F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

...how well do they stand up to scrutiny?

The US pilots were experienced and aggressive, many had flown combat in WW2, flying a thoroughbred second generation jet fighter. Tactically they were the hunters, just like over the Reich, free to find enemy fighters to engage at will.

The Communist pilots varied from similarly experienced Soviets, to unprepared North Koreans. Their fighter overal not different enough either way to make a real difference. The tactical situation however restricting them to a fixed air space and often with bombers and/or fighter bombers as their primary targets. The main (often high altitude) air battle was held over communist held territory.

Does 10:1 in favor of the USAF Sabres still hold?

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

One of the best books I have read on the subject (and the list is long :)) is Robert Jackson's "Air War Over Korea. The analysis of the air strategies employed by both sides alone makes this book worth reading.

The real crux of this book though is the detail with which he addresses the build up of forces and the application of 'all' air operations. Most books are fixated on the battle between the MiG and the Sabre. Jackson provides a much more balanced overview; assessing the success (or otherwise) of the ground support roll played by the both sides, the strategic and tactical bombing efforts by the B-29 and A-26 crews, the impact and function of the USN, Marine and FAA as weel as the air superiority role of the Sabre.

One of the really interesting points highlighted is the diversity of missions flown by the MiG pilots. The point made is that as many missions flown were intercept in nature - against the Mustang, F-80, F-84, A-26 and B-29 - as opposed the the generally accepted fighter sweeps against the Sabre's.

There is an extensive list of UN OOB's and stastics covering aircraft claims, missions flown by all types, enemy material destroyed, carriers employed etc. He doesn't attempt to confirm or otherwise the claim of 792 MiG's claimed shot down. Irrespective of whether the claims are correct or not (and until sources in China and North Korea become available the question is moot), but the point made is that the UN air forces remained on the offensive for almost the whole war. And that, despite quite severe losses, the ground attack component was the telling force in what was in effect a UN air victory.

That victory though came at some cost. In all the UN (predominately USAF) air forces lost almost 3,200 aircraft, approximately just over a third to flak alone. For the USAF they lost the equivalent of 20 combat Groups - roughly one quarter of the USAF's total front line strength as it stood in June 1950!

The lasting effect of the Korean air war was that it woke the American politicians up from the stupor they had allowed the Armed Forces to plunge into after the success of WWII. A whole raft of new military and strategic policies were put into effect to ensure that America would not be found so ill-equipped again.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Ruy - Jim offered some excellent points w/o taking the 10:1 ratio head on.

Another 'subjective' insight is that the debriefing of the defecting N.Korean pilot - who stated that the losses incurred against the F-86 were 'devastating' to the point that combat in 1953 was undertaken only with advantage of altitude and one diving pass and back over Yalu.

I believe the interview is available via FOI Act Request. It was a part of the 1954-1955 curriculum at the Air War College when my father sttended in 1954. One of the other insights was that quite a few MiGs were lost to C/L due to battle damage and/or written off for same reason.

This subjective viewpoint sheds no light on the 10:1 ratio.

An additional question for me and one I have not undertaken is to examine the 'other' operational losses incurred by the F-86 wings. I was careful in my final summary for 355Fg Losses in WWII to place a damaged 47 or 51 which was hit in air combat, but crash landed as a 'loss' to the Luftwaffe.

I do not know how the Chinese/N.Koreans/Soviets (or USAF) categorized similar losses.

Having said this the kill review process and gun camera technology was better than WWII. If a major flyability component was not seen to break away or fireball as witnessed by other pilot or verified by film it was not a 'destroyed' MiG.

Regards,

Bill

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

One of the stats mentioned in Jackson's Appendices is a break down of F-86 losses.

