German Fighter POW pilots describe how they attack B-17 bomber formations and attack countermeasures
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 фев 2025
- In December, 1944 5 German Fighter Pilots were shot down. Their interrogations were documented. They described in detail bomber attack tactics and provided tips for bomber crews to counter German attacks. These interrogations were provided to bomber crews as a lesson learned study. We will walk thru the material provided to the bomber crews.
I once read an account from a German pilot that stated, "attacking a formation of Spitfires was exciting, fun even, but when attacking a formation of B-17s, all the sins of your life passed before your eyes". I can assume that it was not fun for the B-17 crewmembers either to see an attacking Gruppe of 190s.
Sounds like nonsense
@@gorbalsboyI mean with the sheer number of bullets flying every which way you’d probably worry about getting unlucky too
@@Constance_tinopleyep, perspective is reality for the one experiencing it, and dozens of streams of tracers would sure seem to represent a certain outcome for sure
No, read the passage. It wasn't spitfires it was the Eastern front. And for his sins he was made to attack bomber formations.@@gorbalsboy
That would be Hans Philipp a 200+ kill ace of the Eastern Front, transferred to Home Defence April 1943, KIA October 43 during an USAF raid on Bremen. It is believed that he was shot down by the P-47 Thunderbolt pilot Robert S. Johnson.
Super level of documentation that accompanies these most excellent dives into WW2 military aviation. They are exceptionally well supported by relevant case studies and analysis. Brilliant job!!!
I had no idea the USAAF science'd the shit out of everything 😮
As a former Technical Writer, at 1:08 in this video, I find the German Luftwaffe organization chart - illustration - graphic fascinating and of excellent work! Outstanding!
My father was a B-24 pilot in the 15th. Flew missions with and without fighter cover, but said attacking fighter tactics seemed to be the same. The 109s, attacking from above, would dive right thru the formations. Aside from causing losses, this also had a tremendous pychological affect on crews - freaked everyone one out, causing formations to loosen up, thus becoming easier targets for the head-on 190 attacks soon to follow. Early on Luftwaffe pilot quality was excellent and deadly, tho decreased as things dragged on. Dad said they all respected their skill and bravery, especially how the 109 pilots would slash right thru squardons, even between bombers in tight formation.
It's been years since I saw it, but I believe this was shown well in the movie "Memphis Belle".
September 27, 2019 - I had the opportunity to fly in the Collings Foundation B-17 known as the Nine O Nine. This was five days before it crashed and burned in CT. 😞
It was a beautiful fall morning in southern Maine. Not a cloud anywhere. All the passengers got a chance to rotate through the various stations. For me, the nose section was the best - great view! Given that brief experience, I can only imagine what it was like for real - at mission altitude and being pounced on by German fighters. Unbelievable courage and sacrifice on the part of all those crews. They are true heroes.
Thank you for this video!
I was in that same B17 in September of the year it crashed. I flew out of Plymouth Mass. A huge thrill at the time, and a huge gulp when I heard about that crash.
@@jonathangiven9073 Thank you for sharing that. Did the news make you feel, well, let's call it: Out of Sorts? Unsettled? Weird? I was in a funk for week or more. Thinking about that very issue could have been my flight just five days earlier. And I had the opportunity to speak at length with the pilots and then to know they were gone just a few days later was a lot to process. 😞
@ I definitely felt that “shot across the bow” feeling. So sad for all the victims. Even those who survived must be scarred for life. And…so sad that the incident ended future opportunities.
Absolutely love the crossreferencing - thank you for bringing such well done videos so often!
I'm always delighted by this channel's videos.
Being in a B17 getting hit by 20 and 30 mm must have been terrifying
Especially the tail and ball gunners which were targeted first, in a gun camera clip from a bf110 heavy fighter you can see the hanging ball turret not even shooting back
Especially in Coffin Corner.
One thing to note is that the Focke Wulf 190's of JG4 at this point of the war were ’Sturm’ variants with added armament and frontal armor. These were particularly suited for the rear attacks against bomber formations as they could sustain a lot more damage than conventional FW 190s (or Me 109’s for that matter). However, the added weight made them slow and sluggish and thus highly vulnerable to Allied escort fighters, which is why they themselves required escort from three Gruppen of Me 109’s. In addition to JG 4 two other Jagdgeschwader (JG 3 and JG 300) deployed a ’Sturmgruppe’.
Thanks for the upload. The footage at the very beginning is from 02 November 1944 - Mission to Merseburg, Germany.
That was some some interesting, and rather horrifying, footage to watch. I'm not sure I've ever seen it before. Was it taken from another B-17 in the formation?
