P-40 great for toasting BF110's?

[Frequent_Flyer]

 

 

Frequent Flyer is the Personification of Poe's Law. He is perfect in that I still can't tell if he means a Word he writes. His Poe-Levels are through the Roof. 

 

I still assume that he is in Fact a Poe and having a Laugh with us. I'm basing that purely on the Avatar though. Otherwise I would call it insanity. 

 

Be aware , many a truth is spoken in jest. WW II was decided many moons ago, even though some here still try to keep the conflict going.

[BlitzPig_Bill_Kelso]

Market garden?

Let's not forget his terrible performance at Caen.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Be aware , many a truth is spoken in jest. WW II was decided many moons ago, even though some here still try to keep the conflict going.

 

 

[Edited]

 

OK .. enough of that man...

Edited March 2, 2017 by Bearcat

[Lusekofte]

Is it time for cranes.....?

 

Edited February 28, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[hames123]

Let's not forget his terrible performance at Caen.

Where he drew away all the heavy German Panzer Brigades equipped with Tigers and King Tigers, ensuring that Patton's push did not face anything more dangerous than Mark 4s? Remember, if he had not done so, the American breakout in the South would probably have turned into another version of Goodwood, and when the Germans brought their heavy tank units at the end of the battle, the Americans were stopped, though the ground gained would eventually allow the allies to break out of the bocage and encircle the German army.

Edited February 28, 2017 by hames123

[Lusekofte]

None of your Posts contain anything but Half-Truths, Propaganda and outright Lies, written oozing, no, dripping stenchily with Arrogance, Hubris and Self-Satisfaction.  They are nothing but American Exceptionalist Bullcrap Boasting, Hot Air backed up by One-Sided Claims, Tall Tales and Fantasy. 

 

They read like Masturbatory Fantasies of someone with severe Deficits in Areas he would never admit to having any Problem with, but would never let the Trousers down to show for it. 

But sure, he takes home all the 10s, you just never witness him do it. 

 

I still think you are a Poe though, I simply cannot make myself believe that there actually are people like you out there actually thinking the way you do. Admit it, you are here for the Lulz, for People like me to Bait. And you are masterful at it. 

 

Can I quote this on historical groups in Facebooks, splendid put, I´ll say. But I still think it is times for Cranes

 

[hames123]

No cranes in this thread.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Well, methinks erecting Cranes requires a lot of 

 

 

Movie: Pentagon Wars 1998, great Film. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDYpRhoZqBY

 

Edited February 28, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[mb339pan]

the strong point of p40's was the high number was built, although it was a mediocre fighter

[Lusekofte]

the strong point of p40's was the high number was built, although it was a mediocre fighter

 

 

It is not quite right to say that, it was available for the allied in North africa , New Guinea and in general pasific when it was no other alternatives. And it did its job exceptional . It basically won a lot of battles when it counted the most. Another thing was that the production of P 40 did not compromise quality for quantity at any given time, it was a very good quality plane. If you where to buy your self a vintage plane from 1935 - 1950 you do not want a spit build during the war, they was built to last a estimated number of missions, not protected against corruption and misfitting metals, the P 40 kept it standards through out its production history.

And it manoeuvre in medium altitudes like a god compared to other US designs. The P 40 can very much be compared to the P 47 in many regards.

So I disagree totally in your choice of word. In flight sim world it might be rubbish, but it is not the case in historical perspective

Edited February 28, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

["Can I quote this on historical groups in Facebooks, splendid put, I´ll say. "]

 

Funnily enough this text came into my head as I was giving myself some of the good ole Aerobatics *wink wink mudge nudge* and it seemed good enough to Stop a perfectly good Session and type it down. XD

[Wulf]

Market Garden was actually inconclusive, with both sides suffering similar losses, which the British could afford to replace while the Germans could not.

 

 

Inconclusive?

 

Operation Market Garden had very clear objectives which in the end, couldn't be met.  The operation was a costly failure and what's more, German casualties were about half those of the attacking Allied force.  In short, we were forced to retreat.  Retreat isn't usually considered "inconclusive".

[Dakpilot]

Inconclusive?

