The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Actually how many casualties in eastern front of this plane? Its produced until 42,000 (36,000 Il-2 series and other is Il-10)

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

I thought the reply was on Internet but my memory was wrong.

What I found (again) was the Soviet AC losses for 1944, and the total pilot losses for the war.

In case it helps you, the site is:
http://my.tele2.ee/airacesww2/airace...cles/artie.htm

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

AFAIK : Il-2s : most sources state about 12 000 lost in combat (AAA, fighters, on the ground, and unknown) for the whole war.

IL-10s : I did never come across loss figures...

Hope this can help,

kolya.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Thx guys.
12,000 mean 30% of Il-2 populations
I stll looking for the Il-2T data, is it success to sinking ship?

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

I believe there is some doubt about any service use of the Il.2T. This is phrasing it carefully and politely.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

In Europe:
108 GShAP during period 16-30.4.1945 lost 3 Il-10s in combat and 4 for other reasons
118 GShAP starting 8.5.1945 lost 3 Il-10s in combat (1 by fighter, 2 by AAA)
571 ShAP 224 ShAD 15.4-8.5.1945 lost 3 Il-10s during combat missions and 2 for other reasons.
Against Japan:
26 ShAP lost 6 Il-10s in combat - by AAA

Total number: 15 Il-10s in combat.
"Il-10" O.W. Rastrenin, Militaria 232, Warsaw 2005

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

All

According to Yefim Gordon and his book about the Il-2 and Il-10, the Il-2 suffered the following losses
Red Army: 10759 (24% to fighters, 43% to AAA, 32% failed to return, 1% on the ground)
Naval Forces:807

The German overclaiming in relation to Il-2 losses is estimated at appx 2.2.

He also says that SOME Russian researchers state that the Il-2T was in service (even gives the operational Unit) while others state that the type never even existed.

I am not certain how to evaluate Russian research, but such statements reflects rather badly on the research performed and it CAN of course be put in perspective relating to loss research.....

Cheers
Stig

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

I assume the quoted losses were only the combat losses. Overall losses should thus be much higher.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

At 1.1.1945 in SSSR were 11650 Il-2s. 3845 Il-2s in frontal units. In 1941-1944 30282 Il-2s were produced. So it means that about 18632 were lost for all reasons untill 1.1.1945.
I don't know the losses of Sturmoviks in 1945. Numbers according to R. Michulec.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Hi Guys

Denes
Yes you are correct. Combat losses

Leon
I suppose at least SOME Il-2 were used by training units as well, but if we compare non-operational losses with other countries, I can very well imagine quite a number of Ilyushins going down for any number of reasons.

Cheers
Stig

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Stig
When I quoted about 18500 Sturmoviks lost for any reason till the begining of 1945 I meant not only in combat units. But also lost in flight-transport and in training and others. We can see that on 1.1.1945 more than 65% aircrafts were in non-combat (front line) units. The level of non combat losses in VVS during WWII was higher than 50% of all lost planes.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

I also wonder the pix of the DAG-10 (Distance Air Granat), according interview with Yuri Khukrikov, said that, DAH-G-10 its good weapon, but I looking for pix is any?

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

"Non combat" losses in the VVS included aircraft which were simply worn out or considered too old and scrapped, and this explains for a large part why the figures of non combat soviet losses are so high...

Here is an example, however incomplete of the way the losses were counted :

http://my.tele2.ee/airacesww2/airace...losses1944.htm

By the way, to judge correctly the level of Il-2 losses, it would be necessary to compare them with the number of sorties achieved : e.g. : AFAIK, the loss per sortie rate was (very) much higher in 1942 than in 1944 while overall losses were lower...

Hope this can help,

Kolya.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Kolya
I have one question about "weared" status. Were the planes badly damaged during sorties but able to return added to this status? I mean aircrafts damaged to the level which was not wothy to send it to repair works?
Regards
Marcin Leon Widomski

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Hi Marcin,

Nice to meet you here, too.

Based on the table posted on that Estonian site, http://my.tele2.ee/airacesww2/airace...losses1944.htm
it can be safely assumed that yes, the airplanes heavily damaged in combat which were not repaired were included in the 'weared' (worn out) category.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Hi Denes - nice to see you too. Thanks for answer.
Telling the truth I thought that some of "worn out" planes were lost due to damages taken in combat missions. So now so high non combat losses of Soviet planes ( specially ground attack planes wildely exposed to AAA) are more clear.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Here is the statistics of Il-2 losses, according to Hans Seidl:

Year - Total Losses - To Enemy Action - % of Strength at Hand
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1941* - 1100 - 600 - 73.3%
1942 - 2600 - 1800 - 34.2%
1943 - 7200 - 3900 - 45.0%
1944 - 8900 - 4100 - 46.6%
1945** - 3800 - 2000 - 27.3%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total: 23600 12400 70.3%
* presumably from June 22 [D.B.]
** until May 10

Therefore, over 50% of losses [not counting the 'worn out' category] was due to enemy.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

I wouldn't be sure that aircraft heavily damaged by enemy action are included in the "weared" category...