@@rickb1973 yes, tanken by S/Sgt. R. Filipovsky, ball turret gunner. 91st Bomb Group. The B-17s in the footage are 91st Bomb Group planes. I used parts of the same footage for my video about "Jub Jub Bird", which was shot down on 02 November 1944.
Thanks for this note; I had not seen that footage before
@@B17FlyingFortress Just found your channel....Subscribed, and let the binge watching begin. Thanks for your work.
@@B17FlyingFortress Hard to imagine squeezing a movie camera into a ball turret. Are there any pictures of how he managed it?
As a former Technical Writer, at 1:08 in this video, I find the German Luftwaffe organization chart - illustration - graphic fascinating and of excellent work! Outstanding!
There's a ton of original German WW2 vehicle and airplane manuals, spare parts lists, handbooks and whatnot on Ebay, and the illustrations are almost universally superb.
No briefing is complete without an org chart.
These guys were really lucky to get captured when they did
I’ve followed your channel as long as it’s existed. I need to tell you this one is the best. Film from the time makes it difficult to understand Luftwaffe attack technique.
It would appear that the dreaded frontal attack became disused with closing speeds of 600 mph. Film from frontal attacks appear fleeting but brutal when the cannon shells hit the cockpit. Rear attack gun camera film from Luftwaffe show the raking fire and if the tail and ball turret gunners were hit, the bomber was a lame duck.
Listen, thank you for all of you work. Incredible research!
I am so glad my grandpa was a USAAF mechanic and test pilot stationed stateside during the war, and never saw combat.
So, pilots should be: Ltn. Magdanz, Günter, Uffz. Beck, Johann, Fhr. Obermüller, Dieter, Ofhr. Franzke, Herbert, Fhr. Beyer, Rudolf, those were captured without injury, but Oblt.Scheufele, Ernst was captured wounded. Insane 17 Me 109 of JG 4 were lost to enemy fire on 3.12.44! Few other to bad weather + damaged.
Any idea of what these losses were attributed to? Allied Escorts or Bomber return fire?
Maybe you could clarify something in a future video. You've mentioned in several videos that bomber gunners were trained to only shoot at enemy planes that have their noses pointed at the gunner's plane (i.e. the fighter is flying an attack curve). How does mutually supporting fire from the bombers work if gunners don't fire at enemy planes attacking other bombers? Seems contradictory, but I presume there is a good explanation.
Biggest factors are limited ammunition and that if you start firing at planes angling in other directions you can hit friendlies. The combat box is aligned in such a way that with their rules of engagement, friendlies should never get hit. It's extremely difficult to hit a fighter that is not moving towards your plane, so it's not worth the risk and ammunition. Keep in mind that 'nose pointed at' is rather broad. Gunners would still shoot at fighters coming in that were aimed at a plane above, behind, or to their sides, just not at everything they saw.
@@samadams2203 I don't think that explains it. I think the request is a good one.
Heck, I recall after a successful tail attack on a wounder bomber in-formation, one German pilot describing how he got shot down when he broke off the attack flying between the B-17s in formation. So they weren't shooting at a fighter coming at them, but at one passing by them (admittedly, the speed was only 150 mph or so different). I also recall B-17 gunners having watched another B-17 being attacked by a Ju-88, and wishing how they could have helped the attacked bomber (apparently it was a range problem).
@@stewartmillen7708 shooting your friendlies seems stupid and idiotic, you are worse than the german fighters, what are you gonna say to the dead friendly pilots mother that you shot down, hehe sorry maam i was just trying to help, what a load of shit only complete incompetent fools would even dare to think its a good idea to shoot at your friendlies for a tiny sliver of chance to maybe hit a fighter
Please cover what tactics were used to finish off bombers that were hacked out of formations, Luftwaffe gun camera footage shows B-17s continuing to fly after taking huge numbers of rounds, but having to drop out of formation. Which fighters went after them? the escorts or the bomber attack planes. Also how many passes could the Luftwaffe fighters typically make before running out of ammo? Well done and thanks!!
3:53 It's funny how well you know your audience, and how thoroughly prepared your videos are. You mentioned 13mm, I wondered what approx. US munition was, and you answered it. It's rare to have a question and then have it immediately answered in your prepared video.
TIL there was an inline engine variant of the 190.
Excellent as usual.
Extremely informative, thank you!
What happened to "name rank and number? "
1:26 i think you mean 90 cm. It clearly says 900mm on the highlighted portion of the document.
