Erich Hartmann - several questions

[Nokose]

Nikita, Thanks for the answer on the above question on Pokrishkin.

I believe Hartmann stated he was a bad shot in "The Blond Knight of Germany" which is why he bore in close to fire. If your a bad shot a prolong dogfight might not be to your advantage.

In Valeny Romanenko's book "Airacobras enter Combat" he stated that he thought that Hartmann might have shot down on 15Apr43 (he listed a time of 19:00?) one of the two P-39's flown by St.Lt M. Petrov and Serz. Bezbabnov of the 45 IAP (100 GIAP). No location and the time 19:00 seems to be way off from the German times. He also gave two other P-39's same unit shot down at 13:00. Tony Wood's list has the following.

Hartmann 15:33 85192
Mato Dukovac 15/JG52 14:50 Krimskaya
Josef Zwernemann III/JG52 12:52 85753
Lt. Wolf Ettel 4/JG3 15:30 86834
Lt Hans Reiff 8/JG3 14:48 3km SE of Neledshskaya
Lt. Helmut Haberda 5/JG52 uk hrs 85152

Is Hartmann's one of these? And was this a overclaim day for P-39's?

[Nikita Egorov]

Michael,

Well, I have not yet researched this day in details, too many fault claims. First of all St. Bezbabnov was shot down on P-40 and evidently by Waldemar Eyrich of II/JG3. Valery, in his book, it was one of the first books with an attempt to match some two sided info, apparantly omitted damaged Aircobras. In general 216 IAD suffered the following losses: 16 GIAP two were shot up and belly landed, including Maj. Kryukov chief navigator of the regiment, 45 IAP two Aircobras were shot down of S/L Petrov and St. Sapyan and two more made emergency landings due to battle damage, by S/L Dmitry Glinka and St. Popov plus P-40 of Bezbabnov was shot down. From that List Petrov's P-39 was attaked twice, first it was damaged and left the combat, then finished off by another Me-109...So, we have 7 lost Aircobras (2 irrevocably+5 damaged to different extent) and 9 German claims on them. I will check if 298 IAP had any more losses that day.

[Dénes Bernád]

Originally Posted by Nikita Egorov

So, we have 7 lost Aircobras (2 irrevocably+5 damaged to different extent) and 9 German claims on them.

Nikita, I also have the same approach when studying a particular air combat: list all aircraft of all sides, no matter if destroyed, damaged, or broke combat due to technical fault, as often the real cause is improperly listed.

If a pilot claimed a victory and the damaged enemy aircraft crept back to own territory, that can still be regarded as a justified claim, as at least the target was hit and a certain amount of damage caused (N.B. this total number added individually is often higher than the official statistics released for that day or certain time period!).
And, of course, not forgetting claims by flak crews, too, if it was the case.

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by Dénes Bernád

Nikita, I also have the same approach when studying a particular air combat: list all aircraft of all sides, no matter if destroyed, damaged, or broke combat due to technical fault, as often the real cause is improperly listed.

If a pilot claimed a victory and the damaged enemy aircraft crept back to own territory, that can still be regarded as a justified claim, as at least the target was hit and a certain amount of damage caused (N.B. this total number added individually is often higher than the official statistics released for that day or certain time period!).
And, of course, not forgetting claims by flak crews, too, if it was the case.

To me, more information is better than less, so if the author tells me about damaged a/c and mechanical losses so much the better. Also, I agree that damaged (but repaired) a/c provide an *explanation* for overclaims of a/c destroyed, but are not IMO a 'confirmation'. Anyway as long as the author provides the info for the reader to make the decision himself, it's fine.

But I am most curious about this quote:
"as often the real cause is improperly listed. "
This relates to earlier exchange about 'distrust' of German archives, where you seemed to say your statement about them had been mischaracterized, but then this statement seems to somewhat support 'distrust'. Can you explain more, perhaps with examples, causes being mistated, and how we know this is true?

I've seen almost verbatim statements, by the same person actually! that US records in Korea are to be 'distrusted' because, among other reasons, loss causes were often mistated, it is alleged. But in fairly extensive research in those records with close comparison to detailed MiG claims from Soviet records, I have not found that. Both sides virtually always agree when and where the air combats of the day occurred and which general type of UN a/c was involved (swept or straight wing jet or prop; these broad categories were almost never mistaken for one another, it seems). And, losses of similar a/c type on the UN side attiributed to non-air combat causes were usually of different units than the ones involved in the air combat, at different times of day, and usually documented with additional details that would seem preposterous to compile in secret if just made up....why bother? (and I'm speaking strictly of then-secret records, not contemporary press releases). Also, I'm not speaking of cases where a/c were lost in known contact with enemy a/c but the cause was positively stated as something else: that's also rare, 'unk' losses in contact with enemy a/c were generally grouped with known air combat losses. As with any rule there are exceptions to the above, mechanical cases where it's not possible to absolutely determine whether there was also contact w/ enemy a/c by that particular flight, etc. but it's a pretty small %. Yet it's often stated, it's even 'internet conventional wisdom' that the loss causes were 'often' or even usually or systematically mistated in that case.

