didn't make that his policy when he commanded the 12th & 15th Air Forces prior to this. Perhaps his promotion & the extra star on his shoulder enabled him to have more influence. He does mention that when he took over the 8th (Jan 1944) it was finally the time when enough fighters & bombers were arriving in theater every month to act more aggressively.

So although Red Tails is a descent movie I think they got the overall message wrong. Their reputation for protecting the bombers was legendary, & they may have been explicitly ordered to do so, but the AAF & later USAF as a whole moved on to a different doctrine.
 
PRB,
Tuskegee pilots didn't rack up large quantities of air-to-air kills nor large quantities of air-to-ground kills on strafing runs.....

Just food for thought :mixedsmi:
 
Having the fighters sticking close to the bombers was a bad tactic. It limited the fighter's speed and maneuverability. The enemy could better dictate the terms of the fight. The USAAF made the same mistakes as the German's (BOB) in 1943. In '44, the USAAF let the fighters go after the Luftwaffe, to gain air superiority for the D Day invasion. Made the bomber crews mad, but ultimately helped to defeat Germany.
The Red Tails never looseng a bomber is a myth.
 
On a sad note later in the war bombers were used as bait by the US so the allies could destroy what was left of the German Airforce. I read how that decision was made and the effect it did have on the bomber crews and the german pilots who knew that sooner or later they would eventually be shot down. Can you imagine flying 3 or 4 sorties aday for 2 or 3 years. The Brits struggled with the BOB I cant imagine the effect it had on German morale knowing that there were 100s if not 1000s of allied bombers coming day and night.

The idea of staying with the bombers eventually changed with commanders like Doolittle knowing that we had to engaged the german pilots on the offensive not just the defensive so they could be destroyed even if that meant loosing bomber crews. In all honesty they were bait and with the decrease in the number of targets for bomber crews it still made sense to send them out there to draw up the german fighters so they could be destroyed by the fighter escort.

Hell of a price to pay for air supremacy but a necessity.

Very effective tactic which probably cost alot of bomber crews but more importantly helped the allies attain air supremacy over the germans.

As far as the Redtails not loosing a bomber call it whatever you want but its def not accurate. There were radio transmissions between Redtails where they were quoted as saying we lost afew bombers. Whoever or whatever the reason for such an inaccurate or myth saying that they never lost a bomber is kind of disrespectful to every pilot who flew escort duty. Im not blaming the Redtails and Im sure it was one of those saying or qoutes which helped them in theyre cause for equal rights which they clearly deserve.

For those Allied fighter pilots who flew those deep pentration missions with the bombers Im pretty sure most of them had the best intentions on protecting the bombers the best way possible. That includes both white and African Americans.

Creeps.
 
A good point, Creeps… The decision to “turn the fighters loose” on the German air force was a strategic one. The bombers, at some point, will be safe from attack when there are no more enemy fighters… But in the short term that was bad for the bombers. It’s hard to avoid the term “bait” I guess, but they were still trying to destroy factories and such. I suppose if you had an unlimited amount of fighters, you could do both escort and fighter sweep, but such is rarely the case, and certainly not with the numbers of bombers being sent out by 1944. The allied bomber command had the right idea, but not the technology to pull it off, which didn’t really come together until the 1990s… The result was unbelievable loss of life. Probably only the German U-Boat crews had it worse…

I suppose there are varying levels of “sticking with the bombers.” I read someplace that the German escort VF in the Battle of Britain were under very restrictive orders that made them ineffective, even before they hit “BINGO fuel” state…

- Paul
 
Creepy847 said:
As far as the Redtails not loosing a bomber call it whatever you want but its def not accurate. There were radio transmissions between Redtails where they were quoted as saying we lost afew bombers. Whoever or whatever the reason for such an inaccurate or myth saying that they never lost a bomber is kind of disrespectful to every pilot who flew escort duty. Im not blaming the Redtails and Im sure it was one of those saying or qoutes which helped them in theyre cause for equal rights which they clearly deserve.
Creeps.
Click to expand...

Thanks for stating this.
My prior/previous response to they myth post was purely a "politically correct" response. What you've stated in the above is more along the lines of how I truly feel....
 
I don't think comparing the MTO and ETO loss rates or tactics is all that fair to begin with. The average threat levels by 1944 were no where near the same.

I do recall reading that the no bomber losses story originated with a Chicago newspaper that was describing their accomplishments at the end of the war and they misinterpreted some Army Air Corps statements to mean they never lost a bomber to fighters.
It was not their doing but I would be pretty annoyed with the implications of this myth if I were a member of another Group.

