Battle of Britain RAF and LW order of battle

[GregP]

When I went to the link, the numbers seem to mean:

The first three numbers are "Established (approved number to have on hand)), on strength, and serviceable for aircraft.

The last three numbers appear to be established (approved number to have on hand), present, and ready for pilots, and they all appear to be for 28 Sep 1940.

Since these are numbers for only one point in time, it doesn't seem to prove anything except on 28 Sep 1940 for only the Luftwaffe, but the link will let you navigate to numbers at other times. To know anything, we'll have to get to a comparative set of numbers for the same dates, I think, for LW and Fighter Command. Then we have something worth discussing.

My question is, "are the numbers (in the link) reliable?" Milosh thinks so and I simply don't know since I have no prior knowledge of whoever Mr. Holm is other than a number set on the internet from some supposed good source. He isn't on my list of respected experts, so his numbers are suspect. I have no reason to suspect him, but also no reason to believe him. Ergo, he is an unknown and I don't have any access to German libraries and don't read German anyway.

I looked up the Luftwaffe unit breakdowns, but thanks for the post above, Njaco! Now if I only knew what units reported to upper units, I'd have something. Again, I don't speak or read German, but it appears that "Gruppe" is plural and "Gruppen" is singular ... unless I have it backwards. Same for the other unit designators ... I think.

I don't know what units were assigned to Luftlotte 2, 3, or 5, or if all units are accounted for, but the numbers seem to indicate 281 approved fighters, 216 on hand, and 174 serviceable; 281 pilots approved, 238 present, and 206 available for missions.

If that's true, and if all are accounted for, then the 276 isn't far off for approved strength, but the real available was 174 with enough pilots to fly them all.

We'll get there.

 

[Milosh]

Greg, I have some of the same questions but I know what some of what Milosh posted means. I would like to know what date those numbers come from.

Quick LW Unit Designations:

A whole geschwader (or group) was called something like JG 26 and had 4 squadrons within the group that were designated by roman numerals - so II./JG 26 was the second squadron in the 26 Group. To confuse even more, each squadron had 4 units called Staffeln that were numbered by conventional Arabic numbers. So 3./JG 26 would mean the third staffel of JG 26.

The date is at the top of the list Njaco > 28.09.40
Single engine fighters - 28.09.40

For other dates > German Order of Battle - Statistics as of Quarter Years, 1938-45

For Jagdgeschwader > The Luftwaffe, 1933-45

Your not quite right Njaco.

staffel = squadron
gruppe = wing
geschwader = group

 

[Milosh]

Greg, you have it backwards > gruppen is plural

So the Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv, Freiburg is not a good source? That is like saying the USAF Historical Research Agency, Maxwell AFB, Alabama is a questionable source.

I could say the same about John Ellis.

A bit of cross referencing and internet searching on your part will tell you which Luftflotte a unit is in.
To help you along, Luftwaffe Campaign Orders of Battle

I don't know what units were assigned to Luftlotte 2, 3, or 5, or if all units are accounted for, but the numbers seem to indicate 281 approved fighters, 216 on hand, and 174 serviceable; 281 pilots approved, 238 present, and 206 available for missions.

Where did these numbers come from?

 

[Njaco]

Alright, I throw my hands up! I was being lazy and just trying to give an impression of terminology. It was late for me and I was tired. And I didn't check the link. And I wasn't sure those numbers were coming from the link. and.......



I'll take my penance now..

 

[stona]

Your not quite right Njaco.

staffel = squadron
gruppe = wing
geschwader = group

That's not correct either. The translation to the structure of other airforces is always approximate but we can at least get them in the right hierarchical order.

Geschwader = Wing
Gruppe = Group
Staffel = Squadron

In 1940 a typical Jagdgeschwader (fighter wing) comprised a Geschwader Stab and then three Gruppen (groups) which as Njaco correctly said were designated by Roman numerals (I,II,III). Each Gruppe comprised a Gruppe Stab and three Staffeln (squadrons). These were identified by arabic numerals (1,2,3,4 and so on) and further distinguished by a colour code.

The various Stab can be translated as Staff Flights and these aircraft were flown by officers identified by the various bars and chevrons you will see on aircraft from this period.

Everyone else had an identifying number or Kennziffer in the relevant colour for his Staffel usually infront of the fuselage Balkenkreuz and then a device (a vertical or horizontal bar,wavy line,circle (nothing for I Gruppe)) to identify which Gruppe he was from,usually behing the fuselage Balkenkreuz.

Many fighter (and other) units applied unit emblems to their aircraft,usually,but not always,on the engine cowling, and many pilots also applied personal emblems,usually below the cockpit.

This only applies to Jagdgeschwader and it varied throughout the war,particularly with the addition of a fourth Gruppe and a fourth Staffel to each Gruppe late in the war.Other types of units used different systems of marking and identification. That used by the Jagdgeschwader is probably the easiest to decipher!

Cheers

Steve

 

[Njaco]

Hey guys, I knew I was using the wrong and proper terminology. I was just trying to convey something similar for Greg and was lazy about it. Don't need to start a war.

