Time Machine Consultant : Maximizing the Bf-109 in January 1943

Juha said:

Hello Drgondog
The story was that the wreck was found in 80s?, in fact when I now think of it I cannot remember was it 110E, F or G, and recovered, the recover team noticed the bullet holes but when they checked LW records they noticed that the loss reason given was engine failure. Happily the crew had made it back to German troops and the pilot had survived the war and was still alive, when contacted he told that when he got back to his base his CO put strong pressure on him that he would give the reason of loss as engine failure. In the end the pilot gave in and wrote his report as his CO had demanded. The reason of all this was that Luftflotte 5 had got an order from OKL that low level attacks against trains were forbidden in order to avoid losses because of precarious state of LW a/c stocks. Local leadership had thought that those attacks were effective way to harass Soviets and their supply traffic and so had allowed the attacks continue and so to hide this disobedience from OKL the real reason of the loss had to be hide.

Juha

Click to expand...

That makes sense.. different circumstances from my own research..

I have not run into a 'political correctness' scenario like that for USAAF and have a hard time conceiving of it.

Interesting story Juha !!


Kris

Civettone;585929]Yes off-topic but we have been off-topic in this thread for 87 times already hahaha !
In any case, I have started to realize some years ago that the Russian sources are still largely unexplored or at least unexploited when it comes to the history of WW2 or at least the Eastern Front.

Click to expand...

Not only russian, i'm desesperatly lacking italian and franquist claims during Spanish War. In the future, Legion Condor experten will be obliged to share their kills, with them (Aviazione Legionaria, Exercito del Aire)) i hope.

I have seen so much new information coming from people who speak Russian and can consult Russian documents. Not that these documents are the holy grail, but correlated with German sources the image becomes much clearer.

Click to expand...

Sure, it's usefull to hear both sounds of bell.

So I feel a certain humbleness when it.... Also, where does it end? What does it say about all those other Experten??

Kris

Click to expand...

Yes, from the precise Andreï Dikov, quoted by Juha:

On 28.10.44 VVS KBF (Baltic air fleet) lauched at 2 pm a mixed attack against Libava (Libau), with some Pe-2, Il-2 and Yak. Iliushins were from the 8 GShAP and and 47 ShAP VVS KBF ( ~ 50 planes). Suddenly attacked by 8 FW-190 from II/JG-54, they lost 2 Il-2 from the 47th and one from the 8th Guards. On the way home 2 Yak-9 from the 11th IAP VVS KBF collided each other.

During this sole event, Rudorffer alone was credited with 11 kills, 9 confirmed claims on Il-2, 2 others on undefinite planes.
I would be curious to see how many claims, there were for:
- other JG 54 pilots
- Heer's Flak
- Kriegsmarine Flak
- Soviet AAA, that was firing virtually at all planes from all sides...


from Dogfight revue

On 9/02/1944 At 13:45 six II./JG 2 pilots scrambled to intercept incoming enemy aircraft. A formation of four P-39s of the 81st FG was flying a reconnaissance mission north of Ousseltia and east of Kairouan, escorted by nine P-40Fs of GC II/5. 16 minutes after take-off, the Fw 190s attacked the P-40s, and in the engagement Sgt. Chef Denaix was hit and force-landed 24 km east of Kasserine. During this fight, Oblt. Bühligen claimed two P-40s destroyed, as did Ofw. Goltzsch, and these four victories occurred between 13:51 and 13:55, three south of Djebel bou Dabouss and one south of Djebel Rihane. Rudorffer claimed 6 P-40 and 2 P-38 around 14:00. 12 kills for 0 P-38 and 2 P-40 lost. Lt Hebrard ok, AdjChef Denaix wounded during crash of its damaged plane, at east of Kasserine, Adj Chef Verrier hitted by Flak.

On 14/02/1944 5 french P-40, 12 american spits escorting A-20 over Faid attacked by 8 FW-190. II/JG-2 claimed 6 Spits, neither frenchmen nor american having losses!

Well, a very shy overclaim i would say in North Africa, for the one that massively killed 13 or 17 ( i don't remember...) Yak 7,9 on a single day, those loosing 3 of them in the real life, for 41 Luftwaffe claims on that type!

