[Paul Thompson]

Gabor,

Thank you yet again, those mechanical reports are a wonderful source! I agree with you completely, they must be the most authoritative sources on the subject and they do match quite closely with the overall statistics. The 244 BAD seems to have had every conceivable sub-type of Boston in Soviet service. So much for serviceability!

The aerial recconaisance in force is an interesting way of getting around the official reluctance to authorise fighter sweeps. Given the scale of this phenomenon, do you know if it was 17 VA policy?

Given the way that you compared La-7FN to the Yak-11 mis-designation and the fact that this designation has never been noted in a published source, I’m inclined to think that it’s just a result of confusion among users of the La-5FN.

8 Il-2s from one regiment, those are heavy losses! Do you know the overall Soviet loss figures for the day? The Soviet ground forces were apparently in great disarray on this precise date, considering large-scale withdrawal from the entire area.

More from the book:

1. 17 VA strength on 17 January 1945 (serviceable/unserviceable), note plenty of interesting changes, including disappearing Il-2s:
La-5 – 148/40
Yak-3, 9 – 154/30
Il-2 – 265/33
B-3 (A-20 Boston) – 97/10
Po-2 – 94/2
Pe-2 reconnaisance – 18/2
Yak-9 reconnaisance – 8/1
Il-2 artillery spotting – 15/1
Yak-9 artillery spotting – 9/3
Total serviceable 808

2. Il-2 successes in supporting 5th Guars Cavalry Corps on 25 January 1945:
58 Il-2 of 10 ShAK flew 164 sorties, lost 1 Il-2 to AAA. They received a commendation from the cavalry commander for breaking “the decisive German tank attack”.

Regards,

Paul Thompson