WW2TV Horvath lecture/presentation

[keith A]

Fair points. Daniel the area of your research is a rare sideline for me (until recently the Luftwaffe on the Russian Front was always too vast and far too badly reported to get my focus) but when I have dipped in your Dad has been both very informative, patient and courteous. Hence I grabbed a copy of the book as soon as it was released. I hope there's more to come in print, forums and on YouTube

best regards

Keith

[VtwinVince]

Yes Keith, it's me again. I know I'm not popular with certain individuals, so be it. Regarding overclaiming and propaganda, it is certainly a fraught topic, with most of the analysis coming from the 'allied' side of the historical fence, with its implied bias. Most of my interest stems from purely personal reasons, as my uncle was 'Abschuss-Offizier' for JG27 during the Sawallisch-Bendert-Stigler brouhaha, and the fallout from that had far-reaching consequences. I'm definitely no expert on the overclaiming issue in general, but I'm certainly up to speed on propaganda tactics during wartime.

[Juha]

On the Eastern Front, many LW pilots used guerilla warfare tactics, strike fast and disappear. Not necessarily a bad tactic when the opponent has a clear or overwhelming numerical superiority. It tied the opponent's fighter forces to protective tasks and caused losses to the opponent while keeping own losses down, even if it did not produce a decisive benefit for own side, it kept the enemy on his toes. And if Hartmann claimed only 15 Il-2s, out of 267 Otto Kittel's claims 94 were Il-2s and e.g. Lipfert claimed 39 Il-2s. So there were fighter pilots who risked their lives going low to hit ground attack planes to help poor Landsers.

And I wouldn't go as far as to say that Germans in general were overclaiming unusually wildly in the East. Even in the summer of 1944 their claims were generally relatively accurate over Southern Finland and the Northern Baltic, even if for example in the far north with the JG 5 overclaiming was quite wild. And even in the south, where, for example, Hartmann operated, Lipfert's claims were exceptionally accurate.

Although the system and the culture of the unit had an effect, the characteristics of the individual were ultimately decisive in the one’s claim accuracy.

[Siko54]

Great interview Dan - very interesting video thank you.

[Adriano Baumgartner]

I do agree with some of the points pointed out by Vince here regarding the "Allied or other side" of overclaiming. Most of post-war studies focus only on the LW system and the LW airmen who "apparently faked" their claims.
The 8th AF air gunners who, according to the records would have shot down at least twice or thrice the actual number of airplanes of the Luftwaffe on the West between 1943 and 1945 are not even recorded on post-war studies, although some RAF post-war war diaries do mention the "propaganda" purposes of the 8th Air Force at that time (mainly 1943 and early 1944).
Perhaps we will see, on a near futur, a similar book dedicated to the "Other side overclaiming"...

[Juha]

IMHO air gunners are a different breed. And I remember that even in late 60s it was generally well known that 8th AF air gunners' claims were highly inflated. And at least from 1969 it was clear that even during the BoB RAF claims were inflated. And at least in 70s it became clear that the RAF claims over France in 1941 were at least at times highly inflated. The difference is that this is given as general info and not so that someone goes through certain aces claims and compared them to surviving German loss records.

On the other hand there are still authors who tried to show that claims of certain German aces are 100% accurate. E.g. the are some rather desperate attemps to make Marseille's claims 100% accurate in Heaton's & Lewis' Marseille book.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Adriano Baumgartner

Most of post-war studies focus only on the LW system and the LW airmen who "apparently faked" their claims.

Perhaps on Carl Sagan's principle that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? Whilst I don't doubt that many claims in every air force did not correspond to enemy losses, it seems reasonable to think that the more claims there are, the greater the likelihood that some are errorneous. And there is another point here, in the Great War the highest German, French and British Empire claimants fell in the 60–80 range. In the Second World War the gap between Hartmann (352), Bong (40) and Johnson (34) is of a quite different order so I can see why people look for explanations.

[James A Pratt III]

For info on WW I claims ect go to theaerodrome.com and the posts 100 years ago today and pfennings from heaven. lets just say Von Richthofen and other pilots don't come out looking to good. as for rene Fonck the top French/Allied ace of WW I less said the better.
I liked the presentation and will read the book one day

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by James A Pratt III

For info on WW I claims ect go to theaerodrome.com and the posts 100 years ago today and pfennings from heaven. lets just say Von Richthofen and other pilots don't come out looking to good. as for rene Fonck the top French/Allied ace of WW I less said the better.

And in that spirit, I was very careful only to talk about claims, not what actually happened!

[VtwinVince]

Good point James, and the conversations get even more interesting when you do a search on Billy Bishop. And there are certain members of that forum, whom I've repeatedly clashed with, who seem to regard it as a sacred duty to discredit the careers, not only of leading lights such as Richthofen, but all members of the Luftstreitkraefte.