About ten years ago I met one of the Red Tail pilots. I was keen to talk about it but he brushed it off with "That was then, this is now". We then proceeded to have a really enjoyable discussion about drag racing. Very sharp guy.

Break Break


Regarding the BOB escort missions, I recently read that after Goering lit into the fighters for not sticking with the bombers, a certain portion were required to fly close escort no matter what.
Some of the bombers were so slow that the ME-109s had to fly with their flaps down.
I had never heard that last part before.
 
Thanks for stating this.
My prior/previous response to they myth post was purely a "politically correct" response. What you've stated in the above is more along the lines of how I truly feel....
Click to expand...

Agreed. We will say inaccurate.
 
I don't follow you. As far as I know myth can mean a false collective belief.
Seems to be the same meaning to me. How do you feel it is different and who does it slap?
 
joe bob said:
I don't follow you. As far as I know myth can mean a false collective belief.
Seems to be the same meaning to me. How do you feel it is different and who does it slap?
Click to expand...

Well I'm biased somewhat in that:

-I'm a proud member of the USAF
-I'm a black guy that was born during segregation
-Growing up, had a neighbor down the street who was a Tuskegee Airman
-I've been fortunate to meet 2 others in my life - Dr. Granville Coggs and John "Mule" Miles....

Yes, to say that they never lost a bomber under their escort would be incorrect - but to assert myth (IMHO) just doesn't taste right to me.....
 
I see. I guess the difference is not that great to me, certainly not slap worthy.

Born during segregation and still in the AF, you are an old timer!
 
I tend to agree with Creeps that this "inaccuracy" tends to put the Redtails on a pedestal above all the other fighter/escort squadrons, thus slapping them in the face. I'm sure all escort pilots wished they could completely prevent bomber losses, but that was impossible. To suggest, inaccurately, that a certain squadron achieved this and then build a legend (myth) around it would seem to diminish the accomplishments of the rest of the fighter forces.
 
I definitely don't claim to know all there is to know about that theater of operations, I way I understood things was the official doctrine was that of "Hot Pursuit" thereby destroying the Luftwaffe by attrition, but Col. Davis understood if his command left the bombers to go flat-hatting and the Caucasian pilots began to take inordinate casualities, the Red Tails' enemies in Congress and the military establishment would use this as "evidence" of their incompetence. If you want to see Davis' point of view in greater detail, read his autobiography, Benjamin O. Davis Jr., American. Col. Davis was "silenced" during his entire tenure at West Point, meaning his classmates never spoke to him except in class.

I remember when the whole contraversy about the Red Tails' record hit the media. It never changed the way I felt about their contribution because I'm addicted to C-SPAN Book TV and already knew some of the surviving Tuskegee Airmen had already said their "Never lost a bomber" claim might eventually be overturned, and that didn't alter, at least to me, the dedication it took to do what they did. I also saw that some of the people posting on the subject in net forums, a vocal minority, had another agenda quite familiar to myself and probably Panther, if I have him right. That being the idea, which still survives, that African-American accomplishment is illegitimate in essence, but I say again most of the people I encountered online were mainly concerned with getting the historical record straight. I wouldn't say that if I didn't beleive it.

If we're going to talk about WWII mythology, I personally would start with the famous photo of the flag being raised on Iwo Jima. Bruce Gambale says that Gregory Boyington fudged his number of kills after leaving China, and devotes a whole section of his book on VMF-214 to the difficulty in totalling air kills under combat conditions. There's also a certain TV talk show host whose name I will not mention whom I refuse to watch because of certain statements he made about the Ardennes. Now, my family knows people who were there at the time, so I'm apt to take these things personally, but not only has he NOT been roundly denounced, he has no problem telling other people how to live. I could go on and on and on.

JAMES
 
Eoraptor1 said:
, the Red Tails' enemies in Congress and the military establishment would use this as "evidence" of their incompetence.
Gregory Boyington fudged his number of kills after leaving China, and devotes a whole section of his book on VMF-214 to the difficulty in totalling air kills under combat conditions.
JAMES
Click to expand...

That makes sense. I think it is easy to forget that politics was a factor then as it is now.

Speaking of Boyington, I think his Medal of Honor was as much about politics and image as anything else.
So much emphasis was placed on his chase to equal the WW1 record then he goes MIA so the medal puts a positive spin on it. Who could guess that a submarine would pop up and capture him.
I think he was the only one who really believed his claims in China.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top