PDA

View Full Version : Luftwaffe Claims Confirmation Procedure



XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 11:52 AM
Luftwaffe Claims Confirmation Proceedure

As noted on the Luftwaffe Scoring and Awards System page, "victory claims" and "points" were two seperate issues. Whenever an Abschuss (Destruction) of an enemy aircraft was claimed a strict proceedure was followed before the claim was allowed.

Following the policy of "one pilot-one kill", the investigating authorities would determine if the claiming pilot was solely responsible for the destruction of the enemy plane. Every Abschuss had to be observed by a witness: either a ground observer or the encounter, the pilot's wingman, or a Staffelmate. Witnesses were necessary unless the victor's aircraft had been fitted with a gun-camera and the destruction of the plane or the vanquished pilot's bailout had been recorded on film, if the wreckage of the downed pilot or other crew crew member had been captured by German forces. In effect: No witness or tangible evidence - no victory.

Every Abschuss had to be confirmed by the Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe or Commander in Chief of the Air Force. Jagdwaffe pilots were at all times required to note their geographical position as well as the type and number of the aircraft in enemy formations engaged. Naturally, the victor was required to log the exact time of a kill, while he maneuvered for a tactical advantage over the remaining enemy aircraft! In addition, he had to observe other actions in the air in order to be able to witness victories by his Staffelmates. Upon landing, the claimant prepared his Abschuss report for review by the immediate supervisory officer, who either endorsed or rejected the claim. If endorsed, the pilot's report to the Geschwaderstab, or Wing Staff, which, in turn, filed its report and sent both to the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM), or Air Ministry. After checking all the papers that were submitted, the official confirmation was prepared and sent to the unit. This very long bureaucratic proceedure sometimes took as long as a year! During 1944, another authority was created: the Abschusskommission, which received all reports on crashed aircraft remains found by search units. This commission checked conflicting claims between antiaircraft batteries and fighter pilots, and awarded credit for the victory to one claimant or the other. This system ensured that no more credits would be awarded than wrecks found.

The German system of confirming aerial victories was very effective in keeping human errors and weknesses within limits. Despite this, the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, or Luftwaffe High Command, considered the large victory totals during the early days of the Russian campaign as incredulous. On many occasions, they accused the Jagdgeschwader Kommodores of exaggerating the victory scores. In effect Goering was calling the frontline pilots liars. This was one of the grievances that brought about the Mutiny of the Fighters, or the Kommodores' Revolt Conference, in Berlin during January, 1945.

When a German fighter pilot scored a victory, he would call "Horrido" on the radio. This distinctive announcement of victory alerted his fellow pilots to watch for a crash or a flamer, as well as notify ground stations, which helped to confirm many victories.



Typical Luftwaffe Combat Report
(English Version)


Gottlob, Oblt.
Base of Operation, on 23.6.1941
1./JG No. 26

Combat Report

Start:
20.11 hours (8:11 PM)

Mission:
Alarmstart (Scramble)

Landed:
21.04 hours (9:04 PM)


I flew as the protection Rotte of our Staffel, as our Saffelkapitaen engaged a Spitfire. Then I saw that three other Spitfires tried to get behind the Staffel. I engaged them with my Rotte. The Spitfires went into a tight turn. I turned also and climbed above them. I saw one Spitfire flying in a northwesterly direction. The Spitfire was over land at 19, 680 feet altitude. I flew behind him at a range of about 70 feet and the pilot did not take evasive action.

I fired all guns from the rear and below. I saw a lot of smoke and parts falling from his fuselage and wings. The plane climbed and slowed and rolled over the left wing. It rolled 2 or 3 times. Then the Spitfire dived down. I dived after it and fired again. I pulled out of my dive and gained altititude. I turned into a bank and saw the Spitfire hit the water.

The pilot did not emerge from his plane.

Gottlob




Typical Luftwaffe Air Witness Report
(English Version)

Priller, Oblt.
Base of Operations, on 23.6.1941

1./JG No. 26

Air witness report of victory by Oblt. Gottlob on 23.6.1941 (8:50 PM)

Oblt. Gottlob, flying in the 2 Rotte in my Scwarm warned me that I was being attacked from the rear. I went into a left turn while climbing and saw that my protection Rotte engaged more Spitfires at a higher altitude. I saw Oblt. Gottlob, who was alone, attacking a Spitfire from the rear and shooting at it. The plane belched black smoke and dived, and we followed behind it and watched it crash into the sea 26 miles northwest of Calais.



Typical Luftwaffe Victory Claim Report

(English Version)

auf Deutsch (in German)

Copy

1./JG No.26
Base of Operations on 23.6.1941

Victory Report

1. Time (day, hour, minute) and area of victory: 23.6.1941 8:50PM Hour, 5 Km northeast of Calais
2. Name of victor: Oblt. Gottlob
3. Type of plane shot down: Spitfire
4. Nationality of victim: England
Serial No. or other markings: Cockard
5. How was it destroyed:
a) Flame with <u>dark smoke</u>, flame with light smoke (cloud of smoke)
b) <U>Single</u> part shot (which parts) Body and wings
c) Was it forced to land (which side of the Front, good or crash landing)
d) If he crossed the lines did you still attack
6. How did victim crash (must be seen by victor)
a) <u>This side</u> or other side of front
b) Did it crash or crash-land or explode: (in water)
c) If did not see crash, why not?
7. What happened to crew (<u>dead</u>, bail out or not see.)
8. Combat Report is attached.
9. Witnesses:
a) air:
b) ground:
10. How often attacked enemy plane: 1 attack
11. From which direction were the attacks: from rear
12. Range when shooting: 70 ft.
13. From which position was attack started: from rear below
14. Were the pilots wounded: -/-
15. Type of Ammunition: P.m.k.v.,Sm.K.L. Spur v. Br. Spr. Gr. M. Muni Va.m.Muni 06.
16. Ammunition used: 300 shots M.G. and 110 shots cannon
17. Type and number of weapons used: 2 MG and 2 cannon
18. Type of airplane used: Me 109E7
19. Added technical remarks: -/-
20. Was your plane hit: no.
21. Were you assisted (including Flak)

Signed



Luftwaffe Scoring System and Awards System

The major difference between the German and Western Allies' method of scoring victories was that the Germans were not allowed to share a victory. Their cardinal rule was: "One pilot-one kill." In contrast Allied pilots were allowed to share victories. If two pilots fired at an enemy and it went down, each Allied pilot received one-half of the kill. Carried to absurdity, it is conceivable that an Allied pilot could become an ace with ten or more half-victories, never scoring any victories of his own! The Luftwaffe system of awarding victories was impartial, inflexible, and far less prone to error than the American or British method. That is not to say that errors were not made, history shows that both sides during the "Battle of Britain" tended to overclaim victories on a scale of 2:1.

The German's recorded victories in one of three categories: Abschuss (Destroyed), Herausschuss (Seperation), and endgueltige Vernichtung (Final Destruction.) These three categories were used for assessing "points" towards awards. Only an enemy aircraft in an Abschuss was counted towards the pilot's overall victory tally. A pilot that brought down and enemy plane with a Endgueltige Vernichtung or Final Destruction of a damaged aircraft was not awarded credit for the "kill", however he did earn "points" for the aircraft's destruction.



Luftwaffe Points Scoring System / Aircraft-type:

Abschuss
(Destroyed)

Herausschuss
(Seperation)

Endgueltige Vernichtung
(Final Destruction)


Single-engined fighter
1
0
0

Twin-engined bomber
2
1
1/2

Four-engined bomber
3
2
1



The system recognized the fact that achieving a Herausschuss, that is, damaging a bomber enough to force it from its combat box, or "pulk" (as the Germans called it), was a more difficult task than the final destruction of a damaged straggler. The emphasis of the German fighter arm, the Jagdwaffe, was that of intercepting the Allied bombers. Dogfighting with Allied fighters was to be avoided if possible in favor of attacking the bomber stream when one was present. Decorations were awarded after the following point totals had been reached:



German Awards System Iron Cross Second Class
1
Iron Cross First Class
3
Honor Cup
10
German Cross
20
Knight's Cross
40



The point system existed for the purpose of award qualification only. "Victory claims" and "points" were two distinct statistics. The requirements for the verification of victory claims remained unchanged; only the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM) could confirm a claim, and this proceedure could take more than a year. The practice of claiming "Herausschuss" (seperations) died out in 1944 and many "seperation" claims were eventually awarded as "victories"; occassionally claims by other pilots were allowed for the "final destruction" of the same aircraft. This system led to a claims duplication by a factor of as much as two.







Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 11:52 AM
Luftwaffe Claims Confirmation Proceedure

As noted on the Luftwaffe Scoring and Awards System page, "victory claims" and "points" were two seperate issues. Whenever an Abschuss (Destruction) of an enemy aircraft was claimed a strict proceedure was followed before the claim was allowed.

Following the policy of "one pilot-one kill", the investigating authorities would determine if the claiming pilot was solely responsible for the destruction of the enemy plane. Every Abschuss had to be observed by a witness: either a ground observer or the encounter, the pilot's wingman, or a Staffelmate. Witnesses were necessary unless the victor's aircraft had been fitted with a gun-camera and the destruction of the plane or the vanquished pilot's bailout had been recorded on film, if the wreckage of the downed pilot or other crew crew member had been captured by German forces. In effect: No witness or tangible evidence - no victory.

Every Abschuss had to be confirmed by the Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe or Commander in Chief of the Air Force. Jagdwaffe pilots were at all times required to note their geographical position as well as the type and number of the aircraft in enemy formations engaged. Naturally, the victor was required to log the exact time of a kill, while he maneuvered for a tactical advantage over the remaining enemy aircraft! In addition, he had to observe other actions in the air in order to be able to witness victories by his Staffelmates. Upon landing, the claimant prepared his Abschuss report for review by the immediate supervisory officer, who either endorsed or rejected the claim. If endorsed, the pilot's report to the Geschwaderstab, or Wing Staff, which, in turn, filed its report and sent both to the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM), or Air Ministry. After checking all the papers that were submitted, the official confirmation was prepared and sent to the unit. This very long bureaucratic proceedure sometimes took as long as a year! During 1944, another authority was created: the Abschusskommission, which received all reports on crashed aircraft remains found by search units. This commission checked conflicting claims between antiaircraft batteries and fighter pilots, and awarded credit for the victory to one claimant or the other. This system ensured that no more credits would be awarded than wrecks found.

The German system of confirming aerial victories was very effective in keeping human errors and weknesses within limits. Despite this, the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, or Luftwaffe High Command, considered the large victory totals during the early days of the Russian campaign as incredulous. On many occasions, they accused the Jagdgeschwader Kommodores of exaggerating the victory scores. In effect Goering was calling the frontline pilots liars. This was one of the grievances that brought about the Mutiny of the Fighters, or the Kommodores' Revolt Conference, in Berlin during January, 1945.

When a German fighter pilot scored a victory, he would call "Horrido" on the radio. This distinctive announcement of victory alerted his fellow pilots to watch for a crash or a flamer, as well as notify ground stations, which helped to confirm many victories.



