Soviet air force losses 1941-1945

[Six Nifty .50s]

Originally Posted by Mirek Wawrzynski

Some of you are talking about a book Grif Sekretnosti Sniat, edited by Colonel-General G. F. Krivosheev. I wonder what edition do you think about. This book has 2 edition : first in 1993 (about) and secon in 2001 (Poteri voruzonnych sil Rosji i CCCP w XX wiekie) form 2001. I have the second the first I had seen some times ago.

Originally Posted by Mirek Wawrzynski

My impresion about this books as following.

What is for me "shocking" in both books are political manipulation of statictic provided by Russians/Soviets historians. Both book do not have credible datas.
When you check the tables about the Soviet tanks in June 1941 you will get to know that Soviets had about 22.600 tanks in the Red Army.
Other Russian sources edited also in the last years given highr fighyres (I think about Kolomyjetz and his series Frontovaja Ilustratzya) in his series he can specifiy tanks according the types and their serviceability - he put the total figure of Soviet tank force on about 26.000 on June 1941. -all category of tanks

Yes, statistics are always open to interpretation. Both numbers cannot be correct, unless one uses different criteria for inclusion. On the other hand, you compared two numbers in which there is not a significant difference. It is possible that the first number is wrong. But, did you consider that the second number might be less accurate than the first?

Originally Posted by Mirek Wawrzynski

Last biut not least the language of Krivosheev books is also far of being objective and balanced and have strong political (red/Soviet oriented) colour/flovour.

That is possible, but then again some people have accused the German armed services of the same behavior. Certain historians from every country want to believe that their own soldiers and flyers were/are "more honest than the other side", which in itself is strongly political, and far from being objective and balanced.

I would encourage anyone to raise questions about statistics, but I think it is unfair to make assumptions that political motives caused someone to intentionally 'cook the books'.

[Franek Grabowski]

Originally Posted by Six Nifty .50s

I would encourage anyone to raise questions about statistics, but I think it is unfair to make assumptions that political motives caused someone to intentionally 'cook the books'.

Why? Whole Soviet historiography was done this way.

[Marek_W_Pilat]

Originally Posted by Six Nifty .50s

He was quoting statistics from Grif Sekretnosti Sniat, edited by Colonel-General G. F. Krivosheev. The English translation was retitled, Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century.

Table 95 shows aircraft losses by year, including total losses compared to combat losses. There are separate categories for combat aircraft and other planes used for transport, training, etc. The chart indicates that the total Soviet aircraft losses (all types) was 106,400 of which 46,100 were considered to be combat losses. The losses of 'combat aircraft' (Bombers, Ground-Attack, Fighters) was 88,300 of which 43,100 were identified as combat losses.

Sorry, I'm not so much competent !
Its very interesting, substantiate publication in russian Internet !
Author: Aleksieyenko V.I. - "Sovietskiye VVS nakanune i v gody Velikoy Otechestvennoy Voyny" - 11 tables.
Naturally in russian language !!!
-------------------------------
Correct address
http://klad.hobby.ru/alekseenko.htm - not working and automatic changing to other....

Another way :
http://klad.hobby.ru/milarch.htm
1- menu left side, to find "Publications" in russian text started similar: "IIyblu..." (in menu - 11 position down)
2- and on the right frame to find second link down with text started similar from : "Cobetckue......"
Best regards
Marek