Heinrich Ehrler

[focusfocus]

post 9

source:E.Mombeeck,Eismeerjager band 5 p.31 and p.33

Michel

[Nick Hector]

Originally Posted by focusfocus

Guys,I don't have the same info:

30/08/41
13/JG77:Lt.Ehrler one Hudson (1.) (320°Sq) and not the 02/09/41

02/09/41
2/JG77:Oblt.Schafer one Beaufort (3.)
2/JG77:Lt.Muller one Beaufort (?.)

one Beaufort of 22°Sq and Hudson of 608°Sq

Michel

Yes, I have a notation of the Hudson claim on 30.8.41 in my database, but I have all but discounted it because I considered the info out of date, even though three claims for three losses does make sense on 30.8.41.

I hold to the contention that the claims microfilms as presented by Tony Wood and Mathews & Foreman are one of the most canonical, if not THE most canonical sources...

[knusel]

Originally Posted by Nick Hector

I hold to the contention that the claims microfilms as presented by Tony Wood and Mathews & Foreman are one of the most canonical, if not THE most canonical sources...

You mean that claims that the microfilms do not include have likely been invented postwar ?

[Nick Hector]

Not necessarily invented, but certainly mis-attributed. If you can obtain copies of say, the JG 53 and JG 77 victory lists by Prien... ...take the time to compare them to Tony Wood and Mathews & Foreman. You'll see some pretty big discrepancies and what I am saying is: look to those sources for confirmation, an "umpire's decision" if you will.

Additionally, it would appear that some claims in pilots' logbooks never made it to the RLM for confirmation, and that seems to be one of the reasons why different books disagree on pilots' total scores. Barbas for example credits Galland with 104 (as do Ring and Girbig's JG 27) and yet the 1996 edition of Toliver and Constable credited him with 103...

Probably the biggest problem for somebody conducting the research that you do is that some pilots' victory TALLIES have been mis-attributed or even fictionalised in the sense that one source stated that Guenther Specht had 50 victories, another that Knoke had 52 (on what authorisation...?)... ...and yet we now know that these two "tallies" are false. How many more "false tallies" are waiting to be put right by more recent research?

[knusel]

In his newest book "Arctic Bf109 and Bf 110 Aces" John Weal "reduces" Ehrler's score from >200 to 182.
What intrigues me about Ehrler is the story about him being accused to have gone after his 200th kill instead of protecting the Tirpitz.

[Nick Hector]

Originally Posted by knusel

In his newest book "Arctic Bf109 and Bf 110 Aces" John Weal "reduces" Ehrler's score from >200 to 182.
What intrigues me about Ehrler is the story about him being accused to have gone after his 200th kill instead of protecting the Tirpitz.

Which has GOT to leave you wondering, doesn't it...
This is why I am more interested to match German claims to Allied and Soviet losses - it's the best confirmation/verification that an aerial victory actually took place

[Johannes]

Hi Guys

Erhler's first claim was "fact" a beaufort as per his Bf109's rudder. Even if his identification was incorrect, his first claim submitted was for a Beaufort.

Regards

Johannes

[knusel]

Good evening Johannes,

can you tell me more about that rudder ?

Have a nice Wednesday,

Michael

[Nick Hector]

Originally Posted by Johannes

Hi Guys

Erhler's first claim was "fact" a beaufort as per his Bf109's rudder. Even if his identification was incorrect, his first claim submitted was for a Beaufort.

Regards

Johannes

That's a great fact to know, Johannes.
So we can rule out the Hudson theory?

[knusel]

Hello there Gentlemen,

I've found a photo of the rudder of Ehrler's Bf 109.
http://www.jagdgeschwader5und7.de/maj-heinrich-ehrler/
This website indicates that 4./JG 5 was formed von 3Jan42,
whereas that website
http://ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg5.htm
indicates it was on 25Jan42.

Who is right ?

Cheers,

Michael