Originally Posted by SNAFU (Post 346065)

Reading the "First and the Last" and other books like the mentioned "Their most dangerous enemies", "Spitfire", "The BoB" Marce l Lullian, "Operation Eagle" Len Deigthon..., I tend to put Galland rahter in the education of the days between WWI and its remains.

I guess Galland was still in his hype of the "easy" days in Spain with "Legion-Condor,-we-just-waggel-our-wings-and-everything-is-right". He was opposing the use of radios in fighters (and I can understand the KISS/S philosophy), but for opposing the first sohisticated air defence, I guess he was not prepared nor was any of the LW stuff, hanging to the beliefs of knight duells. Even if he understood the basics of aerial warfare, he didn´t seem to be great teamplayer. And the team play was, what made the RAF and the FC strong, or not?

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 346059)

As much as I like Steinhilper's book,I still do believe he had a somehow narrow view of the war,since he spent most of it as an escaping POW. Galland had his quirks,but together with Mölders he had a great understanding of aerial warfare, millions of times better than the RLM. I often wonder how Möelders would have been like, had he not died prematurely.