Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I must have misunderstood. That's my fault sorry about that.
I think the book that started all this has an agenda, and that agenda includes discrediting Hartmann. I think that largely from reading this thread. If it doesn't have that agenda, then this thread is NOT a good advertisement for the book. The agenda may or may not be accurate but, if not, it sure seems that way to me.
No need to apologize, brotha. We need not agree on every,single.thing in order to learn from each other, and on my part, I've learnt a lt from you and others here too. I too may have misread how vociferous you were (or weren't) about the supremacy of records being infallible.
In either event, it's just a discussion, and in one where my knowledge is so limited, I shoot questions and the occasional opinion, which is all I've done.
I've read that latter operations were intentionally spread piecemeal over multiple units to limit the number of losses for any particular unit. Which would obviously make it easier to hide total losses, if they were so inclined.Somewhat off-topic...or not.
About 18-20 years ago, researchers in ex-USSR discovered and published the numbers of VVS losses in 1941 which were filed in the official records under the rather unusual category: "neuchtyonnaya ubyl''", which can be translated as "unaccounted losses".
Over 50% (fifty per cent) of VVS losses on 01 Aug 1941 were in this category. There were various theories and debates around that.
This is concerning, for it does appear that Soviet General Staff study is understating the Second Air Army losses, omitting the considerable losses from the Seventeenth Air Army and of course, grossly overclaiming the number of German aircraft shot down. This was in an internal classified report that was supposed to be an analysis of the battle. Hard to properly analyze if your data is not correct.
Yrs it is well known that there were many holes in Soviet loss records from the summer and autumn 1941. Surprise attack and chaotic retreats, whole armies were wipe out. In fact that is not so strange. I suspect that the US Army and USAAF files for the 1941-42 Philippines Campaign are far from complete. Same to the BEF and AASF files.Somewhat off-topic...or not.
About 18-20 years ago, researchers in ex-USSR discovered and published the numbers of VVS losses in 1941 which were filed in the official records under the rather unusual category: "neuchtyonnaya ubyl''", which can be translated as "unaccounted losses".
Over 50% (fifty per cent) of VVS losses on 01 Aug 1941 were in this category. There were various theories and debates around that.
I've read that latter operations were intentionally spread piecemeal over multiple units to limit the number of losses for any particular unit. Which would obviously make it easier to hide total losses, if they were so inclined.
Chris Lawrence discussed an example of reporting discrepancies in his Kursk research here [The Soviet General Staff study on Kursk compared to Unit Records (part 2 of 3 – Airplane Losses)]:
Chen10, you state pretty clearly that since Hartmann's victories fall into your set of doubtful claims, that he was a chronic overclaimer. That means liar when the overclaims are frequent. You didn't use those words, but that's what you said.
You also think that way largely because there is no reported loss on the other side, despite being told of numerous ways such a thing can happen without a reported loss.
You rather obviously think that wartime records were exceedingly accurate and complete.
So, you apparently want to say Hartmann is a liar, that he isn't a liar and, now, that it is all a misunderstanding.
It isn't a misunderstanding. You are calling Hartmann a liar, plain and simple, because his victories don't all fit your pet theory, so SOMETHING must be wrong. You are basing this on reports that you believe tell the complete story of the entire air war in the area and a book that trashes Hartmann.
Some believe you. A lot of us disagree.
I think the book that started all this has an agenda, and that agenda includes discrediting Hartmann. I think that largely from reading this thread. If it doesn't have that agenda, then this thread is NOT a good advertisement for the book. The agenda may or may not be accurate but, if not, it sure seems that way to me.
So, just to be clear:
I very strongly disagree that a victory means a corresponding loss report must have been generated.
I very strongly disagree that all such reports are available today.
I do NOT believe all reports from the original claiming unit survived the war.
I do not believe Hartmann was a liar or that a significantly larger portion of his victories were overclaims than for other top pilots.
And, once again, I am outta' this thread, this time for good except to check the thread development.
None of this reflects personally on YOU. You are entitled to your opinion, for sure.
