Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And if I'm not mistaken I believe those aircraft eventually went to the Italians (Co-Belligerent AF)
And if I'm not mistaken I believe those aircraft eventually went to the Italians (Co-Belligerent AF)
Tunneler?
The 99th FS was the Tuskegee squadron, which was attached to various FG during their tour. Their 17 victories while flying the P-40 are often left out of the total, which is often listed at 598 (some people claim that some of the 99th FS claims were folded into those of the other FG they were attached to, but I found this not to be the case). Jackson lists 592 victory claims which is pretty close to this. Where the 481 number comes from, I don't know. I thought maybe they left out one of the FG counts, possibly the 79th FG, if you subtract 481 from 598, you get 117 which is almost their number. But that could be just a coincidence.
Stig - looked this doc. You might notice that below 'claimed ground victories' that Ray Wagner is cited as source for Victory Claims in that document.
Definitely. The PBJ units flew 20,770 sorties, of which 8,390 were action. I do not have the USN definition of sortie, assuming it is on operations the PBJ units were clearly doing many patrols that did not encounter the enemy. Most of the USN Anti submarine sorties flown from Britain would not be action. Even the F4U/FG had only around a third of their sorties classified as action. Using the USN definition there would be a number of USAAF fighter escort sorties that would not qualify as action.So is it correct to say then that it be wrong in most cases to directly compare operational statistics between USAAF and USN aircraft, as the definition for what constitutes a "sortie" is different for each branch of the service?
| Month | Mis- | Sor- | Bomb | Flying | Time | A/C | Claims | ||
| Month | sions | ties | Pounds | Hrs | Mins | Lost | Dest | Prob | Dam |
Aug-42 | 1 | 4 | |||||||
Sep-42 | 45 | 286 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 1 | |||
Oct-42 | 81 | 940 | 100,000 | 362 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Nov-42 | 112 | 889 | 89,000 | 1202 | 40 | 2 | 27 | 5 | 14 |
Dec-42 | 50 | 650 | 147,500 | 1581 | 10 | 6 | 17 | 1 | 5 |
Jan-43 | 54 | 839 | 79,160 | 1045 | 25 | 12 | 10 | 3 | 13 |
Feb-43 | 6 | 120 | 10,020 | 1259 | 50 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 7 |
Mar-43 | 27 | 558 | 75,380 | 203 | 0 | 2 | 1 | ||
Apr-43 | 62 | 1015 | 156,320 | 766 | 30 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
May-43 | 60 | 816 | 187,480 | 1550 | 0 | 8 | 55 | 2 | 22 |
Jun-43 | 24 | 328 | 4,000 | 1361 | 30 | ||||
Jul-43 | 38 | 660 | 302,560 | 364 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | |
Aug-43 | 133 | 1202 | 461,000 | 995 | 30 | 3 | |||
Sep-43 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2222 | 0 | 4 | |||
1942 | 289 | 2769 | 336,500 | 3150 | 70 | 9 | 44 | 7 | 21 |
1943 | 404 | 5538 | 1,275,920 | 9765 | 165 | 42 | 83 | 12 | 47 |
| Grand | 693 | 8307 | 1,612,420 | 12915 | 235 | 51 | 127 | 19 | 68 |
Feb-43 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
Mar-43 | 53 | 794 | 16,160 | 745 | 30 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
Apr-43 | 84 | 1262 | 88,000 | 1626 | 30 | 12 | 18 | 2 | 8 |
May-43 | 83 | 912 | 153,700 | 1287 | 0 | 4 | 7 | ||
Jun-43 | 59 | 704 | 43,500 | 853 | 30 | 1 | 26 | 1 | 4 |
Jul-43 | 31 | 395 | 122,000 | 489 | 0 | 2 | |||
Aug-43 | 175 | 1462 | 516,000 | 2118 | 0 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 1 |
| Grand | 485 | 5529 | 939,360 | 7118 | 90 | 30 | 59 | 11 | 23 |
Mar-43 | 50 | 213 | 22,200 | 232 | 0 | 1 | |||
Apr-43 | 70 | 781 | 93,400 | 1119 | 0 | 5 | 25 | 0 | 7 |
May-43 | 98 | 741 | 142,380 | 1148 | 30 | 0 | 1 | ||
Jun-43 | 15 | 169 | 0 | 280 | 0 | ||||
Jul-43 | 63 | 768 | 0 | 1534 | 0 | 14 | 17 | 7 | 5 |
| Grand | 296 | 2672 | 257,980 | 4313 | 30 | 20 | 43 | 7 | 12 |
The 'running out of 1650-1 engines' was a conscious choice by Materiel Command (with prodding by AAF-Hq) after the June 1943 Packard plant strike. At that time their were about 30+ P-51B complete, save 1650-3, lounging at Mines Field. Echols reported to Planning and Requirements that the stike probably cost 1000+ 1650 engines in the delivery plan. At that tim Air Directorate have already decided to replace the P-39 and P-40 and A-36 and P-51A with P-51B and P-47D for 12th and 10th and 14th AF operations in 1944. In mid-1943 only Kuter, Fairchild at AAF Hq and Eaker at 8th AF were begging for P-51B for 8h AF.There was an issue in that the USAAF was running out of P-40F/L, or more specifically, out of the type of (single stage, two speed) Packard-Merlin V-1650-1 engines they used. The British had given them some engines and spare parts to cover the need but there weren't enough available. Only the Merlin engined P-40s were considered capable of tangling with the Bf 109s and Fw 190s at that time, and whatever Italian planes (C 205, G55 etc.) that were still flying with the ANR. They had tried P-40K briefly with the 57th and two British units, which are very good down low, but they hadn't really worked out as fighters in that Theater due to their altitude limitations. The British were also using P-40N / Kittyhawk IV as fighter-bombers but the US didn't consider those ideal for the Theater either.
