A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Were the Tuskeegee Airmen Wrong?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 12th 04, 01:01 AM
Stephen Harding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old February 12th 04, 01:06 AM
Henry Bibb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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  
Old February 12th 04, 01:10 AM
Krztalizer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old February 12th 04, 01:11 AM
Richard Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


  #6  
Old February 12th 04, 01:41 AM
ArtKramr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

  #8  
Old February 12th 04, 02:33 AM
Pete
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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  
Old February 12th 04, 02:54 AM
George Z. Bush
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old February 12th 04, 04:17 AM
Lyle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 03:20 AM
Misawa revamps awards system for airmen Otis Willie Military Aviation 2 December 17th 03 03:28 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.