cheddar cheese
Major General
I doubt that 
When I get time I shall PM him/her/it 8)
When I get time I shall PM him/her/it 8)
The Greatest Fighter Pilot in WW II???
- Thread starter lesofprimus
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Status
There were thousands of excellent pilots during WWII.
Public domain: the Germans made many of the most impressive pilots in the history of military aviation.
All the air forces involved: RAF, USAAF, Luftwaffe, VVS, etc. spawned excellent pilots.
Colonel Ivan Kozhedub was one of the greatest pilots and top allied scorer of the war.
However, we must understand his style of telling his story of the war.
It´s been a while since I first read the interview with Ivan Kozhedub. I digress: he was indeed an excellent pilot, a top fighter pilot.
Notwithstanding everything, there would be hundreds of German pilots who would argue Kozhedub´s statement the Yak-3, the La-5 and the La-7 were "absolutely superior" to both the Fw-190s and the Bf109s.
Since he was an excellent pilot, he surely knew the La-7 had its limits: at some things was excellent, and was not so efficient at performing others.
But that is the soviet fashion of putting things.
The records of Hartmann, Barkhorn, Rall and Willi Batz can certainly put into serious doubt many of Kozhedub´s comments.
Top Finnish ace, Ilmari Juutilainen (94 kills), just like his German fellow aces, would have solid grounds to argue Mr. Kozhedub´s view on the "undisputed" superiority of some soviet planes over the Bf109s and Fw190´s.
During the great summer offensive of 1944 (summer) Ilmari shot down nearly half Kozhedub´s total bag flying a Bf109 G2.
I have read the battle record of Ilmari, an amazing pilot, and the soviet aces would be paralized to discover how in very low altitude dogfights the Finnish guy totally outmaneuvered the La5´s flying his Bf109G-2.
So?
I have said it here in other threads: those soviet fighters (late Yaks and La´s) were indeed excellent planes, equal to any other fighter of any of the combatant nations; however, we can see Kozhedub falling into the typical victor behavior, just like the guys of the USAAF saying the P-51 "wholly outclassed the Bf109".
Kozhedub goes way overboard when affirming the late Lavochkins were "perfect": there was no perfect plane during the war.
Many of his assessments are even untrue: during the Battle of Kursk the VVS did not, at all, changed forever their way for conducting airwarfare during the war.
In fact, the VVS, throughout 1943 (the year of Kursk battle) achieved very little, just to avoid saying nothing.
The Kuban bridgehead (1943), until evacuated by the Germans virtually by the end of that year, saw massive air battles between Germans and Soviets, and the VVS turned out to be uncapable of gaining air superiority in the area.
Yes, there were soviet pilots scoring victories over there, but as a whole the VVS weapon was not a very efficient one.
Kuban in 1943, saw some of the last massive Stuka formations diving- screaming on soviet positions. April 1943 (hardly 2 months before Kursk) a 450 Stuka strong formation launched a massive attack, losing only 7 Stukas, most of them to AA. (A casualty rate for a mission FAR smaller than anything suffered by the B17 boxes in the west at the hands of the Luftwaffe).
I mentioned the Kuban bridgehead just to illustrate how Kozhedub´s view is somewhat distant from reality.
In 1944, the VVS indeed gained air superiority in the east due more to the simple and recorded reason the Luftwaffe started to move many of its fighter units west, to face the allied heavy bomber menace.
The soviets, as members of the victors club, want the whole cake, you name it: "we gained air superiority all by our excellent pilots and superior fighters", "the Lend-Lease was just a tiny help which included lots of crap we did not like" and the like.
Finally, Kozhedub´s statement on the top professionalism, quality and peformance of the VVS in the late months of the war can easily be shattered when one knows the number of soviet aircraft lost ONLY in 1945, that is, from January 1st to May 8th: 11,000 planes (+/-). (Eleven thousand).
See the losses of RAF and USAAF aircraft for the same period time and you will have a better understanding of what I am attempting to land here.
Hoever, I must finish my remarks on Kozhedub´s interview with the same words he finished his interview: "you must understand why" (the soviet propaganda fashion of depicting things).
Cheers!
Public domain: the Germans made many of the most impressive pilots in the history of military aviation.
All the air forces involved: RAF, USAAF, Luftwaffe, VVS, etc. spawned excellent pilots.
Colonel Ivan Kozhedub was one of the greatest pilots and top allied scorer of the war.
However, we must understand his style of telling his story of the war.
It´s been a while since I first read the interview with Ivan Kozhedub. I digress: he was indeed an excellent pilot, a top fighter pilot.
Notwithstanding everything, there would be hundreds of German pilots who would argue Kozhedub´s statement the Yak-3, the La-5 and the La-7 were "absolutely superior" to both the Fw-190s and the Bf109s.
Since he was an excellent pilot, he surely knew the La-7 had its limits: at some things was excellent, and was not so efficient at performing others.
