Tunisian losses

[Frank Olynyk]

When the British Official Histories were written, the decrypting of Enigma was still secret, so no reference to it appears in them (other than the Intelligence volumes published after the declassification of the work at Bletchley Park). But they did prepare properly annotated volumes, and I believe a set of this is at the PRO in Kew. My memory says they are (or were) in the reference room, not the library, and not as accessioned items which have to be requested by computer. So their sources could be checked.

Frank.

[Juha]

Thanks for that info, I'll try to remember that when I visit PRO next time.

Juha

[Andreas Brekken]

Hi, guys.

I do believe the only way we can get any further regarding this issue is to get down to the basis and the hard records that does exist today.

I am also unable to check my records against Your comments here, especially when they are written like 'for the unit I checked some losses seem not to be recorded' like Franek just did. No negative remark really Franek, I just do not want to write an answer regarding apples, when You were counting beans....

There is one source in particular on the German side that has not been mantioned here in detail, namely the 'Summarische Verlustemeldungen' for the units involved. They do not give the details, but they definitely give the number of losses recorded.

I am currently doing some work in regards to checking these against the 'Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen' as published oin Michael Holm's web site. There are discrepancies, but it seems (conclusion this far) that these can be based on the following: Report timespan (losses recorded with dates just before a shortly after the end/start of the month not showing in correct monthly return), and unit dispositions (these records are by Gruppe, and thus a Gruppen-TO or clerk could have had problems obtaining the correct figures for his return, especially when seen against the above dating 'problem').

I will look further into this, and report my findings later.

Also as a general comment - an aircraft damage with a loss percentage BELOW 10% is not reported as an aircraft loss. In my work with the GenQu 6 Abt loss records, I have come across numerous records that are recorded and later stricken with the comment saying: 'Streiche .... da Flzg unter 10% beschädigt'. This could even happen if the pilot or a crew member was killed!

To know how the system that generated our sources worked is especially important when discussing like we do here, I even feel that some of the participants have not fully understood and studied the loss return system of the WWII Luftwaffe based on original documents, but are referring to secondary sources that are at best an authors comprehension of a given event.

Also one VERY important message, You cannot read the GenQu6 Abt listings to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth without comparing esplly to the above mentioned 'Summarische Verlustemeldungen'. The reason being of course that none of us have access to the returns for the following dates (without doing backwards reconstruction from other sources):

January 2nd 1944 - January 28th 1945
February 21st 1945 - February 26th 1945 (current research hints towards these never being completed)
All records after April 1st, 1945

The reason I am saying this is that the records for 1944 most probably contain a multitude of corrections and amendments to the records for 1943.

Regards,
Andreas

[Franek Grabowski]

Andreas
The unit I mentioned is JG26 in April 1942, so no way related to Tunisia. I have enough intriguing reports concerning the former, so I do not trust GQ6 returns anymore.

[Jim P.]

Just to add to the puzzle, do any of you guys have Arthy & Jessen's 'Fw 190 in North Africa'? In their loss list there are numerous incidents that the authors list that are not in the GQ6 reports. They also list a number of machines found abandoned on various airfields - some listed in GQ6, some not.

Prien, in the later volumes of his JG 77 volumes, had a similar abandoned 109 list. Again some could be tied to a specific GQ6 report, but many couldn't.

[Christer Bergström]

Sure, Jim. I've found quite a few losses which aren't in the Genqu listings. Anyway, I see no reason to completely dismiss the Luftwaffe loss reports (Genqu or Summarische Verlustmeldungen). By comparing Genqu with first-hand material such as unit war diaries and logbooks, I get the impression that an absolute majority of the Luftwaffe losses are listed in the Genqu material.


One question: Are there any loss reports by any armed forces which are absolutely complete, 100% reliable, and completely untouched by human error?

Hasn't this thread strayed a bit from the original topic? Wouldn't the header to this thread rather be "General talk about just one example of a classical problem confronting historians in general"? ;-)

[Franek Grabowski]

Originally Posted by Christer Bergström

Sure, Jim. I've found quite a few losses which aren't in the Genqu listings. Anyway, I see no reason to completely dismiss the Luftwaffe loss reports (Genqu or Summarische Verlustmeldungen). By comparing Genqu with first-hand material such as unit war diaries and logbooks, I get the impression that an absolute majority of the Luftwaffe losses are listed in the Genqu material.

Do you suggest that you have seen a representative sample of KTBs and FBs?

One question: Are there any loss reports by any armed forces which are absolutely complete, 100% reliable, and completely untouched by human error?

Bouncing back the question - are there any German loss reports?

Hasn't this thread strayed a bit from the original topic? Wouldn't the header to this thread rather be "General talk about just one example of a classical problem confronting historians in general"? ;-)

No, this thread is still about losses in Tunisia and their reliability.

[Andrew Arthy]

Hi,

Just a quick post regarding the 'extra' losses in the FW 190 in North Africa book by Morten and myself. The sources for those are either ULTRA or German records (especially the BA-MA records of the Führer der Luftwaffe Tunis). In my opinion, the Gen.Qu. lists are only about 75% complete for the FW 190 units in Tunisia and the Mediterranean. In particular, the Gen.Qu. list misses a lot of aircraft damaged or destroyed in bombing raids. This will be more evident in the next book by Morten and I.

PS - Thanks to Jim for providing Morten and I with many of the Gen.Qu. losses for Tunisia.

Cheers,
Andrew A.

[Christer Bergström]

I've found quite a few losses which aren't in the Genqu listings. Anyway, I see no reason to completely dismiss the Luftwaffe loss reports (Genqu or Summarische Verlustmeldungen). By comparing Genqu with first-hand material such as unit war diaries and logbooks, I get the impression that an absolute majority of the Luftwaffe losses are listed in the Genqu material.

Do you suggest that you have seen a representative sample of KTBs and FBs?

I don’t know what your criteria for “a representative sample of KTBs and FBs” is, and neither do I know why you ask that question. I have a number of Luftwaffe unit KTBs (some are copies from Bundesarchiv and some from various private archives) and FBs. By comparing those with Luftwaffe loss reports (Genqu or Summarische Verlustmeldungen) I have found some losses which are mentioned in the former sources but not in the latter sources, but the absolute majority of the losses mentioned in KTBs or FBs are also listed in Genqu or Summarische Verlustmeldungen. Altogether, the KTBs and FBs which I have, have a total a sum of a couple of thousand Luftwaffe aircraft losses, maybe 10 % of all Luftwaffe losses, or maybe less than 10 %. Is that a statistically reliable sample, according to the rules for sample polls etc? I don’t know, since I am no educated statistician. Maybe someone here knows such stuff better than the rest of us?

are there any German loss reports?

I don’t know what your criteria for “German loss reports” is. The answer could be yes or it could be no, depending on which criteria you use.