Typical Luftwaffe Combat Report
(English Version)


Gottlob, Oblt.
Base of Operation, on 23.6.1941
1./JG No. 26

Combat Report

Start:
20.11 hours (8:11 PM)

Mission:
Alarmstart (Scramble)

Landed:
21.04 hours (9:04 PM)


I flew as the protection Rotte of our Staffel, as our Saffelkapitaen engaged a Spitfire. Then I saw that three other Spitfires tried to get behind the Staffel. I engaged them with my Rotte. The Spitfires went into a tight turn. I turned also and climbed above them. I saw one Spitfire flying in a northwesterly direction. The Spitfire was over land at 19, 680 feet altitude. I flew behind him at a range of about 70 feet and the pilot did not take evasive action.

I fired all guns from the rear and below. I saw a lot of smoke and parts falling from his fuselage and wings. The plane climbed and slowed and rolled over the left wing. It rolled 2 or 3 times. Then the Spitfire dived down. I dived after it and fired again. I pulled out of my dive and gained altititude. I turned into a bank and saw the Spitfire hit the water.

The pilot did not emerge from his plane.

Gottlob




Typical Luftwaffe Air Witness Report
(English Version)

Priller, Oblt.
Base of Operations, on 23.6.1941

1./JG No. 26

Air witness report of victory by Oblt. Gottlob on 23.6.1941 (8:50 PM)

Oblt. Gottlob, flying in the 2 Rotte in my Scwarm warned me that I was being attacked from the rear. I went into a left turn while climbing and saw that my protection Rotte engaged more Spitfires at a higher altitude. I saw Oblt. Gottlob, who was alone, attacking a Spitfire from the rear and shooting at it. The plane belched black smoke and dived, and we followed behind it and watched it crash into the sea 26 miles northwest of Calais.



Typical Luftwaffe Victory Claim Report

(English Version)

auf Deutsch (in German)

Copy

1./JG No.26
Base of Operations on 23.6.1941

Victory Report

1. Time (day, hour, minute) and area of victory: 23.6.1941 8:50PM Hour, 5 Km northeast of Calais
2. Name of victor: Oblt. Gottlob
3. Type of plane shot down: Spitfire
4. Nationality of victim: England
Serial No. or other markings: Cockard
5. How was it destroyed:
a) Flame with <u>dark smoke</u>, flame with light smoke (cloud of smoke)
b) <U>Single</u> part shot (which parts) Body and wings
c) Was it forced to land (which side of the Front, good or crash landing)
d) If he crossed the lines did you still attack
6. How did victim crash (must be seen by victor)
a) <u>This side</u> or other side of front
b) Did it crash or crash-land or explode: (in water)
c) If did not see crash, why not?
7. What happened to crew (<u>dead</u>, bail out or not see.)
8. Combat Report is attached.
9. Witnesses:
a) air:
b) ground:
10. How often attacked enemy plane: 1 attack
11. From which direction were the attacks: from rear
12. Range when shooting: 70 ft.
13. From which position was attack started: from rear below
14. Were the pilots wounded: -/-
15. Type of Ammunition: P.m.k.v.,Sm.K.L. Spur v. Br. Spr. Gr. M. Muni Va.m.Muni 06.
16. Ammunition used: 300 shots M.G. and 110 shots cannon
17. Type and number of weapons used: 2 MG and 2 cannon
18. Type of airplane used: Me 109E7
19. Added technical remarks: -/-
20. Was your plane hit: no.
21. Were you assisted (including Flak)

Signed



Luftwaffe Scoring System and Awards System

The major difference between the German and Western Allies' method of scoring victories was that the Germans were not allowed to share a victory. Their cardinal rule was: "One pilot-one kill." In contrast Allied pilots were allowed to share victories. If two pilots fired at an enemy and it went down, each Allied pilot received one-half of the kill. Carried to absurdity, it is conceivable that an Allied pilot could become an ace with ten or more half-victories, never scoring any victories of his own! The Luftwaffe system of awarding victories was impartial, inflexible, and far less prone to error than the American or British method. That is not to say that errors were not made, history shows that both sides during the "Battle of Britain" tended to overclaim victories on a scale of 2:1.

The German's recorded victories in one of three categories: Abschuss (Destroyed), Herausschuss (Seperation), and endgueltige Vernichtung (Final Destruction.) These three categories were used for assessing "points" towards awards. Only an enemy aircraft in an Abschuss was counted towards the pilot's overall victory tally. A pilot that brought down and enemy plane with a Endgueltige Vernichtung or Final Destruction of a damaged aircraft was not awarded credit for the "kill", however he did earn "points" for the aircraft's destruction.



Luftwaffe Points Scoring System / Aircraft-type:

Abschuss
(Destroyed)

Herausschuss
(Seperation)

Endgueltige Vernichtung
(Final Destruction)


Single-engined fighter
1
0
0

Twin-engined bomber
2
1
1/2

Four-engined bomber
3
2
1



The system recognized the fact that achieving a Herausschuss, that is, damaging a bomber enough to force it from its combat box, or "pulk" (as the Germans called it), was a more difficult task than the final destruction of a damaged straggler. The emphasis of the German fighter arm, the Jagdwaffe, was that of intercepting the Allied bombers. Dogfighting with Allied fighters was to be avoided if possible in favor of attacking the bomber stream when one was present. Decorations were awarded after the following point totals had been reached:



German Awards System Iron Cross Second Class
1
Iron Cross First Class
3
Honor Cup
10
German Cross
20
Knight's Cross
40



The point system existed for the purpose of award qualification only. "Victory claims" and "points" were two distinct statistics. The requirements for the verification of victory claims remained unchanged; only the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM) could confirm a claim, and this proceedure could take more than a year. The practice of claiming "Herausschuss" (seperations) died out in 1944 and many "seperation" claims were eventually awarded as "victories"; occassionally claims by other pilots were allowed for the "final destruction" of the same aircraft. This system led to a claims duplication by a factor of as much as two.







Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 12:25 PM
"The Luftwaffe system of awarding victories was impartial, inflexible, and far less prone to error than the American or British method. That is not to say that errors were not made, history shows that both sides during the "Battle of Britain tended to overclaim victories on a scale of 2:1".

Interesting information. Can anyone spot the logical inconsistency here?
How can this have occurred if Luftwaffe witness requirements were so stringent? We are forced to conclude that on many occasions a German pilot was convinced he had destroyed an aircraft and his comrades gave written testimony that he had indeed done so- "no doubt about it, I saw it happen." The RLM presumably agreed, after considering the report, and confirmed the kill.
However, British records show that no kill took place.
I am not one of those who tries to maintain that Luftwaffe scores were exaggerated- there were many exceptional German pilots. However, you will find that Allied pilots' combat reports are just as scrupulously written- and just as 'impartial' (ie subject to error, no better no worse).

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 12:45 PM
You can not bob for the whole fight from luftwaffe use as example.

Bob they has higher fight as eastfront,you has problem to reconize if they crach.


British plane that was shoot down and crach, but was later repair count not as loss by the brits.

Eastfront was is easier to prove victory with witness ,

because only short way to crash(average 10min),when the wingman has not see you victory and you muss prove again.


Message Edited on 10/18/0302:54PM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 12:56 PM
Better say that way. The German system was that system that minimized errors on victory claims as good as possible. The diffrernce on the German system, of claimed kills and real kills, was much smaller than those of other countries score systems./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif And that are most historians agreed with./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



"......und mein Herz steigt wie ein Falke in die Lüfte!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif


http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/Forums/

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 12:59 PM
Good, informative post, Isegrim.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 01:11 PM
i read about that too. well one reason for the differences in numbers in BoB were that pilots reported a kill as they saw a plane go down and crashland for example. the british didn't count a plane as destroyed if they could at least use some parts of it to repair another plane. So if a german shot a spit for example and he saw it go down and crashland somewhere he reported a destroyed plane. now if the brits found that plane and could still use parts of it's engine to repair another spit this plane was NOT reported as lost by the Brits.

2 things we need in FB:
The 110 and the desert!!!
http://exn.ca/news/images/1999/04/23/19990423-Me110coloursideMAIN.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 01:17 PM
Good Post Sir. All information and no personal opinion at all. Of course in many cases we need personel opinions, but in this case it wasn't necessary..Thank You

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 04:43 PM
Excellent Post. I read this exact information in the book HORRIDO! by Toliver and Constable. After the war, many allied pilots were skeptical of the incredible Luftwaffe pilot claims, and marked them down as being exagerated or simply ubermensch propoganda designed to show the superiority of the German race. No one ever questioned allied or any other countries pilot claims as far as I know. Top Japanese and Russian aces had twice the number of kills as most western allied aces. I find the story of a B-17 side gunner that shot down at least 6 German fighters in one mission effectively becoming an ace in a day far more incredulas.

No system was perfect, but the German confirmation system was the strictest and probably the most accurate by far. It certainly didn't have the ridicules system of awarding partial kills to several individuals whether they were fighter jocks or air gunners on bombers, where three fighter pilots and the tailgunner on a bomber could each claim a quarter of a kill.

No doubt there were exagerations, wrongly confirmed kills etc. on both sides as well as great pilots. However when you fly more that 1400 combat missions, many under incredible odds, like Hartmann did, one should expect high kill tallies. Germans never lacked for targets.

Not to get too far off subject, but I wish IL2 would have included the phrase Horrido for the AI voices when German pilots shoot down another aircraft. That's probably the one feature, and the only one that I ever liked about CFS1.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man will never truly be free until the last politician has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest. "Voltaire"

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 08:43 PM
Excellent post! I knew the process was pretty lengthy but talk about red tape!

----------------------------------------
http://www.m1911.org/images/spitfire.gif


The Chinese use two brush strokes to write the word "crisis." One brush stroke stands for danger; the other opportunity. In a crisis, be aware of the danger, but recognize the opportunity

Message Edited on 10/18/0312:46PM by MackZ

XyZspineZyX
10-18-2003, 09:15 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:

- That is not to
- say that errors were not made, history shows that
- both sides during the "Battle of Britain" tended to
- overclaim victories on a scale of 2:1.
-
(and a lot of other good stuff too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )

I've recently been reading about that again, and yes, it was very often almost exactly 2:1 for both sides. However, I think that is claims of destroyed aircraft released to the public, rather than claims allowed to individual pilots.

This reminds me of something I read in Len Deighton's Fighter (was years ago I read it and I can't seem to find it these days - the wife's probably hidden it somewhere). Anyway, he noted that both sides (btw Fighter was about BoB) were very rigorous in checking pilot claims - as you detailed above.

They were far less rigorous when it came to press releases. He could understand why German public claims might be exagerated, because most of the fighting took place over England, so proof was harder to come by. But I recall he was critical of British public overclaiming, considering that the vast majority of the shot down aircraft were scattered about the English countryside, and had probably attracted an armed guard by sunset. It seems no one really bothered to count them. Instead the initial pilot claims were generally released to the public straight away before they had actually been checked, ie before the pilots concerned were actually awarded any kills.


Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 01:41 AM
Excellent post m8, btw what is a 'seperation'?

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 02:45 AM
I was reading "Wing Leader" by (British ace) Johnnie Johnson a while back. He studied the subject post-war and notes that German claims were inflated as much as 3:1, whereas the Allies were only inflated about 2:1 (I might be wrong in my figures - I'm doing this from memory). He also studied HJ Marseilles 14 in a day claim and concluded that the RAF didn't even have planes in the air during the alleged time of some of these kills.

