Tunisian losses

[Christer Bergström]

It is interesting that Wöffen writes 53 out of 65 Ju 52s would have been shot down, when the real numbers seem to be 13 out of 31.

Wöffen probably is confusing this with the figures for another Ju 52 massacre, namely that which took place on 18 April 1943, when 65 Ju 52s were attacked, of which 24 were destroyed and 35 damaged.

Does numerical superiority exclude the possibility that the pilots/planes/organization/leadership is equal or better than the opponent with fewer numbers?

Of course not. However, when 46 American fighter pilots attack 31 Ju 52s and 10 fighters and 17 of the American pilots claim to have shot down enemy aircraft, I think it is reasonable to conclude that if the figures would have been reversed - if there would have been 10 American and 46 German fighters - the result would have been different. Also, ten German fighter pilots managed to shoot down six Lightnings. I think it's reasonable to conclude that more US fighters would have been shot down if the Germans also would have had 46 fighter pilots in that combat. I feel that the objections we hear rather are of the opposite nature, namely implications that numerical superiority is a negligible factor, and that any success in air fighting shall be interpreted mainly as the result of superior skills on the "winning" side. (I am happy that the Swedish ice hockey team does not draw the conclusion that numbers don't matter. Can you imagine "Tre kronor" with only two men on the ice meeting the Finnish team - or even the Polish team! )