Erich Hartmann - how did his comrades regard him?

[Jerry W. Loper]

I believe that in Trevor and Costable's book Horrido!, they do a statistical anaysis of the claims of an American fighter pilot, Robert S. Johnson, who shot down 28 planes and a German pilot (forget the name) who shot down about 100 planes, and found that if Johnson had been allowed to continue flying, statistically he should have scored as many victories as the German pilot. IOW, German aces were not necessarily "better" than Allied aces, they simply flew more sorties and had a more "target rich" environment.

 

[drgondog]

Jerry - at the end of the day there is no way Johnson statistically, while remaining with 56th, that he could have gotten more than say another 20+. All the LW aces were in a target rich environment. Johnson was not, and further the war in the air moved mostly out of his reach as Mustangs took over the Battle of Germany. Nobody in USAAF but J.C. Meyers and Preddy got 20 after March 1944 in the ETO, and just barely, while flying 51's.

 

[tyrodtom]

Except the pilot with 100 victories has been in a lot more combat situations, each one different, and has no doubt, learned a little from each.
The same as a 3000 hr pilot is a little wiser, more savy, than a 1000 hr pilot.
Of course some of the German, and Japanese pilots, had been at the sharp end so long that combat fatigue must have been a problem.

 

[parsifal]

It is well known fact that the victory claims made by fighter pilots of all airforces generally were exaggerated. However, there is no evidence that there was any official German policy of exaggerating the fighter pilots claims; on the contrary, each claim had to go through a thorough procedure, including research, before it was officially accepted.

According to Gemeinschaft der Jagdflieger, pilots claimed a total of 70,000 aerial victories during WWII- 25,000 against the west and 45,000 on the osten front. According to the same source, 16,400 German day fighters were lost ( aerial and ground, total loss ie: more then 59% damage) as the result of hostile action during the war years. 8,500 pilots were killed, 2,700 MIA/taken prisoners, and 9,100 wounded.

Different total loss figures for the RAF and USAAF are published frequently. According to the russian archives, the combat losses of the VVS between 1941 and 1945 amounted to 46,100 aircraft. Due to the fact that several VVS records were lost during the first few months of Operation Barbarossa, the actual combat VVS losses probably were higher, totaling approx. 50,000 aircraft.

There are obvious and glaring innaccuracies here. 45000 Allied combat losses represent the total Allied losses to combat causes, and includes losses to the minor airforces, and losses on the ground. Does not appear to include non-combat related attirional losses. More than half of allied losses were attributable to flak, so a more realistic loss sheet to LW fighters is about 10-15000. To give some perspective to this in 1944 the USAAC lost in total about 3500 a/c in combat related causes. RAF losses to combat related causes, in the air were about 14500 for the entire war.

By comparison, the figures being quoted here appear to relate only to losses in the air (for the LW), and only to air action. It appears for all the world to me to be one of those propaganda pieces, designed to deliberately mask the truth. Total LW losses for the entire war, from all causes were nudging 70000 aircraft, so it appears that whereas the Allied (and presumably the Soviet) are including all combat losses from all causes, it seems by the numbers given that the LW are only listing aircraft lost to enemy aircraft.

We went through a similar excecise in a thread recentl;y concerning the Me 109. Looking at just one JG, for 1943, we found losses for that 50 strong outfit were something like 250 aircraft lost in just one year. Thats a loss rate of 5 times the force establishment.

Murray and others have shown that to December 1941, the LW had lost the equivalent of two airforces , or roughly 10000 a/c....and thats just to the end 1941, during the salad days for the LW. By 1944, total LW losses on all fronts were approaching 1500-2000 a/c per month. Thats about 15000 a/c in just one year. And probably around 80% of these were fighters by that time

It is also worth noting that pilot losses do not represent total aircrew losses. The losses for pilots just dont gel either.....Germany trained about 60000 pilots during the war, and did not have 45000 plus their prewar supply at the wars end. Germany was short of two things insofar as its air force was concerned at the end of the war....pilots and fuel....and on those figures they would not have had any problems with pilot availability. There is clearly something very wrong with the arithematic here........

 

[Ratsel]

You'd have to talk to Claes Sundin. those figures are in his book 'Luftwaffe Fighter Aircraft in Profile 2'. This man knows his stuff so I'm sure he could give a very good explanation on how he arrived at those figures. Perhaps its just for Bf109/Fw190 days fighters(?).

