Talk:Adolf Galland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This person is a Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipient

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Adolf Galland article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Didn't Galland's plane have Mickey Mouse nose art?--GABaker

Yes, some of his Bf-109s wore caricatures of Mickey Mouse. I don't recall exactly which ones.


The following transcript is taken from: http://history1900s.about.com/library/prm/blgalland2.htm

WWII: What was the real story behind the Mickey Mouse insignia painted on the fuselage of your fighter plane?

Galland: We started this in Spain, and when I painted it on my Me-109E in JG.26 it was holding a hatchet and smoking a cigar, which I loved. But after the war I had to give cigars up.

Real Story Behind Galland's Victories

Galland's score of 103 victories was a figure of Nazi propaganda. The article is about how the Luftwaffe augmented its pilots scores mainly focusing on Galland. This explains Galland's high score, the high amount of Luftwaffe aces and their high scores, and the Luftwaffe's claim having a higher kill ratio than the RAF in the Battle of Britain which they lost. Galland's own stories are also very unbelievable and cannot be trusted. It appears he wanted to make himself appear to be a hero and chivalrous. But he was no hero and had no chivalry. http://members.aol.com/geobat66/galland/coppens.htm

Why is this dragged out on numerous Pilot bio pages? The German point system had nothing to do with the number of kills recorded. Let this puppy die already. Abel29a 00:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Why was he not a hero? Because his side lost? Heroism is not a quality reserved for the winning side in a war. Galland served his country with distinction and unlike some other WW2 air force generals on both sides, did nothing to dishonor his country. I'm sure he's a hero to the Germans. Jsc1973 (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Galland's (and most luftwaffe ace's) score stands up to scrutiny far better than many other of the combatant nations pilots in WW2. Whilst inevitably there was alot of over claiming ( as happens in all air combat in WW2) The higher scores in the Luftwaffe fighter force occured because; - they were outnumbered and therefore had plenty of targets -on all fronts, - they were, for the first half of the war at least, tactically and technologically superior to all its opponents. - flew far more missions than Allied pilots ( i.e. Erich Hartmann flew got his 352 in ~800 missions, Francis Grabreski, one of the highest scoring USAAF pilot got 28 kills in ~153) - the pilots did not have rest periods like Allied pilots- they flew until they were incapacitated or died. The Luftwaffe did indeed overclaim during the Battle of Britain. This was due to the problems of kill confirmation flying over enemy held territory. The RAF did exactly the same during the Northern France fighter sweeps in 1941-42 ; one German fighter was shot down for every 5 the RAF claimed destroyed ! This is no reflection of their courage or sincerity- its just what happens in the confusion of war. User:Harryurz 20:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)]

Contents

[edit] The First and the Last

Just came here to ask about The First and the Last. Today, in a small bookstore in Rosario, Argentina, I found and bought a Spanish-language edition of the book which is dated 1955. The edition is by Emecé Editores S.A., Buenos Aires. It has a prologue (explicitly titled "Prologue to the English edition") by Douglas Bader, dated 9 December 1954. The page before the prologue says "Translated by the Argentine Air Force under the author's supervision, with the collaboration of Commander Daniel Pedro Aubone. Translation kindly ceded by the Aeronautics Circle." So there seems to be a mistake in the 1957 date given here. I'm giving the details so you can check. (The fact that Galland had contact with the Argentine Armed Forces is not surprising — according to the final page, the book came out of the press in August 1955, a month before the Revolución Libertadora ousted Juan Perón.) —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Comments moved from the article itself

JG 26 Top Guns of the Luftwaffe by Donald Caldwell

Fighter reserves were not used up in the Ardennes offensive as the weather was too bad during the offensive to permit much flying in support of the ground offensive. Rather, the reserves were used up in Operation Bodenplate (Base Plate) on the morning 01/01/45 - a surprise attack by massed Luftwaffe aircraft aimed at hitting Allied airfields in France and Belgium and destroying large numbers of aircraft on the ground.

This was a strategy Galland disagreed with as his intention for this reserve of aircraft was an all-out offensive against the USAAF heavy bomber raids on Germany.

Galland's cigar lighter modification is a verified fact - see David Baker's Adolf Galland the Authorised Biography. Galland allowed himself this luxury on all of his personal aircraft and was rarely seen without a cigar in his mouth!


