davebender
1st Lieutenant
Only during 1939 and 1940 (i.e. before Germany had an organized night fighter force). By 1943 confirmed German night fighter claims amounted to 81% of total night bomber losses.
the flak tower
- Thread starter fly boy
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I guess Flaks main advantage was that it 'hindered' Allied bombers, forcing them to fly high and fast, or at night. Also psychologically, they were more effective. (Though some crew members became 'Flak happy'!)
Kris
Kris
According to Bomber Command's own website between July 42 and May 45 Bomber Command lost 5708 bombers on operations.
Of the known causes of loss- 39% to nightfighters
23% to flak
2% to collisions
36% to unknown causes.
If all 36% of the unknowns were attributed to nightfighters, ( and that's not likely) it'd still fall short of dave's 81%.
Nightfighters got a lot more than I thought until I researched it, but not quite as much as dave claims.
Of the known causes of loss- 39% to nightfighters
23% to flak
2% to collisions
36% to unknown causes.
If all 36% of the unknowns were attributed to nightfighters, ( and that's not likely) it'd still fall short of dave's 81%.
Nightfighters got a lot more than I thought until I researched it, but not quite as much as dave claims.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Bomber Command was only guessing. Germany could examine shot down bombers so their records are far more accurate in this matter.
You can't determine what shot down a aircraft from pieces of a aircraft, or smoking holes in the ground, I call BS on that Dave.
What % of aircraft downed came down intact enough to determine what shot it down ?
Surviving crew would usually know what brought them down. Flak crews would sometimes be able to id the type of aircraft they were shooting at, and see the results of their shooting soon enough to make a claim.
Nightfighters usually could id ( but not always) the type of AC they were shooting down, and would know the general area of where they fell.
A for instance, you've got a lot of intact crashed Landcasters but a lot of them will be burnt out hulks, and you're going to have a lot of just Landcaster parts in a general area, and then you've got the smoking holes. You've got a lot of claims, do you really believe they had a 3rd Reicht's equvilent of crash scene investigators with the time to sort this mess out. Now days individual crash investigations usually take months, but the aryan supermen could do it in hours of course.
What % of aircraft downed came down intact enough to determine what shot it down ?
Surviving crew would usually know what brought them down. Flak crews would sometimes be able to id the type of aircraft they were shooting at, and see the results of their shooting soon enough to make a claim.
Nightfighters usually could id ( but not always) the type of AC they were shooting down, and would know the general area of where they fell.
A for instance, you've got a lot of intact crashed Landcasters but a lot of them will be burnt out hulks, and you're going to have a lot of just Landcaster parts in a general area, and then you've got the smoking holes. You've got a lot of claims, do you really believe they had a 3rd Reicht's equvilent of crash scene investigators with the time to sort this mess out. Now days individual crash investigations usually take months, but the aryan supermen could do it in hours of course.
Last edited:
Erich
the old Sage
the psyche of the twin 12.8cm Flak was evident at Berlin and Vienna from first person sources of surviving 8th and 15th US AF bomber crews. the crews dreaded flying over these premises for a reason and the heavy Flak was one.
When you look at Bomber Commands loses, you see 47,000 killed in action, with less than 10,000 POWs.
That to me is a strong indication of a lot of catastrophic shootdowns, (smoking holes in the ground, mid air breakups , etc.) that not many could get out of.
And would also result in a lot wreckage no one could examine and determine how it was brought down.
That to me is a strong indication of a lot of catastrophic shootdowns, (smoking holes in the ground, mid air breakups , etc.) that not many could get out of.
And would also result in a lot wreckage no one could examine and determine how it was brought down.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
Tom, your conclusion may be right but your reasoning is not.
Germans had a strict procedure for guarding, examining and clearing every single aircraft shot down. Also, every claimed kill had to be verified, before a kill was awarded to a fighter crew or a battery crew. And this was done by examining the wreck. You claim that there would be nothing left but a smoking hole in the ground. That may be the case for some aircraft, but for many it was not. Even if only 10% was still examineable, they would still give a good overall idea of how the other 90% was shot down. (And no, I do not believe that aircraft shot down by Flak are much more destroyed than those brought down by night fighters.)
Kris
Germans had a strict procedure for guarding, examining and clearing every single aircraft shot down. Also, every claimed kill had to be verified, before a kill was awarded to a fighter crew or a battery crew. And this was done by examining the wreck. You claim that there would be nothing left but a smoking hole in the ground. That may be the case for some aircraft, but for many it was not. Even if only 10% was still examineable, they would still give a good overall idea of how the other 90% was shot down. (And no, I do not believe that aircraft shot down by Flak are much more destroyed than those brought down by night fighters.)