Operational Losses:
Air Combat - 78
Other causes - 61
Total - 139

Non-Operational
Total - 347

Sadly just what the 'other causes' nor 'non-operational' losses are were not specified.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

On one forum where I am moderator one man from Russia is placed a great number of gun camera shoots as well other material and maps. Also there was available list of Soviet air aces. The first on the list if I remember good have 21 kills and some 150 missions over Korea.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

This link:

http://www.af.mil/history/

May 20, 1951
Capt. James Jabara becomes the world's first jet ace, shooting down his fifth and sixth MiGs in the Korean War.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

A very complete list of Korean War aircraft losses by UN forces can be found on the DPMO website http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/ It is a database called KORWALD (Korean War Aircraft Loss Database) and is at http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/pmkor/korwald.htm

On the right hand side of this latter page you will find links to the database sorted in various manners.

Frank.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Cause of loss data for combat missions has been revised by the USAF several times. More than 100 of the total Sabre losses have now been attributed to MiGs. The increase is not definitive however, and is largely based on guesswork because there was no eyewitness for many individual losses. Originally the number of air-to-air combat losses was estimated at 58 and that was mainly drawn from reports of USAF pilots who personally saw another Sabre attacked or shot down by MiGs, or overheard radio distress calls from F-86 pilots under attack by MiGs.



Accidents of all types and ground fire, for starters. By the way, I don't think that Robert Jackson is a reliable historian. I have read several of his books and found his research to be consistently sloppy, outdated, and misleading.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Jim and others

I have not seen mention of "Red Wings Over the Yalu" by Xiaoming Zhang (Texas A&M Univ Press, 2002) in this discussion. Zhang has accessed available Russian and Chinese records and tried to present a balance view on this issue. The data from the USSR/ChiCom/NKor side is presented but not absolutely definitive. US data, as noted in the discussion above, also leaves some room for additional investigation.

The 10:1 ratio whether correct or not (and probably not) is a very coarse measure. As in so many other debates who was flying the a/c, their skill level, and the tactucal situation among other matters need to be considered. One thing Zhang points out is that in many cases the MiGs tried to avoid the F-86s and engage strike a/c like F-51s, F-80s, and F-84s (not to mention B-29s). They also paid special attention to Aussie Meteors.

Opinions and fun discussions are fine but like so much about WW2 and other wars, not everything is known or printed in books. More hard research still needs to be done.

Rick

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

The USAF itself has never officially revised F-86 losses due to MiG's AFAIK. The 58 which appeared in early editions of Futrell's "USAF in Korea" was a mistake. 78 was always the number in the Fiscal Year 1953 Statistics Digest. Likewise the number 103 was not a USAF restatement, it's another author's mistake that's now been repeated hundreds of times. The USAF study he referred to "Sabre Measures (Charlie)" listed 'blue fighter' losses monthly for most of the war. Comparing the relevant tables in that paper and the Stats Digest, it's clear 'blue fighter' losses were all USAF fighter types even including F-51's. And "Sabre Measures" was a random code word, that study wasn't particularly about Korea (it was about sortie rates and losses with WWII and Korea as examples), and others in the "Sabre Measures" series are about stuff like ballistic missiles, etc.

Several *unofficial* researchers have reviewed USAF records and come up with different loss totals. I have for example, though unfortunately I can't point you to a published version yet. I've reviewed almost every case, in view of specific Soviet claims, and found that around 85-90 F-86's could reasonably be attributed to MiG's, including those which returned safely but were damaged beyond repair (which is relatively few though). For a published source Ken Werrell in his recent "Sabres over MiG Alley" quotes, in a footnote, perhaps around 100, but AFAIK from correspondance with that highly distinguished and reliable researcher and author, he didn't focus on that issue.

The Korwald database mentioned by Frank above is an excellent starting point but itself omits several a/c which were damaged beyond repair, and has ambiguous entries for others. OTOH most 'MiG damage' entries in Korwald were planes documented to have been repaired, so some casual researchers just adding them in as losses get too high a number. Also, though not directly relevant to total losses, Korwald has a small % of the F-86's damaged by MiG cannon fire, more seem to have been hit and survived to fight again than were downed. I get around 78 F-86 MiG losses strictly counting in Korwald, but 78 was a sloppy total that clearly doesn't exactly correspond to anything you get building bottom up from individual incidents, the totals some months are just wrong.

