AHC: the best possible Luftwaffe for 1940

Deleted member 1487

An earlier start-up for Germany's parachute arm is what needed but then that can be said for all of Germany's armed forces, elite units and special weapons projects.
It wasn't the only issue even if they were ready to be deployed, Hitler didn't want the war to end quickly so it could be a live fire training ground for his forces to cycle through while making Spain more dependent on Germany as just one example. Plus Italy already put a huge expensive expeditionary force together and it badly screwed up Italian armament plans and might well have crippled their abilities in WW2, which wasn't really doing all that well and served as a warning to Germany, which was already unhappy about the expense of their small expeditionary force.
 
It wasn't the only issue even if they were ready to be deployed, Hitler didn't want the war to end quickly so it could be a live fire training ground for his forces to cycle through while making Spain more dependent on Germany as just one example. Plus Italy already put a huge expensive expeditionary force together and it badly screwed up Italian armament plans and might well have crippled their abilities in WW2, which wasn't really doing all that well and served as a warning to Germany, which was already unhappy about the expense of their small expeditionary force.
I wasn't talking about deploying the Falschirmjägers in Spain but just pointing out that developing the parachute branch earlier might have showed up the faults in the specialized equipment being developed for that particular branch.
Interestingly enough the British and US parachute arm would copy some of the FJ's equipment (like boots with their laces on the side instead of the front) and learn later it wasn't as good as they thought.
 

Deleted member 1487

I wasn't talking about deploying the Falschirmjägers in Spain but just pointing out that developing the parachute branch earlier might have showed up the faults in the specialized equipment being developed for that particular branch.
Interestingly enough the British and US parachute arm would copy some of the FJ's equipment (like boots with their laces on the side instead of the front) and learn later it wasn't as good as they thought.
I doubt it. The Netherlands didn't demonstrate that, it took Crete to force a change in the FJ parachutes. The reason the Germans used the Italian style chutes is that they'd open fully quickly, unlike the US or British models, so paras could jump at less than 300m, which means a lot less scattering and linger time in the air to be shot at.
Since the Germans were flying blind trying to come up with tactics and equipment without real combat experience to draw on, they had to learn the hard lessons the hard way. the Allies copied them after the Germans started to make changes themselves based on Crete; the Allies took it as proof of the importance of the airborne arm, while the Germans took it as proof they needed to change much of what they were doing.
 

JAG88

Banned
I doubt it. The Netherlands didn't demonstrate that, it took Crete to force a change in the FJ parachutes. The reason the Germans used the Italian style chutes is that they'd open fully quickly, unlike the US or British models, so paras could jump at less than 300m, which means a lot less scattering and linger time in the air to be shot at.
Since the Germans were flying blind trying to come up with tactics and equipment without real combat experience to draw on, they had to learn the hard lessons the hard way. the Allies copied them after the Germans started to make changes themselves based on Crete; the Allies took it as proof of the importance of the airborne arm, while the Germans took it as proof they needed to change much of what they were doing.

Actually the FJ deployed the improved RZ 16s on the Netherlands, with the quick-release RZ 20s appearing over Crete already. The last FJ chute, the RZ 36, was mostly developed for ease of manufacture, but it did have a delta-shaped canopy. Still non-steerable.

Crete may have triggered the creation of the FG-42, but did nothing for the parachutes.
 
Last edited:
*Germany buys DC4E in 1939, makes bomber a la G5N counterpart
*He 280 aloft by year's end
*Wipe out Home Chain
*Take French Bugatti prototype fighter and MB 162 bomber
 
Dear Viking,
Germany adopted the RZ-1 parachute harness because it was developed from those worn by World War 1 observation balloon crews. Herman Goring wore a similar harness during 1918. Italian paratroopers used that wide belt as the basis of their Salvatore harness. The Salvatore/RZ harness solved the nuisance of line-twists by adding a metal swivel where all the suspension lines and risers converge, above the jumper’s shoulder blades.
These days, skydiving students are taught that line-twists are a “nuisance.”
On a personal note: I have suffered line-twists during hundreds of skydives, but twists were only bad enough to need a reserve parachute twice! Both those line-twists to reserve malfunctions were on tiny sport parachutes invented after 2000.

The primary disadvantage - of the Salvatore harness - is the awkward landing that ideally includes a forward roll .... requiring extra time to teach.
Despite extra training, Salvatore landings still increased the incidence of foot, knee, elbow and hand injuries, the extra padding on feet, knees, elbows and hands worn by WW2 Italian and German paratroopers.
The other disadvantage of the awkward landing angle was that it limited personal weapons to pistols, knives, grenades and maybe submachine guns .... not a major deficit during clandestine raids, but as soon as you lose the element of surprise, long guns are desperately needed.

A second disadvantage of the Salvatore/RZ harness was the lack of quick-releases. QR can save lives during water landings or when being dragged by high winds. RZ 20 harness introduced 4 quick-release buckles, a quick-release box was not introduced until RZ 36. QRB have all major straps routed to a metal box in the middle of the chest. A simple turn-and-punch releases all important straps from the QRB .... mighty quick when you land face-down in water!