But that is the soviet fashion of putting things.
The records of Hartmann, Barkhorn, Rall and Willi Batz can certainly put into serious doubt many of Kozhedub´s comments.
Top Finnish ace, Ilmari Juutilainen (94 kills), just like his German fellow aces, would have solid grounds to argue Mr. Kozhedub´s view on the "undisputed" superiority of some soviet planes over the Bf109s and Fw190´s.
During the great summer offensive of 1944 (summer) Ilmari shot down nearly half Kozhedub´s total bag flying a Bf109 G2.
I have read the battle record of Ilmari, an amazing pilot, and the soviet aces would be paralized to discover how in very low altitude dogfights the Finnish guy totally outmaneuvered the La5´s flying his Bf109G-2.
So?
I have said it here in other threads: those soviet fighters (late Yaks and La´s) were indeed excellent planes, equal to any other fighter of any of the combatant nations; however, we can see Kozhedub falling into the typical victor behavior, just like the guys of the USAAF saying the P-51 "wholly outclassed the Bf109".
Kozhedub goes way overboard when affirming the late Lavochkins were "perfect": there was no perfect plane during the war.
Many of his assessments are even untrue: during the Battle of Kursk the VVS did not, at all, changed forever their way for conducting airwarfare during the war.
In fact, the VVS, throughout 1943 (the year of Kursk battle) achieved very little, just to avoid saying nothing.
The Kuban bridgehead (1943), until evacuated by the Germans virtually by the end of that year, saw massive air battles between Germans and Soviets, and the VVS turned out to be uncapable of gaining air superiority in the area.
Yes, there were soviet pilots scoring victories over there, but as a whole the VVS weapon was not a very efficient one.
Kuban in 1943, saw some of the last massive Stuka formations diving- screaming on soviet positions. April 1943 (hardly 2 months before Kursk) a 450 Stuka strong formation launched a massive attack, losing only 7 Stukas, most of them to AA. (A casualty rate for a mission FAR smaller than anything suffered by the B17 boxes in the west at the hands of the Luftwaffe).
I mentioned the Kuban bridgehead just to illustrate how Kozhedub´s view is somewhat distant from reality.
In 1944, the VVS indeed gained air superiority in the east due more to the simple and recorded reason the Luftwaffe started to move many of its fighter units west, to face the allied heavy bomber menace.
The soviets, as members of the victors club, want the whole cake, you name it: "we gained air superiority all by our excellent pilots and superior fighters", "the Lend-Lease was just a tiny help which included lots of crap we did not like" and the like.
Finally, Kozhedub´s statement on the top professionalism, quality and peformance of the VVS in the late months of the war can easily be shattered when one knows the number of soviet aircraft lost ONLY in 1945, that is, from January 1st to May 8th: 11,000 planes (+/-). (Eleven thousand).
See the losses of RAF and USAAF aircraft for the same period time and you will have a better understanding of what I am attempting to land here.
Hoever, I must finish my remarks on Kozhedub´s interview with the same words he finished his interview: "you must understand why" (the soviet propaganda fashion of depicting things).
Cheers!
cheddar cheese
Major General
Doesnt surprise me at all, the 109G was a fine plane.
Another point, the Russian planes were INFERIOR to the German planes.
alright I am lost
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
a quick visit to www.barbi.com chould get you back on track (btw i've never been on that site, i don't even know if it works)...............
cheddar cheese
Major General
It doesnt exist, and if it was supposed to be www.barbie.com, what the hell does it have to do with anything?
Still lost.
cheddar cheese
Major General
What you lost on?
The whole discussion right now. LOL
cheddar cheese
Major General
Well basically Udet is saying that Russian planes were superior to 109G's, and I am disagreeing with him. The lancs comment means nothing, he was just spamming
Yeah Lancs comment is where I got lost. As for Russian planes being superior. I dont think they were superior to any of the major powers in the War. The Me-109 with a decent pilot would fly circles around a Russian fighter and the aircraft of the US and England were exactly the same would put Russian aircraft to shame. The Russians had some good aircraft but they were still outclassed.
cheddar cheese
Major General
Yup. I think the skills of the russian pilots (Kozhedub, Pokryshin et al) somewhat blur the vision of just how inferior their planes were.
There were some very skilled Russians and they flew with extreme bravery and heart for there homeland and that says somthing in its self.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
the russians had some of the best pilots of the war..............
cheddar cheese
Major General
I definately agree there. If they had better planes I reckon they would have been able to challenge the great Erich Hartmann's kill total.
Hello over there Cheddar:
I guess you must read again what I posted here: I did NEVER say the late soviet fighters were superior to the Bf109G´s.
)
What I did say was the late soviet fighter models (Yaks and Las) were in equal terms to any other fighter, friend and foe. Very good at some things and not so good at others.
The Bf109G´s, as pure fighters, are not only fine as you say, they made some of the very best flying machines of the war.
