A look at German fighter Ace kill claims

[CHen10]

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.

I acknowledge that the reports will have different stories from either side.

I said this

Well the time of the loss could be 1217 hours but the claim is at 1207 hours. The time is close enough.

The location of the loss could be Várpalota but the claim is at Csór. (You can use google maps to see the close proximity of these locations)
The location is close enough

It's clear the losses are linked to the claims

I never said they will be 100% the same just that they're close enough to match

 

[Luft.4]

I did not call him a name, or attack him personally.

Now stop instigating things that are not there.

Your language in general man, you are a mod. No shame in taking a breather from the screen before writing an emotion filled response.
Speaking of which, I will do just that.

 

[CHen10]

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" ?

Records from opposing sides won't usually be 100% match just close enough

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I referred to post 228, you stated the above. you did not write post 228.

Again, why are you bringing up post 228?

 

[CHen10]

Have you scrutinized every claim for all pilots?

I am examining all the claims for certain pilots but I'm still in the process of doing it.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Your language in general man, you are a mod. No shame in taking a breather from the screen before writing an emotion filled response.
Speaking of which, I will do just that.

Lets make a deal. You knock it off with your condescending attitude, and I'll work on my language. As I said earlier, it takes two…

 

[CHen10]

Bullshit! Reports were lost and misreported by all sides. The Soviets are no different.

But since there are loads of levels of reporting there is no chance that they all go missing for a certain loss.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I am examining all the claims for certain pilots but I'm still in the process of doing it.

So you have a small sample size for which you are making a very broad claim. Thats pretty common in statistics.

 

[CHen10]

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 do look at every single loss at every single time in a certain theatre and I also examine confirmed as well as unconfirmed claims

 

[CHen10]

So you have a small sample size for which you are making a very broad claim. Thats pretty common in statistics.

It's not small, it's every single victory claim by the Royal Hungarian Air Force in ww2

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

But since there are loads of levels of reporting there is no chance that they all go missing for a certain loss.

On a side note, my use of the word "Bullshit" was not directed at you personally. It was at the idea that there is no chance.

I can tell you something right now. Reporting in the military is the furthest thing from accurate. The more levels you add, the more grey it gets. During WW2 it was no different.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I do look at every single loss at every single time in a certain theatre and I also examine confirmed as well as unconfirmed claims

No, you assume you are looking at every loss. You have no way to know you in fact did.

 

[CHen10]

On a side note, my use of the word "Bullshit" was not directed at you personally. It was at the idea that there is no chance.

I can tell you something right now. Reporting in the military is the furthest thing from accurate. The more levels you add, the more grey it gets. During WW2 it was no different.

I knew bullshit wasn't meant at me personally because you said my statement was not me.

Of course military reporting has mistakes and that's why differences appear between the two sides but the details will be close enough. There's no way I could crash at Manchester and the report says London for example

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I knew bullshit wasn't meant at me personally because you said my statement was not me.

Of course military reporting has mistakes and that's why differences appear between the two sides but the details will be close enough. There's no way I could crash at Manchester and the report says London for example

We may disagree, but I can at least converse with you. My apologies this is all getting out of hand again.

It is best that I take my own advice from way earlier in this thread and recuse myself.

 

[CHen10]

No, you assume you are looking at every loss. You have no way to know you in fact did.

But the assumption is true in my opinion because even if some details of loss reports get lost, there are loads of reports of the same thing over and over again.

The loss will be mentioned:

In the VA report

In the corps report

In the Division report

In the regiment report

In the personnel loss report

In the front report

In other units reports that were in the area

To me the likelihood of all of them going missing for one loss is hard to believe

 

[CHen10]

My apologies this is all getting out of hand again.

No need to apologise because it ain't a big deal

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

But the assumption is true in my opinion because even if some details of loss reports get lost, there are loads of reports of the same thing over and over again.

The loss will be mentioned:

In the VA report

In the corps report

In the Division report

In the regiment report

In the personnel loss report

In the front report

In other units reports that were in the area

To me the likelihood of all of them going missing for one loss is hard to believe

You just nailed it. In your opinion.

And in mine, we cannot be certain.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

No need to apologise because it ain't a big deal

No it is a big deal. I am allowing someone else to get under my skin. I shouldn't.

 

[CHen10]

You just nailed it. In your opinion.

And in mine, we cannot be certain.

Oh so you think that the loss could go missing at all these levels?

In the VA report

In the corps report

In the Division report

In the regiment report

In the personnel loss report

In the front report

In other units reports that were in the area (and then the same thing here so their VA report, corps report, division report, regiment report, personnel loss report, front report)

For me the outcome that they all go missing is too far fetched and so I say I have every loss.

 

[CHen10]

No it is a big deal. I am allowing someone else to get under my skin. I shouldn't.

Maybe you're reading too much into it. I don't think L Luft.4 is trying to annoy you.