Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces

Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the German Luftwaffe and the Air Forces of its Allies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 28th December 2019, 18:36
HGabor HGabor is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 944
HGabor will become famous soon enough
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

True, but we can only calculate with things that we have proofs for. Friendly fire, 'what if's, and other uncertain things cannot be part of the equation. The exact number of Soviet fighter losses are known, they won't double just for the sake of old, preferred legends ;-)
Gabor
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 28th December 2019, 19:05
Franek Grabowski Franek Grabowski is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 2,094
Franek Grabowski
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

You would be surprised with the numbers of friendly fire incidents in the ETO. There is a number of aircraft in, time and place, and a number of aircraft out.
I am not going to defend Hartmann, do not care about him. I just only want to pint out, that the identification could be wrong, as it often was in the ETO.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 29th December 2019, 02:38
Stig Jarlevik Stig Jarlevik is online now
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,362
Stig Jarlevik is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Franek certainly has a point

I am neither interested in if Hartmann got 352 or only 52, but I am interested in his phenomena as such.

As I see it for pilots to actually ID correctly an aircraft in air-to-air combat was far more based on luck than skill. Where correct ID was made, it was simply because there were very few alternatives to make mistakes with.

When the British for instance suddenly was confronted with both German and Italian aircraft, misidentification increased straight away.

For a German combat pilot trying to identify a Russian aircraft in a split second and determine if the engine was radial or inline was simply ridiculous. Preferred way was to try and catch your foe from the rear, not from the side or above, so looking at the aircraft from a nice side view or straight from above to determine wing form etc was simply not possible.

It is way too easy for us "armchair eagles" to dismiss combat reports just because the wrong aircraft type is listed.

There are even incidents where pilots reported single engine aircraft instead of twin engined and vice versa.

Is there actually anyone here who has some kind of combat experience with aircraft and actually fired live ammo while being shot at by someone else?
I certainly have not....

Cheers
Stig
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 29th December 2019, 02:39
Nick Hector Nick Hector is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 809
Nick Hector is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Yes,

I have seen a Focke Wulf Condor (airliner) misidentified as a Lancaster
Defiant mistaken for a Blehnheim
Just about every single Russian fighter claimed as a "MiG-3"
P-47s and Typhoons mistaken for each other
Yaks and LaGGs frequently interchangable
Spitfires/Hurricanes/P-40s....

Franek is definitely right. It's more than worthwhile checking.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 29th December 2019, 02:49
HGabor HGabor is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 944
HGabor will become famous soon enough
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Will do soon. Now on the road ;-)))
Gabor
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 29th December 2019, 10:37
focusfocus focusfocus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 756
focusfocus is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Hello Guys

If I may
On the subject of identification errors,of the erroneous types mentioned in the claims,here is what Rall said in an interwiew a few years ago.

"Information on types of aircraft shot down,information is UNRELIABLE.We gave any type because we were asked for one.
"According to the time,if it was a monoplane with "star engine",it was an I-16 or a La-5,without much risk of error....an inline monoplane,it was a MIG, LaGG ,or Yak,haphazard.

All is said!
Regards
michel
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 29th December 2019, 11:32
Nick Hector Nick Hector is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 809
Nick Hector is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Quote:
Originally Posted by focusfocus View Post
Hello Guys

If I may
On the subject of identification errors,of the erroneous types mentioned in the claims,here is what Rall said in an interwiew a few years ago.

"Information on types of aircraft shot down,information is UNRELIABLE.We gave any type because we were asked for one.
"According to the time,if it was a monoplane with "star engine",it was an I-16 or a La-5,without much risk of error....an inline monoplane,it was a MIG, LaGG ,or Yak,haphazard.

All is said!
Regards
michel
Well... ...naturally.
But as I always say: either a loss occurred, or it didn't.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 29th December 2019, 15:20
keith A keith A is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,107
keith A is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Just a small contribution Gabor. Your work on this forum has been immense, and I for one am very grateful for anything you turn up.

This continual reiterating of "misidentification" is just making the obvious more obvious. Frankly I disbelieve anyone could believe a Defiant was a Blenheim, or a P47 a Typhoon. (I'd be interested to know who thought a Condor airliner was a Lancaster and where this occurred, a Luftwaffe pilot obviously). It sounds more like someone claiming a kill and then being told that another type had been seen shot down...therefore claiming that it must be just a bit of misidentification. I know US fighters shot down Spitfires, Typhoons, Tempests and each other in significant amounts 1943-45, and that there were many RAF incidents like "The Battle of Barking Creek", and FLt Buck Casson shooting down WCdr Douglas Bader. I believe Hartmann evidently misidentified some of his kills, made over-enthusiastic damage claims or was awarded the kill for propaganda purposes to avoid unseemly investigations of his veracity. There is a correlation I am sure with Lothar von Richtofen claiming a Sopwith Triplane and being told he had in fact shot down Albert Ball's SE5 (he'd done neither, the triplane returned damaged and Ball apparently crashed accidentally)!