On MiG losses, "Red Devils on the 38th Parallel" by German and Seidov gives 319 Soviet MiG air combat losses, about 300 of which are mentioned one by one in the text by my count. Other Russian sources give slightly varying numbers. The Chinese official air combat loss total was 224 MiG's, quoted in "Red Wings" (as mentioned above) among other places. The NK defector No Gum-suk said in 1953 that the NK's had lost 100 MiG's to all causes during the war; his estimates of Soviet and Chinese losses corresponded pretty well with what they released decades later. Assuming the NK's lost 50 in combat, the total would be around 600, the great bulk by F-86's which claimed around 800, so pretty good claim accuracy ratio, and would make the 'real' ratio 6+:1.

And, Naboka's "NATO's Hawk in the Sights of Stalin's Falcons" gives day to day ops and losses for the Soviets through summer 1951, when there were few non Soviet MiG's. The UN fighter (not just F-86) claim accuracy ratio in that sub-period is also around 3/4, though the B-29's claims were very overstated (mirroring WWII experience).

On Soviet claims they are pretty specific and apparently complete. In almost all cases I've found that the times and places given correspond to actions recorded by the US with the same basic type of planes the Soviets claimed: sweptwing (ie F-86), B-29, straigtwing jet, prop fighter. There are many mis'id's within the last two categories, but no mistaking of F-86's for any of the other three categories, not that I've found anyway. So Soviet (plus Chinese and NK insofar as known) claims of F-86's can be separately compared against actual F-86 losses only, not to ignore any bigger picture of the air war, just saying there is the data to do that.

Joe

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Excellent, informative post JoeB. I sure hope that you are planning on putting that all into a book in the newar future.

I am surprised though at the various MiG losses reported by each country. I would have thought that China would have suffered the most, given they provided the bulk of MiG pilots. Yet the Soviets lost the most according to your research. That is interesting.

Keep up the great work.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Thanks for 411, Joe. Maybe this controversy is closer to being cleared up. I have read about the USAF study Sabre Measures Charlie but did not view a copy of the original document.

Did you figure out how many cases are still remaining in which the cause of loss is unknown?

F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Hello guys

Have any of you come across www.acepilots.com/korea_aces.html before? This seems to be a nice web site with considerable information on the American aces of the Korean War. There is a link included concerning the Russian aces as well www.acepilots.com/russian/rus_aces.html I hope that some of you find this information interesting.

Horrido!

Leo

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Interesting info qualitatively, but I'd be careful with the claim and loss accounting given on that site. For example, see the score of N. Sutyagin on that page, Soviet pilot credited with the most victories in Korea. The comparison of his credited victories v US sources purports to show 12 of 21 claims verified. I got quite a different answer using Soviet sources with exact types, times and places of his claims (beside date) v original US records. See this link for my findings v that site's day by day. I got a score of around 1.5 if his claims are weighted equally with other Soviet and Chinese claimants in the same combats. His maximum possible score would be 5, minimum possible score 0. Five US a/c of the general type he claimed (all F-86's as it happened) were shot down, one each on 5 different days when he was credited with victories. But, there were other Soviet claims at similar times and places each on those days, and known Chinese claims too on one of those days. See link:
http://www.acepilots.com/smf/index.php?topic=79

Re: Six Nifty .50's: there are still a number of F-86 losses whose cause I can't certainly determine, which is why I gave a range of 85-90. And it would depend on what burden of proof one used. For example if one said an F-86 loss in the same time window same day as a MiG claim was due to MiG unless it could be absolutely proved it wasn't, the number might be even higher than 90 (though not more than around 100 in any case). If one said it had to be proven it was a MiG loss, or if one rejected my inclusion of MiG damaged F-86's which returned safely but were never repaired as "MiG losses", the number might shrink below 85, though in no case less than around 80. I also still hope to get more US data on some incidents. And it's possible that detailed claim information from the Chinese and NK's might clarify a few situations, their claims aren't known in the same day to day detail as Soviet ones. But I doubt the end point will be complete certainty about all cases.

