purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

I may have this in the wrong forum--as a Moderator, I apologize but that's one of the privileges of being a Moderator. :D

As may of you know I live in North Carolina. The 4th Fighter Wing at Seymour-Johnson AFB in Goldsboro is having an exercise this week celebrating the fact that in April 1945, the 4th destroyed its 1000th enemy aircraft. As we all know this counted air and ground strafing.

In 1957, the USAF Fighter Victory Credits Board denied all claims for ground kills to both units and individuals, hence the 4th is down the list from 1000 destroyed.

When I pointed this out to the USAF 4th FG historian, he commented that he thought the 1957 FVCB was set up to only deny "Ace" status to those who had ground kills as a part of their claim to Acedom. My sense is that the Board was doing ALL kill claims for both units and individuals, not just whether you were entitled to "ace" status.

Can anyone comment on the "official" mission of the Board?

THX

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

You have really gotten into the deep end on this subject. I believe that you have it right in the board was "doing all kill claims". My opinion is that all the claims Air and Ground should be acknowledged/credited.This for the USAF, USMC and USN --
all of them...

Pyker

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

John,
At one time the Korean War Victory Credits list included the credits awarded for aircraft destroyed on the ground (maybe 20 credits in total). But these have now been eliminated from the USAFHRA Victory Credits database, at least as it can be searched online. http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/avc.asp

The problem with trying to catalog all US ground claims, is that only the 8th FC VCB prepared official orders for them. They are included in the VCB reports. They are not in the 9th AF VCB reports (for 9th, 19th and 29th TAC). And as far as I know no other numbered USAAF Air Force credited them, although they may be recorded in mission reports. The only "exception" is the AVG, which paid for some 80 ground claims (out of the approximately 300 total claims that were paid). Chennault made a request in Jan 1942 to pay for ground claims at the same $500 rate as for air claims, and this was approved by Madame Chiang Kai-Shek. Payments started in March, for claims going back to January.

Going through USN and USMC records, while there are ground claims noted, they very rarely give credit to individuals.

Enjoy!

Frank.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Having said this the 4th is still the top wing for air credits (all combat)with 548.95 in WWII and 506 in Korea. The 'silly' .95 is a function of the three squadrons having a .64 a .65 and a .66 credit.

Summary - the 4th was the 'top' AAF Group in the 8th AF in the manner for which victory credits were awarded, the ground credits were eliminated for the purposes of quantifying Only air credits, and as such the USAF will look at WWII VC's as 548.95 instead of 1016 (or whatever the post VE Day summary was)... and Frank is 100% correct AFAIK regarding the other theatres as well as Korea and VietNam.

Vaguely I recall that ~ 16 ground scores were noted in reports but you wan't see them in VCB.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Thanks Guys:

I'm not quite sure what was answered in your answers!

Bottom line: is the 4th entitled to claim #1 in the 8th in Europe by including their ground claims, or not? Seems a confusing situation not helped by, apparently, the USAF not being too clear about their VCB parameters.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

John,

Many thanks for starting this very interesting thread because I've long wondered the origin of a photo found in HISTORY IN THE SKY (354th Pioneer Mustang Fighter Group). The photo is of a board entitled "FACTS and FIGURES, Standing of the Ten Top Fighter Groups".

It shows the following listing:

GROUP AIR GROUND TOTAL

354 701 255 956
56 677 328.5 1005.5
4 539 463 1002
355 362 493 855
352 493.5 278 771.5
353 320 412 732
339 249 443 692
78 327.5 359 686.5
357 575.5 110 685.5
55 304 275 579

Does anyone know if this is an official listing? (Frank Olynyk?) Did anyone maintain a ranking of the ETO fighter groups.

Any replies greatly appreciated....thanks!

Tripp Alyn

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Sorry, columns won't re-align.
Tripp

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Another viewpoint for discussion would be the meaning/intent of the designation "aerial victory credits".

Attacking ground targets was indeed dangerous and very risky (Don Beerbower of the 354FG and 10 AVG pilots were brought down by ground fire). AVG pilots were credited and paid $500 by the Chinese govt. for every a/c destroyed in the air and on the ground, but those were not a/c that could manuver and shoot back at them. Also, there is the difficulty of confirming an enemy a/c destroyed on the ground due to the location (an enemy airfield!) and the possibility that it might be repaired and returned to service.

Fighter pilots might say that AVCs should only be granted for air combat against other fighters as a true confirmation of the skills of these "aerial knights". So, that would exclude the slower more vulnerable bombers as well (although the bombers might be defended by many guns).

Any additional thoughts out there on the validity of the term AERIAL VICTORY CREDITS?

Tripp

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

The USAF performed an analysis of fighter pilot characteristics which separated them form other pilots and also tried to isolate those elements which separated Ace pilots. They reviewed all the victory credits from all the AEF, AAF and USAF documentation and stripped ground credits from the totals.

The result was USAF "US Army Air Force Victory Credits, World War II< a follow up to Project Ace (above). Published in 1962 as USAF Historical Study no. 73

I loaded up all these into a database and added those that emerged from USAFHRC as referenced by Frank Olynyk above. Having said that Frank found additional evidence, as have I and others that are submitted to USAF for consideration. Particularly important are the 9th AF TAC Victory credits for April which were lost - and USAF won't add the 37+ that the 354FG deserves as 'official'.