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 04:52 AM
Oso2121 wrote:
- I was reading "Wing Leader" by (British ace) Johnnie
- Johnson a while back. He studied the subject
- post-war and notes that German claims were inflated
- as much as 3:1, whereas the Allies were only
- inflated about 2:1 (I might be wrong in my figures -
- I'm doing this from memory). He also studied HJ
- Marseilles 14 in a day claim and concluded that the
- RAF didn't even have planes in the air during the
- alleged time of some of these kills.
-
- I've heard this story before about Johnson and his book "Wing Leader". How many missions did he fly as opposed to some of the top German aces? It always seemed to me that he was just a little jealous, but that's my own personal oppinion. Although I have no doubt that both sides exagerated claims or simply made mistakes, who do you end up believing, the winner or the loser?

Johnson was skeptical about a lot of German fighter pilot scores such as Pips Priller who had 101 kills. In his book "Full Circle" the sequel to "Wing Leader" he admits that it had been possible to document from RAF records almost all of Priller's claimed victories over the RAF.

As for Marseilles one day claim (actually 17 not 14) I really don't know if I believe it myself. I also heard the story about the RAF not even having planes in the air during some of his kills. However, authors Toliver and Constable exhaustively investigated German records in the early 60's and concluded that they were very accurate and meticulous. For all we know the RAF didn't want to admit they had lost so many planes in one day to one pilot.

The U.S. Navy's top Ace David McCampbell personally shot down seven Japanese planes on June 19, 1944 and nine on October 24, 1944. During the second engagement he was accompanied by only one other plane. His wingman shot down six. Out of 40 Japanese aircraft engaged these two men shot down 15. How do you accurately confirm planes shot down over the sea? Gun cameras I suppose, but how do we know that these claims weren't exagerated also for propaganda purposes? Yet no one ever seemed to dispute these claims.

The fact remains that German pilots generally flew four to five times as many missions as Western allied pilots. They flew until they couldn't fly anymore or were killed. They didn't get rotated home after so many combat missions. Many were also shot down multiple times, a dozen or more, survived and went back up again. They were also vastly outnumbered, so they didn't have to go far to find someone to shoot down.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
-



Man will never truly be free until the last politician has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest. "Voltaire"

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 04:53 AM
Salute Isegrim

More propaganda.

The Germans overclaimed just like every single other airforce in WWII. They were better than some, and worse than others.

Anyone who wants to get a good idea of how common overclaiming was on both sides, read "Malta, The Hurricane Years 1940-1941" or "Malta, The Spitfire Year, 1942".

Both books by Christopher Shore, Brian Cull, Nicola Malizia. Day by Day reports on the fighting. Extensively researched and cross indexed from the original Luftwaffe, Reggia Aeronautica, and Royal Air Force sources.


RAF74 Buzzsaw

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:04 AM
Kampfmeister that was good post / obsevation..thanks

U.S INFANTRY 1984-1991

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:31 AM
Thanks Issy!

Another thing, the German Army advancing forward into Russia could quickly confirm victories that crashed on either side of the battlefield.

I heard a small part of a story about a LW twin~engine fighter (multi~crew) unit in France that had a bad time getting it's victories confirmed over the Atlantic. They requested a transfer for that reason. They got the transfer. That's what I heard anyway. Any info? Thanks.

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:43 AM
Xiolablu3 wrote:
- Excellent post m8, btw what is a 'seperation'?
-
-


A seperation was when a particular aircraft was forced to drop out of the mutual protection of his parent formation. These days, the term is most closely associated with the action of damaging a B-17/B-24 and thereby causing it to fall out of formation. This enabled the bomber to easily be overwhelmed as it was devoid of the firepower of the "combat box."

S.

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 06:45 AM
Kampfmeister wrote:
-- I've heard this story before about Johnson and his book "Wing Leader". How many missions did he fly as opposed to some of the top German aces? It always seemed to me that he was just a little jealous, but that's my own personal oppinion. Although I have no doubt that both sides exagerated claims or simply made mistakes, who do you end up believing, the winner or the loser?

I think that Johnson probably flew a comparable number of missions, but due to the overwhelming numerical superiority of the Allied air forces, rarely got to meet the enemy. By the sounds of it, by 1944 the Luftwaffe had moved out of range of the RAF. Personally, (not ever having met the man) I think that if anything, he was jealous of not having the opportunity to blow up more planes. The British are so politely, cheerfully, bloodthirsty.

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 07:27 AM
here's the rules for the good guys /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

USAAF World War II Aerial Victory Credits

Individual fighter pilots in single-seat aircraft earned almost all of the World War II aerial victory credits that were awarded during World War II. When two or more of its fighter pilots shared an aerial victory, the U.S. Army Air Forces (USAAF) usually divided credit among them in accordance with the British system in World War I. For example, if two fighter pilots destroyed an enemy aircraft, each of them earned half a credit (.50). There was an exception. Each member of a night fighter crew earned one full credit for each enemy aircraft his crew destroyed. Thus, two or three credits were sometimes recorded for the destruction of a single enemy airplane, and an accurate number of aircraft destroyed cannot be obtained by simply adding victory credits.
Gunners on bombers such as B-17 Flying Fortresses and B-24 Liberators destroyed enormous numbers of enemy aircraft, but the Army Air Forces quickly abandoned the attempt to systematically award aerial victory credits to them. The average bomber had ten machine guns and six gunnery positions, and the average bomber formation contained many aircraft. If a formation shot down an enemy airplane, witnesses could not determine exactly which bomber, much less which gunner, destroyed the airplane.


Because no single list of USAAF victory credits could be prepared during or at the end of World War II, many different lists, each compiled according to rules adopted in a theater or by a numbered air force, remained after the fighting ended. Air Force historians later integrated these victory records into a single list following a carefully prepared set of criteria. The United States Air Force (USAF) counted World War II aerial victory credits only for USAAF flyers, or Allied aviators who belonged to USAAF units. The action had to occur between December 7, 1941 and September 2, 1945. Only fighter pilots or members of night fighter crews were eligible. The enemy aircraft had to be airborne, heavier than air, manned, and armed. Destruction involved shooting an enemy aircraft down, causing the pilot to bail out, intentionally ramming the airplane to make it crash, or maneuvering it into the ground or water. If the enemy airplane landed, despite its degree of damage, it was not counted as destroyed.


An eyewitness in another aircraft or gun camera film confirmed aerial victory credit claims. USAAF officials then awarded credit, usually through the issuance of numbered air force general orders. An aerial victory credit board, of which there were several during the war, also documented credits. In 1957, the Department of the Air Force assigned responsibility for verifying aerial victory credits, including those of World War II, to the USAF Historical Division, predecessor of the Air Force Historical Research Agency.


During compilation of the World War II listing, historians prepared data cards for each aerial victory. Each card identified the individual who contributed to the victory, his serial number, his unit, the theater, the credit fraction or number, and the date of the credit. The cards listed documentary sources and sometimes the names of the other pilots who shared the victory. From these cards, the historians produced a series of computer printouts, and checked them against other sources, such as files from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis.
A few victory credits board reports are lost. For example, XIX Tactical Air Command Victory Credits Board Report Numbers 71, 79, 80, and 81 have not been located, although references to them exist. Discovery of these missing reports might confirm some claims that by established standards could not be counted in this listing.


Each line of the World War II list contains the following information: name, rank, serial number, service, unit, theater, number of credits, and date. Abbreviations for the categories are:
Rank: FO, flight officer; 2LT, second lieutenant; 1LT, first lieutenant; CPT, captain; MAJ, major; LTC, lieutenant colonel; COL, colonel.
Service: AAF, Army Air Forces; PHIL, Philippine Air Force; RCAF, Royal Canadian Air Force; CAF, Chinese Air Force; POL, Polish Air Force.
Unit: AF, Air Force; AIR DV, Air Division; BMR DV, Bombardment Division; BMR SQ, Bombardment Squadron; CDO SQ, Commando Squadron; CDO GP, Commando Group; FPR SQ, Fighter Squadron (Provisional); FTR CM, Fighter Command; FTR GP, Fighter Group; FTR SQ, Fighter Squadron; FTR WG, Fighter Wing; NFR SQ, Night Fighter Squadron; PRN SQ, Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron; PRV GP, Provisional Group; PRV SQ, Provisional Squadron; PUR SQ, Pursuit Squadron; RCN SQ, Reconnaissance Squadron; TRN SQ, Training Squadron; WRN SQ, Weather Reconnaissance Squadron. On May 15, 1942, the Army Air Forces redesignated virtually all of its pursuit units as fighter units. In this list, all pursuit squadrons are listed as fighter squadrons with the exception of the 3d Pursuit Squadron, which for a time coexisted with the 3d Fighter Squadron.
Theater: AL, Alaska; CBI, China-Burma-India; CP, Central Pacific; ETO, European Theater of Operations; ICE, Iceland; MTO, Mediterranean Theater of Operations; SWP, Southwest Pacific.


All Seventh Air Force credits are designated as "Central Pacific" theater although some Seventh Air Force activities took place in the Western Pacific. All Fifth and Thirteenth Air Force credits are designated as "Southwest Pacific" theater, although some of the operations of these air forces took place in the South Pacific.


The Army Air Forces awarded close to 15,800 aerial victory credits during World War II. Approximately 690 American pilots scored at least 5 aerial victory credits during the war. From Dec. 7 1941 and September 2, 1945 the USAAF scored more overall victories than both the Luftwaffe
and Italy combinded.

<CENTER>
http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p1022.jpg

<FONT COLOR="White">Ghost Skies Matches Starting soon!
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="blue">
Please visit the 310th FS & 380th BG Online @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange" http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="RED">
A proud member Squadron of Ghost Skies Forgotten Battles Tournament League.
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> 310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> Get my Squadron Insignia Files @ IL-2Skins ('http://www.il2skins.com/?action=display&skinid=4206')
<FONT COLOR="purple">Slainte Mhath- Good Health to you!

Message Edited on 10/19/0301:44AM by Copperhead310th

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 10:28 AM
Kampfmeister wrote:
-
- It certainly didn't have the
- ridicules system of awarding partial kills to
- several individuals whether they were fighter jocks
- or air gunners on bombers, where three fighter
- pilots and the tailgunner on a bomber could each
- claim a quarter of a kill.
-

Actually, that system makes a great deal of sense when Airforce leadership is tryng to encourage teamwork, over lone wolf tactics.

Consider, if you got half or three quarters points when someone downed a fighter that you had been working on for some time in Il-2, would you be nearly as mad at them for Kill Stealing?

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 01:27 PM
RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
- Salute Isegrim
-
- More propaganda.
-
- The Germans overclaimed just like every single other
- airforce in WWII. They were better than some, and
- worse than others.
RAF74 Buzzsaw

who are those with the worse system ? .
USAF colonel Raymond Toliver said about the german system,
it is more reasonably and more realistically than the US system.

but it doesn´t means the german system was perfect,
cos better than the US system means nothing .

the question is , who had a better system ?
the british , the soviets ? or may the finns ?


http://www.bayern.de/Layout/wappen.gif

Bavaria is one of the oldest European states.
It dates back to about 500 A.D., when the Roman Empire was overcome by the onslaught of Germanic tribes. According to a widespread theory, the Bavarian tribe had descended from the Romans who remained in the country, the original Celtic population and the Germanic invaders.