Joe

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Joe - I agree your approach and the directed result. On a smaller scale I have looked over ever 47 and 51 loss for the 355FG wrt fighter losses to GAF.

My numbers range from 28 (absolutely seen w/German fighter on tail if 'missing' and or seen to be be shot down) to 45 (all the prior plus 1.) shot up, returned and crashed, 2.) missing in area which had German fighters in area, c.) escaped/damaged but crashed when ran out of fuel) and careful to note the distinctions for each separate Pilot entry.

The most interesting research for me lately is developing the battle tracks, engagement locations and claims/macrs, and having a dialogue with the many very knowledgeable guys (Ruy, Erich, Leo, Richard, etc) on this forum to match LW units and pilots with the 355th FG encounters- which is kinda what you are doing on a larger scale.

It is particularly interesting when there is not a LW claim for a 355 loss and vice versa. These questions are the other side of Overclaims coin.

IMHO, every unit historian on either side should do as much as possible along these lines for posterity.

Regards, and Respect

Bill Marshall

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Hi: Very interesant the theme. I have also investigate a lot about many of the claims of both sides in the Korean War and certainly is a very open theme. Sometimes also there are many differences in the version published.
A typical confussión with the numbers is the day June 17, 1951.

If you consult Korwald for F-86s losses this day, there are nothing but if you consult other publications you find:

49-1281 (4th FIG, 334th FIS) Heavy damaged by MiG.Written off Jun 25, 1951.(F-86A-5)
49-1334 (335th FIS) destroyed on ground by Bedcheck Charlie Jun 17, 1951 at Suwon.(F-86A-5)
49-1335 (335th FIS 4th FIW)shot down by MiGs Jun 17, 1951.(F-86A-5)

The 49-334 was destroyed early in the morning with grenadas by one Po-2 in Suwon, the 49-335 was shot down by Lev K. Shchukin of 17 IAP some hours after, and the 49-1281(LtCol Eagleston) was heavy damaged by Sergei Kramarenko of 176th GIAP and write off the 25th of the same month.

The confussion about the 49-1334 and 49-1335 in a constant in many publications.Already the published photos are not a good help to clear the id of the destroyed F-86 at Suwon.

The second "official" F-86 loss in combat with MiGs was the 49-1307 the June 18, 1951 but there are before this date some curious events with F-86 and MiGs.

The first one was the Apr 3, 1951. This day was loss the the 49-1173 of Maj Ronald D. Shirlaw. The official version say: "crashed behind enemy lines due to fuel exhaustion " .Korwall speak of:" Instrument malfunction, fuel exhaustion, bellied in on river bank 10 mi NW of Kaesong".

And what is the version the V-VS?

"A MiG-15 pilot of the 176th GIAP, Kapetan Ivan Yablokov,
caught by surprise the F-86A BuNo.49-1173 flown by Major Ronald D. Shirlaw, and riddled the fuel tanks and the fuel
boost with 23 mm shells. Shirlaw managed to belly land his crippled Sabre over NK territory, only to become a POW."

Iam near certain , this plane can be counted as a victory for the MiGs but is not so in the "official version".

As example If you count this F-86 and the two others of the Jun 17 , there are now 3 F-86s more "in credit" for the MiGs.

There are so many myths and historic deformations ; a typical example is the combat of the Dec 22, 1950.

In a early combat was shot down the F-86A-5 49-1176, the first one loss in Korea and in the second combat of the day the 4th FIW engaged the MiGs of the 177th IAP.
The 4th FIW claims were for six MiGs ; actually the losses were 2 MiGs ,pilots Zub(Wounded) and Barsegyan(KIA).
The MiG of St Li V. F. Deynegi was slight damaged with five 12.7mm and repaired.

