Interpretation of Luftwaffe Loss Statistics

[Nick Beale]

I'm not absolutely sure about the "enemy contact" bit (although the term is often noted in log books and operational reports). If AHB were translating "Feindb.", the original may have meant "Feindbeobachtet" = observed by the enemy. The Luftwaffe seems to have been quite interested in whether its losses were seen by the other side.

So, to complicate life even more, an accidental loss could still be observed by the enemy while a loss from combat damage may not have been.

[RodM]

Hi Nick,

thanks for the additional 'observation' (pardon the pun). I guess that the answer lies with the original report (where ever within the BA/MA it may be hiding).

I suspect that it wasn't the Luftwaffe per se interested in whether a loss was observed by the enemy, as much as Dr. Goebbels' lot.

In much the same way the RAF, especially BC, used the term 'missing', which did not include losses that were definitely known about, in order not to 'provide comfort to the enemy'... It just seems strange that the BC ORS should work with these 'missing' figures during their research, making their statistical analysis rather skewed.

cheers

Rod