7 Feb 10 -Overclaimers v Reliable Claimers List

[ahafan]

Originally Posted by Don Caldwell

Attention John Beaman --

Hasn't this nonsense gone on long enough to delete this thread? The poor logic, gratuitous insults, and (willful?) misuse of simple English were more common in this forum in years past, and might be expected from non-English speakers in an English-only SIG, but most of this stuff seems to be coming from New York City!!!

Don Caldwell

well with your so down to earth attitudes, I guess i wont be buyin any more books off you.or anybody ele,jumped up mr perfects.. who seem fit that I thought the Nazis were long dead..that been so so, perfect..has too be written like a true Pro- well I will leave that too you.an others..
who be only Ones left here..talk as much rubbish as you like...
One word, NUTS!!
Luvvy;

[ahafan]

Originally Posted by Don Caldwell

Rob –

This will be my last post on this topic, as it’s obvious that we will never be able to understand or sympathize with each other’s positions. I’m glad to read that you are no longer updating your list and that the thread now serves primarily as a place for Nokose to post his studies of specific battles. I’m perfectly OK with that. I’m not a flamer, but continue to find your views naïve, and certainly understand if you find my attempts to educate you arrogant. I’ll try to answer your last post briefly, but cannot avoid repetition:

1. Claims verification procedures did not exist for the benefit of hobbyists. Inconistencies were inevitable – there was a war to fight. Arguments that the procedures “should have been” uniform around the world and “should have been” applied uniformly in all cases are, how else can I say it, naïve. You have refused to accept the “heat of battle” arguments of others, but these are valid.

2. Returning to the Preddy case, I now understand that you’re saying he should be “credited” with five victories in the battle in question based on post-war data. “Credit” implies some form of official recognition, which is not going to happen. Claim-loss comparisons in specifc battles is possible, as we well know, but very difficult. The government has no role in this. Hobbyists can keep whatever lists they want – as you say, it’s an “interesting” topic. Just don’t confuse this with “historically significant”.

3. Air superiority helped determine who won the war (it did not “win” it), but claims themselves had no role in winning air superiority – as I’ve said elsewhere, they’re only opinions, and are not “real.” Their morale function was genuine, but not determining. Overclaiming did help lead to poor decisions on strategy in a few cases – I mentioned the Jagdwaffe’s inflated claims in the BOB, which you seem to have misunderstood – and irritatated national high commands in other cases. The RLM and later OKL could never get the bomber claims of the RLV force in 1943-44 under control, but this did not affect the way they conducted (and lost) the campaign. Specific overclaiming units seem to have been tolerated by the Luftwaffe, as illlustrated by my JG 2-JG 26 comparison, which you also seem to have misunderstood. Repeating: JG 2’s confirmed claims always exceeded those of JG 26, but Luftflotte 3 had to have known these were inflated, given the relative opportunities of the two units, and continued to give JG 26 the prme position in the battle line. Göring’s speech on Galland’s departure from JG 26 called JG 26 his “allerbesten” (very best) unit. This could have been mere hyperbole, but if the high command disagreed, JG 26 would have been guarding Normandy and Brittany in 1942, against little opposition, and JG 2 would have been based on the direct path to the Ruhr (instead of vice versa.)

In conclusion, a list of histrically verifiable victories is a commendable goal. Just be careful – very careful – about ascribing less-than-honorable motivations to those pilots whose claims don’t make your cut.


-- Don

One Point I do Agree on..his claiming-
as a film quote
from the blue max..by Rupp''to Bruno stachel
Rupp-No witnesses''no claim..
Rules! sorry';
Stachel'- I saw it,; it was a kill!!
Rupp-then you have great satifaction that you served the fatherland;
lol

[Jim P.]

Come on, a quote from a movie? Some contrived dialog to move the 'story'? ' The 'Blue Max' is not a documentary, and while I agree it's nice movie, it's just that, a movie, entertainment, artificial reality. It has absolutely no basis in fact to be used for judging real life and death combat, aerial or otherwise - not unless we want to see some well known movie stars really put themselves in harms way to flame and burn. Ben Affleck and 'Pearl Harbor' come to mind in a "I only wish" sorta way. I'm out.

[ahafan]

Originally Posted by Jim P.

Come on, a quote from a movie? Some contrived dialog to move the 'story'? ' The 'Blue Max' is not a documentary, and while I agree it's nice movie, it's just that, a movie, entertainment, artificial reality. It has absolutely no basis in fact to be used for judging real life and death combat, aerial or otherwise - not unless we want to see some well known movie stars really put themselves in harms way to flame and burn. Ben Affleck and 'Pearl Harbor' come to mind in a "I only wish" sorta way. I'm out.

lol hello'
No-am I right, No wittneses -no confirm ..rules of air war..any..
glad you liked my pun.;
sharon

[GMichalski]

Hi to all,
I think the topic of this conversation deviates from the initial idea that was to complete the list with more pilots providing details and sources.
Discussions and reviews of this topic will continue for a long time .... as the years that have been talking about the claims of Hartmann.....
it´s only a proposal...
regards

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by GMichalski

Hi to all,
I think the topic of this conversation deviates from the initial idea that was to complete the list with more pilots providing details and sources.

I agree and suggest that any further posts on this thread would best be confined to specific questions and/or research findings about specific claims and losses — evidence instead of vehement opinions.

[GMichalski]

hi to all,
you have any details about Joachim Kirschner, Karl Gratz, Rudolf Trenkel, Dietrich Hrabak, Heinrich Kraft, Hermann-Friedrich Jopien??
many thanks,
regards

[Nick Hector]

Originally Posted by GMichalski

hi to all,
you have any details about Joachim Kirschner, Karl Gratz, Rudolf Trenkel, Dietrich Hrabak, Heinrich Kraft, Hermann-Friedrich Jopien??
many thanks,
regards

Hi,

Have you checked through the listing I sent you? It should give at least SOME of the info you seek....

Nick

[GMichalski]

hi,
many thanks Nick i take a look
regards

[Rob Romero]

Oh. Oh. . .

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water:

http://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=dfaa8ad773e68d20a59da390545048 91&topic=12389.0

Luca Ruffato and myself are in the process of finalizing our Tainan book. In one of the many indexes we have matched every Allied aircraft shot down by the Tainan in New Guinea from 1 April to 15 Nov 1942 against the the aerial claims as listed in the kodochosho (all claims in this document are, depending on the mission, credited either individually or equally among mission participants.) The total number of Allied aircraft removed from New Guinea/ New Britain skies in aerial combat during this timeframe was 78. The results of the top five scorers might surprise, and please note that the below figures exclude (underline one) the Guadalcanal theatre. The decimals are a result of dividing group claims. Note also that only 'definites' were credited. We have also calculated the reverse, ie actual Allied claims versus real Tainan losses, and hasten to add that the overclaim ratio of about 10:1 equally applies to Allied claims.

Michael Claringbould

Ranking Name Score

1 FPO1c Ōta Toshio 5.3
2 Lt (jg) Sasai Jun’ichi 4.5
3 FPO1c Sakai Saburō 4.3
4 FPO1c Nishizawa Hiroyoshi 3.9
5 WO Yoshino Satoshi 3.4