[Arsenal VG-33]

Originally Posted by Juha

Soviet tanks losses, as you see, Il-2s were not able to give free ride to Soviet AFVs, in fact losses were very heavy.
1944

Tanks: 16900

Heavy: 900 , Medium: 13800, Light: 2200

SP guns: 6800

Heavy: 900 , Medium: 1000, Light: 4900





Juha

Hello.

Just my two pences

PS Il-2 loss info

According to Yefim Gordon's Il-2 and Il-10 book, the Il-2 suffered the following losses:
Red Army: 10759 (24% to fighters, 43% to AAA, 32% failed to return, 1% on the ground)
Naval Forces:807

I would say, from V. Perov and O. Rastrenin book

For 1944: 3344 losses, 822 lost to fighters, 1859 to AAA, 569 failed to return, 34 on the ground.

Here is the statistics of Il-2 losses, according to Hans Seidl:
Year - Total Losses - To Enemy Action - % of Strength at Hand
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1941* - 1100 - 600 - 73.3%
1942 - 2600 - 1800 - 34.2%
1943 - 7200 - 3900 - 45.0%
1944 - 8900 - 4100 - 46.6%
1945** - 3800 - 2000 - 27.3%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total: 23600 12400 70.3%
* presumably from June 22
** until May 10
Therefore, over 50% of losses [not counting the 'worn out' category] was due to enemy.

I would say according to statistical Krivosheiev’s book, based on GHQ accounts. An account is to be complete and balance is about zero. So it’s done. Reasons of losses are of secondary importance.

So on 1.1.44 VVS had 8 800 stormoviks on line , and 10 200 on the 1.1.45
With 10 300 planes recieved for the year, it makes 8 900 account losses.

Exactly as for yout tank loss numbers, from the same source:
On 1.1.44 RKKA had 24 400 tanks and SU, 35 400 on the 1.1.45
Since 34 700 were recieved, 23 700 were lost.

Can you give us partition between those written-off for wear, for combat damages, for technical reasons?

So what conclusion?
Losses were high of course, but not dispropotionnaly higher than in the others armies. Despite them, the Red Army was constantly growing in force, quality and size...
For instance the Il-2 had a loss rate of 1 plane for 85 combat (in fact more than 85...) missions in 1944, instead of 1 for 13 in 1941. Not bad for a plane that had no more than 100 TBO engine hours anyway!
1.1%; compare to USAF bombers loss rate.


And others rough numbers from Alexeenko (using TsAMO op. 64-65 archives) docs:

2999 failed to return, 107 from fighers, 583 AAA, 38 on airfields, 1141 by accident, 2594 from wear ; 7452 total Il-2/10 losses.

It means some early, uncomplete and uncompilated stats probably at the end of 1944; the way your’e managing your stats even without being biaised, can change the whole picture and meaning.

So how was made the research work from later more complete and compilated archives used by Rastrenin or Krivosheiev? I don’t know...

But what is 100% sure from Efremov, Romanov, Zinoviev (yes, yes the famous anti-soviet dissident) and other Il-2 crews testimony, it is that was far better to write off planes for "combat reasons" rather for "flying accident". USSR was the kind of contry where pilots were easily prosecuted and sometimes executed for "unjustified plane crashes". It also should be remembered...when just looking at crude statistics.

Regards