Quote:
Originally Posted by Nokose
That doesn't always mean that an aircraft "reported as shot down by ZA" did not get shot down also by a German fighter.
|
I can second that. Often, it was "safer", less "complicated" to report an aircraft lost to flak than to enemy fighters. I encountered many instances when a loss officially attributed to anti-aircraft defence was most probably scored by fighters. I found such cases especially when researching USAAF losses over Central and Eastern Europe. That's why it's recommended to assess
overall losses against
overall claims (including flak). For example, I used such approach in my book, "From Barbarossa to Odessa", vols. 1 and 2, dealing with the air war over the Southern area of the Eastern Front (June-October 1941). I was very surprised to realise how inaccurate the claims of all involved parties were against actual losses. Finally, not only total losses should be taken into consideration, but also damaged ones, as often such damaged aircraft were eventually written off, but in all cases were certainly taken out of service for a shorter or longer while, which was the aim of the adversary when pursuing a "kill".