Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxim1
With all respect to Mr. Bergström, it is only his own assumption. I suggest that all aircraft that have been listed in "Durch Feindeinwirkung" and "Ohne Feindeinwirkung" columns were irreplaceable (i.e. total) losses. One reason for this is that the aircraft were completely excluded from their units. If an aircraft received a minor damage and only needs a minor repair, it would be still listed in unit strength returns as "temporarily unserviceable".
|
But Christer Bergström is a noted researcher who deals with a specific example in the message under discussion and seems very confident in his opinion. Since this is a matter fundamental to the use of a major documentary source on the Luftwaffe, we cannot discard Mr. Bergström's views so easily. See link:
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showpo...98&postcount=3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxim1
Yes, that is a big problem. However, my totals of aircraft being on strength are based on the same Bewegungsmeldungen (down to Gruppe or in some cases even to Staffel level) and seems like they have a very good coincidence with Luftwaffe strength figures for Eastern front known from other sources.
|
I am not so sure your strength numbers match the published data well. Here is a table comparing your figures to Hooton's, with breaks inserted for ease of reading:
Hooton Maksim M greater by
March 1943 1571 br 2496 br 925
April 1943 1777 br 2813 br 1036
May 1943 2070 br 2844 br 774
June 1943 2095 br 2955 br 860
July 1943 2002 br 3094 br 1092
August 1943 1858 br 2752 br 894
September 1943 1608 br 2432 br 824
October 1943 1510 br 2322 br 812
November 1943 1629 br 2353 br 724
December 1943 1583 br 2464 br 881
By way of minor addition to the loss data, Hooton lists 65 day combat losses in the West in the first half of 1943, so the Luftflotte 3 dayliight activities do not affect the loss picture significantly.