Score of the day USAF 2, V-VS 1. And not : USAF 6 , V-VS 1.

The June 1953 was a great month for the F-86. "Officially" 77 MiGs were claimed as destroyed with the only loss of one F-86. The V-VS and PLAAF versions confirme in part the USAF version:

The V-VS losses were 24 MiGs and the PLAAF loss 43, with a total of 67 MiG destroyed.
Worst day, and the record in the Korean war was the Jun 30, 1953 with 16 MiGs destroyed(14 PLAAF and 2 V-VS).

In the other side the V-VS claims were for 36 F-86s , actually, after investigation of all claims and losses, only 3 of the F-86s were definitively destroyed by the MiGs this month.

Daniel Nole

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Already in theme , I search information about the circunstances of the loss of this F-86s:

48-305 damaged by MiG.(F-86A-5)
49-1318 - lost to enemy action(F-86A-5)
50-587 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-1)
50-622 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-1)
50-666 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-5)
50-672 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-5)
51-2768 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-10)
51-2770 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-10)
51-2792 - lost to enemy action(F-86E-10)
51-12942 -lost to enemy action(F-86F-10)
52-4313 - lost to enemy action(F-86F-30)

The F-86A-5 49-318 was used for the photo sessions with James Jabara after the combat of May 20, 1951(Actually this day he had used the 49-1319). After that, no more informations are available about the loss of this plane.

The 49-1319 in the other side was shot down by Pepelyayev the Oct 6, 1951, recovered, was transported near Moscow for study and investigation. The Sirena warning device installed in the MiGs after 1952 was part of the results of this investigation. Also works with the G suits systems but no utilised in the MiG-15.

Thanks

Daniel Nole

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Hi Daniel, I welcome someone new interested in this topic which so fascinates me. May I make minor comments about just the two points above

1. The problem shown by the source you quote is what I might call the 'Korwald feedback effect'. Some researchers have in recent years read Korwald as well as published accounts from Russia, but then the info in Korwald kind of 'feeds back' into the Russian accounts to imply a neat correlation of facts from each side that wasn't really there. For example, the quote you gave tends to imply that the Soviets later found Shirlaw's plane to have been riddled by cannon fire causing a fuel problem, but there's actually no evidence of that. The Soviets didn't do their own wreck surveys at that time, and their verification comment for this downing is very vague, in fact it says the a/c crashed into the water and the fate of the pilot was unknown, though Shirlaw obviously turned up in the hands of their allies eventually, spent the war as prisoner and was released in 1953.

The part about "riddled fuel tanks" comes from the assumption or imagination of the writer of the website you quoted, putting together the Korwald entry including a fuel issue with knowledge that a Soviet claim was registered the same day.

Also note that Korwald is not 'the official version' in sense of some publicity release. Those explanations of loss are in almost all cases directly from then-secret records.

As best I can tell from April 3 '51's intelligence summary of the 5th AF, which has details of each flight, Shirlaw's particular flight didn't contact MiG's, though others did, which would explain the Soviet claim. It seems he really did get separated and have a navigation problem, and ran out of fuel. He also said so in his POW de-brief interview after his release in 1953. These were all secret documents at the time. I rate this incident 'probably not MiG' in my database, though I admit it's not 100% certain.

2. 49-1318 was damaged in air combat November 29, 1951. Although a photo dated December 5 seems to shows the damage to be relatively minor, there was a severe parts shortage for F-86A's in Korean in late '51; and 1318 was probably cannabalized for spares, and officially written off January 2, 1952, code M (combat loss). I count this as 'MiG loss/writeoff'. This is one of the legendary 'F-86's that were damaged and never repaired but the USAF didn't count them as losses'...except there are only a handful of such later write offs, and some *were* counted as combat losses.

