303 Squadron: The Poles who saved Britain
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Looking forward to the movie, but it seems to have some SOP PR hype in it. The Polish pilots certainly played an important part in the Battle of Britain.
Note that were 16 squadrons with two, the 302 and 303 in the Battle of Britain. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._303_Squadron_RAF
The 1969 movie "The Battle of Britain" is an old favorite of mine. They prominently featured the use of Polish pilots to defend Britain.
I read that one reason the Poles were generally superior pilots to the Brits is because they had trained and fought in relatively primitive air craft back in Poland, which really honed their innate aviator skills. The Brits were very reliant on technology, radar and radio, and consequently did not spend as much time beefing up their raw aviator skills.
And the Poles were just typically older and more experienced than your garden variety Brit pilot
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Ummm...I've never seen it work that way. Training and quality of leadership are very important but so is equipment.
A biplane facing a Messerschmitt bf 109 is most likely to become a smoking hole regardless if the biplane pilot is superior to the German one...and the Germans were good.
Also, the Polish war lasted 35 days.
That said, while I agree that cultural differences between the Poles, Germans and Brits would affect their respective motivation and effectiveness, my main objection is the overhype such as Britain would have lost the war to Germany without the Poles. That's a pretty tough call. Yes, the Poles were a very important part of the outcome but predicting alternative history is dicey at best.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland#Polish_Air_Force
The Polish Air Force (Lotnictwo Wojskowe) was at a severe disadvantage against the German Luftwaffe due to inferiority in numbers and the obsolescence of its fighter planes. However, contrary to German propaganda, it was not destroyed on the ground—in fact it was successfully dispersed before the conflict started and not a single one of its combat planes was destroyed on the ground in the first days of the conflict.[58] In the era of fast progress in aviation the Polish Air Force lacked modern fighters, vastly due to the cancellation of many advanced projects, such as the PZL.38 Wilk and a delay in the introduction of a completely new modern Polish fighter PZL.50 Jastrząb. However, its pilots were among the world's best trained, as proven a year later in the Battle of Britain, in which the Poles played a notable part.[59]
Ummm...I've never seen it work that way. Training and quality of leadership are very important but so is equipment.
A biplane facing a Messerschmitt bf 109 is most likely to become a smoking hole regardless if the biplane pilot is superior to the German one...and the Germans were good.
Also, the Polish war lasted 35 days.
That said, while I agree that cultural differences between the Poles, Germans and Brits would affect their respective motivation and effectiveness, my main objection is the overhype such as Britain would have lost the war to Germany without the Poles. That's a pretty tough call. Yes, the Poles were a very important part of the outcome but predicting alternative history is dicey at best.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland#Polish_Air_Force
The Polish Air Force (Lotnictwo Wojskowe) was at a severe disadvantage against the German Luftwaffe due to inferiority in numbers and the obsolescence of its fighter planes. However, contrary to German propaganda, it was not destroyed on the ground—in fact it was successfully dispersed before the conflict started and not a single one of its combat planes was destroyed on the ground in the first days of the conflict.[58] In the era of fast progress in aviation the Polish Air Force lacked modern fighters, vastly due to the cancellation of many advanced projects, such as the PZL.38 Wilk and a delay in the introduction of a completely new modern Polish fighter PZL.50 Jastrząb. However, its pilots were among the world's best trained, as proven a year later in the Battle of Britain, in which the Poles played a notable part.[59]
The Britsh commader in chief of the RAF said the Battle of Britain would have been in doubt if not for the Polish squadrons.
IMO, if the Battle of Britain had been lost, the war probably would have had a very different outcome. The Battle of Britain and the Battle of Stalingrad were the two key watershed moments of the war.
The other interesting part of the story was British prejudice against the Poles at the outset: they thought the Poles came from a backward country and could not be trusted with British fighter planes.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Many of these same Polish pilots flew in France with the French Air Force. They were given some of the worst fighter planes the French had like this one:
That's the Cauldron C 714, a fighter so pathetic that the French declared it obsolete and ordered it withdrawn from active service. The Poles assigned these planes continued to use them during the battle for France in 1940 because they had nothing else to fly.