Another fine and informational video. It 's really interesting that in some ways they very much agreed with the standard operating procedure in place for the attacking U.S. Bombers, ie stay in the closest possible formation track the fighters with your guns, but in others "gunners should fire at maximum range not weight until effective range they differ. I do think it the primary purpose as stated by the statements by the allied bombers leaders that the primary reason is to stop your bomber from being shot down and shooting down the attacking fighters was only tertiary, then opening fire with tracers at maximum range make sense.
I find it very interesting that in this point in the war, these German Luftwaffe pilots POWs were so very eager to cooperate with their American interrogators to the point of making suggestions as to how to shoot down their fellow German Luftwaffe aircraft and pilots.
By late 1944 these German pilots would feel like stating the obvious facts (though not to interrogators who might not be in air forces) for exchanging some cigars or stuff. Like from their experience and reports of massive Luftwaffe losses they felt the Allies already knew really well how to down German fighter planes.
@@sthrich635by late 44 there were 1000 bomber raids with 1200 fighter escorts.
Took a murderous toll on German pilots. Around this time new pilots were being sent into combat with double digit hours, compared to approx 350 hours on allied fighter pilots, who were also eased into combat with a few milk runs to warm up.
Any description on how these POW handed out this information (willingly or otherwise)? If willingly why ?
German POWs had their quarters bugged so the captors could listen in on their conversations. I don't know often it was done or if that is the only source of this kind of information.
@@hamishanderson6738 all pilots? All had private rooms with microphones? And somebody to listen in on them 24/7?
Love your work!
As usual, really interesting - thanks for posting. I would respectfully request however (and not for the first time!) that you slow down your commentary - it is way too fast.
Just in case this comment gets lost in the void, you could always try changing the video speed down to .90 or so.I just tested it, and it slowed the audio down to normal speaking speeds without making it sound like it was in slow mo.
A lot of people comment on that ,but I kind of like it. Some other channels waste so much time with unnecessary commentary, or showing a document page for 30 seconds (I can pause it!), I feel like yelling at them to get going.
His talking speed is fine, just slow down the video if you can keep up.
Funny. I think he goes a tad slow. But one can always change the video speed however they want.
I wish that 2025 politics was examined with this level of scrutiny. I will never reject the world of primary sources.
fog of war only clears with time
Most surprising to me was coming in below and firing upwards; that opens up the ball turret, whereas coming in level has only the tail turret firing at the fighter. On the other hand, firing from level has a thinner wing target, and from below or above has more of the wing's plan shape to shoot at, and if they feared the top turret the most, that made the attack from below the best choice. Had not thought of that before.
Also hadn't thought of this being December 1944 and a lot of rookie fighter pilots who couldn't handle frontal attacks as well.
The fighter pilots' suggestion for tail gunners to start shooting sooner is interesting, but seems to me to only make sense if the tail gunners had more ammo to waste. Which is better, scaring the fighters away or shooting them down? Hmmmmm....
What a messy business!
Also, I think the "roller coaster" attack is meant to get extra speed in the dive to close more quickly, then pull up into the attack to slow down and perhaps maximize firing time. So, by that nature, you're coming in from below. Me262s specifically adopted this method to manage their higher closure rates.
@@erickent3557
The ME262's used the roller coaster, or "porpoise" style as others have called it, out of sheer necessity because of the speed differential and them not wanting to slow down to the bombers speed making themselves much more likely to be hit by defensive gunners, and it had the problem of the ME262 gun sight not being able to keep up with the direction change, ME262 pilots complained and said that it was a problem.
Scaring the fighters away is much better, believing that you can shoot as many down as you can chase off simply isn't realistic.
The purpose of the defensive guns of the bomber was defense, not the destruction of the Luftwaffe, as a defensive gunner you're much better at your job if you chase off 5 attacking fighters than if you allow 4 to attack because you're saving ammo for an ideal shot where you'll down 1 fighter.
And yea, it's curious that they'd prefer an attack from below as opposed to above, both the top turret and the ball turret each had the Sperry lead computing gun sight making both equally effective, attacking from below means slowing down as you climb to the target even if you're coming up from the bottom of a roller coaster cycle, as opposed to attacking from above where you're gaining speed especially after the attack when you're zooming away at increasing speed instead of continually slowing in a climb, and I don't think nosing down and going back through the bomber box would be something you'd wanna do again, not when you've already got everyone and his brother already shooting at you.
I'm sure they had their reasons but on the surface you'd think a top attack would be preferred, the Japanese preferred that method when attacking US bombers.
@@dukecraig2402 But that's my point -- it takes more ammo to scare off fighters that are far away because it's harder to aim and they don't necessary know who's being shot at. Is it better to try to scare off 5 fighters than shoot down one when you don't have enough ammo to scare off 5? And unless you have tracers loaded, how can you scare anyone?
