![]() |
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Quote:
|
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Quote:
|
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Hello FPSOlkor or Andrey
was there any claims by the Il-2s. There are many possible explanations how the Tikhomirov’s and Knöbel’s wingman’s stories can be explained but IMHO the three simplest ways are a) Knöbel’s wingman didn’t notice Tikhomirov’s attack and only assumed that Knöbel was hit by Il-2(s). From the fragments of the report printed in Valtonen’s book it is not clear how intensively the wingman followed Knöbel’s attack, he might have been making simultaneously his own attack and may have only time to time glanced around the overall situation. b) Knöbel’s plane was first hit by Il-2 and then by Tikhomirov c) Knöbel’s plane was hit more or less simultaneously by Il-2(s) and by Tikhomirov. Juha |
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Quote:
|
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Thanks a lot, FPSOlkor.
That makes perfectly sense. Now it opens another question. Did the II./JG 54 fought like the Finns often? Meaning that in principle there were pairs, fours etc but in reality in target rich environment everybody attacked his own target, of course giving a quick glance around rather often to maintain some situation awareness and to check one’s own 6 and that of nearest own plane but nothing so close co-operation than in a proper leader-wingman pair. Hptm. Aloé also had lost contact to his wingman Fw. Huss in an earlier skirmish before he began his last combat with Soviet fighters. Thankfully Juha |
Re: ? 5./JG 54, Uffz. Erich Kna:bel, MIA 21.06.1944
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:19. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2026, 12oclockhigh.net