FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Exactly - I think before his death Toliver did acknowledge some of this. Again, he was the first to take a stab at it at a time where resources were limited compared to today.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
T's and C's book is unreliable source, not necessarily because of errors by writers. For ex Mason's Battle over Britain, which was a groundbreaking book in late 60s is now unreliable source because research has gone ahead and we know much more than in 60s, not because of that Mason was/is poor aviation historian. I recall reading/hearing somewhere that Hartmann wasn't overly enthusiant on T's and C's project and gave somewhat lukewarm support to it, so T and C had to fill up some blanks from other sources. And of course they didn't have access to Soviet archives so Soviet part of the story is based on what Germans knew/thought they knew/wanted to tell on that side of the story. And the stories of the bounty and trial not necessarily originated from Hartmann.
Juha
Unless your score is one kill, I don't think ANY kill credits from WWII are correct because of a myraid of reasons. But the official record is 352 and like I respect any other pilot and his record, I will respect Hartmann's score and accept 352.
And as stated earlier, why is everyone focusing on Hartmann when there numerous other pilots with high scores? Just because he scored the most?
Anyway, if i heart somebody, moderator or not i feel sorry, but nothing is justifying the overinflation of coarseness and insults.
.
Exactly - I think before his death Toliver did acknowledge some of this. Again, he was the first to take a stab at it at a time where resources were limited compared to today.
Everyone is saying that of the pane is recovered, it is not a loss. That may be true fron the standpoint of the air force that owns it, but is si still a victory for the pilot who shot it down.
So ... losses may actually not add up to victories. Whether or not the aircraft was recovered, it still SHOULD be a victory for the pilot if he shoots it down and it crashes or is forced to land dead stick.
A damaged aircraft uses resources for its repair, just as a wounded serviceman, in a hospital bed, uses more resources than a (buried) body.
This talk of down-grading a man's score is always rather disturbing, since what is it meant to achieve? Will the "researcher" feel a sense of achievement, because he's (in his mind) made that person less of a hero to his country of birth? Will any man, who put his life on the line, day after day, fighting for his country, actually be less of a hero, to his countrymen women? One intriguing question, when this sort of subject appears (again,) is what will the researcher do, if he finds out that there's been a miscount, and the pilot's score is actually higher than was originally thought? Will he immediately say so (the sign of a true researcher, in my view,) or keep it quiet?
Attempts to discredit Hartmann come across as stinginess and sour grapes. The character and ability of the man comes across in the 1400 missions he flew during which he never lost a wingman. His character comes across when he refused to abandon his unit and the men that needed him to join Gallans elite jet squadron. It comes across in refusing to break under soviet torture and admit to fake war crimes, or indict others for fake crimes or become a trophy commie convert. He returned from over 10 years of captivity, which few survived, to his wife with his baby daughter dead. He then gave years of service to the Luftwaffe and USAF. Finally pushed out of the Luftwaffe because he smelled something up re the Locheed F 104 "bribe of the century".
If Hartmann claims 353 victories then he is correct because the integrity of his character is proven by any standard.
Now H lost one wingman in 45 but he was clearly a man who cared for his wingmen, very appreciatedly trait. IIRC he flew well over 800 combat sorties, but one see both that and 1400 as number of his sorties.
Now ability to withstanding harsh treatment, ability to stand firm behind one believes and ability to claim accurately are different facets of personality. Having one doesn't mean that one has another.
Juha
Mr Juha
1)That wingman was a former bomber pilot that executed poorly fighter manouvers. Any way he parachuted safely.
2) Mr Juha if some historians claim that Hartmann had actually 280 kills instead of 352 , they discuss his ability to claim with accurancy
But if some ishorians claim that he had 80 or 120 kills instead of 352,then they discuss his honor and his character. Because such big mistake can be only intentional. Liars are liars in every aspect of their lifes.
3) However there are things that raise questions about Hartmann. For example his low claims of bombers and Il2s , or his avoidance of low level combat. Thats quite serious because Lw s primary role was to support and defend the army, . If you shoot down all the escorts but the bombers do their job undisturbed you have failed your mission .
Mr Juha
1)That wingman was a former bomber pilot that executed poorly fighter manouvers. Any way he parachuted safely.
2) Mr Juha if some historians claim that Hartmann had actually 280 kills instead of 352 , they discuss his ability to claim with accurancy
But if some ishorians claim that he had 80 or 120 kills instead of 352,then they discuss his honor and his character. Because such big mistake can be only intentional. Liars are liars in every aspect of their lifes.
3) However there are things that raise questions about Hartmann. For example his low claims of bombers and Il2s , or his avoidance of low level combat. Thats quite serious because Lw s primary role was to support and defend the army, . If you shoot down all the escorts but the bombers do their job undisturbed you have failed your mission .
I think what he is saying Juha is that an updated score that may be +/- 50 or so kills can be reasonable but a large discrepancy reflects more on the character of the pilot and not innocent claims. That is something we really don't tolerate. Thats Revisionist History at its worst.
Or USAAF 8th AF in '43-44? More action = more mistakes. Its the nature of the business and really not an exact science. I can take whatever fudging the numbers that appears - unless its blatant. But I will also accept what the record books say. Hartmann = 352. 'nuff said. And at this stage of the game, does it really matter?