Bavarian History : http://www.bayern.de/Bayern/Information/geschichteE.html#kap0

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 02:25 PM
Boandlgramer wrote:
-
-
- the question is , who had a better system ?
- the british , the soviets ? or may the finns ?
-

This again is something I think I read in Fighter, where the kills confirmation process for each side is discussed. It mentions the scepticism with which some of the top German totals were regarded in the US/UK post-war. I seem to recall that Deighton concluded the German procedure was every bit as rigorous as the US/UK procedures - if not more so at times.

I think all nations had adequate systems and there's little doubt these days about the general accuracy of most totals.

Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 02:39 PM
Boandlgramer wrote:
-
- RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
-- Salute Isegrim
--
-- More propaganda.
--
-- The Germans overclaimed just like every single other
-- airforce in WWII. They were better than some, and
-- worse than others.
- RAF74 Buzzsaw
-
-
- who are those with the worse system ? .
- USAF colonel Raymond Toliver said about the german
- system,
- it is more reasonably and more realistically than
- the US system.
-
- but it doesn´t means the german system was perfect,
- cos better than the US system means nothing .
-
- the question is , who had a better system ?
- the british , the soviets ? or may the finns ?


For what I know the Soviet system was worst, then western allies(not counting in airgunners whose claims are something else), and Germans had most accurate system of big airpowers. Finnish claims per kills relation is about 1:1, ie. in average no overclaiming.


-jippo



Message Edited on 10/19/0301:40PM by Jippo01

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 04:17 PM
For a very different system of claims, here is what Henry Sakaida has to say about the Japanese Army Air Force, taken from 'Japanese Army air Force Aces 1937-45'. He says very much the same thing about the Imperial Japanese Navy in the companion volume:

"The Japanese adopted many of the flight concepts from the West (Europe in particular). However, in Japanese culture, the trait of individuality which was so valued by the West, was shunned. Since early school days, Japanese children are taught to work and sacrifice for the benefit of the group. In military training both before and during World War 2, it was common for the drill instructor to line up his trainees and strike them for the shortcomings of a single individual in the group. In war, teamwork was critical, and there could be no prima donnas. When an individual accomplished a distinguished feat, the group received the honours.

As with most fighter pilots, Japanese aviators did keep personal scores, and for morale purposes they would paint victory markings on the aircraft. Since pilots flew aircraft on an availability basis, and most did not have their own personal mount, the number of 'kill' markings on the aircraft could be deceptive. It was the fighter rather than the pilot which recorded the victory. There was no established rule for determining a victory. Many pilots would claim the destruction of an enemy aircraft which was seen to smoke in the air, believing that it would never reach home. The Japanese did have gun cameras, but they were only used for training purposes. The claim was taken on face value and added to the group's score. Since there were usually no decorations, promotions or publicity based solely upon claims, there was no motive to inflate totals.

The claims by JAAF pilots cannot be taken at face value, however. The inflated totals resulted from both confusion in combat and from a very liberal method of scorekeeping. During the war, some JAAF pilots received official recognition from the government for their victories (taken from individual citations), but this does not imply that these victories were 'confirmed'. Postwar Japanese historians have recognised the problem of inflated totals, and tried to compensate by systematically reducing the scores by percentages. A case in point would be Maj Yasuhiiko Kuroe. He claimed 51 victories in his postwar memoir, but Japanese historians have 'corrected' his claim down to 30. Maj Iwori Sakai has nine recognised victories, although he claimed 15."

edit - spelling

-------------------------------------
When the (German) rationalisation drive began it was found that the armed forces had greatly inflated the demand for raw materials by exaggerating the quantity needed for each unit of production. The large firms held substantial stocks of scarce materials, particularly aluminium, which had been allocated on the basis of 16,000 lb for each aircraft, regardless of the fact that a fighter consumed only a quarter of this quantity. Aircraft firms had so much ingot aluminium in store that they used it to produce non-essential goods - ladder, greenhouses, even mosquito nets.

Professor R.J. Overy, 'War and Economy in the Third Reich'

Message Edited on 10/19/0303:22PM by Mr_Nakajima

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:54 PM
Some years ago I made a Luftwaffe oriented webpage. At the time my main interest was flying Warbirds and the page was made for my squadron buddies of JG 53 and fellow Warbirds players.

Enthusiasm and expediency made for a rush process and one of the pages was similar to Isemgrim's writings here above.

Its only expedience which stops me from deleting the whole site!

This whole discussion has several layers.

1. The paper system
2. The practical application
3. The campaign in question
4. The unit in question

5. The goal of the discussion

The latter is most interesting in this type of forum, since many join in with their own agenda. Its not about comparing systems or their validity, but to either debunk a "myth" or defend the honor of "fill in name of hero / air force".

When you are objective it is clear that a system on paper is not the same as a system in practice. Counting wrecks can only be done when the fighting is done over friendly territory, even the sea is not a friendly witness.

The Soviet system, at least on paper was at least as strict as that of the Luftwaffe. I have little doubt that the French, British and American systems were, again on paper, just as strict, although they would differ in detail and of course in practice

The only issue that does come up is partial claims. which the Luftwaffe did not recognize.

Although less of a problem in WW2, the RAF had the habit of counting each share as a full kill in WW1, thus the shared shooting down a single fighter could be devided by a whole squadron and be numbered as a full victory in the pilot's final tally. For those who do not believe me, I have to point to "Above the Trenches".

There are some people who think that after the war the USAF studied each and every kill, but that is a falacy, however it did make a clear distinction between air to air victories and "ground kills".

What greatly inflates the US claim total are the bomber claims, because the fighter claims are fairly close to reality.

The Luftwaffe, at least in the West, seems to have suffered greatly from their overclaiming against Britain, however one tends to forget that it was difficult or even next impossible to verify the claims, just as it would be for the Anglo-American fighter pilots for the next 4 years or so while fighting over German occupied territory.

Bottom line, in the 60 years that have gone by after world war two, there hasn't been one researcher or historian that found this smoking gun, to debunk the Luftwaffe once and for all. Far from it, it appears that overal their claims, with fluctuations, were fairly accurate, or at worst not different compared to their adversaries. Even when looking at such massive clashes as the opening of Barbarossa.

This is a double edged sword and the chances of backfiring are high.

Even with Marseille it isn't as simple.

According to Christopher Shores the RAF records for that particular period (around Sept. 1st 1943) are not complete because of the heavy fighting. However as for Johnny E. Johnson's claim. There were 26 Luftwaffe claims (17 by Marseille) against at least 20 lost RAF fighters, not counting damaged aircraft (Cat 1, 2). Did Marseille overclaim, probably, but not with intent.

Shores is an objective historian, Johnny Johnson isn't /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:54 PM
I always think this is an interesting discussion. If I may pose a question then....

Going on the LW Kill System of :

Abschuss
Herrausschuss
Entgültige Vernichtung

Is Erich Hartmann a 352 "Kill" Ace or a 352 "Victories/Points" Ace? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 05:57 PM
JG5_UnKle wrote:
- I always think this is an interesting discussion. If
- I may pose a question then....
-
- Going on the LW Kill System of :
-
- Abschuss
- Herrausschuss
- Entgültige Vernichtung
-
- Is Erich Hartmann a 352 "Kill" Ace or a 352
- "Victories/Points" Ace? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The "award system" did not affect the Eastern Front, but was an attempt to give pilots in the West a shot at some of the higher award and of course by doing so boosting their morale.

But the short answer would be no, he's not a 352 point ace.

Did he really shoot down 352 a/c, that is an entirely different matter.

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 06:15 PM
Anyone seen that one of the Grafs had his claims 'fudged'? This came out just recently (in the last year or two).


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 06:40 PM
Do you mean Hermann Graf?

If so, you should get:

Graf & Grislawski
A Pair of Aces
Christer Bergstr¶m & Vlad Antipov
Eagle Editions
2003
0-9721060-4-9

The title incorporates the latest findings from the Soviet side of the coin. At least if this is the pilot you mean, since "one of the Grafs" is not too clear.

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 06:49 PM
rhorta, all I can remember it was one of the Graf brothers and he had a 'fair' number of claims.

Do you have any more info?


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 07:01 PM
Yep, I figured it wasn't points (based on the eastern front - more bomber formations on Western Front etc) but I know a lot of people around here don't beleive that Hartmann managed 352 kills /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I remember a discussion a little while ago suggesting that Hartmann was more like a 150 kill ace because of the points system - which was bogus IMHO.

S!

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 07:24 PM
I remember Oleg posting a piece about a year ago which quoted Wolfgang Spate (famous Luftwaffe test pilot). Spate had a brief period on operational flying and he was of the view that many of the Luftwaffe's higher scoring aces had inflated their claims in a quest for honours. As far as I know he is the only German pilot to have broken ranks in this way and made that assertion.
He gave a few examples of cases where he was 100% certain that particular pilots had filed false victory claims- either because they had admitted as much or because it was well- known on that unit that so- and- so did this. He refused to name names but there was a long passage describing how, on the Russian front, a particular ace would augment his score. He would lead his unit on a free hunt and if nothing was found would disappear on the return flight. He would return to base sometime after everone else and claim that he had shot down "another two Pe2s"- unfortunately, with no witnesses. These would be added to his score at unit level.
At this time, the last 12 months of the war, it was obvious Germany was going to lose and the RLM was taking 12 months to confirm victories. German pilots therefore didn't have to worry about their victory claims being investigated- it would all be over long before anyone could check. All German scoring during the last 12 months should therefore be taken with a pinch of salt.
In the case of the unnamed ace, a couple of same- rank officers got so fed up with his scam that they confronted him. He broke down and admitted that he had lied about shooting down aircraft just before he landed (he had done this several times).
He gave as his reason the fact that he had not scored legitimately for 3 months and felt under pressure to do so as he was leading men into battle. The matter was hushed- up on the unit and it went no further.
If this is all fact we are left to speculate as to who the ace might have been. Someone (a poster on this board IIRC) unkindly suggested Hermann Graf- I can't remember why- but it could just as well have been one of the others.

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 08:06 PM
BerkshireHunt wrote:
- I remember Oleg posting a piece about a year ago
- which quoted Wolfgang Spate (famous Luftwaffe test
- pilot). Spate had a brief period on operational
- flying and he was of the view that many of the
- Luftwaffe's higher scoring aces had inflated their
- claims in a quest for honours. As far as I know he
- is the only German pilot to have broken ranks in
- this way and made that assertion.
- He gave a few examples of cases where he was 100%
- certain that particular pilots had filed false
- victory claims- either because they had admitted as
- much or because it was well- known on that unit that
- so- and- so did this. He refused to name names but
- there was a long passage describing how, on the
- Russian front, a particular ace would augment his
- score. He would lead his unit on a free hunt and if
- nothing was found would disappear on the return
- flight. He would return to base sometime after
- everone else and claim that he had shot down
- "another two Pe2s"- unfortunately, with no
- witnesses. These would be added to his score at unit
- level.

