[kolya1]

Hello,

Not intending to get involved in this thread, I just wanted to clarify a point Kutscha made : the figures he quoted are not comparable. The figure for Typhoon losses includes losses to all causes, whereas the Il-2 losses are including only combat losses. Comparing the proportion of these losses suffered to AAA makes no sense. And you'd have to integrate a number of factors such as the intensity of enemy fighter activity, the losses to sortie ratio, the period of the war in which these losses were suffered,...

Another interesting point : I didn't know about the Finnish use of AT rifles against aircraft, but it's an interesting fact that the Soviet troops reportedly did also occasionally use AT rifles (14,5 mm) against Luftwaffe aircraft. I would need to check my sources to give more details, but I think this use of AT rifles was mentioned during the Battle of Stalingrad.

Besides, I think this thread is going nowhere. What exactly is the question being discussed ?

May I suggest to clearly define the subject of new threads, such as "effectiveness of armor on WWII combat aircraft" or "results of air attacks against ground forces in WWII" ? Both subjects would be interesting, but such a discussion would require solid sources (such as loss reports from ground unit indicating the number of losses to air attacks, or BDA data collected after the occupation of formerly enemy-held territory).

Regards,

Kolya.