highest kill ratio (11 Viewers)

[CHen10]

Soviet records are incredibly accurate.

- Soviet records contain a list of the tasks carried out so if there are 7 tasks but only 5 task reports then we know records are missing. This has never happened to me personally and the records of the tasks are always there. So the records are all there and we would know if they aren't there.

- EVEN If hypothetically some records are lost, it still doesn't matter because losses are recorded at multiple levels and there are multiple copies of those records. There will always be a trace of the loss. It's too far fetched to say every trace of the loss will get lost. There are just too many documents that would have to go.

-Losses are always documented. If an aircraft becomes a loss, there is always a record of that loss.

-Soviets can't lie about records because everything is accounted for. Pilots, planes, ammunition, fuel, etc. are all documented as being used or lost. If the Soviets lost loads of stuff and didn't report it they would be questioned as to why it wasn't reported.

- Soviet records also explain the circumstances of the loss and the type of mission that was being flown when the loss happened

-All ww2 aviation historians that analyse victories always look at opposing losses.

Henry Sakaida
Michael Claringbould
John Lundstrom
Edward Young
Gábor and Dániel Horváth
Nikita Egorov
Christer Bergström
Ivan Lavrinenko

And many more

Plus all the people that do research and post their findings online

But still, if one didn't report the losses, he could not ask for replacements. If your unit is understreght because of that, at some point one was not able to carry out the missions one was ordered to and you'll be exposed at the latest, probably earlier because the lack of planes would have been easily noticed. A lot of combat losses could not be attributed to technical faults, because then the TO of the unit would have been suddenly brought in for questioning and would hardly have accepted the charge of sabotage to save the unit's commander's ass. The sentence for sabotage was easily death.

This quote by J Juha3 is another perfect explanation why Soviets cannot just lie

 

[SaparotRob]

I hope this research doesn't prove the other guys actually won. That would be a dilly of a pickle.

 

[CHen10]

Since this is a thread about kill ratios, the Croatian 15./JG52 victory claims on the eastern front were pretty appalling in 1943 and early 1944. The worst ratio of any individual pilot I have seen is Franz Stigler.

As for some impressive kill ratios of individual pilots off the top of my head there is:

Sasai Junichi
Ota Toshio
Otto Fönnekold
Otto Schulz
Helmut Lipfert
Walter Wolfrum
Helmut Lent
Anton Resch
Hand Arnold Stahlschmidt
Otto Kittel
Szentgyörgyi Dezső
Molnár László
Debrődy György
Stanley J Lustic
Delmar Johannsen
Ellis C Baker

As for some impressive kill ratios of units or squadrons off the top of my head:

VF-17 in 1945
VF-9 in 1945
VF-16
318 FG in 1945
5/2 Vadászszázad
JG 51 as a whole wing was pretty good

 

[topspeed]

Right. This is the sort of work that is helpful for reconstructing an accurate historical record and why cross referencing both sources is necessary for this.

Just as lots of claims do not correspond to any actual enemy losses, sometimes claims explain enemy losses that were incorrectly recorded as being operational losses rather than combat losses.

I doubt here are "both" sources in Soviet/Russia records...only the one own countrys and enemys records.

Clearly several folks intrepeting soviet archives could not read the soviet "accurate" records like they should have been read.

I still think soviets were using Spitfires and Mustangs in our front. But I could be wrong as for those people all new aircraft on the front could have been Mustang or Spitfire they knew rumours about.

 

[GrauGeist]

Of course, the folks that actually lived under Soviet rule have no idea what they're talking about...

 

[topspeed]

Of course, the folks that actually lived under Soviet rule have no idea what they're talking about...

That is why there were politruks that no double account could exist. Had there been such...all keeping it would have gotten a neck shot. Correct me if I am wrong and show a thread of evidence.

 

[CHen10]

Of course, the folks that actually lived under Soviet rule have no idea what they're talking about...

My post #241 explains it all.

And the folks that lived under Soviet rule did not have access to Soviet records so in that regard, yes they literally don't know what they're talking about. Of course that isn't their fault, they simply couldn't see the records.

 

[CHen10]

I still think soviets were using Spitfires and Mustangs in our front.

No the Soviets did not use P-51 Mustangs at all against the Finnish. Any time a Finnish pilot claimed they fought against a Soviet Mustang they were actually misidentifying another Soviet fighter as a Mustang. None of the 10 Soviet Mustangs entered operational service and instead were just tested, with the Soviets disliking the Mustang.

