Hans U. Rudel, the flying Hero.

Panzerknacker- I’d like to see someone draw a parallel to prove that idealism makes a person a more skilled pilot. It makes absolutely no difference what Rudel’s politics were. Idealogy didn’t assist him in killing 519 tanks. Idealogy didn’t make his bombs and cannon shells go more true. And idealogy didn’t make enemy bullets miss.

I disagree, beleving in your goal is very importand for a soldier, I don’t think that any soldiers no mather how much powerfull is the army that he fighting him, could be any good without any belief in his goal.

I agree first with Ingsock - soldiers which believe in their country cause, which volunteer, which are willing to fight, because they are convinced that they are defending their country, are much better than soldiers forcibly dressed in uniform and send to the front line.
(Because we talk about WWII, I will not mention Israeli soldiers in “6 Days War”.)
The best WWII example would be soviet Red Army in June, July, August 1941.
These blokes did not believed in their country… their family members were in Gulag’s camps or already shot, or perhaps died of hunger.
More or less… soldiers, which were nearly always in civilian clothes, received 1 rifle per 3 man + 10 bullets and were ordered to attack German tanks.
Result - 2 million POWs taken by Germans.
Further result - 1.5 millions of soviet POWs dead, because Germans
couldn’t even dream about that many POWs - hence no food, no camps, no transport, no Geneva Convention obligations.

I expect some discussion about my perhaps misguided opinions…
I may be totally wrong with figures - I don’t have my books at hand now.

Than I would like to salute Twitch1…
He perfectly described connection between ideology and skills…
No connection AT ALL!!!

However, ideology can prompt men/women to be more dilligent in training and achieve better results… I think Rudel was the case… He believed…
And good on him.

Cheers,

Lancer44

It did not , I was simply aswering a question of 1000yds, In my way of see it, the skills and guts of Rudel remain unmatched.

I have always wondered at the apparently inflated kill totals of certain Nazi military personnel, indeed this is not confined to Nazis but Allies too.

How can we confirm that Rudel destroyed 519 Tanks? By the very nature of where he got these kills, there would be little or no German witnesses. I will continue to wonder.

Unfortunately we cannot do that, the OKL confirmed only about 300 of his land victories, aniway even with this leeser number of “panzerabschuss” with the Ju-87G gunship the figure is still impressive.

The reason Germans seem to have increadable kill counts is becuase they never gave there soliders leave. They stayed in the front until they died. Some would become expert aces, while other poorly trained personal would become little more then target practice.

Mate, they did get leave. No one can spend 5 years at the front constantly.

My whole point was that propaganda played a big part in kill statistics.

With T-34 other Sov tanks being produced “like so many loaves of bread” why does anyone feel compelled to even ask the question of whether Rudel’s score is valid in such a target-rich environment by a talented man who flew 2,530 missions- more than any combat pilot in history.

Ideolology CAN’T give you pilot skills either!

Well , I think that from the lates 1990s has been some waves of “Luftwaffe revisionism” in wich some authors ( mostly russian) had declare in others words that the luftwaffe claims are basicly crap, the Bf-109 can barely flight, The FW-190 was a target with wings, etc, etc.

It does not surprize me, If there is revisionism about the holocaust it might be about everything.

That the number of soviet tanks on the eastern front was so vast does not automatically prove such a high kill rate by a pilot. Things like the German supply chain also play apart, a plane can’t fly with fuel nor fight without ammo. All of which would be expended by the score in such a “target rich environment”.

That he was an ardent loon on the side of the Nazis would actually affect his flying. If he beleived so greatly in the ideology and rightness of hte nazi cause he would be prepared to do much more than a pilot who didn’t have such believes. He would have taken chances that others would not.

This is nothing to do with skill, merely his daring.

We also need to address what was classed as a kill. Some tanks tht were killed may only have had minor damage that was soon repaird, and crews that were soon replaced.

Kamikaze pilots were daring. Doesn’t mean they were skillful. Taking chances does no make a good pilot or soldier of any kind. Skill has to do with proficiency in combat aviation and ideology can NOT magically give you skills no matter how much you wish upon a star or how much you believe in a cause nazi or otherwise. Why attempt to reassign personal definitions to words? As Panzerknacker mentions it must be a revisionist plot to tarnish anything German. That’s sad.

Not at all Twitch1. Think of when you got to a shop or a cafe. Someone who genuinely feels positive about there work will do a much better job than someone who doesn’t feel so positive.

If this guy was as ardent supporter of the nazis as is made out then I feel that every time he took off he would see himself doing somthing positive, even defending the very heart of the 3rd reich. Because of this he would fly better, his skills would be enhanced (not created) by this attitude.

Everybodies skills are somehow enhanced when doing work they enjoy/feel passionate about, piloting would be the same. At the end of a hard, long mission he would perhaps take time for that one last strafe, where as another pilot may just fly by, it does happen in combat. At Rourkes Drift the Zulu hoard were within fighting distance of Lord Chelmsfords column yet both sides chose not to engage.

Also many pilots believe that aggresivness leads to better piloting (in fighters), this zeal would have been enhanced with his political believes.

Did you not ask him any of this when you interviewed him Twitch?

Bussing tables at a coffee shop has nothing in common with air combat. Feeling good about yourself and a good attitude working in an office still has nothing to do with skill or aptitude in piloting duties. Aggressiveness is paramount in surviving combat but still has nothing to do with learning how to navigate or recover from stalles or landing in a crosswind. As we know the strict requirements that were in place before 1943 when guys like Rudel, Krupinski, Galland and all went through training, we know that, no doubt, many ardent believers in the Nazi cause washed out. Right?

But if that is what anyone wishes to believe that is fine with me. And as usual you may have the last word on this topic. I realize that is important to some people. I never interviewed Rudel and never said I did, but I wish I did!

My mistake I thought you had interviewed him, must have been someone else.

Not a desire to have a last word on any topic really.

I think you are trying, however, to make a black and white representation, rather than many shades of grey. Piloting is a very complicated task, yes other ardent nazis would have failed to be pilots, maybe even shot down had the become so. I just feel that his ideals would have helped.

The Red Baron, for an aside, was actually a very poor pilot yet his accuracy with his guns allowed him to shoot down many pilots from long range. There are skills and attributes that can overlap or nullify problem areas though.

The hardest evidence of claims v kills against tanks we have is for the RAF/USAF fighter-bombers in France, 1944. Operational Research teams went over the battlefields afterwards, examining the German vehicles and assessing how they were knocked out. The result? The pilots overclaimed by 10x.

It is also known that the Russians wildly overclaimed their aircraft tank kills, sometimes claiming far more destroyed than were actually in the area.

It would be surprising if the Germans were the only ones not to suffer from this.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Probably, someone can say that not all tank were PERMANENT lost, because some of them were salvaged and repaired.

And the comparison between Rudel and kamikazes is not likely, there is a big difference between been brave and to be fatalist about your future.

Fantastic video of Rudel in the hospital after he was shot in the leg.

http://rapidshare.de/files/28222613/rudel_interview.mpg.html

Stukas “D” attacking russian ground targets…and taking some flak too

http://www.wochenschau-archiv.de/kontrollklfenster.php?&PHPSESSID=&dmguid=08E92C00FF3BA5CD030103009D21A8C0101B000000&inf=422200&outf=524080&funktion=play250k

Confirming tank kills is always difficult, especially on the Eastern Front. Unless a tank was totally destroyed by an internal explosion or consumed by fire, then they were often repaired and returned to combat. This was true of both sides and would explain the often inflated kill claims.

Regards Digger.