 

[parsifal]

I dont dispute that losses to air action would be about 16000 (well, actually I do, but not to a significant extent) , but the misrepresentation occurs in that the losses for their opponents, represent total losses. so we end up comparing apples to oranges. Total losses (except attritional losses) for the allies, to losses to air action only, for the LW. Its basically cutting LW losses in half, without being so crass as telling porkies, but just by not revealing the full truth

 

[Ratsel]

In his book it says:

' The following figures are based on many years of thorough going studies of the aerial warfare between 1939 and 1945. ' he further writes ' Note: the German loss figures given are total combat loss figures, i.e: losses to ground fire, and in aerial combat. '

 

[parsifal]

well, he is out of step with every other account I have ever seen for LW losses, and is suggesting in these figures that the LW were never short of pilots at any time in the war. Means that the 8AF strategy was a failure and we are speaking in german at the moment.

 

[Ratsel]

perhaps... Gruss und Horrido!

 

[parsifal]

These are figures according to wiki (a great source I admit, but they are usually at least somewhere near right)

China: Total losses of the Nationalist Air Force were 2,468 (According to Chinese and Taiwanese Sources).

Finland: Reported losses during the Winter War totaled 67, of which 42 were operational, while 536 aircraft were lost during the Continuation War, of which 209 were operational losses. (Overall 603).

France: From the beginning of the war until the capitulation of France in 1940, 892 aircraft were lost, of which 413 were in action and 234 were on the ground. Losses included 508 fighters and 218 bombers.(Overall 892)

Germany: total number of destroyed and damaged for the war totaled 116,875 aircraft, of which (it is estimated) 70,000 were total losses and the remainder significantly damaged. By type, losses totaled 41,452 fighters, 22,037 bombers, 15,428 trainers, 10,221 twin-engine fighters, 5,548 ground attack, 6,733 reconnaissance, and 6,141 transports.

Italy: Total losses were 5,272 aircraft, of which 3,269 were lost in combat.

Japan: Estimates vary from 35,000 to 50,000 total losses, with about 20,000 lost operationally.

Netherlands: Total losses were 81 aircraft during the May, 1940 campaign.

Poland: Total losses were 398 destroyed, including 116 fighters, 112 dive bombers, 81 reconnaissance aircraft, 36 bombers, 21 sea planes, and 9 transports.

Soviet Union: Total losses were over 106,400 including 88,300 combat types.

United Kingdom: Total losses in Europe were 22,010, including 10,045 fighters and 11,965 bombers. (This figure does not include aircraft lost in Asia or the Pacific.)

United States: Total losses were nearly 45,000, including 22,951 operational losses (18,418 in Europe and 4,533 in the Pacific).

 

[parsifal]

One way this might be relevant to the thread would be to get a number of the claims by the LW, and then compare to actual losses. That way we can achieve a baseline error rate between claims vs actual losses and from their determine if Hartmann was statistically overclaiming and by how much. If he was overclaiming and his collegues were aware of it, they might be resentful of his publicity. personally I doubt that, but surely worth a look at.

 

[Ratsel]

the awkward moment when somebodies opinion appears on wikipedia. 116,875 lost/damaged? hmmmm... didn't Germany produce 94,622 of all types?

 

[razor1uk]

Some of the LW numbers of aircraft also IIRC doesn't necessarily exclude reworked A/C either upgraded from earlier to later marks/models or the construction of A/C from salvaged parts from multiple wrecks, along with missing data aircraft caught in the logistical/supply/transport system to due bombing raids late war document destruction, makes things on actual LW numbers murky.
Personaly, to me, my logical or illogical thinking, and how they managed to keep going fairly well mid 44' I'd guess that the lower propossed figures of LW A/C form less understanding/biased sources are quite wrong, and more conjectural about their proponants/supporters opinions upon the multiplicity of available propagandic viewpoints or post-war nationalistic or ideological 'historical' mis-information. I may well too be mis-informed, but as Gunther Rall said in a documentary 'Defenders of the Reiche' (IIRC)
"..You see, we were fighting for 6 years, longer than anyone else, and unlike the USAAF or RAF, we didn't only have to survive 50 missions before returning home, we used to say 'you get two crosses, an iron one or a wooden one.'...."