I fully agree with this summary. Added to this we have the author's own words in post #268 where he suggests that German overclaiming was endemic: "humpty-dumpty Goring with his thirst for power created an environment where this could take place" and that: "the Luftwaffe and introduced the possibility for filing sneaky claims" and that: "staffel captains signing off on their own claim". Finally, this is how he portrays Erich Hartmann: "does Hartmann need 11 more claims to get over the world record of 300, let him have it and broadcast it and give him the medal etc etc etc" and that "they let that slide as he is the poster-boy". And this is just a sample. There is more of the same in that post.
And since this is the way the author chooses to express himself here in the forum on the subject, I feel absolutely no inclination at all to get the book. After all, why would I want to read a book by an author with such a biased opinion?
I assume you are aware that apart for authors such as Theo Boiten, Morgan Seibel, Erik Mombeeck, and Johannes Matthews I am far from the only person to write about how Goring relaxed claiming regulation and how the claiming system had to start anew? And that these are derived from official documents at BAMA. If you recognize none of the above authors then the claiming question must not be your forte.I fully agree with this summary. Added to this we have the author's own words in post #268 where he suggests that German overclaiming was endemic: "humpty-dumpty Goring with his thirst for power created an environment where this could take place" and that: "the Luftwaffe and introduced the possibility for filing sneaky claims" and that: "staffel captains signing off on their own claim". Finally, this is how he portrays Erich Hartmann: "does Hartmann need 11 more claims to get over the world record of 300, let him have it and broadcast it and give him the medal etc etc etc" and that "they let that slide as he is the poster-boy". And this is just a sample. There is more of the same in that post.
And since this is the way the author chooses to express himself here in the forum on the subject, I feel absolutely no inclination at all to get the book. After all, why would I want to read a book by an author with such a biased opinion?
No you couldn't be more wrongSince this is the third time you post a cartoon Chen10, I can only assume that this is an attempt to get the thread locked. In addition, Luft.4 giving this "bacon" simply underscores that both of you are out of arguments.
It's 400+ posts now!!This thread still lacks documented proof from the dismissive side btw, 300+ posts in.
So, you are agreeing with Gregp?.. The rule is that it has to be close enough.
But it does show there is much intrest in it.I assume you are aware that apart for authors such as Theo Boiten, Morgan Seibel, Erik Mombeeck, and Johannes Matthews I am far from the only person to write about how Goring relaxed claiming regulation and how the claiming system had to start anew? And that these are derived from official documents at BAMA. If you recognize none of the above authors then the claiming question must not be your forte.
But as previous admitted some people do not use original documents, in fact they dismiss them. Not surprising.
Both you and that Greg guy appear to be dead set on the booked being biased, as you both have yet to read it I am curious as to how you came to that conclusion? Author of the 4 volume Luftwaffe aces series Johannes Matthews has publicly stated verified Victories is unbiased. They have read the book. They are real experts on claiming.
Interesting that the real researchers and published authors on this thread ( A Andrew Arthy andNick Beale , in addition to myself) can agree that over claiming is a real thing, that high claiming pilots had over claims, and that Soviet documents is a go-to/must for researching the eastern front and that their losses and trustable. At the same time, those that have not used the documents dismiss them.
There is no biased against Hartmann nor any of the other 7 pilots in the book. Hartmann's performance was based on the same docs which propels other pilots to near perfect claiming. His performance was lack luster over Hungary, period. I/JG 53 pilots agreed to btw! Laughable that those who have not read the book would claim such things. This only shows how engraved legacy understandings of the aerial war over the eastern front still is.
This thread still lacks documented proof from the dismissive side btw, 400+ posts in.
So, you are agreeing with Gregp?
He doesn't sound angry to me.Dont get angry
There is no anger in my post. Just stating the obvious about a book I wrote, one which a few didn't read and then state it is biased.But it does show there is much intrest in it.
So relax.
I think it is safe to say that after 80 years it is still an opinion for some what happened.
A few books wont cut it as the more then not refer to each other.
Its quite different for the the one who did do the research. Not all can understand.
One can take a donkey to the well, but not make it drink.
So there is the queste.
Dont get angry
Many holes - of course. What was strange, at least at the time when that information was revealed:Yrs it is well known that there were many holes in Soviet loss records from the summer and autumn 1941. Surprise attack and chaotic retreats, whole armies were wipe out. In fact that is not so strange. I suspect that the US Army and USAAF files for the 1941-42 Philippines Campaign are far from complete. Same to the BEF and AASF files.