The First and the Last. By Adolf Galland. (Methuen, 18s.)
of miracles. But most of Galland's objects of admiration are to be found on the Allied side. Although he has many disparaging things to say about the strategic efficiency of British night bombing, he is full of admiration for the resource and ingenuity of the British bombing tactics, and more especially for the activities of 100 Group, the British force which specialised in interference and intrusion. His comments on the Mosquito will doubtless bring blushes to the cheeks of Captain de Havilland and Mr. Bishop; his praise for British pilots is highly generous; but what impressed him most was the immense build-up of American bombing forces and the far-sightedness with which they were employed.
Here and there, his details appear to be at fault. -He is sometimes so anxious to show how well the German air force might haiie done had it not been hamstrung by the Ftihrer, that he is apt to exaggerate German technical achievements and to underrate those of the Allies. For example, British radar was much older than he implies; the Home Chain was almost complete before the war. Whittle's engine was not three years behind the German jct. The German Lippisch aircraft which flew in 1939 was enginia b? a rocket, and a rocket engine was not what Whittle was, after. His jet project was not much later than that of the 178 and was equally delayed by obstacles of every kind. Nor is it accurate to compare, as Galland does, the performance of obsolete marks of the Spitfire with that of the advanced marks of the ME.109. In fact, the des%elopment of the two aircraft was a technical race in which both ran more or less abreast. On the whole, however, the author's bias works the other way,round. In building up his case against German leadership, he is apt to give Germany's adversaries more than their share of prescience and efficiency. The case itself, on the other hand, appears very convincing and almost irrefutable.
M. M. POSTAN
Previous page
