|
respectfully disagree
I believe that the claim/confirmation process was established to provide systematic checks and balances on individual claims.
The LW, at some level, had a vital interest in estimating its opponent’s losses which could help determining the strength of the enemy. This would avoid a situation similar to the Battle of Britain where Fighter Command was down to its last few Spitfires for weeks upon weeks. Thus a rigorous claim validation process can filter out spurious claims and begin to quantify at least one major cause of enemy losses.
Field units however, had incentives to maximize their victory totals. Personal awards, unit recognition, publicity, all pretty heady stuff for fighter pilots. So when a CO signs a logbook, it can mean that he really believes that Oblt. S shot down an Il-2. It can also mean that Oblt S was close to getting a medal, the Il-2 obviously went down, and so he must have shot it down. In the worst case it may mean the CO wants more recognition and the facts don’t matter, particularly if there’s no one from higher up to check.
Even if the CO, with the best intentions, signs the logbook, does he realize that another pilot from a different unit may have been shooting at the same airplane?
I understand your point, but I my opinion is that until the pilot received RLM confirmation it isn’t a victory. It’s only a claim.
But then again 352 is a sacred cow amongst us LW enthusiasts, isn’t it? And if we had to filter out unconfirmed claims it might be only 250.
After re-reading your post, I agree that a signed logbook should a A primary source. But it doesn't tell the whole story.
|
9th May 2005, 21:43
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