Problem with this remains that no names are mentioned and not even units. Also it is just another case of pointing a finger at a "german ace", silently accusing the whole Jagdwaffe and finally not trying to look at the other side of the coin, as if such behaviour would of course ONLY occur on the German side.

A number of names however are regularly mentioned. For instance, Rudorffer and Graf are both frequent candidates, but even Marseille. Of course that whole last 12 month thing is clearly pointing towards pilots like Hartmann.

IMHO, a real smoking gun would be a pilot's name and for more than just a single mission, but systematic overclaiming that is without a doubt clearly done with intent.

It would be hard for the East, but relatively easy for the West, as we have plenty of data for much of the war. It wouldn't even be beyond looking at a title or two (for instance Foreman's Fighter Command Diaries, Franks Fighter Command Losses and a combination of JG 26 War diaries, by Caldwell and/or a number of Prien's unit histories - however different sets of books would do just as well, depending on campaign or period). The aim would be to acquire an overal picture of claims versus actual losses (on both sides).

Although I do not remember Sp¤te's scepticism, he wasn't alone, even Goering distrusted the high claims, although he could not proof otherwise he certainly tried to.

There was a certain jealousy between Western and Eastern front pilots and even today the Western front pilots will often belittle the war in the East (Bergstr¶m wrote a good piece on the relative difficulties of the fronts and I agree with his assertion that the East wasn't a cakewalk by far).

BTW, what about Sp¤te's own 99 claims, ironically "only" 8 in the West, or 9 if you count the Balkans?

I think before one starts discussing this subject one must show his cards, do you come in objectively and open to all avenues, or do you start with the assumption that the Jagdwaffe overclaimed WITH CLEAR INTENT and/or statistically significantly higher than their opposition?

Personally I haven't seen any proof that shows that this is the case, especially considering the intent and statistics, but I am openminded.

Most comments here are either of the "inflated" or "hero worship" kind.

EXAMPLES is what we need, not "rumors" and vague names.

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

Message Edited on 10/19/03 10:21PM by rhorta

Message Edited on 10/19/0310:23PM by rhorta

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 09:48 PM
And relative difference between allied and German pilots will only grow if the kill/claim ratio is brought up!

Germans were still twice as accurate as Soviets, and also significantly more accurate than western allies too. So what if every fourth or fifth kill of highest ranking Soviet ace was real? How many kills did he really have?


-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-19-2003, 10:05 PM
Kampfmeister wrote:
- --
-- I've heard this story before about Johnson and his book "Wing Leader". How many missions did he fly as opposed to some of the top German aces?

"By the end of the Second World War Johnson had flown in over 1,000 combat missions. He holds the remarkable record of never being shot down and on only one occasion was his Spitfire damaged by the enemy. Johnson has been credited with 38 kills."

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 12:39 AM
My memory was pretty good- but not entirely correct. I just found a hard copy of the report Oleg posted a year ago stuck in amongst some books. Spate writes:

"I know of three instances in the last year of the war alone where there was not a grain of truth to the fighter pilot's victory claims. One of these was a well- known man with over 200 recognised kills. He had come up through the NCO ranks and received a commmission because of his outstanding achievements. His last position was as commander of a fighter group. One day, his squadron commander reported to the wing commander that the group commander had led a mission during which there had been no contact with the enemy. Ten minutes before landing, he had disappeared from the formation and after landing reported that he had shot down three four- engined bombers. Not a single four- engined aircraft had been reported crashing in the area in question. The whole thing stunk! Both the wing commander and I questioned the pilot, who in the meantime had been ordered to bed rest because of a concussion. He finally broke down and freely admitted that he had completely made up the three kills. Why? He had led the group for many weeks and had not registered any victories. He had fabricated the three victories in an act of desperation. "Now I can understand," I couldn't resist observing, "how your string of victories came about." They were even heralded in official military reports. We reported our findings to the division commander. He graciously covered up the incident in an act of mercy. Regardless of what we did, the war was going to be over soon...
The other two cases were, strangely enough, also former enlisted men who, because of demonstrated bravery, had been commissioned as officers and had been assigned as unit commanders. Moreover, I know of someone who reported two kills in the Me163 after the war, even though it could be proven that he had not shot them down.
In no way do I want to diminish the achievements of our comrades throughout the enlisted ranks or the non- commissioned officers. On the contrary, I discovered that they had more guts and foolhardiness, more unselfishness and more camaraderie than I normally experienced with officers in general."

It should be easy enough to work out who the 200 kill man was- what unit did Spate serve in on the Russian front?

The only other observation I would make is that Spate seems to be implying that it was perfectly possible for a Luftwaffe pilot to fake victories and get them ratified- that is, he seems to be questioning the 200 kill total, not all of which can have been scored in the last 12 months of the war.
As a wartime pilot himself he is better qualified to make this judgement than most of us but it would only be feasible if the meticulous procedure outlined by Toliver and Constable was not always strictly adhered to.
It's possible to imagine a situation where two pilots get together and agree to back- up each other's victory claims- the object being to gain promotion rapidly and with it more money. How much did a jagdflieger receive for winning the Ritterkreuz and how much for subsequent grades, oakleaves etc? I believe it was a fair amount. Of course, the same ruse could have been used by Allied pilots but I'm not sure that their promotion was linked to kill scores as closely as it was in the Luftwaffe...
What I can't understand is: how could it ever be possible to falsify a victory in the Luftwaffe if it was always necessary to pinpoint a crash site? Spate is suggesting that falsification did indeed occur; therefore, it cannot always have been necessary or required- even by the RLM.

I am not trying to build a case for the German totals in Russia being exaggerated- there is no doubt that there was a great disparity in experience, training and tactics between the two sides and I believe that, generally, the scores are representative of the gulf in capability. But I think it is naive to hold up the German procedure as a paragon of virtue- life teaches us that individuals will always find a way to cheat the system if there is something to be gained. And in the case of Germany's jagdflieger there was a great deal- rank, money and film- star status. Read more about Marseille and Graf for evidence of the latter.

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 01:03 AM
Just had a look in the Obermaier book- seems Spate spent most of his time with IV JG54 in Russia. Which rules out Hermann Graf as being the '200 kill' man. Only two candidates seem to remain- Erich Rudorffer and Otto Kittel.
I'm pretty sure Kittel (267 victories) was an NCO pilot...

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 02:08 AM
rhorta wrote:
- Problem with this remains that no names are
- mentioned and not even units. Also it is just
- another case of pointing a finger at a "german ace",
- silently accusing the whole Jagdwaffe and finally
- not trying to look at the other side of the coin, as
- if such behaviour would of course ONLY occur on the
- German side.
[snip]
- EXAMPLES is what we need, not "rumors" and vague
- names.


That's one thing that's pretty hard to come by. Most of the eyewitnesses to such accounts have no desire to malign a fellow pilot some 60 years after the fact (if indeed they are still alive). Who wants to slander the name of a fellow vetran for no apparent gain? I do wonder how many false kills and other examples of bad behaviour were hushed up to maintain morale.

Just to be fair, WC Dizzy Allen recounted a story of catching an RAF pilot red-handed as he fired his guns into the sea (and later made false claims). Allen doubts that very many RAF pilots did this - but noted that they could have easily gotten away with it.

There's another story by Canadian spitfire pilot Hedley Everard who had just finished off an fw190 over Italy when he was attacked by a "famous" American p-47 ace. The ace claimed Everard's Spit as a ME-109 and then claimed the 190 to boot! Everard was asked to let the matter go, and only did so after realizing how hard it was for his superiors (both experienced pilots) to make such a request.

Here's a question though: I thought that shared claims did not count towards a Brit pilots's total "kills." I've seen Brit kills listed like this: 6-2-3 (which I think would be 6 single kills, 2 shared and 3 damaged) Am I correct in this?

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:46 AM
Zyzbot wrote:
-
-- "By the end of the Second World War Johnson had
- flown in over 1,000 combat missions. He holds the
- remarkable record of never being shot down and on
- only one occasion was his Spitfire damaged by the
- enemy. Johnson has been credited with 38 kills."
-
-Thank you Zyzbot for the information. I did not set out to offend any Brits or milign Jonny Johnson in any way/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Truly a remarkable combat record. The Germans as I understand it considered the British pilots to be their most respected advesaries followed by the Americans and the Russians.

But it does ( and don't take this the wrong way) bring up some more questions. Where did he fly most of these missions? Were they over England, France, or Germany? Did he not come across enough Germans to shoot down after the BoB? The reason I ask this is that during a one year time frame (43-44) Robert Johnson of the USAAF shot down 28 Germans while flying a mere 91 missions. Better than most German pilots ever did. This of course brings across another point. Had Robert Johnson flown as many missions as Hartmann, what kind of score would he have achieved? Had he maintained this pace, which of course would have been difficult, would he have shot down nearly 400 planes? Would people then say that he had falsified his claims?

To all others who have and will continue to contribute to this thread, my sincerest appreciation for all the information I have learned/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Copperhead310th I'm still trying to obsorb your post, but I'm a little confused about your last statement. You wrote that the USAAF achieved more victories than the LW and Italians combined. As I seem to remember the LW had 5000+ aces which acounts to at least 25K aircraft. I believe the top 100 acounted for some 5K aircraft alone.

One last rambling. I know I shouldn't take it personally, but it always peeves me that whenever the subject of falsified arial victory claims comes up, it almost always falls on the shoulders of the LW pilots and no one else/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Man will never truly be free until the last politician has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest. "Voltaire"

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:16 AM
Salute

Posters have mentioned Marseille's famous 17 victory day on September 1st 1942.

So I thought I would present a detailed analysis of one of the combats which Marseille was involved in that day.

Between 17:30 and 18:00 hours of that day, the Ju-88's of III/KG77, as well as a few from LG-1 flew a mission to attack British ground troops in the El Alamein area.

The Ju's were assigned escorting 109's. I/JG27 was assigned close escort, and II/JG27 as loose escort. III/JG27 was sent on a Frei-Jagd ahead of the two other Gruppes.

For their part, the RAF scrambled 3 Squadrons to intercept. Spitfire V's of No. 145 Squadron, Hurricane II's of No 33 Squadron, and Hurricane II's of No. 213 Squadron.

The aircraft of No. 33, and No. 145 Squadron encountered the 109's of III/JG27, an inconclusive combat developed, II/JG27 entered the fray, and eventually all aircraft dispersed with no losses on any side.

The Ju88's, with I/JG27 escorting, continued on. There were eleven 109 pilots present, including Marseille, Lt. H.A. Stahlschmidt, Lt. Lieres and Obfw. Steinhausen, four high scoring Aces.

On an interception course, were 9 pilots of No. 213 Squadron. These were split into three sections, two high cover with 6 pilots, those being F.L. Waite, (British) F.O. Wollaston and Potter, (both Australian) F.O. Avis, (a RCAF American) Flt Sgt Ross, (a Canadian) and Sgt Garrod. (British) The low section had 3 pilots, those being F.L. Green, (British) and F.O.'s Houle and Steele. (both Canadians) This RAF Squadron was still operating with the "Vic" formation of 3 pilots per section.

The six pilots of the No. 213 Squadron high section were attacked by the eleven pilots of I/JG27, the three No 213 Squadron pilots of the low section were able to attack the Ju88's of III/KG77 unmolested, and forced them to jettison their bombs and abort the attack.