Juha said:

Hello Adler
IMHO in this there isn't question of propaganda but secret air force reports on losses and in all air forces replacemets were allocated mostly according to reports on losses. Of course there might be some irregularities same way than there are in LW records, for ex one well known case when a Bf 110G was reported lost because of engine problems when in fact it was shot down by Soviet AA-mgs during a train busting attack. But there was a special reason to that "lying".

Juha

Click to expand...

What I mean is that I think there was a lot of understating things for propaganda reasons. This is not limited to one side either.

Hello Altea
to Rudorffer's defence I must say, that according to Tony Woods claim lists, see http://www.lesbutler.ip3.co.uk/tony/tonywood.htm , not all of his claims on 28 Oct 44 were from the afternoon combat, vast majority were made just before noon and only 2, 15.01 and .03, were made in connection of this attack, Tangemann also claimed 2, 15.02 and .03, Broch and Räsch both one c. 13 minutes later and Thyben one 7 minutes later than Rudorffer's claims. All claims were Il-2s. So in all at least 4, probably 7 fighter pilots' claims against 3 real losses. AA claims are more difficult to track, I'll try to find out, if I have more on this action in the evening. Now I must continue my day work.

Hello Drgondog
even if in military training they emphasise the importance of the accuracy of reports and soldiers were under military discipline, the mass armies of WWII were also cross sections of nations' male populations and soldiers also knew or at least thought, being unaware of code braking and other intelligence means available to high commands, that it would be very difficult in many cases to check the accuracy of their reports. So also military reports were only products of human activity so may contain human errors or products of failures in personal integrity. So even if we usually can count on documents they are not infallible. Also from 43 onwards part of WM acknowledged that some of orders coming from Berlin were simply stupid and tried to circumvent them. And sometimes it was very difficult to high command to constrain the aggressiveness of combat troops even if the orders were OK for the "big picture", there were cases of that at least in Finnish AF. And of course we have only pilot's word on that he had written misleading report only after heavy pressure from his CO. But IMHO the story is locigal and it is a fact that the reason of loss given in LW records was wrong.

Juha

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

First take the Russian Communist Propaganda and then take the German Nationalist Propaganda and put them together and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I think that the results from both sides are very skeptical, but for some reason I tend to believe the German reports over the Russian reports a little more.

Click to expand...

If,the claims lists are biaised, the losses lists are not. No reason for that, you can't hide your losses from your own autorithies anyway. There all from internal documents send to headquarters that need to know at best the real active units strengh, and also for logistic and manteance chain. Those reports (Qvetermeister) may be uncomplete, lost, erroneous, faulty for all kind of reasons. But not biaised by propaganda.
They are just accounts, more or less right or false, with no political charge inside.

Hello again Altea
I don't have info on AA claims but while checking what I have on the day I noticed that I probably misunderstood what you meant "VVS KBF (Baltic air fleet) lauched at 2 pm...". I understood that it was the take off time of Soviet attack formations but it seemed to be the attack time in Moscow time which was CET+2h and LW used CET, in Germany the time had changed from German Summer Time to CET on 2 Oct. So on my old notes the attack time was 14:12 Moscow time, 12:12 CET, so there is still c. 20 min difference, but Germans probably attacked few minutes before Soviets were over their target. Rudorffer claimed 9 Il-2s 11.46-11.56, Broch 2, Tangermann 2, Thyben one Il-2s, altogether 14 Il-2s plus unknown number of AA claims versus 3 Il-2 losses.

Juha

Juha said:

Hello again Altea
I don't have info on AA claims but while checking what I have on the day I noticed that I probably misunderstood what you meant "VVS KBF (Baltic air fleet) lauched at 2 pm...". I understood that it was the take off time of Soviet attack formations but it seemed to be the attack time in Moscow time which was +2h CET and if LW used CET, as they well might have used, in Germany the time had changed from German Summer Time to CET on 2 Oct. So on my old notes the attack time was 14:12 Moscow time, 12:12 CET, so there is still c. 20 min difference, but Germans probably attacked few minutes before Soviets were over their target. Rudorffer claimed 9 Il-2s 11.46-11.56, Broch 2, Tangermann 2, Thyben one Il-2s, altogether 14 Il-2s plus unknown number of AA claims versus 3 Il-2 losses.