Keep up the good work Gabor. New evidence allows us to better define events, especially on the Eastern Front where details are like gold dust.

The Luftwaffe were not immune from such incidents of friendly fire either, I remember reading of a nightfighter shooting down a Do217 thinking it was a Red Air Force B-25 Mitchell. I wonder if given the propaganda demands of the Nazi regime some LW aces unintentionally counted fighters of their own side in their tallies.

regards

Keith
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 29th December 2019, 16:19
Franek Grabowski Franek Grabowski is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 2,094
Franek Grabowski
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Well, as long as the aircraft attacked but not downed is not named, the identification is not complete. Might be impossible, but it should be the goal.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 29th December 2019, 21:19
Nick Hector Nick Hector is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 809
Nick Hector is on a distinguished road
Re: Hartmann: claims vs. victories

Quote:
Originally Posted by keith A View Post
Just a small contribution Gabor. Your work on this forum has been immense, and I for one am very grateful for anything you turn up.

This continual reiterating of "misidentification" is just making the obvious more obvious. Frankly I disbelieve anyone could believe a Defiant was a Blenheim, or a P47 a Typhoon. (I'd be interested to know who thought a Condor airliner was a Lancaster and where this occurred, a Luftwaffe pilot obviously). It sounds more like someone claiming a kill and then being told that another type had been seen shot down...therefore claiming that it must be just a bit of misidentification. I know US fighters shot down Spitfires, Typhoons, Tempests and each other in significant amounts 1943-45, and that there were many RAF incidents like "The Battle of Barking Creek", and FLt Buck Casson shooting down WCdr Douglas Bader. I believe Hartmann evidently misidentified some of his kills, made over-enthusiastic damage claims or was awarded the kill for propaganda purposes to avoid unseemly investigations of his veracity. There is a correlation I am sure with Lothar von Richtofen claiming a Sopwith Triplane and being told he had in fact shot down Albert Ball's SE5 (he'd done neither, the triplane returned damaged and Ball apparently crashed accidentally)!

Keep up the good work Gabor. New evidence allows us to better define events, especially on the Eastern Front where details are like gold dust.

The Luftwaffe were not immune from such incidents of friendly fire either, I remember reading of a nightfighter shooting down a Do217 thinking it was a Red Air Force B-25 Mitchell. I wonder if given the propaganda demands of the Nazi regime some LW aces unintentionally counted fighters of their own side in their tallies.

regards

Keith
Hi Keith,

16.1.41/0230 and 0245: Oblt. Albert Schulz of 2./NJG 2 claimed two "Blenheims"
The known interceptions/losses in the area were Defiants:
L7002 of 54 OTU, P/O H G S Wyrill and one other safe
N1542 of 54 OTU - damaged and forced to land
Source: Simon Parry, Boiten

28.7.43/1217: Rolf Hermichen claimed a "Typhoon"
W of Rotterdam/Scheldt-Brakel (PQ IH-1 to NH-7) @ 6-7000m
This has been linked to the loss of P-47C-2-RE Thunderbolt
41-6238/VF- of 336th FS, 4th FG. Lt. Henry L Ayres Jnr. Ditched and taken POW
Source: Caldwell, Bishop and Hey

Wilhelm-Ferdinand Galland had made the opposite misidentification a fortnight earlier.
15.7.43/1655
Typhoon Ib (mistaken for a "P-47 Thunderbolt")
10km WNW of Somme Estuary @ low altitude
Typhoon R8866 of 181 sqn. P/O E A Haddock POW
Source: Caldwell, Bishop and Hey

29.11.44/2349: Oblt. Herbert Koch claimed a Lancaster over the Skaggerak
It is believed this was actually D-ARHW "Friesland" of Deutsche Lufthansa. 4 crew and 6 passengers all killed
Source: Boiten

So it looks like three factors are at play:
1) After midnight all cats are black
2) The wrecks of aircraft shot down over the sea cannot be checked
3) Either POWs don't correct their captors as to the type they were flying or once victory claim paperwork was submitted, it was not necessarily corrected
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Birth/Death details of non Ritterkreuz 50+ aces Johannes Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 53 28th January 2020 10:55
Moelders vs Galland vs Wick Nick Hector Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 26 3rd November 2018 14:26
Nightfighter claims in Febr.1945 Peter Kassak Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 2 6th April 2013 11:12
Percentage of Verifiable Victories of Various Aces –Updates & Recommendations Rob Romero Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 25 9th March 2010 03:39
Percentage of Verifiable Victories of Various Aces –Updates & Recommendations Rob Romero Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 0 30th September 2006 10:05


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:47.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net