 

Operation Market Garden had very clear objectives which in the end, couldn't be met.  The operation was a costly failure and what's more, German casualties were about half those of the attacking Allied force.  In short, we were forced to retreat.  Retreat isn't usually considered "inconclusive".

 

Many of the objectives were met however, and I think you will find that at conclusion of the operation the allies had advanced far further than they retreated

 

To say "in short we were forced to retreat" is a very strange way to describe the whole operation, which is rather more complex, the end result was far from a retreat with 5 of the six Bridges except Arnhem under allied control 

 

The straight eight days of terrible weather was the biggest issue, hampering and delaying many parts of the plan, Air and Land, but I rather feel a separate thread should be started rather than totally derail this one

 

On a strategic level it was very much considered a success, from which the Germans did not recover from, when solely considered as a tactical battle at Arnhem, the last objective, then definitely not 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[hames123]

Actually, most German losses are not very well documented, as almost half were "Blue Devils", sailors from the Kreigsmarine fighting on land, not included in the Wehrmacht losses reports.

[Fortis_Leader]

Market Garden inconclusive, or even mildly successful? 

 

Capturing 5 bridges is pretty pointless if you can't actually use them for that "war hack" operation because utter incompetence meant you couldn't capture the vital 6th bridge. And then to, when the battle is obviously utterly lost, drop the Polish Parachute brigade onto the German guns several days after the initial landings (because tactical airdrop operations ftw I guess?) to get slaughtered just so he could tell them to their face that they fought superbly, and then barely a week later blaming them entirely for the failure...

 

Beevor is right, Montgomery was nothing (but at best) a mediocre, overly cautious, immature man-child.

[hames123]

And Bradley, who lost it in his HQ during the Battle of the Bulge, convincing himself that all was lost, and that the the Germans had broken through Montgomery's line, when he actually managed to hold the Northern front of the bulge, and prevented the Northern spearhead from breaking out. He may have had his flaws, but he was a generally good commander that never had a massive screw up(unlike Rommel at the First Battle of El Alamain, Clark for the entire Italian campaign and Zhukov during Operation Mars). Besides, remember how an SS armoured brigade was in Arnhem at the time for R and R? They got pretty trounced, and contrary to what you said, the ground taken was actually used for following operations that would eventually capture Arnhem(in Holland! Don't forget that under Montgomery and Patton, allied troops swept from Normandy in France to the borders of Germany in 3 months. Both were very impressive feats). Furthermore, Market Garden was a very close run thing, with the allies nearly winning, unfortunately, bad communications ensure that XXX Corp did not capture an undefended bridge to the South, which would have allowed them to roam the German rear lines. Finally, Montgomery's overall campaign in Europe was a success, he destroyed almost all German units stationed in Northern France, Belguim and Holland, and his British troops entered Germany after operation Varsity, another victory. Montgomery may be looked upon unfavourably nowadays because of that operation, but overall, he proved to be a capable commander who swept the Germans out of France and the Low Countries as steadily as the Americans under Patton and Bradley.

Edited March 1, 2017 by hames123

[Fortis_Leader]

It's a crying shame that "would've, could've, should've" doesn't win battles.

 

Market Garden was undeniably a considerable failure. Liberating just a narrow corridor into the Netherlands and killing X number of Germans was not the goal of this massive combined air and ground offensive. Strategically, there is nothing impressive about this "get rich quick" scheme operation.

[Scojo]

What does all this battle history talk have to do with the P-40?

[Roo5ter]

Not sure if the 110G2 and the P40 met.  I believe they did over North Africa but I am no historian.  In the scenario that they do meet in game my money would be on the G2 easily.  The E2 is obviously underpowered and not capable of aerial combat in the least.  I would suggest it is the second most vulnerable aircraft in the game, bowing down from the most vulnerable the moment our beloved Ju52 was introduced.

A 110G2 would have so much more power in that engagement it would fight the P40 on it's terms no doubt.

[hames123]

It's a crying shame that "would've, could've, should've" doesn't win battles.

 

Market Garden was undeniably a considerable failure. Liberating just a narrow corridor into the Netherlands and killing X number of Germans was not the goal of this massive combined air and ground offensive. Strategically, there is nothing impressive about this "get rich quick" scheme operation.