 

[stona]

Hey guys, I knew I was using the wrong and proper terminology. I was just trying to convey something similar for Greg and was lazy about it. Don't need to start a war.

Not at all,I just wanted to clarify the approximations,which is all they are.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Milosh]

Actually stona, what I posted is correct if the RAF is used for comparison purposes.

ie. squadron > wing (composed of multiple squadrons) > group (composed of multiple wings)

 

[stona]

Actually stona, what I posted is correct if the RAF is used for comparison purposes.

ie. squadron > wing (composed of multiple squadrons) > group (composed of multiple wings)

Yep, fair point,they are only approximations.

Steve

 

[GregP]

Hi Milosh,

The numbers came from your post #49.

If I copy the ALL the numbers from the link: Single engine fighters - 28.09.40, then when I add them up I get different total than the table in the link. If you actually add the columns, you get:

1,132 aircraft approved on strength, 917 on hand, 712 serviceable; and 1,132 pilots approved on strength, 917 on hand, and 674 ready for missions.

So, on the face of it, if the body of the table is correct, the units covered by this table could field up to 674 single engine fighters assuming no aborts for any reason, even though they technically had 712 fighters avaialble. Can't fly them without pilots.

All this was apparently true on 28 Sep 1940. Seems like they were short 38 pilots on that particular day with regard to aircraft serviceable. The telling figure in my mind is that there were 917 pilots on hand with only 674 ready to fly. That means for some reason or another there were 243 pilots not available for mission that were on hand. Either they were out of crew rest or a large number were wounded and recovering ... or something. It is also possible that many pilots were still listed as being "available" when they were, in fact, missing but not yet declared missing or KIA or POW.

I don't know except that they were "not available" and none were listed as being on limited duty.

From the table's data, I'd say the strength on 28 Sep 1940 was 674 single engine fighters available since that's all the fighter pilots they had available. They were having some issues with the supply line since they had 205 fighters on hand that were unserviceable for some reason. With 205 unserviceable, they might easily have canabalized some to get others running, but there was no point since they only had 674 pilots to fly them and had more serviceable fighters than pilots.

Do you get different numbers? Or interpret it differently? Anybody?

 

[Juha]

On what do you base that opinion? I assume you have some training graduation statistics to make you think that?

Not nitpicking ... just asking.

On memoirs, e.g. Rall got his final part of training in first-line unit.

Juha

 

[GregP]

Hi all,

I looked at Milosh's link (thanks Milosh!) and got the data for all reported points in time in 1940 for the Luftwaffe. The title of the page is "German Order of Battle - Statistics as of Quarter Years, 1938-45," implying the Order of Battle is for the entire Luftwaffe, not that committed to the Battle of Britain alone. They don't have every month, they have only March, June, September, and December in specific days near the end of the month (28 – 30 ).

From March to June 1940, aircraft allowed dropped 19%, aircraft on hand dropped 12%, but serviceable aircraft actually rose by 5%. Pilots stayed roughly equal with pilots available dropping by 5%. The end of June is right about when the BOB started.

From June to September 1940, aircraft allowed dropped 3%, aircraft on hand dropped 17%, and serviceable aircraft dropped 17%. Pilots allowed dropped 3%, pilots on hand dropped 19%, and pilots available for missions dropped 26%. This timeframe includes most of the BOB.

From September to December 1940, aircraft allowed rose 3%, aircraft on hand dropped 9%, and serviceable aircraft dropped 17%. Pilots allowed rose 3%, pilots on hand stayed about the same, and pilots available for missions rose 5%.

These data show a steady drop in aircraft on hand to the tune of 12%, 17%, and 9% for each respective quarter. The Luftwaffe was losing planes faster than they could replace them. For serviceable aircraft, we see they built up for the BOB by about 5%, and then dropped by 17% from June through September and another 17% drop through the end of the year. Clearly they had a lot of aircraft down for repair. Pilots on hand stayed about the same from March through June, dropped 19% during the BOB, and stayed about constant through the end of the year. Pilots available for missions dropped by 5% from March through June, dropped 26% through the BOB, and rose by 5% through the end of the year.

Clearly, the main months of the Battle of Britain were hard on German aircraft and pilots, particularly pilots. The slight 5% rise in pilots available from September through December is misleading since the main 26% drop consisted of a lot of veterans and the 5% rise was only a rise from the lowest level available in the entire year. They went from a high of 951 fighter pilots available for missions in March to a low of 674 in September and only rose to 711 by December. All of the difference were green pilots fresh out of training.

Fighter aircraft on hand went from a high of 1,258 in March to a low of 835 in December. Serviceable fighter aircraft went from a high of 856 in June after the buildup for the BOB to 712 in September after the main BOB and down to 588 in December. So despite any new fighter deliveries, the Luftwaffe was down to 588 serviceable fighters to be flown by 711 pilots available for missions, with a higher percentage of green pilots, as we might expect.