Kris
I fail to see that the few aircraft that crashed intact enough to examine and determine what brought it down would in any way indicate how other aicraft that couldn't be examined were brought down.
The almost 5 to 1 ratio of killed to survivors indicates there were a lot of aircraft that were shot down that were so damaged that few if any of the crew could get out.
That means a lot of big inflight fires, or structual break ups. Either could be caused by flak or nightfighters.
Dead men tell no tales, neither do smoking holes in the ground, or scattered aircraft parts.
I think we all need to read up on the exact procedures the Luftwaffe used to verify claims.
The almost 5 to 1 ratio of killed to survivors indicates there were a lot of aircraft that were shot down that were so damaged that few if any of the crew could get out.
That means a lot of big inflight fires, or structual break ups. Either could be caused by flak or nightfighters.
Dead men tell no tales, neither do smoking holes in the ground, or scattered aircraft parts.
I think we all need to read up on the exact procedures the Luftwaffe used to verify claims.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I have seen many pictures of crashed Allied bombers. It seems to me that most could still show bullet holes as it usually required dozens of hits to bring down heavy bombers. And again, the vast majority of bombers shot down by aircraft will have been reported, including the approximate location. No kills were awarded without these data.
It may not have been 100% accurate, but I guess good enough. Your comparison with modern day crash investigations is not fully justified: those are much more thorough and the planes themselves are much more complicated. For the WW2 bombers, all that was required, was to identify the type of damage which had led to the crash: Flak or fighter plane.
Kris
It may not have been 100% accurate, but I guess good enough. Your comparison with modern day crash investigations is not fully justified: those are much more thorough and the planes themselves are much more complicated. For the WW2 bombers, all that was required, was to identify the type of damage which had led to the crash: Flak or fighter plane.
Kris
How many aircraft were shot down over the Reicht, 15,000 ? I'm just guessing.
If you've seen 150 photographs, that's 1%.
I've seen probably thousands myself, several pictures of the same aircraft even. And i'm sure the Germans photographed every one.
But I realize not matter how many photos i've seen , it's still just a small portion of those shot down.
If you've seen 150 photographs, that's 1%.
I've seen probably thousands myself, several pictures of the same aircraft even. And i'm sure the Germans photographed every one.
But I realize not matter how many photos i've seen , it's still just a small portion of those shot down.
This topic can be discussed without snide comments. Everyone should keep there "baiting" comments to themselves, or they can take them to a different forum.
Not going to name people or posts. You all know who you are. It is usually the same people involved anyhow that derail threads.
Not going to name people or posts. You all know who you are. It is usually the same people involved anyhow that derail threads.
I guess the comment about aryan supermen was uncalled for.
But I don't think the flak towers were a waste of concrete, though they might have been overbuilt.
They were used for much more than just flak, that's just what the top was used for.
I remember one somewhere's around Frankfurth in the early 70's.
But I don't think the flak towers were a waste of concrete, though they might have been overbuilt.
They were used for much more than just flak, that's just what the top was used for.
I remember one somewhere's around Frankfurth in the early 70's.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
I think even 1% of 15,000 would make an acceptable statistical sample.
The Flaktowers were definitely useful, but their utility faded in comparison with the costs. Speer's memoirs give a good idea of how concrete and steel were often wasted on these fortifications, while desperately needed elsewhere.
Btw, I didn't notice any snide comments in this thread. Chris, feel free to PM me if I am in the wrong.
Kris
The Flaktowers were definitely useful, but their utility faded in comparison with the costs. Speer's memoirs give a good idea of how concrete and steel were often wasted on these fortifications, while desperately needed elsewhere.
Btw, I didn't notice any snide comments in this thread. Chris, feel free to PM me if I am in the wrong.
Kris
Kris, if you were not involved it does apply to you, then just stay out of it. Those involved know who they are...
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
We discuss the effects of flak on the aircraft but often overlook the fact that a plane may survive a near miss while the crew members get injured or killed by the projectiles.
Here's a good page regarding figures and statistics on the injuries and KIAs of the B-17 and B-24 crews. It was written in 1944 by Maj. Palmer, Chief Surgeon, US Army, ETO.
Survey of Battle Casualties, Eighth Air Force, June, July, and August 1944
Here's a good page regarding figures and statistics on the injuries and KIAs of the B-17 and B-24 crews. It was written in 1944 by Maj. Palmer, Chief Surgeon, US Army, ETO.
Survey of Battle Casualties, Eighth Air Force, June, July, and August 1944
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Interesting pic - building a flak tower such as that...in 1942? hmmm...........
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
