US Strategic Bombing Survey No59 - a questionable statement about 1-seat fighters production

[Andrey Kuznetsov]

Hello!

The US Strategic Bombing Survey No59 (The Defeat of the German Air Force) states the following about the production of fighters in 1944 (sorry for the long quote):

********************
14. There can be no exact assessment of the number of fighter planes "lost" ... as a result of Allied attacks on production ... The claimed production of some 36,000 single-engine fighter aircraft in the year 1944 greatly exceeds the number of aircraft which can be accounted for in Luftwaffe units and by records of losses.

16. The mystery of "where were all the aircraft going which were claimed to be produced?" requires examination. ... GAF fighter battle order on all fronts increased in 1944 only from 1,500 to some 2,200, while S/E fighter "production" exceeded losses in first line units in the same period by more than 16,000. At the same time, fighter school commanders were complaining that there was a serious shortage of operational types of aircraft on which to train. Oberst Littman, commanding offlcer of Straubing Airport flying school, stated that he was told lies about the number of aircraft in the Luftwaffe ...

17. Even if all fighters damaged more than 10 per cent are added to lost aircraft, more than 8,000 fighter aircraft remain to be accounted for. This means that, if all aircraft receiving anything more than superficial damage were scrapped, there would still be over 8,000 which disappeared.

18. The conclusion - or perhaps "suspicion" is the better word - is that nowhere near so many aircraft were produced ... "Further sources of error are to be found In the way aircraft under repair were accounted for. There were three possibilities of repair which had to be considered: "a. Repair with the troops (not counted in the statistics).
"b. Repair requiring up to 1,000 man-hours, which went to the repair shops. At first, these repairs were counted as stocks. After the crucial period In 1943, they were no longer considered In the statistics.
"c. The normal case: 'Extensive repairs,' which meant that the planes went back to the manufacturers and were counted both as losses and, later, (when they cams back) as new production."

19. Unquestionably there exists, in German aircraft statistics a discrepancy between claimed new production when compared to losses and the strength in units of the GAF. Production of all operational types of aircraft in 1944 was claimed at some 39,000 ... Strength in units at the end of 1944 was virtually unchanged from the beginning of the year. With aircraft written off in 1944 totaling 21,946, there remains unaccounted for a difference of some 17,000 planes; ie, the excess of claimed production over aircraft written off. It is unreasonable to believe that 17,000 planes were destroyed outside of units. A possible partial answer is furnished in the statistics which show 5,689 more aircraft going into repair than were returned for allocation to units. Part of these may well have been repaired, marked as "new production" aircraft and entered in the accounting system as such. In addition, the statistics show that 25 to 30 per cent of the so-called new production aircraft was allocated to "sundry and modification" instead of to GAF units. The records show the assignment of a negligible number of aircraft from modification to GAF units. There is a strong supposition that aircraft came out of modification again marked as new production
********************
Full text:
https://dracobooks.com/The%20Defeat%...r%20Force.html

Has anyone researched this problem? There should probably be a more plausible explanation than just a lie.

Best regards,
Andrey