*** Masters of the Air ***

101,299 Views | 786 Replies | Last: 5 mo ago by double aught
Joan Wilder
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This could be a function of watching on my iPad on a plane, but I see the Luftwaffe fighters attacking but I haven't seen Allied fighters escorting the bombers. Did they really send the bombers in with no other support?

Episode 3 was intense!!
OldArmy71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes, they did, but the losses were so terrible that they didn't try it again.

They waited until they had fighters capable of escorting the bombers.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fighters just didn't have the fuel capacity early in the war to support the bombers the whole way and make it back to England. They'd often escort to a point, return to the airfield and refuel, then meet the bombers on their way back from whatever mission they were on.

Fuzzy Dunlop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OldArmy71 said:

Yes, they did, but the losses were so terrible that they didn't try it again.

They waited until they had fighters capable of escorting the bombers.


Also, because the other elements left late, they were on their own against the entire Luftwaffe. Had all the elements left at the same time, it may not have been as bad.

My only complaint about the episode is the ball turret gunner being left behind. The book makes it clear that many times, flight crew members stayed behind with trapped buddies. Not sure if this side story is historical or not but it will be a way to show the route that downed flight crews utilized to escape back to England.

Overall, the best episode so far in my opinion.
Double Talkin' Jive...
Joan Wilder
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I thought the range might be the issue. Thanks.

I'm very interested in the story of the underground resistance helping Allied bomber crews return. Next week's episode looks great
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Look up The Comet Line and Andree de Jongh.

Hey Nav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/schweinfurt-regensburg-raid-august-17-1943

Good summary of the mission. 3rd Air Division Commander, Colonel Curtis LeMay, was in the lead plane.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I liked that episode quite a bit. Very intense with the fighter attacks. That kid in the ball turret, yikes.
OldArmy71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just realized that Callum Turner, who plays Bucky Egan, played the lead role in The Boys in the Boat.
Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DG-Ag said:

As an aside...I'm listening to the book on Audible (haven't started watching yet) and in the early chapters they talk a lot about Curtis LeMay. They mention that the character in Dr. Strangelove, Col. Jack D. Ripper, was patterned loosely after LeMay. That piqued my interest so I watched Dr. Strangelove again last night. What a great movie that was (or at least to me). Numerous laugh-out-loud moments.

Apologize for the derail.
I just finished the book on Audible. It was fantastic. It really does a good job of breaking down all the moving parts to the European theater. So many things built on one another - and there were a lot of failed experiments on the path to finally overwhelming the Germans.

I think one of the things the casual viewer with this series may not realize is the book touches on a LOT of sub-topics. It's not just the Bloody 100th and their missions.

They get into the atmosphere of London during the war, racial tensions, the tug of war between commanders on how to utilize the 8th AF, the build-up to D-Day, the British 'terror bombing' early in the war as retaliation for the bombing of London, how strategic bombing evolved from small targets to finally hitting the German oil/rail/coal and industry, the "not so neutral" Swiss, the impact felt by German cities, the decisions of the 8th to gravitate toward city/suburban bombing, and the POW experiences - which were horrifying in some cases.

Band of Brothers had a fairly simple, straight-forward, story that followed one company of men. Masters of the Air has to cover A LOT more.

So I would say give the series a chance to set things up, that's a lot more difficult to do in just 9 episodes and you're simply not going to get the personal connections with the characters that you did with BOB.
HummingbirdSaltalamacchia
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hey Nav said:

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/schweinfurt-regensburg-raid-august-17-1943

Good summary of the mission. 3rd Air Division Commander, Colonel Curtis LeMay, was in the lead plane.


My grandfather, who was Squadron CO for the 819th bomb squadron, 7th AF in the pacific (b-24s) knew LeMay. Had a couple run ins with him during and immediately following the war. But then had more interactions when he (my grandfather) was at the pentagon, and LeMay was CO of SAC(I think). The only time I had ever heard my grandfather cuss was in reference to him. I was watching Dr Strangelove, and they did a cutaway explaining some of the cultural references , and mentioned how Gen Ripper was based on LeMay, I asked if he ever knew him. He simply responded (in his calm Louisiana drawl) "Yeah, I knew the son of a *****"
Cliff.Booth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Finally caught up with Ep 3. Powerful filmmaking, had me literally holding my breath and tensed up in a few parts. I'd pay to be watching these in a cinema with great sound. The ball turret part will stick with me. Great series so far.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was just informed that my MIL's grandfather is a man by the name of Herman E. Molen. He flew with the 364th Bomb Group as a flight engineer/top turret gunner. He was shot down in Oct. 1943 on the 2nd raid to Schweinfurt. Ended up in Stalag 17 and is apparently one of the guys that the play/film is based on. She is bringing me his written memoirs to go through.

He went on to serve in both Korea and Vietnam
BBRex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hey Nav said:

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/schweinfurt-regensburg-raid-august-17-1943

Good summary of the mission. 3rd Air Division Commander, Colonel Curtis LeMay, was in the lead plane.


