BTW, the IL-2 also had an inline engine. That plane was famous for holding battle damage. Was it's radiator much different than that of the P-51?
Yes as its radiator was surrounded by armour plate.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
BTW, the IL-2 also had an inline engine. That plane was famous for holding battle damage. Was it's radiator much different than that of the P-51?
The only comment that I disagree with (mildly) is the 'impossible' nature of validating ground destruction. The 8th AF Intelligence Officers collaborated with the pilots in methodical ways to sort chaos into tangible 'belief's'. The pilots, as a briefed process began to assign one of the high cover pilots to turn on gun camera film and take pictures of the field they strafed - for those missions that had planned high cover. Burning aircraft were the only targets permitted as 'destroyed'
Overclaims existed as a matter of course for many specific airfield scores but more on an individual basis rather than aggregate for large 'bags' primarily.
The intelligence officers broke the daily claims into locations of the claimed aircraft to assist in sorting out the individual gun camera film and tried to match it with the film of the airfield. The primary purpose was to attempt to sort out 'shared' claims into a.) assignment of different pilots shooting as same aircraft which at one time in the process would burn or blow up, and by virtue of the 'mapping' process, be assigned to an X' on the master location drawing by the IO's. That document and the gun camera film would travel, along with the local pilot preliminary award in the Mission Summary Report, to 8th AF Victory Credit Board for review and final disposition.
The mere fact that causing a fire was the minimum requirement for a locally approved Destroyed claim was very serious reason for belief of that aircraft was not likely return to service resulted in high probability of an observed aircraft to truly be destroyed or >60% damaged which was LW criteria for scrapping it..
It wasn't perfect but there were, ONTH, many aircraft that were damaged very badly but did not burn for lack of fuel. Me 262s fit in that category most of all.
Specifically if the target didn't burn or blow up it would get only a Damaged claim so 8th AF rules for air to ground victory credits were sound if not perfect.
I was distracted after my last post while looking for a match to clear the air, but the answer to the question 'Do I have the data for the number of Mustangs and Thunderbolts which did not return for 'unknown' reasons?' is yes as I examined every one of the MACR's at NARA and HRC which later went to Form3'. As a 'number cruncher' I carefully sorted out the 'unknowns' into 'last seen strafing' with the LW KUJ reports (yes I read and recorded what they stated when available (mostly complete) to note what the reporting LW report said about time and location. I have a spreadsheet which carries the 'unknown' category into multiple probability categories for 'likely cause'
I'm with two 355th warriors tonight that were guests of the Hilton for six years..
Takhli and Korat warriors that have died and are dying from Agent Orange showers
Joe - there are no words of consolation. Fingers crossed
Joe, I dont know what to say. I am very saddened by that news.
There is distinct odor of gaseous emissions in the air.. it is easier to exit stage right than joust with it.. anybody have a match?
My brother right now....