Can you compare and contrast this to the situations you are speaking of? wrt 'real cause improperly listed'. It's a pretty far from Hartmann, but loss record debates tend to be interconnected, because proof that such fudging of loss causes was done in one case makes it more plausible that it was done in other cases.

Joe

[klemchen]

Hi everybody,

could it not be that most cases of overclaiming were in fact cases of over-self-confidence? I imagine that the experts were quite convinced they could tell when an opponent was finished (cf. Obleser's assertion above), particularly when they saw pieces coming off their target or smoke and fire developing. I have read of several occasions when a later expert was shot down while watching his victim crash, so from then on he abandoned that habit and also told young pilots not to indulge in it.
I suspect the weakest point in Luftwaffe claims is that probably in most cases they were confirmed by the wingmen. These were mostly subordinates of their leaders, and it must have taken some courage to contradict those, all the more when the wingman did not know for sure that it was not a victory he was supposed to confirm.

Regards,
klemchen

[Russell]

Originally Posted by Nokose

Nikita, Thanks for the answer on the above question on Pokrishkin.

I believe Hartmann stated he was a bad shot in "The Blond Knight of Germany" which is why he bore in close to fire. If your a bad shot a prolong dogfight might not be to your advantage.

In Valeny Romanenko's book "Airacobras enter Combat" he stated that he thought that Hartmann might have shot down on 15Apr43 (he listed a time of 19:00?) one of the two P-39's flown by St.Lt M. Petrov and Serz. Bezbabnov of the 45 IAP (100 GIAP). No location and the time 19:00 seems to be way off from the German times. He also gave two other P-39's same unit shot down at 13:00. Tony Wood's list has the following.

Hartmann 15:33 85192
Mato Dukovac 15/JG52 14:50 Krimskaya
Josef Zwernemann III/JG52 12:52 85753
Lt. Wolf Ettel 4/JG3 15:30 86834
Lt Hans Reiff 8/JG3 14:48 3km SE of Neledshskaya
Lt. Helmut Haberda 5/JG52 uk hrs 85152

Is Hartmann's one of these? And was this a overclaim day for P-39's?

On page 91 and 92 of Kurt Braatz's biog of Walter Krupinski, there is a commentary on the circumstances of Hartmanns' claim, near Taman and a single P-39, which Krupinski coached Hartmann to shoot down.

Regards

Russell

[DiegoZampini]

Nikita:
One more reason for me to assume that Straznicky was Danilov's victim is the fact that Straznicky flew a Bf.109F-4/R1, that is an gondola-armed Messerschmitt, usually tasked with the mission to intercept and destroy the heavily armoured Il-2s.
Kind regards
Diego

[DiegoZampini]

