Quote:
Originally Posted by HGabor
Bronc, I think you are correct. With an instant ambush it was next to impossible to verify the results. Even a few 'very visual' hits were not enough to down a plane. This is why about 70% of Hartmann's so called 'victories' turn out to be just damaged ones. Lipfert eg. knew, that just to damage an enemy plane was already a huge achievement in itself. Three 'real' air-to-air victories a day was an extraordinary and unusual success for any pilot. This is why I am still amazed that despite of this, generations truly believed the repeated six or more air-to-air victories for Hartmann... General rule: victories can/should ultimately be confirmed by the verified losses of the opponent side, not by the reported claims of your own. (For any sides, of course.)
Gabor
|
It gets even more confusing when you have a very rugged aircraft (say a Grumman F4F, P40 or P47) vs a lightly armed aircraft (say a Mc202 or a Ki43, or even a early mark of Zero), especially when you're evasive action of choice is dive like hell at full throttle-all the opponent has time to see is an aircraft diving like it's out of control, streaming black smoke (exhausts?) after being hit. I think Lundstrom 'First Team' recounted a Coral Sea dogfight where a F4F pilot got jumped; dove away then climbed back up into the fight several times. He survived but multiple Zero pilots claimed a shot down 'Grumman' in each encounter.