@grizwoldphantasia5005
You're taking things to extremes with the "far away" point, of course you're not going to shoot outside of your effective range.
This was real life not a video game, as I pointed out defensive guns are for defense, they're not offensive weapons, the whole idea is to protect the bomber and a defensive gunner who chases off attacking fighters is doing exactly what he's supposed to do, as far as tracers that's the biggest reason behind them going back to using tracers in the defensive guns after they'd removed them, because it unnerved the German pilots knowing they were being shot at.
I was an Air Defense gunner in the Army, that's exactly how they explained it to us;
"Don't go thinking your job is shooting down aircraft, don't go getting visions of grandeur and thinking you're going to be the first guy in your unit to shoot down an aircraft or reach ace status, your number one priority is the defense of the asset you're assigned to protect, the chances of actually hitting an aircraft are slim anyway so lead well ahead so he sees that tracer stream cross his nose, that'll make his self preservation instincts kick in and suddenly he won't be worrying so much about hitting his target as keeping himself alive, if you make it through an entire war without shooting down a single aircraft but none of your assets were ever destroyed you've done exactly what you're supposed to do and you'll be a far bigger success than an air defense gunner who shot down half the aircraft he shoots at but let half of his assets get destroyed waiting on ideal shots."
The bombers job was putting their bombs on target, not the destruction of the Luftwaffe in the air, that was the fighters job.
Where do you get these documents that you source in your videos? I'd like to take a look at some of them.
@ 6:15 you should have said top,front, and side. not top side and front..
I want to know the methods used to extract this information. One day pilots are risking their lives to defend their fellow countrymen, and then they are giving tips to the people killing their comradesand countrymen.
They threatened to put them up in a B-17.
The top gunner had the best visibility, with the ball turret probably having the worst
the constant attach wave is probably the same as in flag, with certain distances between the planes the defensive guns cannot shoot every plane. they are still shooting the first, when the next already is coming. That is probably the reason why even the plane with jammed guns need to to attack.
What I couldn't get over is the claim that 8th Air Force bombers shot down 5 Ju-87 Stukas!
I noticed that too. Perhaps air recognition was not a strong suit of bomber aircrews.
In Martin Caidin's book on the October 14th 1943 second Schweinfurt raid, "Black Thursday" he includes post-mission debriefings where B-17 crews claim they were attacked by Ju-87 dive bombers and seemingly every plane the Luftwaffe possessed. This is certainly misidentification by terrified noob US crews who had watched many bombers failing to come home, - there were a LOT of new B-17 crews on the second raid. The JU-87 would be unable to get into position to attack bombers due to speed & altitude limitations. On other occasions the Luftwaffe drop bombs with timers into formations, but this wasn't using Stukas.
Thanks a lot!
Joined up the large air armada described for this company front attack must have taken even longer than forming up one of Leigh-Mallory's "big wings" in the Battle of Britain.
I’ve always wondered in the B17 formations, how many gunners actually shot down their own planes by accident? There’s no way with 12 bombers and 13 .50 cals each shooting at enemy planes they didn’t strafe other planes?
But again, why are these POWs so _glib? These interviews took place while the war was still going on, right? What ever happened to name, rank and serial number? Isn't advising the Allies on how to shoot down their comrades back in Germany basically Treason? Were they all tricked into bragging about their exploits? How would we feel if an American who parachuted out of a bomber starting giving his German captors useful "tips" on how to shoot down a B-17? Is it possible they were lying? Giving _bad advice to the Allies?
It was December 1944. They knew they had lost, even if Fred Trump’s favorite Austrian didn’t believe it yet.
Everyone on both sides talked. Hanns Scharff was the Chief Luftwaffe interrogator who was so effective that he was invited in 1948 to lecture on interrogation techniques and stayed till the 1950s. He never used physical methods. Interrogation is both an art form and a science. The USA also had one of two master interrogators I think a Marine Officer.
You have to isolate the POW from each other so that they can't learn rumors from each other and pass them on as fact or concoct a story.
I think the Luftwaffe generally overlooked guiding their pilots on what to disclose in captivity; as of late 1944 most of the combat took place behind German lines in any case, so becoming POW was not a major concern.
By late 1944 these German pilots would feel like stating the obvious facts (though not to interrogators who might not be in air forces) for exchanging some cigars or stuff. Like from their experience and reports of massive Luftwaffe losses they felt the Allies already knew really well how to down German fighter planes, like no close secret knowledge or anything.
around 5 min it says much intel was lost due to looting of the planes. At this point in the war I wonder what intel was lost?