German Claims


The following claims were posted by the Germans:

Marseille: 5 aircraft shot down, all accepted, victories number 117 to 121.

Stahlschmidt: 2 aircraft shot down, all accepted, victories number 49 and 50.

Lieres: 1 aircraft shot down, accepted, 18th victory.

Steinhausen: 1 aircraft shot down, accepted, 37th victory.

Total claims 9 aircraft shot down.


British Losses


No 213 Squadron admitted the following losses:

Wollaston: Killed

Potter: Killed

Avis: Crashlanded, aircraft destroyed.

Ross: Crashlanded, aircraft destroyed.

Garrod: Bailed out, aircraft destroyed.


In addition, a single Photo Recon Hurricane of No. 208 Squadron which unfortunately found itself in the wrong place, was also lost. Pilot survived. This plane was likely shot down by Lieres, since he specifies encountering a lone Hurricane away from the main combat.

From the above, we can see that excluding Lieres victory over the Photo Recon Hurricane, the remaining Germans claimed 8 victories over 5 actual losses. That is an overclaim of 1.6 to 1.

As to who actually shot down aircraft and who did not, is impossible to determine.

In combat, confusion is the norm, and it is likely that the various pilots took shots at the same aircraft and probably quite honestly thought they had been responsible for downing it.


How about the British side?


British Claims:

F.L. Waite: 1 Ju-88 destroyed, accepted.

F.O. Houle: 1 Ju-88 destroyed, accepted. (this victory was confirmed by several sources and is the most solid)

F.Sgt. Avis: 1 Ju-88 destroyed, accepted. (this claim was most questionable, since pilot was a rookie)

F.L. Steele: 1 Ju-88 damaged, accepted.


German Losses:


Obfw Moritz's Ju-88 32+KR of III/KG77 was shot down.

In addition, members of III/KG77 reported seeing another Ju-88 crew bailing out, although the records for LG-1 cannot be found to confirm this loss.

In addition several other Ju-88's of III/KG77 landed with battle damage.


So we see that there was an overclaim on the part of the British of at least 1.5 to 1.

Again, I doubt that the RAF pilots were deliberately overclaiming, it is likely once again, that in the confusion, several made attacks on the same plane, and seeing it crash, both claimed.


I have included this example to show a bit of the reality of combat and claiming. There are no messages appearing in print in front of a real pilot saying "Enemy Aircraft Destroyed", or "So in So, shot down So in So". Imagine FB without those little text announcements. There would be a lot of confusion and overclaiming too. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


Cheers RAF74 Buzzsaw

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:26 AM
It should be easy enough to work out who the 200 kill man was- what unit did Spate serve in on the Russian front?

That would have to be Erich Rudorffer and he was seen with a bit of sceptism by the fighter pilots themselves. He was rumored to have "produced" a lot of fake kills with the help of his buddies in Northern Africa and if there is one thing that spreads in armed Forces it's latrine rumors.

Buzzaw what is your intention here? I cannot help but think that you need to prove that the LW didn't shoot down more planes than other Air Forces just to boost your ego. And about overclaiming:

The RAF claimed to have shot down 731 german fighters in the last 6 months of 1941 while loosing 411 own fighters. In reality the Luftflotte 2 with JG 2 and 26 lost exactly 103 fighters.

Intentional? Hardly. But I wonder which number made it into the official documents.

---------------------------
http://home.t-online.de/home/340045970094-0001/lwskins_banner_gross.jpg (http://www.lwskins.de.vu)
Historical Skins for Luftwaffe-Fighters

Message Edited on 10/20/0305:28AM by csThor

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:29 AM
RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
There are no
- messages appearing in print in front of a real pilot
- saying "Enemy Aircraft Destroyed", or "So in So,
- shot down So in So". Imagine FB without those
- little text announcements. There would be a lot of
- confusion and overclaiming too.

You mean like the way an AI pilot will dispatch the bomber whose engines you've just set on fire and claim it? BTW, I kind of liked Jane's WW2 fighters - you could get half credits - and also see how the rest of your squadron did (kills and losses).

Cool post btw.

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:32 AM
Salute

By the way, my source for the information posted above is:

"Group Commander A.U. "Bert" Houle", a biography of a well respected RCAF Group Commander who flew Hurricanes and Spitfires over the Desert and Italy.

http://www.rquirk.com/lavigne/hbcover.jpg


The author of this book is Michel Lavigne, a man who has published a number of very detailed and well researched books on WWII Aerial Combat.

These include "Kittyhawks over the Sands"

http://www.rquirk.com/lavigne/khcover1.JPG


He has recently published "Hurricanes over the Sands" and is currently beginning a detailed day by day history of the Battle of Britain.

I am happy to count him as a friend.

His books can be ordered directly from him at:

lavigne.michel@sympatico.ca


RAF74 Buzzsaw





Message Edited on 10/20/0304:33AM by RAF74BuzzsawXO

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 06:00 AM
RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
- Salute
-
- Posters have mentioned Marseille's famous 17 victory
- day on September 1st 1942.
-
- So I thought I would present a detailed analysis of
- one of the combats which Marseille was involved in
- that day.

Good post Buzzsaw, the kind I was hoping for.

Concise claim vs loss list for a single encounter, which shows the overclaim ratios, in this case 1.5 and 1.6 for the RAF and Luftwaffe respectively. As a single encounter it is not statistically significant, but still it serves its purpose.

OTOH, when talking of "big guns" like Marseille, do not forget that overall the whole unit worked as a team to get the "star player" his kills. This is a well known phenomena in the Jagdwaffe and should to some extend explain the scores of a number of Experten, notably Marseille.

As for the 200+ ace, as mentioned earlier the name Rudorffer pops up frequently and that's not something new.

Was he a bad apple? His claims in the West shouldn't be too hard to verify to some extend using a number of publications, at worst a couple of visits to the PRO.

Luckily because of the work of a few historians it becomes easier as time goes by to tie up a number of loose ends. Is it definitive, no, but it goes a long way.

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 08:08 AM
Little bit related:

"Tuominen and two Sergeants were on duty, playing cards, as the Flight Commander, Lt. Mikko Linkola joined them. Soon the phone rang and the pilots received a scramble order. As often before, Tuominen disappeared after start, but returned with others about 20 minutes later.

Back in the hut the men picked up their cards and continued the game in silence. Tuominen broke the silence and said in an offhand way that he had "squirted" at Miikkulainen one or two planes. "Uh huh", the lieutenant commented and the game continued in silence until the phone rang again. Linkola answered, listened and turned to stare at Tuominen.

Then the Lieutenant rang off and asked:
- Oippa, what was it that you just said?
- I said I squirted a couple of planes. Then he volunteered:
- One Tchaika and one I-15, probably.
The lieutenant said that the "observer girls" in Miikkulainen had seen how a "Fiiu" pursued a Tchaika in a cloud, then they had heard shooting and soon pieces of aircraft fell out of the bottom of the cloud. The Fiat emerged from the cloud alone, the I-15 fell a moment later... The squadron leader, Major Harju-Jeanty had complained once:
- Damn that Oippa. Always he lies, and when you for once check you find that he has told the truth..."


From here:
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/tuomin/tuomin.htm

Couple of Finnish combat reports can be found here:
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/sarvan/sarvan.htm



-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 08:46 AM
Salute /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif RAF74BuzzsawXO
i just wondering , if your friend ,Michel Lavigne, was ever in a german archiv ?
or can he do it from his desktop only ?

what the truth need is a independent autor, like Christer Bergstr¶m. he did / does an outstanding work with BC& RS series.

http://www.bayern.de/Layout/wappen.gif

Bavaria is one of the oldest European states.
It dates back to about 500 A.D., when the Roman Empire was overcome by the onslaught of Germanic tribes. According to a widespread theory, the Bavarian tribe had descended from the Romans who remained in the country, the original Celtic population and the Germanic invaders.

Bavarian History : http://www.bayern.de/Bayern/Information/geschichteE.html#kap0

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 08:59 AM
Finnish policy for granting kills was strict on the matter, if there werent witnesses or a wreck found then there wasn't a kill either. Too bad for example Juutilainen didn't have a guncam fitted on his patrols of the fin gulf... He killed a bunch of ruskies after long pursuits and often alone so it wouldhave made a nice addition to his 94 confirmed kills /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BTW Juutilainen shot down a p-38 once when vvs was testing it.. I want p-38 in FB (in my brewsters sights..)

On another occasion he shot down 6 russian planes in just one mission

-pozzu

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 01:54 PM
Kampfmeister wrote:
--
- But it does ( and don't take this the wrong way)
- bring up some more questions. Where did he fly most
- of these missions? Were they over England, France,
- or Germany? Did he not come across enough Germans to
- shoot down after the BoB?... -



Johnson flew over England, France and Germany. I am sure that he was limited by the fact that the Spitfire had less range than the American escort fighters and I seem to recall that he didn't fly many escort missions anyway. I recall that he flew four missions over the beaches on D-day but never saw a German fighter that day.He finished the war leading a Spitfire XIV unit and flew over Berlin at least once.

Another interesting fact is that all of his 38 kills were against single engine fighters.

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 02:00 PM
TurboPorsas wrote:
- Finnish policy for granting kills was strict on the
- matter, if there werent witnesses or a wreck found
- then there wasn't a kill either. Too bad for example
- Juutilainen didn't have a guncam fitted on his
- patrols of the fin gulf... He killed a bunch of
- ruskies after long pursuits and often alone so it
- wouldhave made a nice addition to his 94 confirmed
- kills /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- BTW Juutilainen shot down a p-38 once when vvs was
- testing it.. I want p-38 in FB (in my brewsters
- sights..)
-
- On another occasion he shot down 6 russian planes in
- just one mission
-
--pozzu
-
-
-OT a bit: what plane did Juutilainen mostly fly? Got a decent web site you can recommend that has some info on this part of the war? You never really see much on the Finns, though they sound like they were excellent pilots.
-
-



http://palpatine.chez.tiscali.fr/Dilbert/Fist-Of-Death.gif


Alice for moderator!

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 02:26 PM
I think Col. Raymond Toliver and Trevor J. Constables {Authors of Horrido} did the most exhaustive studies of these claims beginning 25 years after the war and contiuing for many years. They had access to records of all types.
Col. Toliver himself was a former fighter pilot. Both men were highly skeptical of the German claims.
After very labored and exhaustive research they became convinced that the German claims were true, and both became lifelong admirers of the "Inner Spirit of the luftwaffe.