Joe

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Thanks Joe for the answer and a pleasure to speak with a another passionate with this theme.Very interesant the history of the 49-1318. A good day this one for the V-VS, apart the damage of 49-1318 , Pepelyayev had also heavy damaged the 48-301, one of de A-5 of the first early series.This second one was also written off.
Losses for the V-VS this Nov 29, 1951 was one MiG downed by Vernon L. Wright of the 336th FIS.

After the point about the loss of the 49-1173 of Maj Shirlaw, that mean no F-86 were losses in combat with MiGs between Nov 22, 1950 and June 18, 1951 with the loss of 49-1307 of Capt William D. Crone of the 334th FIS? "Officially" the 49-1307 was the second F-86 loss in combat with MiGs.
Maybe the only "light"exception between this two dates was the damage with a hit of 37mm at the rudder of the 49-1227 the Apr 18, 1951 but this plane returned to Suwon. After my documentation was again damaged the Sept 13 of the same year.(A lucky F-86 this one after so a such hit).

I have finded also in the Korwald a curious event, but his one no with F-86 but with F9F Panthers of the USMC.
After the information the tragic loss of a complete formation of six Panthers with his pilots(All MIA) of the VMF-115, MAG-33 the Sep 10, 1952.Korwald speak of "Bad wx diversion from K-3 to K-2 after combat mission, crashed into Unmun-san 23 nm SE K-2". Maybe a navigational mistake, very bad weather with limited visibility and colission with montanious terrain. Very tragic.

Daniel Nole

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

BTW, may it would be interesting for you? Just now has been edited a new book about Russian aces of Korean war 1950-1953. Looks very serious, and good done. Only in Russian, edition of 750 copies, not so many. Author has spended a lot of time writing it, as it is written.

Regards,
Mirek Wawrzyński

See more:
http://aerospaceproject.ru/book/46.html


http://aerospaceproject.ru/book/min/asy.gif

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Hi,

What is your source for PLAAF losses? According to "Red Devils over Korean Sky" by I Seidov, PLAAF losses for June 53 were 11 MiGs and 7 pilots KIA.

Regards,
Szymon

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Well is a combination of differente sources, but the mentioned 11 PLAAF only losses for the whole month sound really too optimistic and that mean also a hipotetic a lot of overclaims by the USAF. Some 32 overclaims?
Actually this numbers are revised because the official one published some year before and still in many publications were biggest and mentioned 77 MiGs shot down this month!

After USAF claims, PLAAF MiGs were engaged the:

Jun 5 ,1953 (six MiGs shot down , a double for Vermont Garrison)

Jun 7 , 1953(three MiGs, included one for future astronaute Edwin Aldrin)

Jun 10, 1953(two MiGs for James Jabara)

Jun 18, 1953(three MiGs for Ralph Parr, Loonie Moore and Jabara)

Jun 24, 1953(eight MiGs , a double for Foster L. Smith and another for Vermont Garrison)

Jun 26, 1953(two MiGs for Thomas H. McQuade and Vermont Garrison)

Jun 29,1953(five MiGs for Nott, Howell, Palmer and Jensen all 51th FIW and John Granville-White of the RAF but assigned in the 51th FIW)

Jun 30, 1953(14 MiGs divided in: 12 for the 4th FIW and 2 for the 51th FIW)The two V-VS MIGs shot down this day were credited one to the 4th FIW and the other for a pilot of the RCAF assigned to the 51th FIW)

Regards

Daniel Nole

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Daniel,
As I know at last months of the war KPAFAC had three MIGs regiments, two of them over PLAAF command. In my opinion there is possible that most victims of 30 June clashes were from regiment that is simply not counted in PLAAF statistics. KPAFAC were poorly trained, so very heavy losses in one combat are highly possible. BTW Seidov claimed that on 30 June VVS suffered only one lose - a MiG from 224 IAP, pilot bailed out.