Note: American Fighter Aces did remove many heretofore (by 8th AF) ace designees because the ground scores were necessary for some of those recognized as having 5 victory credits. Only those that have five air to air victory credits are recognized as Aces by USAF and AFAA.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Aerial victory Credit is defined in USAF "US Army Air Force Victory Credits, World War II" a follow up to Project Ace (above). Published in 1962 as USAF Historical Study no. 73.

Simply it is an award/credit for the destruction of a heavier than air aircraft in which the destruction was observed and witnessed or recorded on film. Further, the victory credit is awarded against an enemy aircraft presumed to be armed and includes crew served night fighters(as the victor against enemy aircraft). It also includes instances in which a mid air collision destroys the enemy aircraft even if the US or Allied pilot flying in the service of the US is also lost in the collision.

For the purposes of the USAF VCB no air to ground destruction credit is permitted

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Thanks for the very precise detailed explanation of AVCs, drgondog.

When 354th Fighter Group CO Col Kenneth Martin's P-51B collided with a ME-109 on 11 Feb 44 and he became a POW, I presume that he was awarded a confirmed destruction of an enemy a/c.

I know of Cesar Rodriquez, USAF (F-15) being awarded a confirmed kill in the Gulf War for manuvering an Iraqi a/c into the ground. The AVC online list for later conflicts (after WWII) also indicates the type weapon used and the model of a/c destroyed.

Tripp

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Yes to Ken martin VC for 2-11 collision.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Another thought to help clarify this discussion. Sometimes we "miss the forest for the trees"......

This system started with the first major era of aerial combat....The Great War (yes, that's what they called it before it became World War I). Measuring aerial victories and awarding ACE status was a means of measuring the prowess of a force's "aerial knights", the fighter pilots!

Credits were also awarded for downing bombers (which had gunners) and observation/scout planes (gunners?). Ground kills were never considered....
but begs the question: suppose you damage an enemy aircraft and it lands. If you then destroy it on the ground is it an aerial victory, a confirmed damaged e/a, a ground kill?

For comparison purposes between all conflicts a level playing field is necessary. Thus, there is no room for ground kills in making a fair comparison. Going forward...will this include drones? Or do they require that the pilot be aboard....otherwise, we have some guy at Creech AFB downing five enemy drones and filing for ACE status? Any comments out there?

Tripp

P.S. Special thanks to Super Moderator John Beaman for starting this thread to give us an opportunity to discuss this topic. Yes, the AVG had approx 80 ground kills (for which they were paid $500 each by the Chinese Air Force) which has always been included in their 7 month total of 297 enemy aircraft destroyed (air & ground).

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

The first victory credit awarded by 8th AF VCB was Lt. Elza Shahan, 27FS/1st FG August 18, 1942. P-38 VC. IIRC it was for a credit near Iceland? but have to look it up.

As to the 'other question' - was the VCB an "Ace machine"? Nope.

The VCB was constituted to accurately dispose of claims as the credits were also an intelligence tool. Who knew who would be an "Ace"? Ditto USAF Study 85. When you compare 8th VCB to USAF 85 the credits assigned were seldom removed unless double counting occurred (and such did occur).

If you have a choice I suggest aligning your fact gathering to Dr Olynyk's research data.

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

Hi guys. What an awesome discussion.

Sorry to butt in. Ha - as a relative newbie I feel like a new employee sitting in on a Managers' meeting!

For mine, VCs have to be aerial kills. It fits more with the perceived "glamour" of being a Fighter Pilot. AFAIK all the lists I have seen over the years have always separated aerial kills from ground kills and drone (read V1) kills if possible so as to level to field.

And in WW2 shooting down a jet was a much bigger deal than shooting one up on the ground, no?

Sure, there are big risks involved in shooting up ground targets and pilotless aircraft, just consider the likes of Beerbower and Jean Maridor, but it's just not the same!

Cheers

Re: purpose of the Fighter Victory Credits Board?
 

I have commented on this in this thread.

That said, The biggest consequence to the focus on air victory credits was that so many Aces as determined by 8th Air Force with combined air/ground, or ground only victory credits, were stripped from the American Fighter Aces Association. It was a sad consequence for the warriors that risked their lives in perhaps the most dangerous activity for a fighter pilot during WWII - strafing a German airfield.

As an example, the 355th FG pilots were perhaps the most affected as their 'ace list' went from 56 to 21. Additional 'insult to injury' is the fact that 90 of 180 downed fighters (notably including evaders and one rescue) were due to strafing. Of the remaining "90", The 355th lost 39 air to air or 'unknown cause' suspected due to air to air.

Summary - the USAF had a reason to research and publish their 'best efforts' to analyze, parse and assign air victory credits - punishing the 4th Fighter Group (or 355th or 339th, etc) was not a motive. As an aside, even the rules of an "enemy aircraft expected to be armed" as a necessary criteria was 'bent' because more than a few Ju 52 and Do 24 and FW 44 (transport/trainers) are in the credits.