Air & Space had a good article on this raid, too.

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0210schweinfurt/#:~:text=In%20the%20summer%20of%201943,and%20potentially%20shorten%20the%20war
BBRex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also, if you're interested in the B-17, "Flying Fortress" by Edward Jablonski is a great book. "Log of the Liberators" is great if you're a B-24 fan.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I find it interesting how the marketing (not sure if that is the right term, maybe propaganda?) of the time was so focused on certain aircraft, the B-17 being one (P-51 is the other I'm thinking of). I wonder why the Flying Fortress was the "pretty girl" of WWII US bombers when more B-24s were produced and the Liberator had arguably better "statistics" (range, altitude, bomb load, etc). Was it simply because the FF came first? Or was it because the B-17 was a stylistically better looking aircraft than the Liberator, which might be described as a box with wings due to the fuselage shape?
HummingbirdSaltalamacchia
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

I find it interesting how the marketing (not sure if that is the right term, maybe propaganda?) of the time was so focused on certain aircraft, the B-17 being one (P-51 is the other I'm thinking of). I wonder why the Flying Fortress was the "pretty girl" of WWII US bombers when more B-24s were produced and the Liberator had arguably better "statistics" (range, altitude, bomb load, etc). Was it simply because the FF came first? Or was it because the B-17 was a stylistically better looking aircraft than the Liberator, which might be described as a box with wings due to the fuselage shape?
Not a historian, so I cant speak for certain. I think there were a mix of factors. If i recall, many of the Liberators were in different theaters, Pacific and Africa, and not so much out of England (though there were some ). I think the availability of press and photogs was more prevalent in England comparatively for obvious reasons. So I think the American public seeing so many photos of damaged b-17s returning from bombing missions, and less so from similar missions out of africa and italy, I think you see how the "focus" would be more on the FF compared to the Liberator.

Also, I believe the b24 was tasked with a lot of low level bombing missions, which lead to more casualties and bombers not returning. More returning bombers/crews = more people to talk to the press/authors during and after the war. i looked at wikipedia for a minute, and there is a comment about how aircrews "preferred" the b17 while the brass preferred the b24 for the reasons you listed. Not sure where that came from and how true that sentiment was.
Stive
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

I find it interesting how the marketing (not sure if that is the right term, maybe propaganda?) of the time was so focused on certain aircraft, the B-17 being one (P-51 is the other I'm thinking of). I wonder why the Flying Fortress was the "pretty girl" of WWII US bombers when more B-24s were produced and the Liberator had arguably better "statistics" (range, altitude, bomb load, etc). Was it simply because the FF came first? Or was it because the B-17 was a stylistically better looking aircraft than the Liberator, which might be described as a box with wings due to the fuselage shape?

This would be a really good question to ask on the Masters of the Air History Board thread. The air junkies over there could probably answer it pretty quickly.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Stive said:

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

I find it interesting how the marketing (not sure if that is the right term, maybe propaganda?) of the time was so focused on certain aircraft, the B-17 being one (P-51 is the other I'm thinking of). I wonder why the Flying Fortress was the "pretty girl" of WWII US bombers when more B-24s were produced and the Liberator had arguably better "statistics" (range, altitude, bomb load, etc). Was it simply because the FF came first? Or was it because the B-17 was a stylistically better looking aircraft than the Liberator, which might be described as a box with wings due to the fuselage shape?

This would be a really good question to ask on the Masters of the Air History Board thread. The air junkies over there could probably answer it pretty quickly.
Thanks. I do like Hummingbird's answer. But I'll ask on that history board thread.
Stive
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah I'm going to have to stay away from that thread though. They keep spoiling stuff.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Allies win the war
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgsMnn said:

CyanideJenkins said:

Y'all say whatever the **** you want about character development and storylines....

I'll just be over here trying to still wrap my mind around the idea of being a Ball Gunner on one of them things. Holy hell!


Almost suicidal if you were one.
Kinda surprising based on Army data (albeit from later in the war).


wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Claude!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HummingbirdSaltalamacchia said:

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

I find it interesting how the marketing (not sure if that is the right term, maybe propaganda?) of the time was so focused on certain aircraft, the B-17 being one (P-51 is the other I'm thinking of). I wonder why the Flying Fortress was the "pretty girl" of WWII US bombers when more B-24s were produced and the Liberator had arguably better "statistics" (range, altitude, bomb load, etc). Was it simply because the FF came first? Or was it because the B-17 was a stylistically better looking aircraft than the Liberator, which might be described as a box with wings due to the fuselage shape?
Not a historian, so I cant speak for certain. I think there were a mix of factors. If i recall, many of the Liberators were in different theaters, Pacific and Africa, and not so much out of England (though there were some ). I think the availability of press and photogs was more prevalent in England comparatively for obvious reasons. So I think the American public seeing so many photos of damaged b-17s returning from bombing missions, and less so from similar missions out of africa and italy, I think you see how the "focus" would be more on the FF compared to the Liberator.