Giving information to the enemy as a prisoner of war is high treason that endangers the lives of comrades. No respect for these guys.
Easy to say from the safety of being behind a keyboard.
@deaninchina01 This is a completely stupid remark. There is nothing stopping you from giving false information to those who question you. It would increase their confusion since they would collect contradictory information.
The Mg131 13mmx64mm has half the energy of the .50bmg / 12,7mmx99mm
and thats enough for aircombat
It seems highly probable that much of the shift to a simpler tail chase was driven by the falling experience level of Luftwaffe pilots. However, given the challenge of massing over 100 fighters from carried squadrons and then attacking from behind, plus fuel shortages, it seems this tactic would be highly challenged. Of course the attacking fighters with the slower relative closing speed meant longer exposure to B-17 and B-24 rear facing guns. The Luftwaffe was grasping at straws.
Plus by this time there were more escorts than bombers. Some 1000 bomber raids had 1200 escorts.
Bombers role was to be bait to draw up the interceptors, especially as the 8th continued to run the “precision bombing” line despite the assessments which showed the cloudy skis of Europe made the accuracy the same as nighttime bombing with technology like the look down radars. Don’t understand at all why the Yanks were so reluctant to use the technology they had available and clung so doggedly to methods which did not deliver the stated aim.
I would appreciate knowing how the British rationalized manning their heavy bombers with a single pilot-in-command (with apparently a flight engineer helping to monitor engines and systems) while the USAF consistently crewed both heavy and medium bombers with pilots and co-pilots. My assumption is that if the Brit pilot was incapacitated the crew was lost; at least the American crews had the potential for duplicative flying skills.
Different philosophies, with a seemingly pig headed view of “we are right”.
Why did the US bomber command poo poo technological advance which dealt with cloudy European skies and persist with the Norden bombsight which worked great in clear US skies, but by 44 was giving the same accuracy results in day time as Bomber command was getting at night by using technology like look down radar. The US could have easily seen through the clouds , but typically have the new technology little credence.
Lack of pilots had a lot to do with it in the early years.
Wow.
Page 32: Note to souvenir hunters
Great content, but you speak too fast mate.
A positive comment.
i have nothing pertinent to add.
these squiggles are for the algo-deities.
I’m surprised they were not aware that the landing gear is electrically actuated on a 17. The only hydraulics being the cowl flaps, brakes, and chin turret gun chargers.
The advantage of electrics is that there’s no hydraulics to leak and cause a fire will make the aircraft so slippery that the crew can’t bail out. However, it’s hard to make electrics reliable unless it’s done very professionally. Back in the day people didn’t understand fact, it’s hard to make hydraulics and reliable though it’s mainly a matter of cleanliness I suspect.
Some of the American turrets were pure electric like the dorsal Turret but the ventral Turret may have been Electro Hydraulic depending on who made it.
-The Fw 190 was all electric with an armour plated battery but eventually transition to hydraulics I believe due to copper shortages. It’s interesting that Kurt Tank the Fw 190 designer they complained that being forced to use electrics on the Fw 191 bomber and indeed they turned out to be a disaster.
The United States perfected something called an amplidyne It’s a type of rotating generator vastly superior in amplification and speed to the Ward Leonard and Metadyne systems the British and Germans used.
The Germans developed moving jet hydraulic amplifiers and use these in their electrohydraulic turrets. They also controlled the vanes of the V2 missile when were instrumental in helping the US missile space program after World War II
What a loathsome traitor to his country!
Good for the air force but nobody likes a traitor. Imagine helping the enemy, perhaps they did ‘ enhanced interrogation’ though, you never know.
There war was over. They might have thought they would get better treatment.
My great uncle who fought in the Italian campaign stated to me once "the Germans would fight like hell but then when they surrendered they took off their helmets, put on their caps and never gave you any trouble at all or made any attempt to escape." He commented the Italian or Hungarian soldiers we much more likely to try to escape than the Germans. Perhaps they thought once they had surrendered that was that.
I am not saying that allied interrogations never used any form of torture but the best German and Allied interrogators did all use kindness even if it was feigned to get better results.
You must remember that Hitler only won like 33% of the vote in a free and fair election, and that even with the SA running the polls in 1933 he only got 43%. Plus there were a number of attempts on Hitler's life by Germans.
So maybe since a lot of Germans didn't really care for either Hitler or his war maybe had an effect?
More likely they were people who had no interest in helping the NSDAP scum anymore than decent people help the Trump Reich?
Look up Hanns Scharff who was the Chief Luftwaffe interrogator and so so effective that he was invited in 1948 to the USA to lecture on interrogation techniques and stayed till the 1950s. He never used physical methods.