Greatest Fighter Pilot in World War II..... UPDATED

[Udet]

I have these shots.

First: it might be my sight but unlike you RG Lunatic, i do not think the presence of drop tanks can be detected at all (or the absence thereof) on the P-51 in the first series of shots.

The second series clearly show drop tanks in the underwing; curiously for one moment the plane does not appear being a P-51 (USAAF markings can be detected though). If you take a closer view, in the second shot from the left, in the second series, the plane has a similar shape to a RAF Hurricane, still the squared wing tips are a giveaway.

I have asked further, and it seems like Soviet fighters fitted with guncameras were extremey rare. Perhaps only an "enfant chèri" such as Kozhedub and a number of other aces received cameras on their fighters.

I ve been told Kozhedub`s victories over those 2 Mustangs could be an invention of soviet propaganda, what do you think?

 

[Anonymous]

I have these shots.

First: it might be my sight but unlike you RG Lunatic, i do not think the presence of drop tanks can be detected at all (or the absence thereof) on the P-51 in the first series of shots.

The second series clearly show drop tanks in the underwing; curiously for one moment the plane does not appear being a P-51 (USAAF markings can be detected though). If you take a closer view, in the second shot from the left, in the second series, the plane has a similar shape to a RAF Hurricane, still the squared wing tips are a giveaway.

I have asked further, and it seems like Soviet fighters fitted with guncameras were extremey rare. Perhaps only an "enfant chèri" such as Kozhedub and a number of other aces received cameras on their fighters.

I ve been told Kozhedub`s victories over those 2 Mustangs could be an invention of soviet propaganda, what do you think?

Look at the right wing of the first sequence. Very clearly there is something hanging under the wing, right where the drop tanks should go. The left wing also shows something there, though less distinctly. The film quality is not great, but since the 2nd set clearly shows drop tanks, and the first set show what appear to be likely to be drop tanks, and the planes were flying together, it seems only logical that both had drop tanks on when attacked.

It may well have been an invention of Soviet propoganda. I've never seen any official US side to this incident. You'd expect there would have been some kind of an investigation right?

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Udet]

RG:

Ok. I do think I can detect what you tell me on the first P-51, still I have my doubts.

Well, I am afraid yes. An investigation should have been carried out by the USAAF. Or perhaps has it been already conducted? Did they discover the soviet claims were real and decided to conceal it?

My point is the soviet propaganda was perhaps more prolific than that of the Reich. Cases of soviet propaganda creations and manipulations or soviet mythology, have been discovered. Such cases are plentiful (a bit off topic, but the following examples are illustrative), here you have a few:

(i) The "famous" duel between sniper Zaitsev and the "top German sniper" sent into Stalingrad for the sole purpose of hunting down the soviet guy. Never happened.

(ii) The so called "greatest tank battle in history" in the Kursk salient in 1943, having the soviets claiming the destruction of "hundreds" of Tigers of the SS PanzerKorps, in the fight around the village of Prokhorova. Recent books and info proved such a thing never quite happened as well. Quite the contrary, the II SS Panzer Korps had virtually gutted the whole soviet tank reserve in the area.


I could name more, but let`s keep it on topic.

Perhaps Mr. Kozhedub indeed brought down 2 Mustangs. Why do I think it could be an invention of their propaganda state? First, and as I said, precedents of soviet inventions are plentiful. Secondly, to forge an idea of how a soviet hero could more than deal with the top USA weapons in the prelude of what would be known as cold war?

You make a strong point when you affirm a Mustang with its drop tanks still in the underwing certainly was not operating in the attack or offensive mode. Then the apparent generally accepted version of Kozhedub being attacked relentlessly leaving him no choice but to strike back and destroy his attackers would be shattered.

Shall this be the case, the soviets again, would be the victims of their own manipulations.

 

[Anonymous]

RG:

Ok. I do think I can detect what you tell me on the first P-51, still I have my doubts.

Well, I am afraid yes. An investigation should have been carried out by the USAAF. Or perhaps has it been already conducted? Did they discover the soviet claims were real and decided to conceal it?

If this were the case the results of the investigation would have come to light no later than 1995 under the FIA. This is a topic that I'm sure someone has submitted FIA's with respect to. Only matters of continuing National Security, after review by Congress, are protected from the FIA, and this certainly would not fall into that catagory.

My point is the soviet propaganda was perhaps more prolific than that of the Reich. Cases of soviet propaganda creations and manipulations or soviet mythology, have been discovered. Such cases are plentiful (a bit off topic, but the following examples are illustrative), here you have a few:

(i) The "famous" duel between sniper Zaitsev and the "top German sniper" sent into Stalingrad for the sole purpose of hunting down the soviet guy. Never happened.

(ii) The so called "greatest tank battle in history" in the Kursk salient in 1943, having the soviets claiming the destruction of "hundreds" of Tigers of the SS PanzerKorps, in the fight around the village of Prokhorova. Recent books and info proved such a thing never quite happened as well. Quite the contrary, the II SS Panzer Korps had virtually gutted the whole soviet tank reserve in the area.


I could name more, but let`s keep it on topic.

