Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

My article about Rudel’s successes on 8.Feb.45:
https://warspot.ru/13416-trinadtsat-tankov-za-odnu-nogu
Original title was “Hard day of Oberst Rudel”.
The article was heavily edited. Anyway, the essence remained intact.
Text in Russian but at least the map is illustrative.

In brief:
8.Feb.45 was the day then Rudel lost his foot but, according to his memoirs, destroyed 13 Soviet tanks near Lebus (western bank of Oder, 10 km N Frankfurt).

60+ TsAMO folders were used for analysis.
Lebus was in the sector of 69.Army. 8.Guard Army (neighbor of 69.Army in Oder bridgehead) also checked in details – all units with tracked vehicles with guns, including light self-propelled guns SU-76, were took into account.
Two other armies were on Oder - 33.Army and 5.Shock Army. They were checked on the levels of armies war diaries, operative reports and combat reports.
1 T-34 was destroyed and 2 T-34 were damaged during the day – all of them near Lebus, from 68.independent tank brigade of 69.Army. Can’t find yet (but hope to find later) detailed report about the loss/damaged. In the different day summaries the reasons of the losses varied a bit:
- during the bombing by 30 planes between 16:00 and 17:00 msc
- by aviation and artillery
- by aircraft guns.
As for so vividly described destroying of «IS» heavy tank – first «IS» of 69.Army crossed the river at night 11/12.Feb.43, the sole lost «IS» of 69.Army in February was destroyed during the heavy artillery shelling on 26.Feb.45.

So Rudel’s description of 8.Feb.43 is somewhere between huge exaggeration and pure fantasy. Maybe it is too naively but I though before that his memoirs are closer to reality a bit. Of course it is the one day only, but anyway …

Can’t find for additional analysis any other day relevant to theme “Rudel vs tanks” with exact location and exact date.

Whether the time of Rudel’s forced landing on 8.Feb.45 is known?
Also interesting what is the source (apart from memoirs) of the info about his 30+ forced landings due to AA fire.

Best regards,
Andrey

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Sad to hear your text had been edited but I've read it (using Google translator :o ).

Your research are very interesting and we can be more or less surprised of its results, but I think many will appreciate your work on this subject.

Also about asking the source, we also may ask from what came from his various tally for victory credit.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Interesting article, thanks for sharing.

From my own experience with books and documents, overclaiming in the air is nothing compared to overclaiming in the ground. Overestimating the enemy losses by 5 or 10 was usual. Like being attacked by a force estimated to be a battalion and claiming 500 enemy dead.

As for Rudel, the "legend" is probably too great to be true, but still he flew 2500 missions, so I think his real score should still be impressive, even if far less than 500 tanks. And actually I think judging from the air if a tank was destroyed or not, especially while under fire of AA defences, was probably way more difficult that what the book says (I have the French version). So Rudel might have been an optimist claimer, considering each tank he attacked as destroyed if he could see fire or smoke around it.

I find your article especially interesting because they are IMHO too few written on the effect of the air attacks on the ground. I was for example very disappointed that the 2nd TAF series of book was focused at 95% on air losses and air claims, while only listing ground targets and their eventual losses (or claims from the RAF pilots), while the 2nd TAF first work was to attack ground targets, not to defeat the Luftwaffe.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Very interesting Andrey

But why censored??
Can't say I am surprised. Rudel (and other ground support pilots) must have been just as affected by the "glory syndrom" prevailing within the Luftwaffe as anyone else.

The Western Allies evaluated their own close support effort shortly after the war and if I remember right, it was not quite what was expected. As long as soft skinned vehicles were concerned, the accuracy was within reasonable limits but when it came to armoured vehicles the accuracy vs claims was much lower than expected.

The Western Allies chose rockets as their best way forward. That is not quite comparable with the Germans who chose mostly large caliber guns instead.

No idea really how accurate the German close support aircraft (Ju 87G and Hs 129) were against the Soviet armoured vehicles. That is something which only can be evaluated by our Russian friends. But I have a feeling it is not going to be a happy reading for those still believing in all the German claims.

Cheers
Stig

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Once again the 'abschuss' fanatics are at work, trying to denigrate the achievements of genuine German heroes. I agree that the figure of 519 is probably wrong, but so were all claims by all combatants involved in the conflict.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Or to put it another way, "trying to establish the facts".

I agree but in the German section of the forum it's Germans that we tend to discuss.

There is no question that Rudel was a physcially brave man but his own book left me in no doubt that he was an unrepentant Nazi. He may have been a hero in National Socialist Germany but citizens of democracies are entitled to take a more detached view.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Thank you for the most interesting article! And thank you, google translator
Richard

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Thanks for your opinions, gentlemen!
Yes, apparently. Most interesting are his results as a pilot of Ju87G with 37-mm guns because the real effectiveness of that type still unclear.

Not censored but edited. Catchy titles were added (partly too catchy for me). Article size was shortened a bit; in some places the style was changed – partly well, partly not so well for me; etc. But the essence and the facts remained intact.

I'm not abschuss fanatic certainly :)
Initial goal was to establish can I use the «Stuka pilot» as more or less reliable source for description of some events of 1943 or not. From this perspective I was wholly disillusioned. Rudel as a memoirs author isn’t Lipfert certainly.
The 2nd operant motive was pure curiosity of course.
As for “denigrate the achievements”: it seems the real achievements of Luftwaffe (indisputable) and such stories as about 8.Feb.45 are different things.

Some questions to the forum members:
According to the memoirs his flugbuch was lost at the end of the war. Can it be true that Rudel with his 2500+ sorties had a single logbook? And what about such invaluable source as his Leistungsbuch?

Are the some logbooks of Rudel’s air gunners survived the war?

Whether NVM contains the info about Rudel on 8.Feb.45?

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

It eould be interesting to examine Rudel's claims against Soviet ships with actual losses and also with other German engaged planes/units. There was Soviet book with list of warships lost during ww2, and claims from Rudel's book are higher than those combined...

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel on 8.Feb.45 - the article
 

Hello Andrey,

Gen.Qu. loss return 12 Feb 1945 item 63:
8.2. Stab/S.G. 2 Feindflug, Ort: nicht gemeldet, Ursache: Sprenggeschoß, Flugzeugmuster/Werk.Nr.: wird nachgemeldet, Oberst Rudel, Hans-Ulrich (Geschwaderkommodore) verletzt.
Correction 6 March 1945: Füge hinzu Ju 87 G-2 Werk-Nr. 494220 Bruch 50%.

Regards
Leo