We were talking about Montgomery as a whole, not just Market Garden. And his one screw up did not come out nearly as bad as Rommels at First Alamain or Zhukovs at Operation Mars(500 000 Soviet troops killed). Aside from Market Garden, Montgomery had a pretty good career,being able to steadily sweep all German units in the North of France and in Belguim and Holland back to Germany, except those that became trapped on the Scheldts in Holland. Overall, I would say that he was a fairly capable commander.

[Scojo]

A 110G2 would have so much more power in that engagement it would fight the P40 on it's terms no doubt.

Oh absolutely, but I think I still feel safer in an E-2 right now than a P-40 lol That may just be my bad piloting skills, though

[Roo5ter]

Oh absolutely, but I think I still feel safer in an E-2 right now than a P-40 lol That may just be my bad piloting skills, though

The E2 has such little stability as a gun platform though and the constant reloads.  The low speed performance of the P40 would be a definite advantage in that matchup where no one can gain speed very quickly.  The E2 is more likely to fall out of the sky and the rear gun is likely to only tickle the sturdy P40

[Scojo]

The E2 has such little stability as a gun platform though

 

The low speed performance of the P40 would be a definite advantage in that matchup where no one can gain speed very quickly.  The E2 is more likely to fall out of the sky and the rear gun is likely to only tickle the sturdy P40

 I've never really thought it was unstable, but I have the same opinion on the low speed performance

[Frequent_Flyer]

 

 

Yes, but the P-40 had little to do with that.

 

You have very little knowledge of WW II aviation history.

 

7-30-1943

 

": III./J.G. 77 and the remnants of II./J.G. 51 were the only units on the island at that time. A strength return on the evening of 29 July shows:

 

II./J.G. 51, 5 Bf 109s, 2 serviceable

III./J.G. 77, 29 Bf 109s, 23 serviceable

 

The reconnaissance Bf 109 was shot down by the 52nd FG at 07:45 north-east of Bizerta, and was from III./J.G. 77. This combat was unrelated to the 325th FG combat. The Spitfires had scrambled at 07:27, and claimed two FW 190s shot down near Bizerta.

 

The 325th FG flew the sweep from 08:00 to 11:05, and made claims from 09:45 to 10:15. Final tally was:

 

- 21 Bf 109s destroyed

- 3 Bf 109s probably destroyed

- 1 Mc. 202 probably destroyed

- 3 Bf 109s damaged

 

III./J.G. 77 scrambled from Chilivani at 09:25. Four Bf 109s from the Gruppe were shot down, with one pilot killed and three wounded. A first-hand account from Eduard Isken mentions the presence of Lightnings as well. III./J.G. 77 pilots claimed five P-40s shot down between 09:40 and 10:10.

 

The Checkertail Clan book confirms that only one of the 36 American aircraft involved was lost on this mission, and none were damaged. Lt. Bob Sederberg failed to return, and was taken prisoner.

 

An account of the combat appeared in 9th and 12th Air Forces in the Sicilian Campaign:

 

"Taking off at 0800, the 317th Fighter Squadron flew up the west side of the island. At a point due west of Sassari they were attacked by a force of 25 to 30 Me-109's which was augmented during the course of the ensuing air battle by additional flights of Me-109's and Mc-202's, bringing the total number of enemy aircraft engaged to between 40 and 50. Approaching from a northwesterly direction the Jerries attacked the rear of the formation on the same level as the P-40's, whose altitude was about 9,000 feet. During the first attack four Me-109's were seen to crash almost simaltaneously, while in one area alone there were nine fires from burning aircraft. In the course of the 20- to 30- minute running battle there were 21 enemy aircraft destroyed and four probables reported for the loss of one P-40."

 

III./J.G. 77's first two victory claims were made in the Sassari area, so it seems very likely that it was the first Axis unit to engage the Americans.

 

 

 

 

Sources

- Hanf, Logbook

- ULTRA

- Luftwaffe victory claims material

- Genst.Gen.Qu.6.Abt. loss material

- 9th and 12th Air Forces in the Sicilian Campaign

- McDowell & Hess, Checkertail Clan

- Olynyk, USAAF Claims

- Prien, Jagdgeschwader 77 "

[unreasonable]

Always good to post the URL when you copy/paste from another site so that people can read the whole discussion for themselves.

