Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Japanese and Allied Air Forces in the Far East

Japanese and Allied Air Forces in the Far East Please use this forum to discuss the Air War in the Far East.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 9th June 2007, 20:27
kolya1 kolya1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 112
kolya1 is on a distinguished road
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

Hi,

I just wanted to remark something about loss statistics.
I agree that the argument about "hidden losses" is almost always unsubstantiated.

But I wished to remark that the cause of losses may sometimes be questionable.

Generally, this is not the case, but when records are uncomplete, this may happen, the example about which I'm thinking about here is German losses on the Eastern Front, where some combat losses have been later recounted as accidents, or air-to-air losses as caused by AAA, or various different causes mentioned (I think about Hans Ahn's loss or the death of Otto Kittel).

That said, I'm playing here the devil's advocate...

Kolya.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 9th June 2007, 23:42
JoeB JoeB is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 124
JoeB
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

Wrong classification of losses is certainly possible, but again the example of Korea comes to my mind. It's often said the US did this extensively in that war, classing air combat losses as due to AAA and accidents, and not counting written off planes, but in my research I've not been able to find much substantiation of that charge. There are a few cases, but in many dozen incidents of course there would be. It's not statistically significant. In most cases it's easy to see the AAA or accidental loss really was as classified, in a separate incident at another place/time of day, and written up in detail.

It makes me tend to skepticism when that possibility is suggested as explaining any significant part of the claims v losses discrepancy in other wars, though one must be open minded to specific evidence.

Joe
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10th June 2007, 10:35
Ruy Horta's Avatar
Ruy Horta Ruy Horta is offline
He who rules the forum...
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amstelveen, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,468
Ruy Horta has disabled reputation
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

I was forwarded this message from Christopher Shores:
Firstly, those who seek to attack what I have written on the subject should be made aware that I found AVG claims no more or less unreliable than those of most other air forces I have researched. Always the circumstances of each engagement needs to be looked at carefully. In fighter-v-fighter combats the claim:loss ratio always seems to climb rapidly, multiplied by the numbers of aircraft/units involved. In Burma the AVG were often fighting over jungle and attacked in steep dives before climbing back for altitude. Good tactics, but fraught with opportunities for double claiming - or triple claiming for that matter.
When I wrote 'Fighters over the Desert' way back in the 1960s, I could not understand why I kept finding claims that I could not verify when I seemed to have all the available records to hand. It was only years later, and after I had been attacked by apologists for just about every air force in the world, that I found in the official British war histories published in the early/mid 1950s a clear warning that claim totals were likelty to be inflated and could not be relied upon - and that was admitted within ten years of the end of WWII !!
Indeed, overclaiming, albeit in the best of good faith in most cases, certainly seems to have been endemic in aerial combat. It happened on every front and with every air force. Some (though not all) Luftwaffe units and Finnish units were considerably more accurate than most, most of the time. Fighter pilots by and large were young, aggressive and optimistic men who knew what they should be seeing and wanted to see. Even now, some still get very upset when it is pointed out that something they were quite certain had happened (and wanted to have happened) had not in fact occurred just as they recalled it. Others are much more pragmatic and realistic - and strangely, it is usually the latter whose claims prove to be easier to verify as having been accurate (or at least reaonably so).
I always remind myself of the little verse Barrett Tillman recited once - "You can tell a bomber pilot by the spread across his rear, and by the ring around his eye, you can tell a bombadier; you can tell a navigator by his maps and charts and such, and you can tell a fighter pilot - but you can't tell him much !"
Just for the record, I love it when I can find a loss that fits a claim so that I can properly confirm what actually happened at the time. It gives me no joy at all to have to point out that there was not a loss for a particular claim. I love the world of fighter pilots and have spent more than 40 years of my life researching and recording their exploits. But in doing so if one is to retain credibility as a historian, one must look at the full picture, not just one side.
In 'Bill; a Pilot's Story' by Brooklyn Harris, the author records how day after day Japanese formations kept returning to targets in the Solomons despite the losses apparently being inflicted on them by the 13th Air Force. It never once occurred to the author that perhaps the reason for the apparently inexhaustible supply of aircraft the Japanese seemed to have available to them - something to which he specifically referred - might have indicated that at least in part the losses they were actually suffering were not as severe as those being claimed.
To research matters from as wide a perspective as possible and to report the results as accurately as one can, should reflect no shame on those participating except in the occasional and thankfully rare occasions when some individual is deliberately falsifying their contribution. (The latter did happen now and again, but fortunetly not often). From my own researches I can certainly state that the vast majority of fighter pilots (and aircrew generally) of all nations did their duty in an exemplary fashion. If anyone has done them a disservice I would suggest that it was more likely to be those who wrote about them carelessly for sensational and propaganda purposes - not those who have tried to be objective and honest in recording history to the best of their abilities. Personally, I am always pleased to be able to update and correct any statement I have recorded in the past where further or more reliable evidence becomes available.
If you should feel it appropriate to include these words on the Forum I would be grateful. If you feel it is too long, then fine.


Kind regards,
Chris
End of quote.
__________________
Ruy Horta
12 O'Clock High!

And now I see with eye serene
The very pulse of the machine;
A being breathing thoughtful breath,
A traveller between life and death;
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10th June 2007, 11:15
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 2,630
Nick Beale is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

Characteristic good sense from Chris Shores. Thanks for posting it.

There's one other factor I suspect affected claims: adrenalin. I find it hard to imagine that a bunch of young guys could remain dispassionate while hurtling around the sky behind 1,000-plus horsepower and trying to shoot while being shot at. And it's possible that buzz would last right through debriefing …
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10th June 2007, 11:21
CJE's Avatar
CJE CJE is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bordeaux (France)
Posts: 1,083
CJE
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

Thanks Ruy. This should write the word finis to this debate.

Chris
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10th June 2007, 18:15
Ruy Horta's Avatar
Ruy Horta Ruy Horta is offline
He who rules the forum...
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amstelveen, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,468
Ruy Horta has disabled reputation
Re: Flying Tigers VS Christopher Shores?

My thanks goes to Chris Shores for his contribution.
__________________
Ruy Horta
12 O'Clock High!

And now I see with eye serene
The very pulse of the machine;
A being breathing thoughtful breath,
A traveller between life and death;
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
Mr Christopher Shore's new project marsyao Books and Magazines 30 25th September 2010 03:01
Solomons-based Corsairs - open cockpit flying? chicoartist Japanese and Allied Air Forces in the Far East 22 21st November 2006 05:50
V-1 flying bombs Brian Allied and Soviet Air Forces 34 9th April 2006 16:25
Losses of B-17's in RCM role paul peters Allied and Soviet Air Forces 4 15th February 2006 20:57
anyone have the Rechlin 190A4 test chart? ring Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 3 9th January 2005 03:46


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:23.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2007, 12oclockhigh.net