Top Bf 109 aces
Dear gentlemen
this list compiles all aces with 150 or more Bf 109 kills. Enjoy. I would be very intrested in the exact Bf 109 score of Stotz. Michael 1. Hartmann 352 2. Barkhorn 301 3. Rall 275 4. Batz 237 5. Graf 212 6. Lipfert 203 7. Ehrler 200 8. Schuck 198 9. Krupinski 195 10.Kirschner 188 11.Brändle 180 12.Bär 179 13.Weissenberger 177 14.Reinert 174 15.Schmidt 173 16.Steinhoff 169 17.Stotz ~163 18.Wilcke 162 19.Sturm 158 20.Marseille 158 21.Düttmann 152 22.Beisswenger 152 23.Hafner 151 |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Michael
have you done any (recent) reading around the subject ? |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
What do you mean ?
M |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Hi Michael
Only Hartmann, Weissenberger, Krupinski and Schmidt are listed correctly with Bf109 confirmations. Schuck had only a total of 181 plus 25 unconfirmed, the others slightly less in each case, in my opinion! Düttmann had some 1945 panzers counted as aircraft!!! Kind Regards Johannes |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Good evening Johannes,
very intresting. What is your source ? Michael |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Quote:
Trust me on this: he is correct. Also, don't bug him too much. He doesn't post often, and we don't want to waste his time with posts about very basic information. Thank you, Bronc |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
If I may... I remember upsetting a TOCH member greatly because I dared to try and discuss an issue further with a member under nickname Seaplanes, who posted reply to my initial query on the He 51 designation. Part of the problem was that I just did not know who I was conversing with. And I still don't know it to this date. And... that is perfectly fine. It is a privacy issue, I do not need to know.
However, in order to try and avoid misunderstandings like these, can the individuals who made (far) greater contribution in the field than the rest of us, be given some elevated status (irrespective of the number of their posts) on the TOCH, so they can be approached with a healthy respect thereby avoiding (petty) queries on their sources, or the like? This is just a proposal for consideration. There might be certain limitations in the software that runs the TOCH that I am not aware of, or the proposal itself cannot be given the green light, or ... Regards, Sinisa |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
There are dozens, maybe 100, serious, respected, (renown) world-class researchers, resources and authors on TOCH. Many of them don't post all that often, and it's best not to waste their time with posts about very basic information.
The archives contain vast stores of knowledge, and they should be consulted. It's an honor and a privilege to be here. This should never be forgotten. Thank you, Bronc |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Thanks for the complement Bronc
Michael You base your totals on the old accepted totals, these are sometimes including unconfirmed claims, sometimes like Kurt Tanzer I just cannot see how their totals are given. My source is the micro films listing Staffel/daily Luftwaffe claims, these have few mistakes, have areas missing, but are consistant. They run-out in late 1944. Regarding Stotz, we all previously all led to believe a total of 189. In the Oetersen air museum a total of 183 is given. On the micro films 182 + 1 unconfirmed. Last 173 in the East. Personally I do not have access to the Russian losses, however other specialist enthusiasts have perused his claims and concluded that Stotz was a honest claimer until he crossed-paths with Hans"Assi" Hahn, then his claims like his Gruppenkommandeur are spectacular and rather dis-honest, then upon Hahn's capture they return to a normal claim pattern and honesty. My friend Bernd Barbas knew Heinrich Sturm's wingman. We quizzed this wingman when we couldn't find the 150+ claims for Sturm, his wingman told us that a total of around 130 was more realistic. If you or anybody else would like "my" list of all claimers i.e any Luftwaffe pilot claiming at least one confirmed kill, then drop me a personal e.mail . I have found so far 7600 claimers, of which 2600 were 5+ aces. Kind Regards Johannes |
Re: Top Bf 109 aces
Dear Johannes,
thanks for the information. Do you think there is a common reason or tendency for the widely printed wrong totals or do we have to consider each case differently ? Have a nice week, Michael |
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 21:53. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net