 

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/archive/index.php?t-29045.htm

 

The P-40s certainly seem to have won this fight 4-1, but the over-claiming looks even more absurd than usual, probably partially because the 325th appear not to have ever awarded shared victories during this period, unlike other US units.

 

IMHO this result says more about training standards by this point in the war than about aircraft capabilities  - the GAF fighters had taken a terrible pasting in the Med and the replacements were just much less well trained than US and UK pilots. But clearly the P-40 was not, in practice, completely useless.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Kind of reminds me of Fantastic Tales of "Old 666" being attacked by "More than 20 Aircraft" when in reality there were 6. Claiming between 7 and 12 Shot Down, when in reality all enemy Aircraft Returned to Base. 

Really shows the Trustworthiness of American Aircrew. 

[unreasonable]

I think that is a little unfair: overclaiming of about 3/1 was fairly widespread in all services, especially for fights that took place over hostile territory or the sea where the wrecks could not easily be counted.  Then if you have a policy of counting shared kills as one per each pilot, you could easily get the 7/1 overclaiming that seems to have happened here. 

 

I doubt that the USAAF Operations Research and Intelligence staffs believed these claims, even if they were allowed to stand for morale purposes.

[Stig]

There is quite a difference between the 21 Bf-109's the 325th are credited with, and the 4 that were actually lost. The 325th won this fight, but to conclude that the

P-40 therefore is a equal match for the 109 is stretching it.

The 325th is often brought up when the P-40's combat performance is discussed, and their results do look spectacular. However, of 80+ credits the group was awarded while flying the P-40, there are about 20 known Axis losses. How many of the some 50 remaining credits were awarded that can be linked to actual losses, I don't know, but my guess is not a lot.

 

Overclaiming was consistant, by both sides, in the MTO in this period of time that the P-40's were active.   

[CUJO_1970]

325th over-claims are the stuff of legend unfortunately.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Kind of reminds me of Fantastic Tales of "Old 666" being attacked by "More than 20 Aircraft" when in reality there were 6. Claiming between 7 and 12 Shot Down, when in reality all enemy Aircraft Returned to Base. 

Really shows the Trustworthiness of American Aircrew. 

Oh yeah, that is one of my favorites. It was used over War Thunder forums as a prime example of why B-17 or bombers in general should remain as robust and invincible as they were back then. Then I went over to jacar.go.jp which is a digital archive containing millions of Japanese documents and archived materials since Meji era I believe. It also contains Kodachosho, combat reports, which I have mentioned and presented in my Zero-sen debut article. Japanese unit involved in Old 666 incident was 251^st Kokutai for which Combat reports for given time can be found under following signature: C08051658400 

 

The page 44 and 45 indicate that only 8 Zeros scrambled at 07:00 AM. Seven of them intercepted lone B-17 at 07:43 and action continued until 8:15. All Zeros managed to land before 08:45.

Overall in combat 546 20 mm shells and 711 7.7 mm rounds were fired.

Specific data are as follows:

a) Yoshio Okhi machine fired 60 20 mm shells and 14 7.7 mm. His plane was badly damaged.

b) Pilot Yamamoto, fired 60 20 mm shells and 200 7.7 mm rounds

c) Pilot Terada, didn't have a position to make safe approach

d) Pilot Sakagami, fired 160 20 mm shells and 17 7.7 mm rounds. His plane was hit by 12.7 mm rounds.

e) Pilot Komeda, 160 20 mm shells and 130 7.7 mm rounds fired. His plane was also hit by 12.7 mm rounds.

f) Pilot Yagi, His engine had some issues and had to disengage and landed at 7:30.

g) Pilot Yamazaki, fired 160 20 mm shells and 350 7.7 mm rounds. He was hit by 12.7 mm rounds and had to land due to combat damage.

h) Pilot Iwano. Had to return to base in the middle of combat for unknown reasons.

 

Overall Japanese had no combat losses, 1 plane was critically damaged (Petty Officers Okhi machine) and 3 other were hit.

None of the Zeros was shot down.