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 02:47 PM
BerkshireHunt wrote:
- I remember Oleg posting a piece about a year ago
- which quoted Wolfgang Spate (famous Luftwaffe test
- pilot). Spate had a brief period on operational
- flying and he was of the view that many of the
- Luftwaffe's higher scoring aces had inflated their
- claims in a quest for honours. As far as I know he
- is the only German pilot to have broken ranks in
- this way and made that assertion.
- He gave a few examples of cases where he was 100%
- certain that particular pilots had filed false
- victory claims- either because they had admitted as
- much or because it was well- known on that unit that
- so- and- so did this. He refused to name names but
- there was a long passage describing how, on the
- Russian front, a particular ace would augment his
- score. He would lead his unit on a free hunt and if
- nothing was found would disappear on the return
- flight. He would return to base sometime after
- everone else and claim that he had shot down
- "another two Pe2s"- unfortunately, with no
- witnesses. These would be added to his score at unit
- level.
-
- At this time, the last 12 months of the war, it was
- obvious Germany was going to lose and the RLM was
- taking 12 months to confirm victories. German pilots
- therefore didn't have to worry about their victory
- claims being investigated- it would all be over long
- before anyone could check. All German scoring during
- the last 12 months should therefore be taken with a
- pinch of salt.
- In the case of the unnamed ace, a couple of same-
- rank officers got so fed up with his scam that they
- confronted him. He broke down and admitted that he
- had lied about shooting down aircraft just before he
- landed (he had done this several times).
-
- He gave as his reason the fact that he had not
- scored legitimately for 3 months and felt under
- pressure to do so as he was leading men into battle.
- The matter was hushed- up on the unit and it went no
- further.
- If this is all fact we are left to speculate as to
- who the ace might have been. Someone (a poster on
- this board IIRC) unkindly suggested Hermann Graf- I
- can't remember why- but it could just as well have
- been one of the others.
-
-
I'm pretty much convinced that this is true. I read another article. I don't remember name of the author and pilots, that's why I can't present it as a fact. So, according to this article, many German pilots, who fought on the Western front and didn't score a single kill for a years, in the end of the war, than Germans were screwed up and needed reinforcement, were transferred to the Eastern front and started to bring a kills literally from every mission. And it was in situation of total VVS air superiority (i remind you it was the end of the war, not the beginning).

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 02:54 PM
JG5_UnKle wrote:
- Yep, I figured it wasn't points (based on the
- eastern front - more bomber formations on Western
- Front etc) but I know a lot of people around here
- don't beleive that Hartmann managed 352 kills

- I remember a discussion a little while ago
- suggesting that Hartmann was more like a 150 kill
- ace because of the points system - which was bogus
- IMHO.

Yes, that shows excactly how well those people are informed./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif They even don't know the difference of the Luftwaffew point system and real kill system./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif That makes very little sense to explain that difference to such unbelievers./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



"......und mein Herz steigt wie ein Falke in die Lüfte!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif


http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/Forums/

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:02 PM
Jippo01 wrote:
-
- Germans were still twice as accurate as Soviets, and
- also significantly more accurate than western allies
- too. So what if every fourth or fifth kill of
- highest ranking Soviet ace was real? How many kills
- did he really have?


Where did you get this. Do you know soviet system of score confirmation? I dont think so.

I remind you what kind of country it was in 1940-s. Total suspicion to everybody. People were punished for their errors and for their achievements. Tupolev, one of the greatest a/c designer was working on his projects in the prison.

The system was pretty much the same as german. But there were some differences.

1. Confirmation of your wingman is not a prove.
In fact any confirmation of the pilot from the same mission was not good alone.

2. To sources were needed to confirm the kill - from ground troops, which had to find wrecks and from the pilots.

3. Group kills were recorded as a group kills and didnt go to the personal score of the pilot.

Many siviet aces in their memories mentioned the fact that pilots avoided fights over enemy territory because there were no way to get the credit (no ground troops confirmation)

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:03 PM
- The RAF claimed to have shot down 731 german
- fighters in the last 6 months of 1941 while loosing
- 411 own fighters. In reality the Luftflotte 2 with
- JG 2 and 26 lost exactly 103 fighters.

I think a double standard is being applied here.

During the BoB, the RAF had 420 Spitfire and Hurricane pilots killed, by all causes, and around 1,000 Spitfires and Hurricanes lost. Those figures are accepted as the Luftwaffe kills (although they claimed many more)

That's about 2,4 planes lost per pilot killed.


During the second half of 1941, JG 26 lost 47 pilots killed. Those are the ones known about, at least.

If the same ratio is followed, JG 26 alone would have lost over 100 fighters, not counting JG 2 and miscellaneous recce, maritime aircraft etc.

I suspect that the "103" figure is the number of kills firmly attributed to RAF fighters. If you were to apply the same standard to the BoB, then the RAF lost a lot less to the Jagdwaffe, as they lost pilots in accidents, to bomber guns etc. What does that say about the 3000+ claims of the Luftwaffe during the BoB?

The RAF's losses of 411 fighters during the second half of 1941 is certainly an all causes figure, so why isn't the same standard applied to Luftwaffe losses?

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:05 PM
maxim26 wrote:

--
- I'm pretty much convinced that this is true. I read
- another article. I don't remember name of the author
- and pilots, that's why I can't present it as a fact.

what a surprise, you forgot the name of the autor and the pilots. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


http://www.bayern.de/Layout/wappen.gif

Bavaria is one of the oldest European states.
It dates back to about 500 A.D., when the Roman Empire was overcome by the onslaught of Germanic tribes. According to a widespread theory, the Bavarian tribe had descended from the Romans who remained in the country, the original Celtic population and the Germanic invaders.

Bavarian History : http://www.bayern.de/Bayern/Information/geschichteE.html#kap0

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:06 PM
KIMURA wrote:
- Yes, that shows excactly how well those people are
- informed./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif They even don't know
- the difference of the Luftwaffew point system and
- real kill system./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif That makes very little sense to
- explain that difference to such unbelievers./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-

Ppl know difference between points and kills. The problem is that when system is too complex there is a bog deal of confusion. It's easy to manipulate the facts.

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 03:13 PM
- Ppl know difference between points and kills. The
- problem is that when system is too complex there is
- a bog deal of confusion. It's easy to manipulate the
- facts.

Sorry, I don't agree to that. Read the last thread to the same topic. There are alot of guys who didn't knew that difference, but these were the guys who posted as a hell about incorred German score system./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

edit: the point system was never published, during the war. Non German authors mixed up some things after the war and brought it up and confused people, that's a big difference./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


"......und mein Herz steigt wie ein Falke in die Lüfte!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif


http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/Forums/



Message Edited on 10/20/0303:15PM by KIMURA

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:07 PM
Isegrim,

Nice informative post. Thanks. It also fits with German WW1 confirmations practice, which, according to various historians (Norman Franks for one) was also considered more accurate than that of the Allies over the Western Front. Part of this better accuracy lay in the the fact that most of the Western Front air fighting occured over German controlled ground, which made confirmation far easier. Part lay in the fact that British standards were rather lax, - for example:"out of control kills" forwarded by British WW1 pilots often were simply combat disangagements by means of a purposely induced spin. In fairness, this was all pretty new stuff back then; it had never been done before.



Blutarski

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:19 PM
hop2002 wrote:
-- The RAF claimed to have shot down 731 german
-- fighters in the last 6 months of 1941 while loosing
-- 411 own fighters. In reality the Luftflotte 2 with
-- JG 2 and 26 lost exactly 103 fighters.
-
- I think a double standard is being applied here.
-
- During the BoB, the RAF had 420 Spitfire and
- Hurricane pilots killed, by all causes, and around
- 1,000 Spitfires and Hurricanes lost. Those figures
- are accepted as the Luftwaffe kills (although they
- claimed many more)
-
- That's about 2,4 planes lost per pilot killed.
-
-
- During the second half of 1941, JG 26 lost 47 pilots
- killed. Those are the ones known about, at least.
-
- If the same ratio is followed, JG 26 alone would
- have lost over 100 fighters, not counting JG 2 and
- miscellaneous recce, maritime aircraft etc.

According to Jochen Prien the gross numbers are as followed:

For JG 2 and 26 between June 22 and December 31, 1941

100 killed
48 wounded
1 prisoner of war
-----------------
149 lost pilots

110 fighters lost due to air combat
168 total fighters lost

June 22 there were 166 fighter pilots available to JG 2 and 26 combined, which roughly means a 90% attrition at the end of the year.

(next paragraph edited a number of times, had some errors due to rushing this whole thing...)

The RAF claimed 741 fighters against the Luftwaffe during that same period, which results in a roughly 4.4:1 (741:168) overclaim at best, or 6.74:1 (741:110) at worst, compared to 1.4:1 (838:580) for the Jagdwaffe, the latter is close to Buzz's previous 1.6 number as to make an interesting observation. (*NOTE)

- I suspect that the "103" figure is the number of
- kills firmly attributed to RAF fighters. If you were
- to apply the same standard to the BoB, then the RAF
- lost a lot less to the Jagdwaffe, as they lost
- pilots in accidents, to bomber guns etc. What does
- that say about the 3000+ claims of the Luftwaffe
- during the BoB?

3000+ claim or credit?

- The RAF's losses of 411 fighters during the second
- half of 1941 is certainly an all causes figure, so
- why isn't the same standard applied to Luftwaffe
- losses?

Is that an assumption?

According to a ready available publication I get the following figures (Foreman's Fighter Command War Diaries Vol. 2)


=================================
July
=================================
claims
221:75:105 (+4:2:2 ground)

missing/Destroyed
119 Spitfires
8 Hurricanes
1 Beaufighter

96 pilots missing
5 pilots killed
22 pilots wounded (+1 air gunner)

=================================
August
=================================
claims
160:73:96 (+14:1:13 ground)

missing/destroyed
110 Spitfires
20 Hurricanes
2 Havocs
2 Beaufighters

108 pilots and 6 aircrew missing
6 pilots killed
18 pilots wounded (1 died later)

=================================
September
=================================
claims
206:97:110 (+3:0:3 ground)

missing/destroyed
118 Spitfires
19 Hurricanes
3 Whirlwinds
1 Havoc

110 pilots and 2 aircrew missing
3 pilots killed
2 pilots wounded

=================================
October (Enter the Fw 190)
=================================
claims
101:32:46 (+6:1:2 ground)

missing/destroyed
52 Spitfires
11 Hurricanes
2 Beaufighters
2 Whirlwinds
1 Defiant
1 Havoc

53 pilots and 2 aircrew missing
7 pilots killed and 3 aircrew
7 pilots and 1 aircrew wounded

=================================
November
=================================
claims
22:13:38 (+2:1:4 ground)

missing/destroyed
44 Spitfires
15 Hurricanes
2 Beaufighters
1 Whirlwind
1 Defiant
1 Havoc
1 Tomahawk

51 pilots and 3 aircrew missing
5 pilots killed
5 pilots wounded

=================================
December
=================================
claims
31:6:15 (+2:0:1 ground)

missing/destroyed
25 Spitfires
10 Hurricanes
4 Beaufighters
2 Defiants
2 Tomahawks

25 pilots and 3 aircrew missing
5 pilots killed and 1 aircrew
6 pilots and 1 aircrew wounded

=================================
July-December
=================================
claims
741:296:410 (+31:5:25 ground)

missing/destroyed
468 Spitfires
83 Hurricanes
11 Beaufighters
6 Whirlwinds
5 Havocs
4 Defiants
3 Tomahawks

443 pilots and 16 aircrew missing
32 pilots and 4 aircrew killed
60 pilots and 3 aircrew wounded

====================================

Note the high MIA number.

Now I'm going to prepare our dinner, so make your own assumptions for the time being /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

EDIT

*NOTE:

There is one serious flaw in this list and that's the number of bombers (or non fighter a/c) claimed as part of the total. I will try and sift some more info from these sources, but keep in mind that this period was dominated by large offensive sweeps by the RAF (with or without a small number of bombers) and as such fighter vs fighter losses will dominate. The day to day descriptions list relatively few bombers. But granted, the ratios will not fully apply.

