I acknowledge that the reports will have different stories from either side.
I said this
I never said they will be 100% the same just that they're close enough to match
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I acknowledge that the reports will have different stories from either side.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 never said they will be 100% the same just that they're close enough to matchWell 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
Your language in general man, you are a mod. No shame in taking a breather from the screen before writing an emotion filled response.I did not call him a name, or attack him personally.
Now stop instigating things that are not there.
Records from opposing sides won't usually be 100% match just close enoughYou 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.
I am examining all the claims for certain pilots but I'm still in the process of doing it.Have you scrutinized every claim for all pilots?
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.
But since there are loads of levels of reporting there is no chance that they all go missing for a certain loss.Bullshit! Reports were lost and misreported by all sides. The Soviets are no different.
I am examining all the claims for certain pilots but I'm still in the process of doing it.
I do look at every single loss at every single time in a certain theatre and I also examine confirmed as well as unconfirmed claimsI 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.
It's not small, it's every single victory claim by the Royal Hungarian Air Force in ww2So you have a small sample size for which you are making a very broad claim. Thats pretty common in statistics.
But since there are loads of levels of reporting there is no chance that they all go missing for a certain loss.
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
I knew bullshit wasn't meant at me personally because you said my statement was not me.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
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.No, you assume you are looking at every loss. You have no way to know you in fact did.
No need to apologise because it ain't a big dealMy apologies this is all getting out of hand again.
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
No need to apologise because it ain't a big deal
Oh so you think that the loss could go missing at all these levels?You just nailed it. In your opinion.
And in mine, we cannot be certain.