Also, I believe the b24 was tasked with a lot of low level bombing missions, which lead to more casualties and bombers not returning. More returning bombers/crews = more people to talk to the press/authors during and after the war. i looked at wikipedia for a minute, and there is a comment about how aircrews "preferred" the b17 while the brass preferred the b24 for the reasons you listed. Not sure where that came from and how true that sentiment was.
That tracks with what I read in "It Wasn't So Jolly" by Tom Baker about the 90th Bomb Group (the Jolly Rogers) in the Pacific. The B-17 was proven and pretty, while the B-24 was ugly and an unknown; bomb crews were a little apprehensive about using the B-24.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just watched episode three. Best one so far!

This mission took place on August 17, 1943. Not really related, but coincidentally the same day the seizure of Sicily was completed.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Best episode yet, and I think they have all been good. By now, I was complaining a lot about Pacific. So far, this one is right up there with BoB.

The only thing that would make this equal to BoB in my view is having interviews with real participants, but I assume they are all dead at this point. That gave BoB gravitas and somber realism that no new show can replicate.
LMCane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

Band of Brothers aired in 2001.
The Pacific aired in 2010.
MotA airs in 2023/24?

So I suppose we should expect a series focused on a US Navy destroyer (hypothetical) around 2040/41? The timing could be gold given it's roughly the 100th anniversary of Pearl Harbor.

Come on, spill the beans! When will that one debut?????? Gotta plan my viewing around it.
supposedly there was a Mel Gibson helmed film about the USS LAFFEY at the end of the war under development
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Trivia: The original BoB premiered the Sunday prior to 9/11.

Carry on.
OldArmy71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Someone may have mentioned this book already, but I have gotten about a quarter of the way through Harry Crosby's memoir A Wing and a Prayer.

Crosby is the navigator who gets airsick all the time.

It is well-written and honest.

According to Crosby, the 100th was a sort of Animal House unit whose leadership had to be replaced and who had to be brought under tighter discipline

Interestingly, he depicts Egan and Cleven in a less favorable light than the series is showing them so far (though he acknowledges that both were first-rate pilots) while simultaneously contrasting those two with the excellence and leadership of two of the pilots he flew with.

Crosby takes quite a bit of time to explain the intricacies of navigating, but I find it interesting.

So far I recommend it highly.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That might be spoiler-esq as people (like me) were unsure who would live or die. Now I know that at least he (and his crew) lives.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
LMCane said:

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

Band of Brothers aired in 2001.
The Pacific aired in 2010.
MotA airs in 2023/24?

So I suppose we should expect a series focused on a US Navy destroyer (hypothetical) around 2040/41? The timing could be gold given it's roughly the 100th anniversary of Pearl Harbor.

Come on, spill the beans! When will that one debut?????? Gotta plan my viewing around it.
supposedly there was a Mel Gibson helmed film about the USS LAFFEY at the end of the war under development
I think if they were to make a Navy limited TV series, I'd do the USS Enterprise (although this would be so tough between the absolute size of the carrier and also having to do both naval and aerial combat via CGI), or the USS San Francisco. Both ships saw tons of action in the Pacific. Could do the USS Johnston. She saw several big actions before being part of the The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors where several destroyers and destroyer escorts charged the entire Japanese Fleet to buy time for the carriers they were protecting.

Read this book if you get the chance

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Stand-Tin-Sailors-Extraordinary/dp/0553381482


Could also do Battleship Texas since she saw action in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and Pacific.
jwoodmd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wangus12 said:

LMCane said:

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

Band of Brothers aired in 2001.
The Pacific aired in 2010.
MotA airs in 2023/24?

So I suppose we should expect a series focused on a US Navy destroyer (hypothetical) around 2040/41? The timing could be gold given it's roughly the 100th anniversary of Pearl Harbor.

Come on, spill the beans! When will that one debut?????? Gotta plan my viewing around it.
supposedly there was a Mel Gibson helmed film about the USS LAFFEY at the end of the war under development
I think if they were to make a Navy limited TV series, I'd do the USS Enterprise (although this would be so tough between the absolute size of the carrier and also having to do both naval and aerial combat via CGI), or the USS San Francisco. Both ships saw tons of action in the Pacific. Could do the USS Johnston. She saw several big actions before being part of the The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors where several destroyers and destroyer escorts charged the entire Japanese Fleet to buy time for the carriers they were protecting.

Read this book if you get the chance

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Stand-Tin-Sailors-Extraordinary/dp/0553381482


Could also do Battleship Texas since she saw action in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and Pacific.
Sure, battleship Texas would be an entire movie of transport escort and shore bombardments. Good movie - blah.
wangus12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thats why I suggested it at the bottom. She wasn't exactly in the thick of it.

That's why the Big E is the easy choice. She saw action in so much of the Pacific theatre.
AggieOO
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Indianapolis could be very interesting, but it'd be a completely different kind of series.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieOO said:

Indianapolis could be very interesting, but it'd be a completely different kind of series.
Sign me up for that.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.