By the time these pilots made it to Britain, some were already aces, others had numerous hours of combat flying. That made them some of the most experienced pilots the RAF had in 1940.
That's the Cauldron C 714, a fighter so pathetic that the French declared it obsolete and ordered it withdrawn from active service. The Poles assigned these planes continued to use them during the battle for France in 1940 because they had nothing else to fly.
By the time these pilots made it to Britain, some were already aces, others had numerous hours of combat flying. That made them some of the most experienced pilots the RAF had in 1940.
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
That's not what he said. He said the outcome might have not been the same. No shit. More Brits would have been killed, but that doesn't mean Operation Sea Lion would have been as successful as the invasions of Poland and France.
Again, the Poles were critical to the outcome but hyping that into "Britain would have lost the war without the Poles" is an unknownable prediction.
Thanks for the links. I look forward to watching the movie.
I have my doubts that the Poles turned the tide of the war.
On the other hand, I do not think the air mashall would have made that statement if all he was implying that the Brits would have lost a few more planes without the Poles. The Battle of Britain was not a rout, it was a very close contest, and there was a distinct possibility the Brits could have lost air superiority and been defeated. Hitler blundered by deciding to shift the focus to bombing civilians. If he wanted to succeed, he should have kept the focus on destroying the RAF, their bases, and radar infrastructure.
Just my two cents.
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Again, no one can predict alternative history. He was right to credit the contribution made by the Poles. It's wrong, IMO, to claim that without them that Hitler would have conquered Britain.
I do not disagree with that.
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Have you seen the movie "The Battle of Britain"?
BTW, a great book series is Edward Jablonski's "Air War".https://www.amazon.com/Air-War-Four-Volumes-One/dp/038514279X
It's a great bargain for about $11 used. If you buy it and don't like it, I'll pay you the $11.
It covered the Battle of Britain in great detail, along with the other actions around and during WWII. I read it when it was four books and, after I was deprived of them, bought a second set.
Have you seen the movie "The Battle of Britain"?
BTW, a great book series is Edward Jablonski's "Air War".https://www.amazon.com/Air-War-Four-Volumes-One/dp/038514279X
It's a great bargain for about $11 used. If you buy it and don't like it, I'll pay you the $11.
It covered the Battle of Britain in great detail, along with the other actions around and during WWII. I read it when it was four books and, after I was deprived of them, bought a second set.
If a movie involved WW2, I probably saw it. I am a WW2 history buff. I might have the world's record for watching Private Ryan.
My latest recommendation is The Zoo Keeper's Wife, a true story about the operators of the Warsaw Zoo hiding jews from the Nazis.
I hold a special place for Battle of Britain. It was the last stand of western liberal democracy against the forces of tyranny, and the results of a bad outcome would have been catastrophic.
It is amazing how the right people and the right technology came together at that one moment of time to save western civilization. Without Churchill, the Spitfire, the brand new British radar technology, things could have gone from bad to worse
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
I saw the Zoo Keeper's Wife too.
Don't forget Lend Lease. It saved the Russians too.
All wars create an incentive to develop better tech. That tech always results in a boon to peacetime economics. You obviously know the tech that came out of WWII, but it applies to everything from the Civil War through WWI to the present.
indeed.I saw the Zoo Keeper's Wife too.
Don't forget Lend Lease. It saved the Russians too.
All wars create an incentive to develop better tech. That tech always results in a boon to peacetime economics. You obviously know the tech that came out of WWII, but it applies to everything from the Civil War through WWI to the present.
If I had to identify the allied technology which won the war in a short, pithy sentence, I would say: Spitfire, T-34 tank, P-51 mustang
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Those are specific instances, although the Hurricane was the backbone of the RAF....but the Spitfire was sexier. Same goes for the B-17 bomber. The B-24 was more numerous, carried more bombs and, therefore, did more damage to the Third Reich, but the B-17 was sexier.
I was thinking more broadly. You already mentioned RADAR (RAdio Detection And Ranging). Metal, single wing aircraft, semi-automatic battle rifles. Although tanks and SONAR had been developed in WWI, their advancements took a great leap in WWII. Nuclear weapons ("canned sunshine"). Just to name a few.