We have discussing about how uncomplete and reliable/unreliable are the German loss records are. I will show some examples:
o In Osprey’s book P-39 Aircobra Aces of World War 2, written by George Mellinger and John Stanaway, it is included the account of the famous German ace Walter Nowotny about how he claimed to shot down three Soviet P-39s, but also his Fw.190 was seriosuly damaged by one of the Russian-flown Aircobras. Nowotny own’s testimony: “The whole fight had lasted exactly 45 minutes. After a successful landing, I climbed out of my machine dreched in sweat. I examined the damage in silence. It was worse than I realised. Half the rudder is missing and one aleiron shot to pieces. My main undercarriage tyres are bullet-holed and one cylinder and cylinder head completely shot away. More damage to the engine, bullet-riddled wings…” No exact date is given for this combat, but occurred indeed in 1943, when Nowotny began to fly the Focke-Wulf fighter. The only ocasions on that year when Nowotny claimed to shot down three P-39s in one combat occurred on 19 August and 9 October 1943. The extension of the damage mentioned by Nowotny in his Fw.190 indicates that this loss should be obligatorly recorded in German loss records, at least as damaged in a 40%-50%. However, in the available list of JG 54 losses, Nowotny appears only shot down once (on 19 July 1941, flying Bf.109E-7 WkNr 1137) and forced to belly land a second time (on 11 August 1942, also in a Messerschmitt - his Bf.109F-4 WkNr 10360 was scrapped). No trace of this shot-up Focke-Wulf nowhere the more complete list of JG 54 losses available so far , which is fully admitted by Nowotny himself. Neither on 19.08.1943 nor on 9.10.1943. On such dates there are other Fw.190s admitted lost, but they were flown by other pilots, and in the cases where no pilot’s name is given, none belong to the 1./JG 54 (where Nowotny served at that time).
o In Christer Bergstrom’s work Black Cross – Red Star, Volume 3, it is stated that “[Major Joachim] Müncheberg, holder of the Knight Cross with Oak Leaves, had been one of the most outstanding German fighter pilots on the western Front in 1941-42 and had been posted to Stab/JG 51 to be tutored in the role of Geschwaderkommodore under Major Karl-Gottfired Nordmann’s supervision. Muncheberg had the concept of air war over Russia as did most German fighter pilots on other fronts, that it was something of an ‘easy game’. After getting shot down by Soviet fighters twice within two weeks, he reconsidered his opinion.” . Bergstrom referes to the aerial battles around the Rzhev salient in July-August 1942. But to look for these two times that Joachim Müncheberg was shot down in Jochen Prien’s meticulous book (which cover the period May 1942 to early February 1943) proved to be infrunctuos – they simply are not there.
o Also in Bergstrom’s work is mentioned an audaceous raid carried out by Soviet paratroopers against the German aerodrome at Maykop at 22:00 hs on 23 October 1942. “Hans Ellendt clearly remembers that the paratroopers wreaked havoc on II./JG 52 before withdrawing. According to the official German report, only one of the II./JG 52’s Bf.109s and two Ju.52s were destroyed, […]. But according to Ellendt, the Soviet paratroopers had run along the nicely parked Bf.109s, shooting them up or heaving hand greades into their open cockpits in a quick and skillfully coducted raid. In this manner, they destroyed at least a dozen Bf.109s.” . So, there are at least 11 Messerschmitt fighters which were actually lost but did not appear in official Luftwaffe loss records.
o On the night of 25-26 October 1942 the night bombers Po-2 of the 588 NBAP flown by female pilots made a very succesful raid against Armavir, taking out most of II./KG 51 Edelweiss: “The flames spread rapidly and caught fuelled and bomb laden aircraft. Since the airfield had several units on it having a total of more than 100 Ju.88 and He.111s, there was no lack of combustible of combustible material. Only one of the II.Gruppe aircraft survived without damage. Ther unit was hastily withdrawn to Bagerovo on the Kerch Peninsula to acquire new aircraft.” A Gruppe of a German KG (Bomber Wing) consisted in about 15-20 aircraft. If only one of II./KG 51’s aircraft survived the air strike, that indicates that no less than fourteen Junkers and Heinkels were destroyed in the raid. However the official loss records mention specifically the complete destruction of only four aircraft (He.111H-6 WkNr 2948, Ju.88A-14 WkNrs 144231 and 144232, and Ju.88C-6 WkNr 460013), one written off because of a 60% damage (Ju.88A-4 WkNr 4018) and a sixth bomber damaged in a 25% (Ju.88A-4 WkNr 2256). Again, there are no less than eight more aircraft “missing” in Luftwaffe’s loss statistics.

[Rasmussen]

Originally Posted by DiegoZampini

We have discussing about how uncomplete and reliable/unreliable are the German loss records are. I will show some examples:
o However, in the available list of JG 54 losses, Nowotny appears only shot down once (on 19 July 1941, flying Bf.109E-7 WkNr 1137) and forced to belly land a second time (on 11 August 1942, also in a Messerschmitt - his Bf.109F-4 WkNr 10360 was scrapped).

Maybe we have to discuss how reliable/complete are your secondary sources and not the German loss records. Only one example:
- W.Nr. 10360 wasn't an F-4 but an G-2
- the a/c wasn't scrapped but used by Stab/ JG 54 and in January 1943 searched by Lz.4/108 and send to Erla VII in Antwerpen

Best regards
Rasmussen

[robert]

Hi Diego,

perhaps you can find in these "accurate" Russian losses 2 SB-2 bombers that had been shot down by Polish fighter in the early afternoon of 17.9.39 by railway station Nadworna? Killed Russians were buried and two were captured wounded and admitted to the hospital. But still no trace could be found in these "accurate" Russian documents.

Robert