Still consider the totals...

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

Message Edited on 10/20/0310:57PM by rhorta

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:45 PM
maxim26 wrote:

- Where did you get this. Do you know soviet system of
- score confirmation? I dont think so.
-
- I remind you what kind of country it was in 1940-s.
- Total suspicion to everybody. People were punished
- for their errors and for their achievements.
- Tupolev, one of the greatest a/c designer was
- working on his projects in the prison.
-
- The system was pretty much the same as german. But
- there were some differences.
-
- 1. Confirmation of your wingman is not a prove.
- In fact any confirmation of the pilot from the same
- mission was not good alone.
-
- 2. To sources were needed to confirm the kill - from
- ground troops, which had to find wrecks and from the
- pilots.
-
- 3. Group kills were recorded as a group kills and
- didnt go to the personal score of the pilot.
-
- Many siviet aces in their memories mentioned the
- fact that pilots avoided fights over enemy territory
- because there were no way to get the credit (no
- ground troops confirmation)


Soviets claimed 8 times more planes than they shot down in Winter War against Finland.

After Barbarossa situation was better but looking Russian claims vs. German and Finnish losses they still overclaimed 4-5:1 in the first half of 1942 according to BC + RS vol 2.

Germans overclaimed about 2:1 in the same period.


-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-20-2003, 05:51 PM
jensenpark wrote:
--OT a bit: what plane did Juutilainen mostly fly? Got a decent web site you can recommend that has some info on this part of the war? You never really see much on the Finns, though they sound like they were excellent pilots.



These are probably the best places to visit. Answers also the Juutilainen plane question. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/finland.htm

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/

http://www.sci.fi/~ambush/faf/color.html


-jippo



Edit: Aces page seems to be down at the moment, but do bookmark it and visit later. Unbelievable, but true, stories. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif





Message Edited on 10/20/0304:53PM by Jippo01

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 03:04 AM
Zyzbot wrote:
-
- Johnson flew over England, France and Germany. I am
- sure that he was limited by the fact that the
- Spitfire had less range than the American escort
- fighters and I seem to recall that he didn't fly
- many escort missions anyway. I recall that he flew
- four missions over the beaches on D-day but never
- saw a German fighter that day.He finished the war
- leading a Spitfire XIV unit and flew over Berlin at
- least once.

- Another interesting fact is that all of his 38 kills
- were against single engine fighters.

Thanks for the info Zyzbot. Always trying to learn something whether I like to or not/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Man will never truly be free until the last politician has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest. "Voltaire"

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 04:34 PM
Just some comments. It`s very funny when people come up over and over with Marseille`s single day victories, and keeping arguing how inaccurate it was. Apart that they are unable to bring up any convincing proof that he overclaimed (simple as that, German claims for that they were the same as British losses, but the die-hard critics somehow just jump over that fact), they miss one VERY basic, yet the most important thing :

No matter how many he claimed for that day, the only thing that matters is how many the Luftwaffe accepted of those kills as valid.

So, it may be he downed 10 planes at that day, and claimed 20, the LW would not accept more than 10 as valid as he would sure have none of the required proof to make them accept his non-valid claims. Simple as that.

So, if Marseille`s (or any other`s) published 150+ kills were actually that of a lower number, that would hardly mean that the LW`s system for confirmation was poor. It more like points out that many Anglo-Saxon authors who published those numbers never visited German archieves, never took the time to get familiar with the German confirmation system, and most of them doesn`t even speak German at all (something very similiar that happens here, as I know neither Buzzshaw or Hop2000 speaks any German, or did any research in the topic).

A typical example of this "overclaim by authors" is Heinz Knoke. He had 33 (or so) kills confirmed by the LW. But pilot`s or perhaps even units kept their own record of their kills (as they were convinced they were true), and as happened, some ill-prepeared author misunderstood those and reported Knoke had 50+ kills. Then it was reported. It was Knoke himself who corrected this mistake in the book about his life.

As for the "pilots knew any kill will be accepted in the last 12 months" theory... it`s awfully ridiculus. How the heck they would know how long the war would last? Why the heck they would risk a military tribunal for lying to the superiors ? And again, anyone who looks at the JG 26 war diary can see that in the last 4-6 months of the war, NOT a SINGLE claim was accepted. I bet the pilots were all awfully happy that they missed dozens of real kills! This just shows how serious they took the process even when everything started to crumble.



Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 04:56 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:

- As for the "pilots knew any kill will be accepted in
- the last 12 months" theory... it`s awfully
- ridiculus. How the heck they would know how long the
- war would last?


I had the same thought. We actually have agreed on something! Ain't life grand?


Blutarski

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 05:52 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:

- So, it may be he downed 10 planes at that day, and
- claimed 20, the LW would not accept more than 10 as
- valid as he would sure have none of the required
- proof to make them accept his non-valid claims.
- Simple as that.

Although I am the last who will try and debunk the Jagdwaffe claims, this remark strikes me as naive. Anyone who will take the German system at face value is bound to burn his fingers since there are plenty of examples to show that even this strict system wasn't infallible.

This face value acceptance borders on blind believe and heroworship. Blind believe serves only as a nice juicy target for debunkers, since it makes their case easier.

The only acceptable method is either comparing totals for certain periods (day, month, year), or if possible on an individual basis (actual encounter).

There are times when the claims are spot on, there are times when they are less than perfect. The final ratios are again interesting as a comparisson.

The more I read this kind of post the more I am convinced that I need to remove or rewrite my Luftwaffe webpage, not to take part in another type of myth making.

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 06:30 PM
Fighter Command figures (based on Foreman)

=================================
July-December
=================================

claims
741:296:410 (+31:5:25 ground)

missing/destroyed
468 Spitfires
83 Hurricanes
11 Beaufighters
6 Whirlwinds
5 Havocs
4 Defiants
3 Tomahawks

443 pilots and 16 aircrew missing
32 pilots and 4 aircrew killed
60 pilots and 3 aircrew wounded

=================================

Bomber Command Figures (based on Martin Middlebrook & Chris Everitt)

=================================
July-December daylight ops
=================================

7/8 July to 10 November (given period)

112 aircraft lost

rest of days 1-6 July and 11 November to 31 December gave rough a count of 25+

for sake of argument it makes for 140 bombers lost on daylight ops (majority Blenheims).

A number of these bombers fell to the guns of Luftwaffe fighters and will add strength to the claimed figures (even if some of the fighters would drop off).

The RAF encountered few Bombers after the Start of Barbarossa and the bulk of non-fighters encountered were recon a/c. If I have some time left I might make a rough count for these 6 months in question.

BTW, my aim is not to proof which side is wrong or which one is right, nor to give decisive information, only to show that by using some (up to date) publications one is able to get SOME idea about claims and their relative value. This is a kind a "research" that anyone can practice, and IMHO even required to practice before starting to make general statements about overclaiming, kill inflation and blatant lies.

For those interested I'll list the titles used for my rough (!!) comparison. Note these are general histories and the main aim is RAF Fighter Command vs Jagdwaffe second half 1941.

===

Jagdfliegerverb¤nde der deutschen Luftwaffe 1934-1945 Teil 5

Heimatverteidigung Mai 1940 bis Ende 1941
Einsatz im Mittelmeerraum 1941 - Balkan, Kreta, Sizilien und Nordafrika
Einsatz im Westen - 22.06. bis 31.12.1941
Erg¤nzungsjagdgruppen Einsatz 1941 bis zur Aufl¶sung Anfang 1942

Jochen Prien
Peter Rodeike
Gerhard Stemmer
Winfried Bock

Struve Druck, 2002
3-923457-54-5

===

Fighter Command War Diaries Part 2
September 1940 to December 1941

John Foreman

Air Research, 1998
1-871187-35-4

===

The Bomber Command War Diaries
An operational reference book 1939-1945

Martin Middlebrook
Chris Everitt

Midland Counties, 1996
1-85780-033-8

===
also, but not used now
===

Royal Air Force Fighter Command Losses of the Second World War Volume 1
Operational Losses: Aircraft and Crews 1939-1941

Norman Franks

Midland Counties, 1997
1-85780-055-9

===

The JG 26 War Diary
Volume One 1939-1942

Donald L. Caldwell

Grub Street, 1996
1-898697-52-3

===
sidetrack, but with twist
===

Aces High
A tribute to the most notable fighter pilots of the British and Commonwealth forces in WWII

Christopher Shores
Clive Williams

Grub Street, 1994
1-898697-00-0





Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-21-2003, 09:20 PM
- Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
-
-- As for the "pilots knew any kill will be accepted in
-- the last 12 months" theory... it`s awfully
-- ridiculus. How the heck they would know how long the
-- war would last?

From my reading it was obvious to all but the most die- hard fanatic that the war was lost for Germany after the reverses of 1943/44 (North Africa, Stalingrad, Kursk) and the Normandy invasion. After that it was simply a matter of time.
If you were on the Eastern front, most of 1944 was one long retreat punctuated by the odd counterattack. The refrain most heard was "Wir haben kein sprit, kein ammunition!" because the German supply system was unable to re- provision Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe units. It's difficult to fight with empty rifles and tanks that won't move.
The Russians had over 5,000,000 men in the field against Germany's 2,000.000- in 1944.
Helmut Lipfert's diary makes it clear that there was a headlong rush to get out of the Soviet Union when the Crimea fell. Everyone on his unit, JG52, knew that the game was up.
By August 1944 you would have had to have been a supreme optimist to forsee a German victory. The men at the front were not idiots- they were at the sharp end. They saw- probably more clearly than Hitler- that the end was near.
In other words, you didn't have to be Nostrodamus to arrive at the conclusion that another year was out of the question.

XyZspineZyX
10-22-2003, 04:50 PM
Not even an easy remark or a flame?

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-22-2003, 05:28 PM
BerkshireHunt wrote:
- From my reading it was obvious to all but the most
- die- hard fanatic that the war was lost for Germany
- after the reverses of 1943/44 (North Africa,
- Stalingrad, Kursk) and the Normandy invasion. After
- that it was simply a matter of time.
- If you were on the Eastern front, most of 1944 was
- one long retreat punctuated by the odd
- counterattack. The refrain most heard was "Wir haben
- kein sprit, kein ammunition!" because the German
- supply system was unable to re- provision
- Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe units. It's difficult to fight
- with empty rifles and tanks that won't move.
- The Russians had over 5,000,000 men in the field
- against Germany's 2,000.000- in 1944.
-
- Helmut Lipfert's diary makes it clear that there was
- a headlong rush to get out of the Soviet Union when
- the Crimea fell. Everyone on his unit, JG52, knew
- that the game was up.
- By August 1944 you would have had to have been a
- supreme optimist to forsee a German victory. The men
- at the front were not idiots- they were at the sharp
- end. They saw- probably more clearly than Hitler-
- that the end was near.
- In other words, you didn't have to be Nostrodamus to
- arrive at the conclusion that another year was out
- of the question.
-
-


..... I do not disagree with anything in your very well presented reply. But was not the real question not when the war was known to have been lost, but when the controlling bureaucratic structure under which the pilots served would cease to control them?


Blutarski