Here are PLAAF MIGs losses at last months of the war (according to Seidov book)
November 52 - 7 destroyed and 4 damaged, 2 pilots KIA
December 52 - 6 destroyed, 12 damaged (according to "Red Wings over Yalu" by Xiaoming Zhang 12 destroyed)
January 53 - 12 MiGs destroyed 4 pilots KIA, 1 Tu-2 destroyed
February 53 - 7 destroyed, 10 damaged, 5 KIA
March 53 - 13 destroyed, 11 damaged
April 53 - 15 destroyed, 3 pilots KIA
May 53 - 27 destroyed, 10 pilots KIA
June 53 - 11 destroyed, 7 pilots KIA
July 53 - 17 destroyed, 9 pilots KIA

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Thank Gizmo and already coincide about the time of start of operations of the fresh trained MiG-15 pilots of the KPAFAC.

Checking yesterday the Jun 10, 1953 I have finded one claim by Fedorets for one F-86s , the kill is also related in the book of Osprey "Soviet MiG-15 Aces of the Korean War".
After the soviet version , Fedorets firing from some 200 m hit the Sabre in the left wing , center section and this one broke up. His MiG was damaged by debris and landed taking with him a part of the left wing slat of the Sabre.The regimental commander told to the technicians "Maj Fedorets has saved us from having to search for the wreckage of the aircraft he shot shot down.He's brought back the evidence himself".

Well the point , aparently only one F-86s shot down this day and was by AAA. The F-86F-30 52-4339 of Capt Robert Coury of the 18th FBG, 12th FS was part of the D Flight lead by Major Howard Ebersole in a fighter-bomber mission againts Chinese supply dumps.
Maj Ebersole had see the plume of fire coming of the tailpipe of Coury F-86 after the AAA hit and had also checked his ejection after clearing "Old Papa San" mountain. The Sabre exploded as soon as he ejected and Coury was taked POW. Any mention of MiGs in the report.
Fedorets speak also about "Air Cover for the Suphun power station" and eight F-86 attacked and engaged. Other source speak about other two F-86 shot down this day but in any case and after the testimonies of that, Coury cannot be the victim of Fedorets or other MiG this day.

Regards

Daniel

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

A very good and complet document. Was write in 1952 by Squadron Leader Harbison. Information about MiGs are limited, but is normal, was write in 1952.

http://scilib.narod.ru/Avia/Sabre_vs_MiG/sabres.htm

Daniel

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Something of the other side. A Chinese film with PLAAF MiGs about the time of the Korean War. Of Course, is only a film like many others of Hollywood like the films of Alan Ladd, Robert Mitchum or William Holden, etc. Nice to see something of the other side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7Rm2zFcX_c

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Daniel Nole,
Thanks for posting that Chinese clip. It seems war movies all over the world are the same. Some nice clips of Migs.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Great thread guys. Thanks to all of you. So, what's the bottom line here? Did we grossly overclaim or just some? Did we understate our losses to MiGs to save face?

Understating losses is something all air forces do if they count a certain way. Recall the Schwinfert mission of 14-Oct-43 where we admitted officially losing 60 B-17s. We also had a further 30 return that were fit only for spare parts and were scrapped. Why are they not counted as losses and Luftwaffe victories?

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

1. I think the figures are in an earlier post in this thread; UN fighters claimed around 800 MiG's destroyed (the vast majority by F-86's); apparently around 550-600 were destroyed (319 Sovet per Seidov's book, 224 Chinese per their official figures, probably several dozen NK, based on No Gum-sok's estimate that 100 NK MiG's were lost to all causes). That's quite accurate claiming by WWII standards. It's corroborated by the figures for certain sub periods of the war where individual Soviet losses are well known and Chinese a/c were not heavily involved, the % is similar. OTOH B-29 credits for MiG's were almost wholly erroneous, perhaps 3 destroyed v 27 credits and 2 of the real kills were not officially credited. B-26's downed 2 MiG's according to Soviet and Chinese accounts (one each) whereas no credits were awarded on the US side to B-26 gunners. Such a random relationship of bomber claims and actual victories though was also typical of WWII.

