Luftwaffe Strength 40-45

[Hop]

Juha, my mistake. Transport Command doesn't seem to be included at all, I believe the figures I gave for transports are troop carriers of 38 Group.

The figures show 204 Dakota delivered to the RAF in the year to 3 September 1943, and another 792 in the year to Sept 1944. I have no idea how many were with squadrons, though.

As to reserve aircraft in squadrons, it's true that 1,824 Spitfires in squadrons means less than that would be capable of flying at any one time, but then again that's true of the Luftwaffe figures as well.

But the point I was trying to make about reserves is the RAF had additional aircraft in storage, over and above the aircraft with squadrons.

Here are the figures for April 1945. The first figure is the number of aircraft in front line squadrons in the UK and Northern Europe, the second is the total number of aircraft on hand in those areas:

SE Fighters
Spitfire - 804 (2,557 (VIII, IX, XIV and XVI only)
Typhoon - 332 (1,234)
Tempest - 131 (468 )
Mustang - 302 (782 (III IV only))

As you can see, the RAF typically had several times as many aircraft "on hand", compared to the "front line squadron" strength.

 

[tomo pauk]

Just to say thanks to fellas for their effort

 

[ctrian]

Like i said the first table had some mistakes this one should be error free.

 

[Juha]

Hello Hop
Thanks for clarification.

To clarify my RAF Dakota numbers, those were those in GB only.

Juha

 

[Freebird]

A while ago i asked if someone had data for RAF strength during ww2 in this post
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/raf-strength-1939-1945-request-24313.html
unfortunately noone anwsered.Since i have data for the Luftwaffe i decided to post them for anyone interested.Sources are Luftwaffe Data book for 1941-45 and Strategy for Defeat table 3 for 1940 (Note that Murray gives higher figures for 1941.)

Small mistake: Ground Attack for 1940 should be 467 not 477.

Super!
Thanks for posting this data, it's been most helpful

I found this table of LW strength Jun 1941 at Assault on the Balkans and the Soviet Union
Does anyone have a table of LW combat losses in Barbarossa during 1941?

 

[michaelmaltby]

The German figures demonstrate more than anything else that the country was not on a war economy in 1940 - let alone 1941 - when Hitler was about to take on the Soviets. Then you look at American industrial production - doubling itself year over year. Absolutely staggering.


MM

 

[ctrian]

Super!
Thanks for posting this data, it's been most helpful

I found this table of LW strength Jun 1941 at Assault on the Balkans and the Soviet Union
Does anyone have a table of LW combat losses in Barbarossa during 1941?

i think the number is 2700 combat losses.Look at axis histoy forum ,member RichTO has posted luftwaffe
combat losses per year and theater

The German figures demonstrate more than anything else that the country was not on a war economy in 1940 - let alone 1941 - when Hitler was about to take on the Soviets. Then you look at American industrial production - doubling itself year over year. Absolutely staggering.


MM

Friend this has been debunked over and over and over again.Check 'Wages of Destruction' by Tooze.

 

[michaelmaltby]

Ctrian - exactly what has been "debunked" over and over again ...? Germany's industrial war footing in 1940 or America's "staggering" industrial capacity

MM

 

[ctrian]

Ctrian - exactly what has been "debunked" over and over again ...? Germany's industrial war footing in 1940 or America's "staggering" industrial capacity

MM

You said the country was not on a war economy ,that is simply not true.As for the US completely different case one country had abundant natural recources the other had crap.Like i said before check the book or
'The economics of ww2' Cambridge press.

 

[michaelmaltby]

".. The German figures demonstrate more than anything else that the country was not on a war economy in 1940 - let alone 1941 ."

ctrian - you suggested I read AdamTooze (Wages of Destruction) . I am - started at Chapter 20. From what I've read - including scholarly reviews - I don't think I am wrong in my interpretation of the aircraft production numbers (1940 - 1942).

In 1940 Germany was in the peak of its REARMENMENT economy - Tooze says so himself. It began in the mid-30's and is not synonomous with a war footing economy.

In 1942 - when the spin-up comes - slave labour is a more significant 'input' - and continues moreso as the war moves to '44 and '45.

My point was before and still is - in 1940 German civilians had reason to feel a little smug about themselves because they were fighting "successfully" and living improving lives. Guns AND Butter. (Tooze makes it clear that a lot of that BUTTER was mythology - Nazis manufactured mythology - that made Germans feel good about themselves). And the butter may not have been domestic - but Danish , a dividend of war so-to-speak.

By 1942 - the SS-Party-Corporate-Industrial technocracy triad had added the slave component. Germany went from a REARMAMENT economy to SLAVE LABOUR economy. That was their war-footing.


So - "dedunked" or not - I stand by my original observation . But Tooze is an eye-opener. Thanks for the reference.

Chairs,

MM
Proud Canadian

 

[ctrian]

".. The German figures demonstrate more than anything else that the country was not on a war economy in 1940 - let alone 1941 ."

ctrian - you suggested I read AdamTooze (Wages of Destruction) . I am - started at Chapter 20. From what I've read - including scholarly reviews - I don't think I am wrong in my interpretation of the aircraft production numbers (1940 - 1942).

In 1940 Germany was in the peak of its REARMENMENT economy - Tooze says so himself. It began in the mid-30's and is not synonomous with a war footing economy.

In 1942 - when the spin-up comes - slave labour is a more significant 'input' - and continues moreso as the war moves to '44 and '45.

My point was before and still is - in 1940 German civilians had reason to feel a little smug about themselves because they were fighting "successfully" and living improving lives. Guns AND Butter. (Tooze makes it clear that a lot of that BUTTER was mythology - Nazis manufactured mythology - that made Germans feel good about themselves). And the butter may not have been domestic - but Danish , a dividend of war so-to-speak.

By 1942 - the SS-Party-Corporate-Industrial technocracy triad had added the slave component. Germany went from a REARMAMENT economy to SLAVE LABOUR economy. That was their war-footing.


So - "dedunked" or not - I stand by my original observation . But Tooze is an eye-opener. Thanks for the reference.

Chairs,

MM
Proud Canadian

Im glad u like the book.The german economy was on a war footing since the mid 30's.Any increase in one sector could only come by taking resources(workers,raw material) from somewhere else.As for the aircraft production in 44 look at the weight not the numbers, 1 bf109 isnt the same as 1 Ju88.Id also suggest u read the book from the beginning if u have the time.

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... also suggest u read the book from the beginning if u have the time."

I am. But Tooze himself suggests in the forward to read Chapter 20 first if you want to understand the ending - and I do so I took him at his word.

"... The german economy was on a war footing since the mid 30's." If you're on a war footing in peacetime, what footing do you move to in wartime ...? (I don't question the aggressive nature of the German "reconstruction" program - but nobody was dropping bombs).

MM