[Buz]

This has been an interesting discussion, but alas the want to review a pilot’s score seems to be the "in thing" these days.

I acknowledge that over claiming is a constant in war, especially air side of the conflict, with closure speeds in excess of 700mph, split second the opposition is in the gun sight, the need to keep the head on a swivel stick, the need to keep control of your aircraft, and most importantly the need and want to survive.

Of interest I find the statements in this discussion about Hans-Joachim Marseille's claims as being quite accurate of note, due to my own interest in the Curtiss Kittyhawk Family.

I will firstly state that my belief is that Marseille's score is and always will be 158. I, however, have yet to be able to confirm all his claims against first and second source data for the P-40 aircraft. Does this make him a "fraudster" - certainly not, does it mean that P-40/P-46 claims were miss-identified - possibly (in the case of the P-46 certainly). Could it be that the aircraft although damaged made it back to home plate, the pilot claiming in good faith - certainly (bare in mind just how much damage a P-40 can take - I'll also assume that the Russian aircraft could also take a beating as well).

Does this mean I must review and write to the world that his score was “XX”, being lower than what he claimed - Not at all. I can tell the world with some certainty which of his claims can be tallied with available records, the rest are presently unidentified, or in some cases disputed as other German pilots claimed during the same sorties/timeframes/areas as well as other airforce pilots claiming as well.

Maybe a thought would be post the ones that can be verified through other documentation (sources quoted), and that way others who may have additional data from untapped sources can add or provide further relevant details, so that we as a community can further our knowledge of these airmen.

I believe that people should understand that the scores stand, for right or wrong. Also in many cases the primary source of data is no longer available to be checked - These being the pilots themselves.....most are not here to defend themselves. The written records, both official and unofficial can and are at time in error, with both dates, times and in some cases area.

In many cases this form of historical need for accuracy is a blight to our research as I know personally of pilots not wishing to discuss their operations and experiences because "What's the point, no-one believes us anyhow" (direct quote from one pilot).

Regards

Buz