 

But I'd not say that American aircrews are not trustworthy. They are about as trustworthy as any other nation aircrew and prone to same mistakes and overclaims. Nothing unusual here if you ask me. Bomber crews were among the ones overclaiming the most but that is primarily due to their inability to verify claims or to trace the target to confirm its fate. You should see combat reports from China where bomber crews reported seeing 109 G-4s flying along Ki-43s. People make mistakes and simply 70+ years ago it was considerably harder to verify that. So overclaiming P-40 pilots do not surprise me at all. 

[Gambit21]

But I'd not say that American aircrews are not trustworthy. They are about as trustworthy as any other nation aircrew and prone to same mistakes and overclaims. Nothing unusual here if you ask me. Bomber crews were among the ones overclaiming the most but that is primarily due to their inability to verify claims or to trace the target to confirm its fate. You should see combat reports from China where bomber crews reported seeing 109 G-4s flying along Ki-43s. People make mistakes and simply 70+ years ago it was considerably harder to verify that. So overclaiming P-40 pilots do not surprise me at all. 

 

 

 

This

Really shows the Trustworthiness of American Aircrew. 

 

....but then not so much.

[Stig]

325th over-claims are the stuff of legend unfortunately.

 

Not really unique for the 325th, though, nor for P-40 units or the USAAF in general. Overclaiming was the norm in WWII, not the exception, irrespective of airforce or theater.  

[Frequent_Flyer]

Kind of reminds me of Fantastic Tales of "Old 666" being attacked by "More than 20 Aircraft" when in reality there were 6. Claiming between 7 and 12 Shot Down, when in reality all enemy Aircraft Returned to Base. 

Really shows the Trustworthiness of American Aircrew. 

You have a difficult time grasping the obvious, -that is the underwhelming performance of the Luftwaffe against a obviously" inferior " aircraft flown by a group of cowboy US airman

Not really unique for the 325th, though, nor for P-40 units or the USAAF in general. Overclaiming was the norm in WWII, not the exception, irrespective of airforce or theater.  

 

Always good to post the URL when you copy/paste from another site so that people can read the whole discussion for themselves.

 

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/archive/index.php?t-29045.htm

 

The P-40s certainly seem to have won this fight 4-1, but the over-claiming looks even more absurd than usual, probably partially because the 325th appear not to have ever awarded shared victories during this period, unlike other US units.

 

IMHO this result says more about training standards by this point in the war than about aircraft capabilities  - the GAF fighters had taken a terrible pasting in the Med and the replacements were just much less well trained than US and UK pilots. But clearly the P-40 was not, in practice, completely useless.

These were not replacements nor new units, just and old fission ass whooping-one of many.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

You have a difficult time grasping the obvious, -that is the underwhelming performance of the Luftwaffe against a obviously" inferior " aircraft flown by a group of cowboy US airman

 

These were not replacements nor new units, just and old fission ass whooping-one of many.

Well, that one Instance. But in General when looking into the Lists of Aircraft Shot Down by German Pilots, the P-40, in Relation to Production and Service Numbers, is over-represented. 

Well, you can't expect all People to understand Statistics. Just because the P-40s beat a couple 109s that one time doesn't negate that in General the other 99 times the 109s saw the P-40s as more of a Filler between proper Airkills, like Spitfires or Yaks. 

 

Actually. that it's found worthy to mention that one time the P-40s weren't just quickly dealt with shows how inadequate they were in general. I mean, where are the proud Stories of german Airmen boasting about their P-40 Kills?

 

Extreme Outliers always exist in a large enough Sample Group.

 

Edited March 12, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Frequent_Flyer]

Well, that one Instance. But in General when looking into the Lists of Aircraft Shot Down by German Pilots, the P-40, in Relation to Production and Service Numbers, is over-represented. 

Well, you can't expect all People to understand Statistics. Just because the P-40s beat a couple 109s that one time doesn't negate that in General the other 99 times the 109s saw the P-40s as more of a Filler between proper Airkills, like Spitfires or Yaks. 

 

Actually. that it's found worthy to mention that one time the P-40s weren't just quickly dealt with shows how inadequate they were in general. I mean, where are the proud Stories of german Airmen boasting about their P-40 Kills?

 

Extreme Outliers always exist in a large enough Sample Group.

 

 As I stated near the begining of this topic the P-40 had no trouble with the 109 s and 190's. None of the US aircraft did, they had more trouble with the German AAA.The P-40 It also had  sucess with a much tougher opponent the Japanese. It just a matter of how you choose to fly the aircraft. Your rambling.

