GregP
Major
For all the good it will do you, sure.
It's like reading, "Gentlemen and Sandwiches Quarterly" magazine .... relatively pointless.
A look at German fighter Ace kill claims
- Thread starter RCAFson
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It's like reading, "Gentlemen and Sandwiches Quarterly" magazine .... relatively pointless.
So I take it you could not find yourself in post 228 right?
You can prove it when you find the actual wreckage itself and see the details match the record.
Yeah it will do a lot of good.
You can analyse victory claims and compare them with losses.
You still don't seem to understand. Reports had to be hand written or typed. Reports get lost. Reports may or may not have been actually filed even if an aircraft is missing. How an aircraft was lost could be misreported.
Actually I am certain you understand this. You just won't admit it because it pokes a hole in your theory.
Luft,
The funny thing is both the USAAF and the Luftwaffe published a reg saying that a plane has to be destroyed to be counted as a kill. But neither of those two Air Forces actually followed their own regulations. And if you claim that the Luftwaffe gave a wide latitude to Hartmans claims, how is it that the Russians didn't do underhanded things as well, or the USAAF? I think they all did less than honorable things but there are less than honorable people everywhere.
I think you have opened a good debate, but unless you look at every loss, of every aircraft, at every time a pilot squeezed the trigger regardless of whether he made a claim, then you can't be absolutely positive. I think you raise some good points and it scratches a question itch I've had for years. While I don't completely agree with your conclusions, I don't completely disagree either.
Chen10,
Have you ever witnessed a terrible event, been in combat, been shot at, or in fear for your life for more than a few seconds? Multiple eyewitness of the same event will tell very different tales. Your absolute conviction in reporting done under the duress of war actually undermines your credibility. There was a thread in here where someone commented that military members were paid too much. My reply was based on the very famous picture taken from the back of a landing craft on D-Day. The fear on the faces as they know almost certain death awaits them. Or the guys who went door to door in Fallujah, cleaning things up. You can't pay a guy enough to do those things. Don't be the guy who thinks otherwise. My point being your perspective is way off.
Luft and Chen, if you haven't read the P-39 threads do so. Then you will understand why people are making references of this thread to that.
Cheers,
Biff
The funny thing is both the USAAF and the Luftwaffe published a reg saying that a plane has to be destroyed to be counted as a kill. But neither of those two Air Forces actually followed their own regulations. And if you claim that the Luftwaffe gave a wide latitude to Hartmans claims, how is it that the Russians didn't do underhanded things as well, or the USAAF? I think they all did less than honorable things but there are less than honorable people everywhere.
I think you have opened a good debate, but unless you look at every loss, of every aircraft, at every time a pilot squeezed the trigger regardless of whether he made a claim, then you can't be absolutely positive. I think you raise some good points and it scratches a question itch I've had for years. While I don't completely agree with your conclusions, I don't completely disagree either.
Chen10,
Have you ever witnessed a terrible event, been in combat, been shot at, or in fear for your life for more than a few seconds? Multiple eyewitness of the same event will tell very different tales. Your absolute conviction in reporting done under the duress of war actually undermines your credibility. There was a thread in here where someone commented that military members were paid too much. My reply was based on the very famous picture taken from the back of a landing craft on D-Day. The fear on the faces as they know almost certain death awaits them. Or the guys who went door to door in Fallujah, cleaning things up. You can't pay a guy enough to do those things. Don't be the guy who thinks otherwise. My point being your perspective is way off.
Luft and Chen, if you haven't read the P-39 threads do so. Then you will understand why people are making references of this thread to that.
Cheers,
Biff
You simply do not understand that a loss was reported at multiple levels. Lost the division report, there is the IAP report, the OUSM report, the VA report, the stick-off order, the resupply order etc...
What does 228 have to do with me?
No I just don't understand why loads of losses would go missing for some pilots but not others. Wouldn't the reports that get lost be random?
I'm well aware thank you. Don't make assumptions.
You do realize all these claims, and reports were written up after the missions were over.
Maybe directly after landing, maybe a great deal later, when the memory isn't quite as clear.
When what is called pencil pushers is in charge of the records, everything always balances out.
For a brief period in my own military career I was under orders to falsify records, can't be the only time that ever happened.
You have a lot more faith in official records than I do.
And all combats were not witnessed by survivors, some planes lost even in the crowded space of western front being discovered to this day. And the same in Russia, and other areas of the former USSR.
You can have 3 people witness the same event, but give out wildly different stories of what happened , when it happened, and where it happened.
Who decides what's recorded in the "official record" ?
I referred to post 228, you stated the above. you did not write post 228.
Bullshit! Reports were lost and misreported by all sides. The Soviets are no different.
Mod, what is it with your words?!
"ass", now this?
Have you scrutinized every claim for all pilots?
Respectfully, have you read the book? That is exactly what we did.
We have a lot of latitude in the book, but this thread wanted to know what a victory was that's why it seems I am "victory or over claim" only. I am not. we have other types of outcomes too.
I did not call him a name, or attack him personally.
Now stop instigating things that are not there.
Sure in a perfect world.
