WW2TV Horvath lecture/presentation

[Juha]

The LW did not have combat tours but more like the system the RAF had up to the beginning of 1942, i.e. the CO and the Medical Officer observed their pilots and if noticed signs of tireness/too high stress gave if possible a short or longer leave to the pilot. E.g. Marseille had two furloughs, one month and two months in duration in 1941 plus one and half months with his unit in Bavaria when it changed from Bf 109 E-7/trops to Bf 109 F-4/trops. And 1½ months sick leave and furlough 1941/42. In 1942 he had two two months furloughs. I know that several other aces spent furloughs in Germany during the war. Lipfert also spent some time training Rumanian fighter pilots.

[Stig Jarlevik]

Our friend Geoffrey Sinclair wishes to add some thoughts to the subject!

Using published sources, like Fighter Command War Diaries, Battle of Britain Then and Now, the lists of Luftwaffe combat claims etc.

Battle of Britain 10 July to 31 October 1940. Removing all the known non fighter causes of loss like friendly fire, enemy bomber, crashes etc. but retaining unknown cause, enemy action etc.

Overall the RAF fighters claimed around 2,440 kills, for 1,255 actual, or 1.9 to 1, the over claiming by month July to September was around 1.3 to 1, 1.9 to 1, 2.5 to 1, 1.2 to 1, the heavier the fighting the higher the over claims, 15 September makes a big contribution. The RAF was aware of the over claiming given the number of Luftwaffe aircraft wrecks found.

Luftwaffe fighters claimed just under 2,000 kills of Spitfires and Hurricanes, 1.7 Spitfires per Hurricane and shot down around 700, or around 2.8 to 1, a ratio that is consistent July to September, dropping to 2.5 to 1 in October, throwing in the bomber gunner claims explains the reports of the Luftwaffe over claiming 5 to 1.

In 1941 over France the RAF was over claiming around 5 to 1, Ultra told the British about this. The RAF was also making major over claims in North Africa in 1941 and 1942 which can be seen in the Christopher Shores et. al. books.

January to June 1943, RAF fighter command allowed 249 kill claims against Luftwaffe fighters, the true number of kills was 235, according to British Intelligence in World War II (Hinsley).
Looking at 8th Air Force B-17 and B-24 losses the Luftwaffe fighters quite consistently claimed about 2 B-17 for every 1 shot down by fighters, and under 2 to 1 for B-24 ("B-24 easier to shoot down" ideas). The exchange rate of Luftwaffe fighters shot down by the bombers to bombers shot down by the fighters was around 2 fighters to 3 bombers in 1943 becoming 1 fighter per 2 bombers in early 1944.

Theo Boiten in Nachtjagd War Diaries notes only a couple of nightfighter pilots where he suspects their claims.

Making trouble are reports like the USAAF examining a small number of Luftwaffe gun camera films post war finding the most reliable indicator of whether a kill claim was granted was not visible damage, or visible hits, or a fire, but the rank of the pilot making the claim. (91% Major/Captain, 50% Lieutenants, 47% Sergeant). 6 out of 6 claims by Lt Colonels were granted, 1 out of 3 claims by corporals. Total sample size 173 claims.
Stressing these are broad brush figures to give an idea on the size of over claims, not a statement of absolutes.

Cheers
Stig

[keith A]

Cheers Stig

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

In 1941 over France the RAF was over claiming around 5 to 1, Ultra told the British about this.
Cheers
Stig

Did it? I have not read the ULTRA 1941 (except for one message!) but I would be quite surprised if regualr fighter loss reports were being recorded from France where the units could use long-established landline communications. I have looked at several months of 1942 and found that material from the Western Front is very rare, most of the traffic coming instead from the Mediterranean.

[harryurz]

In a wider context it seems to me that WW1 and WW2 fighter pilots of all nations were of a similar personality; very young, intuitive, well-educated, self confident, often petulant men full of enthusiasm and highly motivated, dutiful and dedicated (tho sometimes fearful) to their task. Yet only a few were gifted enough to become adept at their profession; essentially shooting down or killing other fliers. The Hawks and pigeons scenario.......?


These who regularly claimed enemy aircraft shot down or destroyed were all however at the tender mercy of their respective air force administrative infrastructure; namely the dreaded intelligence departments, who collated their reports, often asked awkward questions and continually doubted their eye witness accounts.

So surely if some 'aces' were making exaggerated claims it was the job of the ever pragmatic Intelligence Officer to moderate these claims and restore reality?
But in the case of overclaims it could be deduced that the IO's were more lax or tolerant in allowing claims (due to pressure from COs, high command, for the sake of morale or being simply bullied?)

All fighter pilots over-claimed, to me it appeared most IO's allowed them to?

[keith A]

I think it's a bit unfair to claim the Luftwaffe is being unfairly scrutinised. The desire and popularity of researching aerial claims is relatively new and the investigation of the Luftwaffe does yield valuable information about how accurate British Commonwealth and American (as well as Russian, French, Polish etc.)were. Often it can be seen that the death of an aircraft is claimed by both sides in the same air battle.

To ignore the credibility of the claims of the Luftwaffe aces because the RAF, USAAF is not being researched to the same extent is not a valid argument. From my own reading the RAF has been evaluated, discussed and published in a myriad of books and other media, to the extent that we are able to identify where overclaiming has occurred. However the RAF aces such as Johnson, Finucane, Bader, Stanford Tuck, Malan, Beurling, Caldwell etc do not have the same world-wide interest as Hartmann and Barkhorn. The details of their combats are easily found and consequently their records are easily investigated and explained (I would recommend Anthony Cooper's books on the Kenley and Darwin Wings for forensic examination of overclaiming). The 100s and 100s of claims by the high scoring Luftwaffe aces until recently have been accepted despite some obvious issues as to their accuracy. Russian records now allow us to examine how accurate they really were. The lack of desire or interest to investigate American air aces to the same extent may have a number of reasons.

What I would say is if you are interested in researching the allies overclaiming there's no better resource than this forum and the books, blogs and websites of it's many authors and contributors. The advantage is that unlike the Luftwaffe very few Allied pilots shot down five or more in a single mission (and almost all of those are Americans), let alone seventeen in a day! If you are not then THAT is the reason the Allies do not get the same focus. Those of us who spend a lot of money and time buying and reading the works in print already know a lot of the answers because we asked the questions. There's still work to do on the RAF but the scores are already in. Faced with an intelligence requirement that after the 1941 campaign (overclaiming still allowed Allied bombers to hit targets with minimal losses, while Luftwaffe "aces" chased Spitfires around the sky to put another bar on the tail) demanded reasonable accuracy. As the war progressed the RAF could address issues such as effectiveness of it's pilots and it's aircraft. Massive overclaiming by fighter pilots chasing "ace" status does neither of these.

best regards

Keith

[VtwinVince]

Good points Nick, although like any ongoing technological contest, there was a swing back and forth when one side 'caught up' with the other, not unlike the first conflict.

[NickM]

Yup, the tech advantage traded hands several times throughout the war, but the number of experienced pilots only went one way for the Jagdwaffe after 1942