Kind of reminds me of Fantastic Tales of "Old 666" being attacked by "More than 20 Aircraft" when in reality there were 6. Claiming between 7 and 12 Shot Down, when in reality all enemy Aircraft Returned to Base. 

Really shows the Trustworthiness of American Aircrew. 

Would you say they are more or less trustworthy than  Volkswagen Corp .?

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

As I stated near the begining of this topic the P-40 had no trouble with the 109 s and 190's. None of the US aircraft did, they had more trouble with the German AAA.The P-40 It also had  sucess with a much tougher opponent the Japanese. It just a matter of how you choose to fly the aircraft. Your rambling.

 

The P-40 was in Fact so awesome that the US didn't push for new Designs as quickly as humanly Possible. In Fact they stopped wasting Money on Testing and New Aircraft in Favour of Mass Producing the P-40 only.

Really, the P-38, P-39, P-47, P-51, P-63, F6F, F4U and F8F Bearcat frankly were unnecessary since the P-40 had no Trouble. 

 

And the Germans, man were they scared. As soon as Intact ones were captured they were desperate to fly them themselves ... Oh wait, they gifted them to the Finns ... but anyways, the P-40 was so great the RAF desperately tried to re-equip their Spitfire Squadrons with as many P-40s as they could get. 

 

Didn't Marseille attack 16 P-40s on his, shooting down 6 of them in a Turnfight? Five of them in six minutes, including three aces: Robin Pare (six victories), Cecil Golding (6.5 victories) and Andre Botha (five victories)

 

"Some DAF units initially failed to use the P-40's strengths or used outdated defensive tactics such as the Lufbery circle. The superior climb rate of the Bf 109 enabled fast, swooping attacks, neutralizing the advantages offered by conventional defensive tactics. Various new formations were tried by Tomahawk units from 1941–42, including "fluid pairs" (similar to the German rotte); one or two "weavers" at the back of a squadron in formation and whole squadrons bobbing and weaving in loose formations.^[41] Werner Schröer, who was credited with destroying 114 Allied aircraft in only 197 combat missions, referred to the latter formation as "bunches of grapes", because he found them so easy to pick off.^[41] The leading German expert in North Africa, Hans-Joachim Marseille, claimed as many as 101 P-40s during his career.^[42]"

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk#Deployment}

 

Would you say they are more or less trustworthy than  Volkswagen Corp .?

Well, the TDI is still a damn fine engine, Low CO2, High Mileage and Long Engine Life. And very clean when you have the Windows down. I kind of Wonder why No-One made the same kind of Fuss when GM did the exact same Thing. Could it be American Protectionism? 

 

Hmm, a safe Car?

 

Edited March 13, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Uriah]

I would never want to take a P-40 against any BF 109.  But I think it a great single engine plane take down any twin engine plane.

Edited March 13, 2017 by Uriah

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Frequent Flyer would probably die before admitting, well he doesn't really seem to be the Personality Type to ever be admitting anything, that the P-40, although a fine Aircraft in and of itself and having great Ground Attack Capabilities, was a rubbish Fighter when compared to 109 and 190. 

 

I would love to actually be in a Situation where we could actually waste a perfectly good, service ready 109 and a service ready P-40, just to see if he then really still saw the Odds favourably enough to go up against me in the 109 in an equal Chance Dogfight. Or a 4v4. Life or Death.

 

But then again, he is quite delusional and the Issue would be settled with a Couple of Minengeschosse to his Chest. 

Edited March 13, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Bearcat]

Alright knock off the personal stuff.

[EAF_Starfire]

So, When the Luftwaffe was outnumbered 4:1 on the Eastern front and thrived in that target rich environment. but when they were out numbered 4:1 in the west and were annihilated in the same target rich environment it was'nt because the aircraft and pilots were far superior  to what they faced in the East.  ? Your logic is at best flawed. The Luftwaffe lost more aircraft to western allies vs the VVS in WW II. 

.

 

Nope.

It is not my logic, but a recognized historian who based his conclusions on material that the US compiled themself.

You should read the book. I would also recommend that you read General Kenney Reports. The concludes that attack i large numbers where why the US was more succesfull.