Erich Hartmann: verifiable claims

[Nick Hector]

Thanks Nick,

It just means that in the other thread, where for example Gabor thanked me and I told him "You're welcome", posts such as those make no more sense LOL

...Pointing out in friendly spirit....


Nick

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Nick Hector

Thanks Nick,

It just means that in the other thread, where for example Gabor thanked me and I told him "You're welcome", posts such as those make no more sense LOL

...Pointing out in friendly spirit....


Nick

Give me the post numbers and I'll move them here.

[Nick Hector]

Nick,

Roughly 21 thru 26

Other Nick

[Juha]

Sorry, I put this at first onto the original thread.

IMHO I’d not like to speak honesty/dishonesty even if there are cases of fraudulent claimers. Just because it much easier to dig out real world facts than figure out someone's motives. I think it simply the question that some can appraise the results of their actions more objectively than others. And then there is the effect of used tactic, Hartmann preferred hit and run tactic and as in the case of the Flying Tigers, this easily produced overclaims. Lipfert, who seems to be exceptionally objective claimer, was more diverse in tactics he used and didn’t shun close in dogfights. He also seems to be above average in a/c recognition, which made it easier to verify his claims.



Juha

[HGabor]

More for Hartmann:

328: OVERCLAIM - 5.12.1944 13:20 LaGG-5 4./JG 52 98 419: at 1.200m
329: OVERCLAIM - 5.12.1944 13:25 LaGG-5 4./JG 52 98 278: at 1.000m (One 486 IAP La-5FN loss (S/N: 39212724, Snagovskii KIA) at 11:55 over Ercsi- too big difference. A recce. La-5 pair against 6 Fw 190s. 2nd La-5FN (S/N: 39211776) of 177 GvIAP (pilot: Vereshak) was downed around 14:05 in dogfight/flak.)
330: OVERCLAIM - 9.12.1944 13:10 Yak-9 4./JG 52 88 683: at 2.000m
331: ???, probably OVERCLAIM - 9.12.1944 13:20 Yak-9 4./JG 52 88 694: at 2.000m (2 Yak-9 losses of 513 IAP, but one was a landing accident in soft soil at 13:20 after IL-2 escort (Fokin, Yak-9D, S/N: 19166063), the other one (Fedosov, Yak-9M, S/N: 2515361) was downed at 13:50 by flak. 513 IAP also lost one of their Po-2 messenger biplanes: S/N: 640314, pilot: Durakhov. All 3 pilots were OK. 150 GvIAP lost a Yak-3 after Baracska mission at 1000 m against 20 Fw 190s on landing at their airfield: S/N: 2329218 at 14:50, pilot: Kamanian was unhurt.)

Gabor

[harrison987]

Interesting stuff...

But does any of this really matter?

I mean...what is the point?

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by harrison987

Interesting stuff...

But does any of this really matter?

I mean...what is the point?

To me it matters to establish what really happened. I realise it won't change the outcome of the war but we may understand it a little better.

[Broncazonk]

Was Hartmann's appearance, presence and success known to the Soviet's? I seem to remember reading that the Russians placed a reward (bounty) on Hartmann's life, and his aircraft. Can this be confirmed in Soviet records? Also, was Hartmann's uniquely painted aircraft known to the Soviets? Can this be confirmed by Soviet or German sources?

If a bounty on Hartmann's life was a fact, and if the Soviets knew what Hartmann's aircraft looked like, this would suggest that Hartmann was the subject of, "special attention." That special attention may have involved specifically denying him credit in Soviet loss reports. We all know the power and the role that political officers and the NKVD played in the Soviet war effort, and that role included EXACTLY the kind of morale and counter propaganda campaign that would supersede the need to file accurate loss reports.

Given Hartmann's profile in Germany and the Eastern Front, Hartmann was almost certainly given "special attention" by somebody on the Soviet side.

On the other hand, Hartmann may have been ordered to over-claim as a part of a German/Luftwaffe propaganda effort. This is a distinct possibility as well.

One thing is certain:

Hartmann walked into Soviet captivity rather knowingly and more voluntarily than anyone else. He was given several opportunities to go to JV-44. He also disobeyed General Seidemann who ordered Hartmann and Graf to fly to the British sector to avoid capture by Soviet forces. Hartmann refused on multiple occasions to abandon his men who were not given the option to go west. (Not being critical, but others went West when given the same opportunity.)

Bronc

[HGabor]

Not sure about the 'special attention', but I think Hartmann himself did not affect the soviet loss records at all. the soviets very often mixed the Fw 190s and Bf 109s in the air (based on distance, poor visibility, etc.) so I do not think they saw any special markings if they missed even the plane. Especially, because Hartmann usually attacked from the back and disappeared quickly - that's why he had serious problems observing the ultimate fate of his attacked opponents. The soviets had quarterly plane 'inventories' in their mechanical papers, planes couldn't just disappear from those lists without showing up in some units' loss reports, etc.

[Broncazonk]

Originally Posted by HGabor

The soviets had quarterly plane 'inventories' in their mechanical papers, planes couldn't just disappear from those lists without showing up in some units' loss reports, etc.

So so simple for a NKVD/political officer to turn an air combat loss into another kind of loss. "Loss due to ground fire," is a well known method. Operational losses turn in to training losses from time to time, no?

The mere existence of the Soviet commissar/political officer/NKVD directorate makes any and all Soviet records suspect. And I'm including weather reports. A Soviet record reporting that the sun came up one morning is suspect on it's face given the historically documented propaganda power and influence of the Soviet commissar/political officer/NKVD.

Bronc