Warplanes in accordance to Lend-Lease terms to USSR

The Soviet Union’s US-built Mustang Mk. I fighters

In late 1941, the Soviet Union received ten North American Mustang Mk. Is from the Royal Air Force. Acquired by the RAF for use as tactical reconnaissance and fighter-bomber in early 1941, the Brit…

vvsairwar.com

 

[GrauGeist]

My post #241 explains it all.

And the folks that lived under Soviet rule did not have access to Soviet records so in that regard, yes they literally don't know what they're talking about. Of course that isn't their fault, they simply couldn't see the records.

Post #233, #235 and #236 explains it all, actually.

 

[CHen10]

Post #233, #235 and #236 explains it all, actually.

No they don't. My post #241 explains everything along with the comment by J Juha3

 

[topspeed]

My post #241 explains it all.

And the folks that lived under Soviet rule did not have access to Soviet records so in that regard, yes they literally don't know what they're talking about. Of course that isn't their fault, they simply couldn't see the records.

Propaganda in USSR was even tougher than in Nazi-Germany....exponentially.

 

[topspeed]

No the Soviets did not use P-51 Mustangs at all against the Finnish. Any time a Finnish pilot claimed they fought against a Soviet Mustang they were actually misidentifying another Soviet fighter as a Mustang. None of the 10 Soviet Mustangs entered operational service and instead were just tested, with the Soviets disliking the Mustang.


View attachment 897174

Warplanes in accordance to Lend-Lease terms to USSR

View attachment 897175

The Soviet Union’s US-built Mustang Mk. I fighters

In late 1941, the Soviet Union received ten North American Mustang Mk. Is from the Royal Air Force. Acquired by the RAF for use as tactical reconnaissance and fighter-bomber in early 1941, the Brit…

vvsairwar.com

I bet our pilots had no knowlegde if they were fighting Airacobras or Kingcobras.

In the summer of 1944, a worn-out Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-2 would likely achieve a maximum top speed of roughly 560 to 590 km/h (348 to 366 mph) at its rated altitude of around 7,000 meters. At sea level, this would drop to roughly 470 to 490 km/h (292 to 304 mph).
While a factory-fresh, clean Bf 109 G-2 had a theoretical maximum speed of 660 km/h (410 mph) at 7,000 meters and 537 km/h (334 mph) at sea level, several real-world degradation factors during the late-war period explain this significant performance drop: [1]

Why a 1944 "Gustav-2" Lost So Much Speed

• • Severe Warping and Finish Degradation: By mid-1944, a surviving G-2 was an aging airframe (produced between May 1942 and February 1943). Years of hard field utilization resulted in warped paneling, dented cowlings, misaligned gear doors, and chipped, rough camouflage paint. This aerodynamic wear drastically increased drag, easily shaving off 15–20 km/h. [1]
  • Engine Wear and Restricted Boost: The Daimler-Benz DB 605 A engine in the G-2 suffered from reliability issues early on, prompting strict limitations on manifold pressure. A heavily worn engine in 1944 would suffer from compression loss, piston wear, and fouled plugs. Pilots would be highly reluctant—or mechanically unable—to push the engine to its maximum 1.3 ata combat rating for fear of catastrophic mechanical breakdown. Running at a safer "cruise" power level or suffering from a degraded supercharger meant a massive drop in horsepower. [1, 2, 3, 4]
  • Late-War Fuel Quality: By the summer of 1944, Allied bombing campaigns against Germany's synthetic fuel plants caused a severe drop in aviation fuel quality and availability. Running lower-octane or contaminated fuel severely limited the engine's output and forced pilots to run leaner or lower power settings to avoid destructive engine knocking.
  • Field Modifications and Non-Retractable Tailwheels: Many mid-to-late production G-2s featured the larger, non-retractable tailwheel, which historical Finnish Air Force test logs note caused a fixed 12 km/h speed penalty by itself. If the aircraft was fitted with underwing gun pods (Rüstsätze) or tropical sand filters to keep it flying in harsh conditions, the top speed fell even further. [1, 2]

By mid-1944, a worn G-2 was dangerously obsolete compared to newer Allied fighters like the P-51D Mustang or Tempest V, which routinely exceeded 700 km/h.