'44 fighter lost

[Vincenzo]

Luftwaffe lost ~8000 fighters in '44, to enemy actions, (my calculation on data on ww2.dk) how many the other air forces??


p.s. with fighter i'm talking of fighter plane in fighter unit, so no recce, attack, trainer used fighter

p.s. day fighter

p.s. with 109 and 190 loss in attack and recce units the total is ~9000

 

[Vincenzo]

I found that USAAF loss ~4300 fighters in combat mission in '44, (from aaf statistical digest) this is not directly comparable with Lw total, it maybe include fighters in others units, and exclude ground loss (a aircraft loss on ground is not in combat mission)


p.s. was noted there are ~1900 fighters loss, same year, in combat mission for other cause (no enemy aircraft no AA)

p.s. this include also AAF twin engined fighters

 

[drgondog]

I found that USAAF loss ~4300 fighters in combat mission in '44, (from aaf statistical digest) this is not directly comparable with Lw total, it maybe include fighters in others units, and exclude ground loss (a aircraft loss on ground is not in combat mission)


p.s. was noted there are ~1900 fighters loss, same year, in combat mission for other cause (no enemy aircraft no AA)

USAAF losses ETO/MTO day fighters -1944
-----Total----Air----Flak-----Oth
ETO..3765 ---1293--1611----861
MTO..1571----441---493-----637

Total..5336---1734--2104---1498
List of Tables: Operations

 

[Vincenzo]

same source only your data are limites at europeans theatres

 

[drgondog]

I have no idea what your sources are

From Kutscha (compiled from Caldwell and Price and Prien)

 

[Vincenzo]

for my source it's enough read my posts

 

[drgondog]

for my source it's enough read my posts

Not if your source isn't backed by some scholarly research. You think you are immune from being asked to back up your claims with sources?


The above are tables from Prien/Caldwell/Price research, where is your data coming from? BTW ww2.dk is a good source for may LW related data but there is no single point or tables that I know of.

 

[Vincenzo]

Not if your source isn't backed by some scholarly research. You think you are immune from being asked to back up your claims with sources?


The above are tables from Prien/Caldwell/Price research, where is your data coming from?

if you don't read my post it's not my fault but your

 

[drgondog]

if you don't read my post it's not my fault but your

I often read your posts - you make a lot of claims but seldom back them from data, when others present sources to refute theirs , you frequently dismiss them, but still don't present references.

This is a general comment - as you occasionally do present references.

So, back to this one. If you developed the loss totals by sifting through the Order of Battle, there are many gaps in them

 

[Vincenzo]

what are the gap?

 

[Vincenzo]

useless some admin can delete this

 

[Vincenzo]

and when i refuted of post sources?

 

[drgondog]

what are the gap?

As one example you cite 9000+ LW fighters lost in 1944

Caldwell/Prien cite 6487 (1/1/44-5/31/44) and 7477 (6/44-10/44)

That total = 13,964 (which does not include the tremendous losses of Nov/Dec 1944) ---------> a LOT more than 9000.

So, your figures are 64% of this source, and my source (Prien Caldwell) are missing two months of serious losses because of incomplete LW data.

Do you want to adjust or justify your data based on verifiable references rather than be offended when someone questions your data?

 

[Vincenzo]

i've no offended none, but you offended me, i writed in the post "my calculation on data on ww2.dk", commonly it's prohibited deep linking so i don't linked the page, i give you the path: order of battle, flugzeugbestande und..., jagdverbande i calculated for all units 1944 loss for enemy actions as i writed in my post, maybe you've trouble in reading my post.

 

[drgondog]

i've no offended none, but you offended me, i writed in the post "my calculation on data on ww2.dk", commonly it's prohibited deep linking so i don't linked the page, i give you the path: order of battle, flugzeugbestande und..., jagdverbande i calculated for all units 1944 loss for enemy actions as i writed in my post, maybe you've trouble in reading my post.

I read "9000+" I am very familiar wit ww2.dk especially when I am looking for one particular LW unit Order of Battle. He will be first to tell you not all units details are correct and it is a continuing WIP. If you have performed some interesting research - post it as I did my preliminary 8th AF FC details

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/marshall/SUMMARY_OF_COMBAT_OPERATIONS.pdf

You might follow suit and document your sources


As to being offended by my request for sources? I suppose you'll get over it - or you won't.. either works for me.