Moved these comments here from the main articke Abel29a 16:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nickname

In response to Adam Carr who keeps removing the nickname from the infobox: Why is there a nickname section added in the infobox for military personell unless you are supposed to list the persons nickname there? Not that I really care wheter we list the nickname or not, but wouldnt this have been decided on when the military history project actually created the infoboxes? Abel29a 04:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not privy to what others may have decided. His nickname is included in the text. I fail to see how why the fact that a person called Adolf was called "Dolfy" by his friends belongs in his info box. Adam 05:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm amazed this has caused such a fuss. I'm (fairly) happy to have it in the article but not in the infobox, if only to prevent a revert war going on here, which is what I can see happening. For what it's worth, I have no problem with it being in the infobox. A nickname for a military leader is not the same as a nickname for any old Joe Bloggs in the street, there is precedence for including nicknames in biographies of military people, it has been generally accepted and has never proven contentious before as far as I can see. However, we might as well leave it as is, but if someone adds it back in I will not take it out.Mumby 08:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

"A nickname for a military leader is not the same as a nickname for any old Joe Bloggs in the street." And why is that? Why does Richard Nixon's infobox not record that his friends called him "Dick"? Or the Marquess of Hartington's that he was called "Harty-Tarty"? I fail to see why what Luftwaffe pilots were called by their friends is of more historical signifance than what presidents and prime ministers were called. Adam 08:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why Nixon's infobox does not mention it, but I do know that there is an entire page called List of United States Presidential nicknames. If they are deemed worthy of their own page, surely they are worthy of being in an infobox? Try doing a search of wikipedia for "nickname list", you'll find that there are many wikipdians who consider that all kinds of nicknames are significant in some way. Anyway, we aren't talking about presidents, or European Royalty and Nobility: G-I. In answer to your question, I don't know why fighter pilots make such a big deal of their nicknames, but if you read anything about them then it soon becomes apparent that they do put a lot of emphasis on them. Some are earned, or reflect a particular event that happened to the pilot, others are just a diminutive form of their full name e.g. Bob. I see the point you are trying to make about it possibly being a name that only his friends used, and therefore is not on the same standing as, for example, Sailor Malan, but I think the nickname is slightly more general and widely used than that. But, like I said, I do see your point. Anway, I refer you to my previous comment: "we might as well leave it as is, but if someone adds it back in I will not take it out." Mumby 10:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Works for me to leave the nickname in the intro of the text and not the infobox - I'm fine with that as well. The only thing is almost every pilot article in here has the nickname listed, so somebody is bound to come along and put it back in :) Abel29a 17:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Dolfo? lol! I too am perplexed why the fuss over a nickname when his FULL name isnt even given? "Adolf Joseph Ferdinand", according to Britannica. Alongside Britannica I have luftwaffe documents with his name given "I.A Galland" (but I discover that I.A = im Auftrag). Never have I seen the man referred to as "Dolfo". That appears to originate with 'luftwaffe.cz' (copied, like much of the detail in all the wikipedia luftwaffe articles, without a 2nd thought). Dee Mac Con Uladh 20:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you are right that not having his full name wasn't great for the article. I have added the nickname back in with a full reference. I should have referenced it properly a long time ago. The suggestion that it "appears to originate with 'luftwaffe.cz' (copied, like much of the detail in all the wikipedia luftwaffe articles, without a 2nd thought)" isn't true, I have seen him referred to as Dolfo many times, and I have never been to that website. Lets get a few things clear: I am not a particular fan of Galland, or the luftwaffe. I don't get off on adding some guys nickname, it doesn't give me any pleasure to edit this page, and to be honest I don't care either way. Many pilots have a nickname, almost all of them sound stupid, Galland appears to be no different. However, the fact that so much literature makes a point of mentioning these nicknames is sufficient reason to consider them encyclopedic, in my opinion. Let's remember that we are all doing this in what little free time we have, so lets be nice to each other and maybe even respect the effort that others put into their contributions.Mumby 22:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] gallands comment to goering ref spitfires

Bruce, the problem here is simple, use your source! At the moment Kaplan is credited with saying this exactly. He does not. Please remove my citation of Kaplan and replace it whith the one one you have just given. That is all I am asking. Dapi89 (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The wording as stated in Galland's

  • Galland, Adolf. The First and The Last. Cutchogue, New York: Buccaneer Books, 1954. ISBN 0-89966-728-7.

Is "I should like an outfit of Spitfires for my squadron" (page 29). The book was translated by Mervyn Savill. To my understanding of Wiki, the reference to a publicly available book/source supersedes an editors translation, even if this translation comes closer to the truth. I suggest adding both the German and the English wording to the article. MisterBee1966 (talk) 03:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I second MisterBee's suggestion. The quote as you've given it from p.29 of The First & the Last tallies with my recollection of the 60s paperback edition (which I can't locate at the moment so I'm glad you've been able to validate my memory). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)