My sole intention in this thread was to illustrate the Ivan Kozhedub´s interview posted here, is 100% soaked with the Stalinist soviet propaganda style of depicting the "great patrotic war".
Really, I suggest you read further on the air battles over the Kuban bridgehead throughout 1943. JG/52 was one of the German units involved there.
The Kuban region, is located in the northwestern corner of the Caucasus. After the German defeat in Stalingrad (1942-early 1943) and the retreat from the Caucasus through the Rostov area, the German forces left on purpose an isolated bridgehead in that area.
There, virtually the whole year of 1943 saw raging battles between soviets and Germans. The soviet air force proved totally uncapable of gaining and establishing air superiority over the Luftwaffe. Many selected VVS fighter units were sent there and they failed, losing in the process big numbers of planes and even several of their aces (i.e. Vadim Fadeyev, who got shot down and killed by a Bf109). Yes, the Germans had their losses as well but they kept the upper hand.
The Kuban example was brought up to argue Kozhedub´s view after Kursk, the VVS emerged as a "superior force", equipped with "perfect planes and top quality fighters", making it such an accurate tool of war which would eventually devour the Luftwaffe.
That is totally misleading. The VVS, through out the war, performed in a mediocre manner. The bulk of its pilots were hastily trained.
The hammer delivered by the Luftwaffe in 1941 was so brutally smashing, the VVS never ever really had the time nor the interest in becoming a proffesional branch of the armed forces.
This was explained to me by retired USSAF pilots of WWII: the defeats the Luftwaffe inflicted to the VVS in 1941 was so total and complete in the westermost areas of the Soviet Union, no country´s air force at all, much less that of Soviet Union of the 1940´s, can recover in the fashion it has been depicted.
1942 continued to see an outcome very similar to that of 1941, the Luftwaffe always keeping the upper hand.
Do not get me wrong, the Luftwaffe victories were never easy: but they were total and complete in 1941. There were several superb fighter pilots in the soviet union during WWII, but they happened to be only a minority.
Bravery is not an issue here; all the airmen of the war, of all the combatant nations were brave, and their fears, joys and sacrifices are well to be respected.
I guess you must read again what I posted here: I did NEVER say the late soviet fighters were superior to the Bf109G´s.
)What I did say was the late soviet fighter models (Yaks and Las) were in equal terms to any other fighter, friend and foe. Very good at some things and not so good at others.
The Bf109G´s, as pure fighters, are not only fine as you say, they made some of the very best flying machines of the war.
My sole intention in this thread was to illustrate the Ivan Kozhedub´s interview posted here, is 100% soaked with the Stalinist soviet propaganda style of depicting the "great patrotic war".
Really, I suggest you read further on the air battles over the Kuban bridgehead throughout 1943. JG/52 was one of the German units involved there.
The Kuban region, is located in the northwestern corner of the Caucasus. After the German defeat in Stalingrad (1942-early 1943) and the retreat from the Caucasus through the Rostov area, the German forces left on purpose an isolated bridgehead in that area.
There, virtually the whole year of 1943 saw raging battles between soviets and Germans. The soviet air force proved totally uncapable of gaining and establishing air superiority over the Luftwaffe. Many selected VVS fighter units were sent there and they failed, losing in the process big numbers of planes and even several of their aces (i.e. Vadim Fadeyev, who got shot down and killed by a Bf109). Yes, the Germans had their losses as well but they kept the upper hand.
The Kuban example was brought up to argue Kozhedub´s view after Kursk, the VVS emerged as a "superior force", equipped with "perfect planes and top quality fighters", making it such an accurate tool of war which would eventually devour the Luftwaffe.
That is totally misleading. The VVS, through out the war, performed in a mediocre manner. The bulk of its pilots were hastily trained.
The hammer delivered by the Luftwaffe in 1941 was so brutally smashing, the VVS never ever really had the time nor the interest in becoming a proffesional branch of the armed forces.
This was explained to me by retired USSAF pilots of WWII: the defeats the Luftwaffe inflicted to the VVS in 1941 was so total and complete in the westermost areas of the Soviet Union, no country´s air force at all, much less that of Soviet Union of the 1940´s, can recover in the fashion it has been depicted.
1942 continued to see an outcome very similar to that of 1941, the Luftwaffe always keeping the upper hand.
Do not get me wrong, the Luftwaffe victories were never easy: but they were total and complete in 1941. There were several superb fighter pilots in the soviet union during WWII, but they happened to be only a minority.
Bravery is not an issue here; all the airmen of the war, of all the combatant nations were brave, and their fears, joys and sacrifices are well to be respected.
cheddar cheese
Major General
Ah I apologise, I though thats what you were implying.
cheddar cheese
Major General
I agree. But at least they werent so bad that they just got crushed.
I agree there aircraft were not flops or anything I just think they were not quite at the levels of US, Englisch, Jap or German aircraft.
- Status