Juha

Click to expand...

Look, Juha. The problem with pathologic liers like mister R***, is when the say truth nobody trusts them anymore. BTW, Dikov wrote for Marine forces and for the whole day, AFAIK , even if he quoted time for cultural information. Were there Rudorffer kills on Il-2 before? So if, than obviously it was army Shturmoviks, not baltic fleet ones. But, Libau being a Marine target, outside frontal aviation working aeras, i wouldn't understand what were they doing there.

Hello again Altea
no need to get agitated, the afternoon, LW time, combats seemed to have been some 60km East of Libau, so near/over frontline where there has been a big Soviet offensive, front line seemed to have been stabilized on 27 Oct, so the afternoon combat might well be against Army Il-2s and the noon combat around Libau against Naval Il-2s.

BTW the date when II/JG 2 claimed 15 victories, 8 by Rudorffer vs 3 French P-40s lost was 9 Feb 43.

Juha

Juha said:

Hello again Altea
no need to get agitated, the afternoon, LW time, combats seemed to have been some 60km East of Libau, so near/over frontline where there has been a big Soviet offensive, front line seemed to have been stabilized on 27 Oct, so the afternoon combat might well be against Army Il-2s and the noon combat around Libau against Naval Il-2s.

Click to expand...

Who knows? It looks like that Sturmoviks were caught at the Libau port, not 60 km east.

BTW the date when II/JG 2 claimed 15 victories, 8 by Rudorffer vs 3 French P-40s lost was 9 Feb 43.

Click to expand...

I doubt there were still fights over Kasserine pass in 1944...15 you said, not 12?

Hello Altea
Yes the just before noon, CET time, claims were around Libau, but the afternoon, 3 pm, claims were clearly more East according to grid numbers, so they might have been against VVS Il-2s, but I don't have any info of VVS Il-2 losses on 28 Oct.

On 9 Feb 43 II/JG 2 claimed 15 kills, all confirmed, 12 P-40s of which 6 by Rudorffer and 3 P-38s of which 2 by Rudorffer.

Juha

gorizont said:

So - think over the matter: Figures of measurements made up by those unreliable methods seems to you doubtfull, but why figures of calculations based on figures of measurements made up by those unreliable methods seems to you undoubtfull?
It's a contradiction in your position - from logical point of view.

Click to expand...

The matter of fact, it's no my position, but the one from the link you have send to us. Authors Perov and Rastrenine, main Il-2 specialists. Reread them again.

But the fact is, that NS-37 recoil power was mesuared by the same unreliable methods and its figures were estimated as equal or a bit more excessive compared to ones of VYa.

Click to expand...

Sorry, methods changed througout the war. Later ones were not such unreliable.

You should take in attention a little difference in mountings: VYa were installed closer to fuselage as far I remember, than NS-37. Besides, NS-37 were a bit downed relatively axis through point of gravity

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, early Il-2 had its 20 or 23 mm canons outside machine guns position. Later ones inside, instead of ShKAS.

And what we have: 1) most of Il-2 were armed with Shvak not VYa,

Click to expand...

Can you send us numbers? AFAIK 13 420 were produced in 1942, 16 430 in 1943, 22 820 in 1944. Maybe were they used somewhere. No? Notice that the Sturmovik was the only plane to carry them, except small LaGG-3 and Yak batches.

2) VYa were installed on Il-10 so its production wasn't cancelled so what didn't allow to install it in 42-43 as a motor-canon on fighters, if the gun hadn't being installed generally on Il for two or three years, in exception a rather small quantaty?

Click to expand...

Considering respective YVA and ShVAK production, rate of fire and probably weapon coast was that very usefull?

3) why on Il-10M (and on Il-10 last batches) were refused of VYa and was made a decision to install NS-23, if the VYa was so good?

Click to expand...

Don't you know the NS and VYa weights, and quality factors respectivly ? Il-10 either had 2 YVA and 2 ShKAS, or 4 NS-23. ShKAS were called "humane weapons" by russian pilots and counts for nothing. That means Il-10 with NS had a much better firepower. But it had 4 23 mm canons, not 2.