Hartmann: claims vs. victories

[Monaco]

I have 11 claims for Jaks/LaGGs by JG.52 and II./SG.2 that day...

[HGabor]

Hi Folks,
As has been voiced many many times on this forum, a detailed analysis into the victory claims of Erich Hartmann (and other JG 52 aces), put into print, has long been overdue.
I am pleased to announce that, with my son Daniel Horvath, we will be publishing our first co-authored book titled 'Verified Victories: Top JG 52 Aces Over Hungary 1944-45'! This book seeks to fill that void which has been expressed over the previous years, at least for what pertains to Hungary. This book would not have been considered had it not been for YOUR enthusiasm, dedication to real history, and generous assistance!


P.S. Expect the level of detail THIS thread and indeed THIS forum is capable of producing!

Cheers,
Gabor

[Nick Hector]

OUTSTANDING.

Very well done, Gabor and Daniel.

I look forward with much anticipation to ordering and enjoying a copy.

(Raises a glass to the book's success...)

Regards
Nick

[Johannes]

Hi Michael

Diligent research.

Please not that almost all previously thought accurate claims for Hartmann, and Barkhorn for 1945 are no longer tenable. With Barkhorn we think that Hans Ring was playing a little game..........again.

If Barkhorn had 229 out of 300/301 actually confirmed through research, and tending to "over-claim" as he approached "300", "over-claiming" as he approached "300" was because the information of his claims at this time were incorrect, the 229 is very likely now over 250. With Rall and Kittel believed honest, but not every one correctly claimed, it is likely that Barkhorn was in reality the highest scorer, and first to "250", and Rall first to "150" and "200", but we cannot change official history, despite their scams Hartmann and Nowotny will always be the leaders.

Keep well

Johannes

[BenFolk]

Hi
for example
the 42 OTER 5 VA under the command of St.Tech. Voronin , evacuated from August 1944 to May 1945 850 emergency landing aircraft, many by German effect (over-claims), 600 of which were repaired. 25 under enemy fire.


BenFolk

[BenFolk]

Hi

for example

In the period from July 5, 1943 until February 18, 1944 mechanic Panchulidze 165 GvSAP evacuated 8 damaged aircraft from the front line from the places of forced landings.

During this period Panchulidze personally took part in the repair of 11 aircraft, 5 of them on forced landings.

On July 5, 1943, after the first combat sortie, his plane was shot down anti aircraft gun the enemy and made an emergency landing. Panchulidze goes to the place of the forced landing and in a day the plane comes into operation again.

Most likely in June 1944 the aircraft Nr 24611, Airacobra, being knocked out in an air battle, made an emergency landing in the mountainous terrain in the Yass direction. Mechanic Kotlyarov 104 GvIAP within 24 hours found it, restored it in 18 working hours and delivered it to his airfield.

Such losses were not recorded in Russian documents. Most of the time the planes came back by truck or pulled by a tractor.

So an aerial victory for the Germans, but not an aerial victory for today's historians.

Regards

BenFolk

[HGabor]

Exactly. Just because you have a flat tire you do not buy a new car considering that you've lost your old one. Fixing a belly landed, durable Soviet plane was only a routine maintenance practice that took a little longer than simply re-fueling a plane before a mission. We know cases where Hartmann's 'victim' was back in the air within 24 hrs. Then we can guess why the Russians could reach Berlin despite of those hundreds of German aerial victories. The Germans won the war on papers and in statistics, but they lost it in reality.

Gabor

[Stig Jarlevik]

Originally Posted by BenFolk

Hi

Such losses were not recorded in Russian documents. Most of the time the planes came back by truck or pulled by a tractor.

So an aerial victory for the Germans, but not an aerial victory for today's historians.

Regards
BenFolk

Two points

One
A very good way of hiding away post war research. If this is correct that the Russians never recorded force landed aircraft and their repairs, there are surely thousands of German claims which can never be verified.

Two
And why should not such an aircraft not be counted as a valid German claim?
As far as I go, the only mistake made by the Luftwaffe was not to locate the damaged aircraft and strafe it to destruction.

Oh and Gabor, regarding a flat tyre, I can assure you it can easily wipe out your car, depending on where you get it.
I was some 25 km away from any useful place on Iceland when I got one. The wheel had of course been attached by a machine and was totally stuck.
I had to drive some 13-14km on that tyre before reaching some help from a by passer. It took both our strength to get that wheel off.
Incidentally you can assure a rented car for practically anything you can imagine on Iceland, except one thing....flat tyres.....

Cheers
Stig

[robert]

Seems that the book will be not unbiased. My loss list (when published) will show also the aircraft that returned with 1 bullet holes. Of course I will not track down each such loss but I will show all that will be found.

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by robert

1) Seems that the book will be not unbiased.

2) My loss list (when published) will show also the aircraft that returned with 1 bullet holes. Of course I will not track down each such loss but I will show all that will be found.

1) Upon what do you base your statement that the book will not be unbiased, given that it has not been published yet? Unless you have seen an advance copy...

2) When will this be published, and by whom? I will be looking to pick up a copy.