GC II/7 claims

[focusfocus]

Some of his claims were made with the Spit IX MA254,not his personal plane, shared with different pilots,Lt Claude Mangin among them ,the others with the Spit Vc JK110.

28/09/43=Ju.88 prob......Spit Vc JK110
30/09/43=Do.217....Spit Vc JK110
10/10/43=Ju.88....Spit IX MA254
29/10/43=Ju.88prob....Spit IX MA254
30/10/43=Ju.88....Spit Vc JK110

Michel

[keith A]

Hi Michel. Was the victory on 29 October a "probable"? Reading the account in Poret and Mechin it appears "damaged" at best. The description of the combat in Decot is clear that the Ju88 was able to evade the Spitfires in cloud (Gauthier's guns failed). No mention of severe damage. No corresponding Ju88 loss.

best regards

Keith

[focusfocus]

Classified as damaged and then upgraded prob.

Credit 10 victories+4 prob. but in reality 12 victories+2 prob

Michel

[keith A]

Interesting. Mechin agrees with you but Porret/Thevenet lists it as "damaged". Decot does not even describe any damage. Did Gauthier claim a "probable" in his combat report. Who upgraded it. The RAF?

I have his "probables" as occurring on 17 November 1943 and 9 February 1945.

The " Ju88 damaged" claim of 28 September 1943 deserved to be awarded "probable" because it was an Me410 which was lost. It was given as "probable" in the Mechin article, but not in Porret/Thevenet or Decot.

K

[focusfocus]

There are many errors and omissions in Porret/Thevenet....once interesting but now obsolete.

his prob.
28/09/43=Ju.88
29/10/43=Ju.88
17/11/43=Ju.88
08/02/45 (not the 09)=Bf.109 (his second claim)

Concerning 29/10/43
in his flight log
Spit MA539
Altitude 3000
Durée 1h20
Scranble attaque Ju.88

Michel

[keith A]

Cheers Michel,

How dare you disparage Porret/Thevenet!

I bought both the WW1 "Les As..." books (in 1987) and then the WW2 books about five years later. Until Amazon came along (and I finished my University studies) they were my bible. Now luckily I have lots of others, both from Amazon and from many trips to the Parisian booksellers along the banks of the Seine. Obsolete, yes and inaccurate in many ways (hence my query about the battle on the Swiss Border 1-2 June 1940) but they were my door into French Air Force claims of both wars.

I wonder if the claim on 29 October 1943 was awarded because the Ju88 disappeared from RAF surveillance of German radio signals? The log book doesn't give details of any of his claims in this period. "Attaque" is all he states.

Sorry for my error. My notes give the 8 February 1945 as his last probable, my old eyes read 9th

best regards

Keith

[focusfocus]

Hello Keith

I am simply saying that the informations from Porret/Thevenet at the time(1991) is not necessary corroborated today(2023) with more recent and updated documents

Their work remains a good basis,often correct....but not always.

For ex.
In their book:
Eugeniusz Nowakiewicz=5 vict+1 prob (only 4 vict+ 2 prob)
René Roger=5 vict (4 vict)
Henri Dietrich=5 vict (4 vict+1 prob)


Amédée Passemard=4 vict+1 prob(in reality 5 vict)
Raymond Cazade=6 vict
Maurice Le Blanc=5 vic+1prob
Bernard Challe,Raymond Clausse,Pierre Boillot.....etc,etc

The second claim prob (08/02/45) is truth (JG/53)

Best Regards
Michel

[Stig Jarlevik]

And how is this re-evaluation of these claims made?

New documents unknown by 1991?

New interpretation of already given facts, ie in 1991 the French could not read their own writings, but
by 2023 they have learned how do that?

Since both Porret and Thevenet were writing more or less on behalf of the French Government (both
books were published by SHAA), have the new findings also official support, or is it individual's research
statements Michel is talking about?

I do hope we are not about to get into the same controversy which surrounds Clostermann's claims with
these revisions.....

Cheers
Stig

[keith A]

No problem., Michel. I agree the books are dated (especially the WW1 "Les as de la Grande Guerre") but I am a Scot and therefore a Francophile. It gave me a base to build on, and I still use it alongside works by CJE and others.

Stig. Adjusting the tallies is just a bit of fun. In the Grand Scheme of Things it's of little major interest but most of our discussions on this forum are into tiny details for our own particular interests. Clostermann is another starting point for me, his victory tally is confusing but it's what we like surely? New research new opinions.

Michel, I note that in Gisclon's "La Grande aventure de la Chasse Francaise de 1939 a 1945" Gauthier receives credit for 10 confirmed and two probables

The major thing for me has been confirmation that the Luftwaffe suffered significant losses to the French in 1939-40. The impression I used to have was that the French airmen were outclassed and that morale was low. The former was true among much of the bomber and reconnaissance aircraft but the French fighters regularly met the Luftwaffe and gave them a bloody nose. The fact that the Luftwaffe were flying over French occupied territory gave a true image of LW losses of all types.

Best regards

Keith

[keith A]

Michel - Raymond Cazade is a new one for me. Many thanks. I have found him in CielDeGloire.