[rlmorel]

Hi Jeff, my response of “I didn’t know that” was directed towards the “no-bomb” edict for the Mikasa, not the shipping losses attributed to the Stuka.

When I read that post, I had the same incredulous reaction of “That can’t be right!”

Now, I always did think the Stuka was a iconic aircraft, but I would definitely not have pegged it as having sunk more shipping than US Naval aircraft in WWII.

[jboot]

Not a problem. When one talks facts one must always be prepared to defend them. It's cool, and it is how we learn.

I don't think my source meant that the Stuka had sunk more shipping than US Naval aircraft in WWII, but that it had sunk more tons of shipping than any other type of dedicated dive bomber in service. (I highlight the notion of "dedicated" because many DB attacks were performed by aircraft that were not dedicated dive bombers, i.e. B-25s, A-20s, JU-88, etc.) As I told Jeff, I can't lay my hands on the book, so I am not quite sure how the author arrived at the conclusion.