Or if they are then this should not make a big part of these...

I cannot be sure because we lack elements to be fully affirmative but simply look at the losses in older aircraft types : very few were lost on combat missions or accidents, the enormous majority of the losses were "weared" aircrafts, which most probably means that the surviving I-16s, or early LaGG-3s were dumped because they were too old and not useful or safe to fly anymore (and not that e.g. : 500 were too damaged to be repaired while not a single one didn't return from mission..., which is quite unlikely).

BTW, don't you find that 12 400 combat losses is a number high enough ? I know the german claims were probably higher but still, if you compare it to the number of aircrafts in service this is a really heavy loss rate...


Kolya.


P.S. : Remember the issue of the number of gunners killed on the Il-2 during WWII, it was very often said there were some 7 to 10 gunners killed for each pilot (AFAIK, not a german claim), but when you try to check that claim, there is absolutely nothing to substantiate it, that's simply wrong...

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Regarding the rear gunner issue, if he was killed - and it's known that some Axis fighter pilots attacking a two-seat Il-2 tried to finish off with the rear gunner first, to eliminate the rearward defense - the aircraft could still return to the base if the pilot was lucky enough. However, if the pilot was killed, the rear gunner died automatically, too - except for the rear occasions when he could bail out from the doomed airplane.
Therefore logic says that the number of rear gunners killed in action must be higher than the number of pilots. By how much? Unfortunately, I cannot tell. Perhaps someone else can.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

The overall numbers of pilots lost are in fact even higher than those of gunners because early in the war only single seat Il-2s were in service and therefore only pilots were lost...

Even later in the war you will find that the number of gunners lost, is no more than about 1.5 per pilot lost...

Just check in the history of any soviet assault regiment, this thing about gunner losses is simply part of post-war myths (probably inspired by cold war propaganda or something like that...).

BTW, I myself read it time and again, and believed it for some time :( (however incredible the difference may now seem (I mean : if these figures are to be believed about four men died for each Il-2 (1 or 2 crew) shot down, excluding prisonners and injureds, this is complete nonsense...), which just goes to show how much it is true that if you repeat something often enough it becomes true for most people, whatever the facts...

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Well, it seems logical. Most of the losses due to enemy fighters occured when single seaters were in use. Later on, when two seaters entered service, number of victories dropped in favour of Flak. The latter was not particularly dangerous for gunners, it was just deadly dangerous for all Hunchbacks. Unfortunatelly, statistics are not enough detailed to make a clear proportion but for 1942 it was 169/203/1290 (fighters/Flak/missing) and for 1945 369/1048/266.
By the way, I cannot find any reference to Il-2T. What it was supposed to be?

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Kolya, obviously, what I've written is valid only to the two-seater Il-2s. It is not based on what I've read, but solely on logic, as detailed in my previous post.

If we take the overall figures, from 1941 to 1941, I agree that probably more Il-2 pilots were lost than gunners, for the simple reason that early in the war only the one-seat aircraft were available.

Franek, the Il-2T was suppose to be a torpedo carrying version, reportedly armed with a Type 45-12 torpedo. I am not aware if this version indeed existed, however. Perhaps someone else could enlighten us about this issue.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

No mention of torpedo Il-2 in any serious monography. I tend to believe this is an error eg. with torpedo version of Il-4, as I believe Il-2's payload was too small to carry a torpedo.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

Hi all!

About Il-2 T. This plane WAS NEVER EXIST. I know 1 guy, who had talk about that plane with general engeneer of factory, witch made Il-2 during WWII.

& that engeneer sayd - IL-2 CANT hang sutch weight as torpedo.

Re: The Il-2 role in Eastern Front
 

My two cents. If the aircraft was unrepairable, then the loss was characterized by rather standard "Samolyot razbit, vosstanovlyeniyu ne podlezhit" = "Aircraft is crashed, a repair is impossible".

After that there should be a phrase characterizing whether it was combat or no combat loss: "Ot boyevich povrezhdeniy IA/ZA" ("Combat damage Fighters/Flaks"), "Ot drugikh prichin" ("Another causes") in case of non-combat loss, etc.

To sum up, I don't think that heavily damaged and written off crafts were sumed in non-combat columns of loss tables. And documents I worked with confirms my point of view.