2. No evidence of systematic deliberate understatment, and actual understatement, which as you say depends on how you want to count, doesn't change the figures substantially. See the recent F-84 thread for a comparison of the monthly figures in 1953 Statistics Digest for F-84 air combat losses v incident by incident comparison with benefit of knowing the enemy claims. The actual total is relatively slightly higher, but in some cases the Stats Digest numbers for particular months are too high; there are simply errors in that table. It's similar for the F-86 and other types.

3. Two distinctions which might be made here are firstly, accounts and figures released to the public at the time v what records said, and secondly whether record keeping in USAAF in WWII was the same across numbered AF's or same as USAF in Korea, not necessarily. The number of a/c written off due to air combat damage was a small % of the total air combat loss in Korea*; in a few cases a/c are mentioned in unit historical reports as 'lost' (to the front line unit) which were actually later repaired and used by other units in combat.

*the largest proportional discrepancy between Stats Digest and case by case analysis is for B-29's. The 1953 Stats Digest gives 17 B-29's lost in air combat, one in July 1950, to Yak-9, the other 16 would be due to MiG-15's. It omits 2 RB-29's (operations and results still classified at that time and the column heading *is* 'B-29'), 1 B-29 outright known MiG loss in the records, 1 a/c believed lost to AAA which may have been lost to MiG's**, 1 a/c written off due to MiG damage, 2 a/c which may have been written off due to MiG damage (badly damaged by MiG's, their Individual A/c Record Cards or other proof of repair cannot be found), 1 a/c which may have been written off to either AAA or MiG.** All other B-29's damaged by MiG's (and a couple by Yak-9 and La-11) over Korea were repaired, AFAIK, as evidenced by their IARC's and/or presence on later missions.
**In the raids of Jun 10 1952 where MiG-15's first operated effectively at night, 1 B-29 was recorded as lost to MiG's, one to AAA (based on surviving crew accounts) one damaged final fate unknown. Soviet pilots made several claims, but it seems possible those were duplicate claims for the 1 B-29, rather than errors on US side as to loss/damage cause of the other two.

Joe

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Thanks, Joe

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

I saw the "History Channel" story of one F-86 ace who chased a MiG into China to shoot it down but then had to ditch his jet on the way home. No gun camera and I believe no wingman. I wish I could remember the pilot's name to see if he got credit or just a good "probable" story.

Also the "incidents" early in the war of Russian airbases getting attacked by mistake. Where there any MiGs destroyed there?

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

Several had crossed the border in hot pursuit. Can be Maj Robinson Risner of the 336th FIs 4th FIW or Capt Ralph Parr of the 335th FIS 4th FIW. This last had shot down two MiGs of the 535th IAP over Dapu(Fencheng)the 7th June 1953.

Daniel

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

About the attack on Russian airfields: Two F-80C of the 49th FBG straffed Sukhaya Rechka, near Vladivostok the October 8th 1950, some sixty-two miles from the border with Korea in Soviet Union.

United States eventually volunteered an explanation to the UN. According to General Douglas MacArthur, commander in chief of the combined forces in Korea, the attack against Sukhaya Rechka was a mistake due to navigational error and poor judgement. The air force commander was relieved, the pilot were disciplined, and the United States offered to pay damages.

After Sukhaya Rechka was attaked, all V-VS regiments in the Far East were placed on Alert-1, the first time since the end of the Second World War.

No MiGs were deployed at Sukhaya Rechka; only P-63 Kingcobras of the 821th IAP 190th IAD.Seven planes were damaged and one destroyed. The others were repaired.No human losses were suffered. After two straffing runs the F-80C returned to base and... poor guys. Also, for sure the V-VS base commander of Sukhaya Rechka had not a easy life, the day after, October 9th.

Re: F-86 vs MiG 15, the claims...
 

A interview of V.N.Zabelin. Excelent and recommended.

http://www.airforce.ru/history/cold_...hapter5_en.htm