Perhaps Mr. Kozhedub indeed brought down 2 Mustangs. Why do I think it could be an invention of their propaganda state? First, and as I said, precedents of soviet inventions are plentiful. Secondly, to forge an idea of how a soviet hero could more than deal with the top USA weapons in the prelude of what would be known as cold war?

You make a strong point when you affirm a Mustang with its drop tanks still in the underwing certainly was not operating in the attack or offensive mode. Then the apparent generally accepted version of Kozhedub being attacked relentlessly leaving him no choice but to strike back and destroy his attackers would be shattered.

Shall this be the case, the soviets again, would be the victims of their own manipulations.

I agree. Personally I think that these P-51's were indeed shot down, but it probably happened over enemy territory (German or Soviet) with no US witnesses. The USAAF probably didn't hear of Kozhedub's claims until years after WWII was over, and no meaningful investigation was possible.

From the guncam footage, it appears the first (top) P-51 was attacked from out of the Sun, and the second still had not yet realized it was under attack as its drop tanks are still on (it only took seconds to dump them in the P-51). It looks like a classic bounce attack to me - kill the rear of the two planes on the first pass from out of the Sun, then swoop around and kill the second, who is unaware his wingman has been shot down, from the low six.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[lesofprimus]

I dont know what happened to this poll, but the # of votes for Kozhedub CANNOT be that favorable over Hartmann, as much as I would like them to be.....

900 votes + is just wayyyyyyy off..... Someone spamming????

 

[Udet]

RG:

I guess i agree.

It shall also be understood we can not know everything on WWII. Trying to detect each and every P-51 shot down over Europe is way too much a task, if not an arrogant one.


Still, I would put Kozhedub´s P-51 claims into serious doubt.

Not because he was not capable or anything (he was a top fighter pilot) but beause of the issues i mentioned on the soviet propaganda.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

hell i didn't spam vote, i haven't even voted once yet........

 

[Grim_Reaper]

I've submitted to the forum just to reply
Guys, there are no serious reasons for "soviet propaganda" to invent anything of this sort - we were allies after all&this accident was only mentioned in Kozhedub's book as a real ACCIDENT for which he himself was very sorry. Moreover, the case was never used during the cold war, as far as i know. So, in conclusion, i have no reasons to doubt the whole fact of this accident.

About Prohorovka... Pals, i think yu're totally wrong - this battle DID happen during the summer offensive in 1943&soviet tanks and tank killers overwhelmed the german forces in number and efficiency - i'd like to see the "new info" about it that you've mentioned btw, saying that this battle was not real is like doubting the attack on Pearl Harbour or Battle of Britain (as far as i know, these events are filled with myths and propaganda as well)

 

[Anonymous]

I've submitted to the forum just to reply
Guys, there are no serious reasons for "soviet propaganda" to invent anything of this sort - we were allies after all&this accident was only mentioned in Kozhedub's book as a real ACCIDENT for which he himself was very sorry. Moreover, the case was never used during the cold war, as far as i know. So, in conclusion, i have no reasons to doubt the whole fact of this accident.

About Prohorovka... Pals, i think yu're totally wrong - this battle DID happen during the summer offensive in 1943&soviet tanks and tank killers overwhelmed the german forces in number and efficiency - i'd like to see the "new info" about it that you've mentioned btw, saying that this battle was not real is like doubting the attack on Pearl Harbour or Battle of Britain (as far as i know, these events are filled with myths and propaganda as well)

There is every reason to doubt it. He claimed he was attacked first by the P-51's. This is of course impossible, as they still had their wing tanks on! This totally disputes his story. P-51's did not engage in combat with the drop tanks on, the tanks sit right beneath the ejection chutes. So there is no way they fired at him!

Soviet motivations would have been internal propganda, not external, in the years immeadiately following WWII.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Erich]

P-51's do not engage with their drop tanks on ? wanna bet pard. in 1945 Luftwaffe a/c systematically tried to get P-51 escorts to drop their tanks and engage them when all of sudden the P-51's went ahead and dived down on the climbing Lufwaffe fighters....

shades of the 78th fg, 355th and 352nd blue nose bastards

26 Nov. 44 2nd SF attacked large groups of unsuspecting JG 301 Fw 190's from behind (P-51's with their drop tanks still on the wings)

 

[Anonymous]

P-51's do not engage with their drop tanks on ? wanna bet pard. in 1945 Luftwaffe a/c systematically tried to get P-51 escorts to drop their tanks and engage them when all of sudden the P-51's went ahead and dived down on the climbing Lufwaffe fighters....

shades of the 78th fg, 355th and 352nd blue nose bastards

26 Nov. 44 2nd SF attacked large groups of unsuspecting JG 301 Fw 190's from behind (P-51's with their drop tanks still on the wings)

It was certainly not a normal practice. The drop tanks sit beneath the ejection chutes, casings hitting them would possibly damage the drop tank which could lead to disaster (especially paper tanks). Casings bouncing off them could also jam the release works.

Besides, the incident you describe was one of pure advantage. The La7 incident involved a plane that was an immeadiate threat to both the P-51's and the bomber. They'd surely have dropped their tanks!

