Burmese Bandit
Senior Airman
- 474
- Dec 5, 2008
Just goes to show that someone at the history channel should have his pay docked for whoppermongery.
Unbelievable Statistic
- Thread starter stevethebuilder
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #22
stevethebuilder
Recruit
- 4
- Jun 2, 2009
Thank you all for putting paid to this poor research. You are knowledgable and friendly people.
I could have posted to many forums but this one looked to be quite extensive, as a WWII, WWI aviation enthusiast I'll be visiting quite often.
I could have posted to many forums but this one looked to be quite extensive, as a WWII, WWI aviation enthusiast I'll be visiting quite often.
HerrKaleut
Airman
I would be more inclined to believe something like 1/3rd of B17s built were shot down by fighters than the programmes stat.
Knowledgeable and friendly .....thanks, your turn to by the drinks!!!
Knowledgeable and friendly .....thanks, your turn to by the drinks!!!
Last edited:
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
but still wrong
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
Im not sure staticaly wise, but i certainly reckon its a good bet that the B17 claimed more bomber v fighter kills than any other heavy, IMO logic says if you pump out enough lead your chances of a hit increase expedentially having said that I suspect the guys in the 109's preferred taking on bombers more than fighters at least you have a massive speed manouverability difference on your side.
drgondog
Major
Trackend- maybe not!
I have talked to a lot of LW experten that would rather fight spits and mustangs than take on a combat wing of B-17s or B-24's.
To a man they all said it was one of their most dreaded (but effective) experiences to attack head on and see the sky light up and fill with 50 caliber tracers knowing there were 5-10 unsen API for every tracer.
Most felt that their fate was in the hand of God and chance - with fighters more his own skill and awareness and ability to choose the fight.
The context appears to be 8th air force operations during Point Blank, which lasted roughly from mid 1943 to March 1944.
By "enemy fighters" they appear to be referring to the Reich Defence interceptors covering western Europe.
In such a context the statement appears genuine, though as mentioned above would then suffer modification for how the data was gathered, its sources, etc.
It has been frequently stated that the bomber offensive of 43-44 over western Europe won air superiority by bomber attrition. My take is essentially air superiority was maintained by the Luftwaffe in late 43 largely by the support of zerstörer heavy fighters using rocket salvos and flak cannon to separate individual aircraft which could then be set upon, they did this from a good distance. But then the appearance of a very capable escort (the Mustang) cleared the skies of everything but single seat interceptors, and then these faced terrible attrition going in against the bomber boxes at point blank range. That totally changed the environment of Reich Defence, forcing the jagdflieger into a fight of attrition where it was mostly bomber crews facing this challenge earlier.
So combining these two elements brings some credence to the claim, though I would agree it sounds exaggerated, most definitely where taken as a blanket statement. I lacks context and detail.
By "enemy fighters" they appear to be referring to the Reich Defence interceptors covering western Europe.
In such a context the statement appears genuine, though as mentioned above would then suffer modification for how the data was gathered, its sources, etc.
It has been frequently stated that the bomber offensive of 43-44 over western Europe won air superiority by bomber attrition. My take is essentially air superiority was maintained by the Luftwaffe in late 43 largely by the support of zerstörer heavy fighters using rocket salvos and flak cannon to separate individual aircraft which could then be set upon, they did this from a good distance. But then the appearance of a very capable escort (the Mustang) cleared the skies of everything but single seat interceptors, and then these faced terrible attrition going in against the bomber boxes at point blank range. That totally changed the environment of Reich Defence, forcing the jagdflieger into a fight of attrition where it was mostly bomber crews facing this challenge earlier.
So combining these two elements brings some credence to the claim, though I would agree it sounds exaggerated, most definitely where taken as a blanket statement. I lacks context and detail.
The bombers probably shot down 1/20th of the fighters shot down in the ETO, the rest was the work of the escorts.
By far the majority of the German fighters in the ETO were shot down by the Allied escorts whilst concentrating on the bombers, so the bombers no doubt helped, although not much physically but a lot in terms of being a high source of distraction.
And like Bill pointed out, German pilots found it a dreadful experience attacking the bombers from any angle knowing the sheer amount of lead that was poured into the air in the attempt to shoot them down. Like Bill said, for every tracer they saw (Which was MANY!) there'd be 5 to 10 API projectiles flying around! No surprise that German pilots often found .50 cal holes in their a/c after they landed.
By far the majority of the German fighters in the ETO were shot down by the Allied escorts whilst concentrating on the bombers, so the bombers no doubt helped, although not much physically but a lot in terms of being a high source of distraction.
And like Bill pointed out, German pilots found it a dreadful experience attacking the bombers from any angle knowing the sheer amount of lead that was poured into the air in the attempt to shoot them down. Like Bill said, for every tracer they saw (Which was MANY!) there'd be 5 to 10 API projectiles flying around! No surprise that German pilots often found .50 cal holes in their a/c after they landed.
Is that based on statistical knowledge or just your opinion?
drgondog
Major
There is np way to get closure on bomber claims versus actual. Simply stated the LW actual losses frequently were under 10% of bomber claims until the escorts were going all the way. Then the LW actual losses approached 80-90% of the Fighter claims - some of which were surely due to bomber gunners
Conclusion - the fighter claims were probably in the 70-80% of actual destroyed w/o consideration for heavily damaged but maybe salvaged.
This is speculation based on a lot of cross comparion of 8th AF awards to LW records.