As to Hartmann, I think that he certainly downed more than 300 A/C even taking into account the largely political reasons for his 10 years inprisonment as a nautural Soviet reaction to counter his 'official LW combat record' (and/or/aka - LW info to Signal propaganda) verses postwar Stalinistic propaganda/Coldwar Soviet media public opinion feeding/control.

 

[parsifal]

the awkward moment when somebodies opinion appears on wikipedia. 116,875 lost/damaged? hmmmm... didn't Germany produce 94,622 of all types?

To a degree yes, an awkward moment, but far less so than claiming 16000 losses (even for fighters). And 94000 does not include aircraft constructed for the Luftwaffe or expropriated by the luftwaffe from other countries, produced prewar, or produced as non-combat types like primary trainers.

The problem with claiming just 16000 fighters lost in the whole war basically goes to this. You might be able to add 40-45% to this figure due to non-combat related causes, say another 7500 airframes. You might be able to add around 10000 additional airframes for strike and bomber aircraft. You might just accept that 15000 trainers were lost in their entirety. That means, on that rough accounting, that the LW might have lost 47000 aircraft both combat and noncombat, but excluding losses to fighters on the ground. That means, on the basis that the Luftwaffe ended the war with 5000 airframes, and using your source as the basis for fighter losses that either a whopping 50-700000 german fighters were lost on the ground (more than they actually produced!!!!!!) or, this source that claims only 16000 fighters lost in air combat is just not koche. Personally, I would go for the latter.

 

[Ratsel]

wellll he didn't list all combat related losses. just a2a and a2g losses. also, even if the total a/c in Germany was 100000+ units doubt very much they were all lost due to combat/combat related. most likey they were destroyed after May 8, 1945, or destroyed by pilots right before the Luftwaffe surrendered. then listed. thanks for the most interesting conversation btw =)

 

[parsifal]

No, thank you, has ben most intersting, but we do need to somehow relate this back to the topic.

I personally dont believe that hartmann only shot down 70-80 aircraft (only 70-80...my god, thats more than any allied pilot ever achieved.....), I think , at a guess probably 300-320. He was an exceptional pilot, and should not be denigrated when he is not in a position to defend himself.

 

[Ratsel]

yes, 70-80 claims only is pure hogwash. 300+ is a very realistic number for Hartmann. I've seen some site that say that was accomplished in 800 or so missions, others say 1400+ missions. I'll have to check whats what and get back to yah.

Aces of the Luftwaffe - Erich Hartmann says 825 missions.

 

[Juha]

the awkward moment when somebodies opinion appears on wikipedia. 116,875 lost/damaged? hmmmm... didn't Germany produce 94,622 of all types?

Firstly, Parsifal's figure was destroyed and damaged, which isn't very helpfull without info on the degree of damage included.
Secondly, LW used widely war-booty planes, especially trainers but also for ex Italian transport planes, so when LW lost for ex S.81 transport it was still LW loss even if the plane was made in Italy, or a night harasment flight lost a Fokker C.V.

Juha

 

[Juha]

Hello Razor
even if many LW pilots thought that a tour lenght of RAF and USAAF fighter pilot was 50 combat sortie, that wasn't true. The limiting factor was operational flight time, 200 hours, for P-51 and P-38 pilots that was more or less like 50 combat sorties, but for Spitfire, P-47 or P-40 pilots clearly more, for Spitfire /Hurricane pilots close to 200 sorties. So some USAAF and RAF pilots in ETO flew appr. 500 combat sorties during the WWII. And in SEA RAF day fighter tour was 300 hours or one year, whichever was completed earlier.

Juha

 

[razor1uk]

Kitti ja terve Juha, mita kuluu?
I was quoting from memory what GR said, and I think, by the mission limit (possibly obtained 'off the top of his head') he suggested, was for USAAF Bomber crews - I think even if he got it wrong as a generalisation in trying to highlight the fact, that in the LW back then, you only were relieved of active flight status/duties when you were mentally /or physically unable to fly, dead or restricted by promotion to a high enough rank with its associated command duties.

Not completely unlike the western allies, but, there was a usually a defined tour limit or goal as a US/GB/CW pilot/crew, even if this limit itself was changed or differed between different services allied nations.
If you reached them, you could be given the option of going home or doing another tour should you survive in body and mind pass medical mental evaluations.

The only other airforce that flew for longer in war/combat around the ww2 era, was Japan - if you include the Invasion of China, it was atleast 8 or 9 years - but thats going off topic