=S=

Lunatic

 

[cheddar cheese]

I dont know what happened to this poll, but the # of votes for Kozhedub CANNOT be that favorable over Hartmann, as much as I would like them to be.....

900 votes + is just wayyyyyyy off..... Someone spamming????

Theyve gotta be...certrainly isnt me cos im not a fan of Kozhedub. If you ask me, at the moment you would be the prime suspect There's probably some unknown person doing it though.

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Soviet motivations would have been internal propganda, not external, in the years immeadiately following WWII

This is only a matter of belief for you&it's more realistic for me - this accident was never used even during Korean war (soviet people knew very little of what happened there, so i doubt the need of highlighting some incidents in WWII then)

The only thing i'd like to ask is where did you find the tape - my collegues and I are discussing the problems regarding this tape on one of the russian military forums but we still cant find out any reliable information in the internet - can you help?

 

[Grim_Reaper]

2RG_Lunatic: i think the reason why they haven't dropped the tanks was that they were on escort mission&tried do shake off Kozhedub's "Fw" (as they thought) with long range fire. Kozhedub himself was a very rough man, he could have mistaken the american fighters for Bfs+they were engaging - he was forced to shoot back: using his La-7 advantages he climbed and shot one from the long range (they didn't see him, maybe thought they've shaken him)&another from medium range. Then he, probably, noticed the USAF markings and didn't "finish" the second one - that's my point of view. Actually, he thought he was defending the Fortress, maybe this can be an excuse for him

 

[Porco14]

Udet:
Are you sure Mj Koenings wasn't shot by Zaitsev in Stalingrad? If you don' seem to believe anything from this side of Germany, Koenigs' scope in Moscow museum including, you can always check "Enemy at the Gate" - the original book by William Craig, not that shitty movie of course.

At Kursk nazi won a big victory, that's probably why they fall back and never have a major offense since then

As for propaganda - that case with Mustangs was never open to public until several decades after the war. How you can get propaganda value out of smth that nobody knows?

 

[Udet]

Erich:

Sorry, but I do not think I understod your point.

"in 1945 Luftwaffe a/c systematically tried to get P-51 escorts to drop their tanks and engage them.." ?

A fighter without its drop tank can certainly be more manouverable and faster, so what you possibly meant is the Germans tried to get the Mustangs still with their tanks on?

The footage I have shows perhaps two shots of P-51s getting destroyed with their drop tanks on; it is, however, a clear case of bouncing, the USA guys never say what killed them. But in the vast majority of the cases, when it is clear you are watching a dogfight, no drop tanks in the underwing at all.

That is perhaps the main reason why such fuel tanks could be jettisoned, don´t you think? (i) Drop tanks diminished the manouvering and speed of the fighter and (ii) to enter a dogfight with your drop tank on and take enemy shells and bullets...you become a flying torch.


Porco14: I will not get into details with you on that. If you firmly believe what the soviet propaganda displays in Russian museums and pray everyone of the dogmas they told you, I am quite comfortable with that.

 

[Erich]

a couple of notations.

there never was a König gent a sniper at Stalingrad as the German Heer sniper did not get above sergeant in rank. there were no Waffen SS truppen at Stalingrad anyway. this is all myth. Koenig could easily have been scratched into the scope and that was strickly against regulations anyway.

second yes the Luftwaffe wanted to decrease the range of the P-51's by getting "mixed up" with the Allied escorts early on in the air battles so they could not come down after aerial engagements and shoot up airfields. What I was saying is that there was so much confidence in the US P-51 pilots they went ahead and operated against Luftwaffe single engine fighters with drop tanks on. Not necessarily a smart move but many did it anyway.

E

 

[plan_D]

Porco, start a thread on the Kursk battle in WWII General and I'll gladly educate you on the subject.

And no major offensive since Kursk? I see... Tell the lads sat around Bastogne that Germany had no fight in her.

 

[cheddar cheese]

not that s**t movie of course.

Hey theres nothing wrong with that film...may not be terribly accurate but its a great flick.

 

[BALU]

...there never was a König gent a sniper at Stalingrad as the German Heer sniper did not get above sergeant in rank.
... Koenig could easily have been scratched into the scope and that was strickly against regulations anyway.

As Zaitsev has been told König (Konings according to Zaitsev) was a head of sniper school in Berlin. One german prizoner told that Konings arrived by aircraft with a task to kill Zaitsev. And in fact a very good sniper appeared on the german side that time. That sniper destroyed a scope of the Morozov (russian sniper) and wounded sniper Shaikin. Both were very expirienced.
After Konings wounded a friend of Zaitsev - Nikolay Kulikov and wounded a politruk (in a finger) who tried to show Konongs shelter.
Next day Zaitsev killed a german sniper who were major with documents (Zaitsev has seen his body). The scope of german sniper was wery powerful (x6 o more). Only very good sniper can use this kind of scope. Olso, that german sniper was very patient. It was unusual for "regular" german snipers.
In Stalingrad Zaitsev was not the best soviet sniper. The best was Sasha Kolentiev.