Master Corporal (retired) Rob Warner CD
Canadian and West German Army (static line) jump wings
FAA Master Parachute Rigger: back, seat, chest and have sewn a few lap packs
More than 6,600 total parachute jumps including more than 4,000 tandem jumps
Civilian skydiving instructor: static-line, IAD and Progressive Freefall
 
Last edited:

JAG88

Banned
Dear Viking,
Germany adopted the RZ-1 parachute harness because it was developed from those worn by World War 1 observation balloon crews. Herman Goring wore a similar harness during 1918. Italian paratroopers used that wide belt as the basis of their Salvatore harness. The Salvatore/RZ harness solved the nuisance of line-twists by adding a metal swivel where all the suspension lines and risers converge, above the jumper’s shoulder blades.
These days, skydiving students are taught that line-twists are a “nuisance.”
On a personal note: I have suffered line-twists during hundreds of skydives, but twists were only bad enough to need a reserve parachute twice! Both those line-twists to reserve malfunctions were on tiny sport parachutes invented after 2000.

The primary disadvantage - of the Salvatore harness - is the awkward landing that ideally includes a forward roll .... requiring extra time to teach.
Despite extra training, Salvatore landings still increased the incidence of foot, knee, elbow and hand injuries, the extra padding on feet, knees, elbows and hands worn by WW2 Italian and German paratroopers.
The other disadvantage of the awkward landing angle was that it limited personal weapons to pistols, knives, grenades and maybe submachine guns .... not a major deficit during clandestine raids, but as soon as you lose the element of surprise, long guns are desperately needed.

A second disadvantage of the Salvatore/RZ harness was the lack of quick-releases. QR can save lives during water landings or when being dragged by high winds. RZ 20 harness introduced 4 quick-release buckles, a quick-release box was not introduced until RZ 36. QRB have all major straps routed to a metal box in the middle of the chest. A simple turn-and-punch releases all important straps from the QRB .... mighty quick when you land face-down in water!

Master Corporal (retired) Rob Warner CD
Canadian and West German Army (static line) jump wings
FAA Master Parachute Rigger: back, seat, chest and have sewn a few lap packs
More than 6,600 total parachute jumps including more than 4,000 tandem jumps
Civilian skydiving instructor: static-line, IAD and Progressive Freefall

Hi, AFAIK the LW did use the regular type of parachutes for their aircrew, could those have been used safely on a 100m jump?
 
At work.

Just a thought while reading through the wonderful information about the 'Paras'.

The nascent German gov created 'Glider schools' with competitions, trophies and prizes.

The Horten bros gained much experience from such.

Could something similar be done with parachute clubs?

Cheers.
 
At work.

Just a thought while reading through the wonderful information about the 'Paras'.

The nascent German gov created 'Glider schools' with competitions, trophies and prizes.

The Horten bros gained much experience from such.

Could something similar be done with parachute clubs?

Cheers.
Introduce skydiving earlier?
 

Deleted member 1487

Actually the FJ deployed the improved RZ 16s on the Netherlands, with the quick-release RZ 20s appearing over Crete already. The last FJ chute, the RZ 36, was mostly developed for ease of manufacture, but it did have a delta-shaped canopy. Still non-steerable.

Crete may have triggered the creation of the FG-42, but did nothing for the parachutes.
Do you have as source on any of that?
 

JAG88

Banned
Do you have as source on any of that?

Always.

51VJeoNB1ML._SX384_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
 

Deleted member 1487


Interesting, I'll try and find a copy to check out, but Schiffer books does have a reputation of being historically inaccurate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiffer_Publishing
Schiffer's military imprint has been criticized by two American historians as providing a distorted portrayal of the German armed forces during World War II.

According to Smelser and Davies, Schiffer provides a platform for authors who present an uncritical and ahistorical portrayal of the German war effort during the Soviet-German war of 1941–1945.[1]
Though to be fair there are issues with work of the two particular historians who've raised the issue.
 

JAG88

Banned
At work.

Just a thought while reading through the wonderful information about the 'Paras'.

The nascent German gov created 'Glider schools' with competitions, trophies and prizes.

The Horten bros gained much experience from such.

Could something similar be done with parachute clubs?

Cheers.

Keep in mind that when needed, the Germans simply gave mountain troops a quick parachute course and dropped them on Narvik, they expected 10% losses, but surprisingly they were very low.
 

JAG88

Banned
Interesting, I'll try and find a copy to check out, but Schiffer books does have a reputation of being historically inaccurate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiffer_Publishing

Though to be fair there are issues with work of the two particular historians who've raised the issue.

This is a book specialized on parachutes and the author is clearly a paratrooper, his statements on their use are based on photos, not documents, which unless mislabeled are better for establishing use.

The author clarifies that the RZs owe nothing to the Italian Salvator, being derived from the earlier WW1 German Heinecke parachute.
 

Deleted member 1487

This is a book specialized on parachutes and the author is clearly a paratrooper, his statements on their use are based on photos, not documents, which unless mislabeled are better for establishing use.

The author clarifies that the RZs owe nothing to the Italian Salvator, being derived from the earlier WW1 German Heinecke parachute.
Ok? So there is little written sourcing, mostly pictures and 'how to' instructions for parachutes? Doesn't sound like a great source for establishing the history of the parachutes, what the influences were for the designs, and even when and where they were first used. It also doesn't help that the author died in 1979, so the information came from the period when a lot of BS history was being passed off by smaller publishers like Schiffer, who lacked any sort of fact checking to save on overhead.
 

JAG88

Banned
Ok? So there is little written sourcing, mostly pictures and 'how to' instructions for parachutes? Doesn't sound like a great source for establishing the history of the parachutes, what the influences were for the designs, and even when and where they were first used.

You havent read the book and are already criticizing it?

It also doesn't help that the author died in 1979, so the information came from the period when a lot of BS history was being passed off by smaller publishers like Schiffer, who lacked any sort of fact checking to save on overhead.

That would be a remarkable feat for a dead man, to write a book in 2000...
 
Top