I emphasize that these data are for the whole Luftwaffe, not only the aircraft committed to fighting in the west. Naturally, if they assigned any fighters to points east, then these would necessarily detract from the numbers available to fight in the west. The Soviet Union wasn't invaded until June 1941, but there were certainly some aircraft based near the Russian Front to preclude a surprise attack from Russia. The Germans were in North Africa and the general Mediterranean Sea in June 1940, so some of the serviceable aircraft and pilots were certainly there. So in September 1940, with 712 fighters serviceable and 674 fighter pilots, how many were based near Russia, how many were in North Africa, and how many in the general Med? I can easily see the number of pilots and planes available to fight the Battle of Britain at the close of September 1940 as being less than 500, but I have no concrete proof of a particular number based on these data. The numbers for Russia, North Africa, and the Med totally ignore any fighters based on the west coast of France to cover any sea actions near the coast and we KNOW there were some there as well as up in Scandinavia covering the action in that area. Fighter air cover was available to German ships along the coast of France throughout 1940.

The data certainly show that Germany was hurting for fighters about the time the battle of Britain was winding down, and they show the difficult time they were having reinforcing their aircraft and pilot availability.

Maybe we can get some of the same information for RAF Fighter Command in 1940.

By the way, just a comment about the data in the links. Not all the totals in the tables are correct. If you copy them into Excel and add them up yourself, there are about 3 - 4 mistakes that don't amount to much, but they are off by 1 or 2 in some columns. I checked and the mistakes are not due to aplha characters for numbers, they are simple addition errors. Let's remember they weren't using too many computers immediately post-war ... particularly for things so mundane as adding up tables. Most were being used for hard scientific research.

 

[GregP]

Thanks Juha, I always liked Rall. A very straightforward guy in his interviews, and forthcoming with frank discussion.

 

[Njaco]

Map showing Luftflotten locations and Fliegerdivision locations.......

,

 

[GregP]

By the way, Milosh, I never intended to say or imply the Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv, Freiburg is not a good source.

What I have found, on the internet, is that if you bother to check sources against data posted on the internet, then people who CLAIM to have gotten numbers from sources are correct about 60% of the time, and seem to be more interested in proving their point than in being honest the rest of the time. As I said, I have no reason to doubt Mr. Holm but also have no reason to trust him either, and I do not have access to the original German documents. So, his data are useful but I would not want to base conclusions in, say, a book on them until I checked at least a few tables for correctness. Generally, if someone posts correct numbers most of the time, they tend to be honest the rest of the time ... not always.

So, if the data are, indeed, correct from German documents, then we can see the result of fighting in the Battle of Britain in the declining numbers of both serviceable fighters and available fighter pilots in plain old black and white.

Again, thanks for the great source, Milosh. I'll do the rest of the war at my leisure and draw conclusions from there myself, based on the data I get. Hopefully it is historically accurate.

 

[Glider]

The best I can find for the RAF are
Servicable Aircraft
17th July 1940
■Blenheim - 67
■Spitfire - 237
■Hurricane - 331
■Defiant - 20
■Total - 659

28th September 1940
■Blenheim - 57
■Spitfire - 214
■Hurricane - 390
■Defiant - 12
■Gladiator - 8
Total - 681

RAF - Battle of Britain 70th AnniversaryBattle of Britain 70th Anniversary

 

[GregP]

Thanks Glider! I was running into a quagmire trying to find useful numbers. I can easily find squadron and wings, but it is harder to find number of serviceable aircraft!

I DID find losses as: View attachment 229082

These from: www.SchoolHistory.co.uk

By the way, these are losses confirmed by the other side, not claims ... according to the text. Of course, I can also find other numbers that differ from these ... frustrating, to say the least!

 

[Njaco]

Greg, thats a bad link - didn't come up for me. Did they give the dates for these numbers, like from July to Sept, etc.,?

 

[GregP]

No they give dates at the end of March, end of June, end of September, and end of December.

As you know, I am a lousy typist .... it's SchoolHistory ... not Historu .... of you add the "y" it will work. I'll go fix the link. I clicked "online history lesson," did a search for "Battle of Britain," and went from there. It wasn't too hard to find the order of battle page.

If you can't find it, I'll find it again and update the link. Let me know either way, no trouble.

 

[Hop]

Greg, the RAF losses in those tables are for all causes on operations, including accidents. The Luftwaffe losses only cover losses to enemy action, and exclude accidents.

The Narrow Margin by Wood and Dempster gives the following figures for German single engined fighter losses, July - October:

On operations, due to enemy action: 502
On operations, not due to enemy action: 98
Not on operations: 63

I believe there's a tendency in German records to attribute unknown causes to accident rather than enemy action. Hooton in Eagle in Flames gives German bomber sorties and losses by day and night, from 1 July - 6 October:

Day
9,700 sorties, 507 lost to enemy action, 134 lost in accidents

Night
7,150 sorties, 36 lost to enemy action, 8 lost in accidents

As you can see, the Luftwaffe had a far, far lower rate of accidents flying at night than by day. That doesn't make sense unless "accidents" includes a large proportion of aircraft lost to enemy action.