 

[Vincenzo]

the 9000 figure come out adding at jagverbande the 109 and 190 loss in unit in schlachtverbande and aufklarungsverbande. it's offence because i've already writed where i take the data, it's offence don't read what one write.
Why the details aren't correct on ww2dk?, they coming from microfilm of luftwaffe documents, for me are incorrect the supposition of your source.
i've already saw your fine work but i think the lw loss are only claims

 

[drgondog]

the 9000 figure come out adding at jagverbande the 109 and 190 loss in unit in schlachtverbande and aufklarungsverbande. it's offence because i've already writed where i take the data, it's offence don't read what one write.
Why the details aren't correct on ww2dk?, they coming from microfilm of luftwaffe documents, for me are incorrect the supposition of your source.
i've already saw your fine work but i think the lw loss are only claims

I read 9000, I read ww2.dk (which I respect and has proven useful in researching particular unit attrition from time to time). Others like Erich have also used it as a cross reference but not as an officially sanctioned complete and accurate set of details.

Michael Holm would be the very first to tell you that his posted data gets better but is not complete and may never be accurate because of so much interlinking data being missing from individual squadrons through Gruppe and JG - much less transactions between the units and the factories or repair depots. The 1945 records are particulary atrocious as well as late 1944.

So, when you pose your summary numbers, reference ww2.dk, and cite that as a reference, then my first question naturally is based on your research methods and why you think they are accurate?


The data I presented contain only Awards, not claims.

For air to air the source is the USAF Study 85 as I referenced in my paper, and further cross referenced to USAAF 8th AF Victory Credits Board which compliled the original summation of all Awards for air and ground Destroyed, Probable and Damaged. The 8th AF VCB has a complete compilation of all 8th AF fighter pilot by pilot name, rank and serial number - also by squadron and date.

The USAF in a parallel study to research attributes that make up a successful fighter pilot in the 1950's also went back to all the encounter reports (claims), the VCB judgements, the posted Victory Credits and reduced them to the Awards contained in USAF 85. Dr. Frank Olynyk has deveoted nearly 30 years of his life to the compilation of the same (plus additional post 1958 information) Awards data. They agree closely, but have some differences, with USAF 85. Those are my Primary sources.

Whether or not the actual destroyed match to LW records is always the eternal debate and the answer is no - and further it is impossible because the LW records are neither complete nor do they account for inventory balances for all units throughout the war to even arrive at a reasonable picture of attrition on a monthly basis.

I only recently was appraised by Dr. Prien of a specific set of reasons why some records don't match up. If an american fighter pilot chased a 109 into the ground for a belly landing, however convincingly destroyed, that 109 if repairable, even if pilot KIA, was go into their records as damaged. Very few LW accounts will dwell on Damaged a/c - they will cite in great detail the KIA, WIA and MIA pilots but not on the aircraft the pilots flew.

For Losses, I have read every available Macr from NARA and now Footnote.com (for cross reference) which represents maybe 98 of MIA records, The Accident Reports of the 8th AF for which Ted Damick is THE SOURCE, although others have posted much data and are reliable first check.

There are subjective assignments to category which I explain - but I try to be conservative and give credit to LW for an air loss if the MACR cites "UNKNOWN" but German fighters were in the area. Ditto for flak when a pilot crashes while strafing.

I balanced additional questions againt the extensive library of Fighter Group Histories, as well as other significant researchers like Kent Miller and Frank Olynyk.

So, Caldwell and Prien for example, perform many similar techniques - I do not place myself in their category as researchers but I am thorough and analytical and will match my 8th AF FC research against anybody's.

Hopefully you understand more why I asked for sources and failing that, your methods - because I really was interested in whether you had developed a superior source.

 

[Vincenzo]

In case of absence of data on some units or time it's noted on ww2.dk and this are a very small. My method it's not a method i've only sum, maybe some errors on sum, i make partial sum a brain, but the round it's surely over the errors, and also the miss data from ww2.dk (no more that 2 gruppen/month and 1 staffeln/month if i rememebr right). award victory it's not a actual loss.

 

[drgondog]

In case of absence of data on some units or time it's noted on ww2.dk and this are a very small. My method it's not a method i've only sum, maybe some errors on sum, i make partial sum a brain, but the round it's surely over the errors, and also the miss data from ww2.dk (no more that 2 gruppen/month and 1 staffeln/month if i rememebr right). award victory it's not a actual loss.

????? And you know the 'missing data' on ww2.dk is very small - How do you 'know this'.

what does 'award victory it's not a actual loss' mean? If you mean the award from the 8th AF (or LW) did not always translate to an actual Loss - well that's what I said earlier.

If you had another meaning what is it?

 

[Vincenzo]

in the table if there are miss data there is a note. example no data for that month for 3rd staffeln.
so we agree that a award is not a loss