The newer mark P-39s at that time had finally found a niche as a short range ground attack aircraft in Italy, and were doing alright in that role (though still not loved by pilots). I think for a minute maybe the USAAF were thinking of switching the 99th FS over to ground attack missions, such as in A-36s or something, but those got phased out suddenly after a couple of mysterious crashes (probably due to metal fatigue in the wings from dive bombing). Then more P-51s were available, and the rest is history.
Definitely. The PBJ units flew 20,770 sorties, of which 8,390 were action. I do not have the USN definition of sortie, assuming it is on operations the PBJ units were clearly doing many patrols that did not encounter the enemy. Most of the USN Anti submarine sorties flown from Britain would not be action. Even the F4U/FG had only around a third of their sorties classified as action. Using the USN definition there would be a number of USAAF fighter escort sorties that would not qualify as action.
Numbered USAF Historical Studies 51-100 If you want your own copy of study 85.
Official totals of credits,
8th Air Force,
The Confirmation of Victory Credits Board was still making determinations in June/July 1945. Statistical Summary of 8th Air Force Operations, 10 June 1945. Fighters 5,222 in the air, 4,250 on the ground, with some claims still being assessed. Of the air claims 1,948 Fw190, 2,535.5 Bf109
The 8th Air Force April 1945 monthly report, P-51 3,354 destroyed in the air, 3,299 on the ground, P-47 1,617 destroyed in the air, 747 on the ground, P-38 264 destroyed in the air, 204 on the ground, total 5,235 in the air, 4,250 on the ground.
Assessed fighter claims against enemy aircraft August 1942 to April 1945, dated September 1945, 5,291.84 destroyed in the air and 4,146.47 destroyed on the ground, 3,337 pilots claimed at least 1 destroyed, of these 2,769 claimed 0 to 4, and 7 claimed 30 or more. 1,964.5 Fw190 and 2,549 Bf109 destroyed in the air.
9th Air Force
2,399.5 destroyed in the air, credits A-26 7, B-26 60, P-38 266, P-47 1127.5, P-51 750, P-61 50, F-5 2, F-6 135, P-51 reconnaissance 2, including 1,006.67 Fw190, 1,140.33 Bf109. 2,216 destroyed on the ground, P-38 133, P-47 1,821, P-51 257, F-6 5. Including 504 Bf109, 365 Fw190, 356 Ju88, 222 He111 and 158 unknown.
1st Tactical Air Force, US units,
238 destroyed in the air, B-26 9, P-47 177, F-6 47, Beaufighter 5. Including 182 Bf109 and 34 Fw190. 763 destroyed on the ground by P-47. Plus "10 Me109 captured in the air by an F-6 on 8 May 1945"
Using the April 1945 8th Air Force report and assuming any claims by 8th Air Force F-6 are under P-51 the ETO claims for destroyed in the air are 4,288 by P-51/F-6, 2,921.5 by P-47 and 530 by P-38. Then apply the gold standard, the Frank Olynyk lists.
9th Air Force P-40 unit statistics, see how these compare to other sources.
57th Fighter Group
Month Mis- Sor- Bomb Flying Time A/C Claims Month sions ties Pounds Hrs Mins Lost Dest Prob Dam Grand
79th Fighter Group, the February 1943 claims are for pilots flying with 57th FG
Grand
324th Fighter Group
Grand
Yes, and it was the right decision, P-51B was better than all of those other aircraft. But it created a brief crisis in the MTO TheaterThe 'running out of 1650-1 engines' was a conscious choice by Materiel Command (with prodding by AAF-Hq) after the June 1943 Packard plant strike. At that time their were about 30+ P-51B complete, save 1650-3, lounging at Mines Field. Echols reported to Planning and Requirements that the stike probably cost 1000+ 1650 engines in the delivery plan. At that tim Air Directorate have already decided to replace the P-39 and P-40 and A-36 and P-51A with P-51B and P-47D for 12th and 10th and 14th AF operations in 1944. In mid-1943 only Kuter, Fairchild at AAF Hq and Eaker at 8th AF were begging for P-51B for 8h AF.
The result was two fold:
NAA was assigned Top Priority for US Packard production around early Q3/43. Curtiss was cut out for future consideration. Ditto Lockheed (which killed the P-38K 'experiment' by Kelsey and Hough in mid 1944). Curtiss got no more future orders for any 1650 derivative type, nor any follow on test bed prototype ventures requiring a Packard 1650.
The A-36 got 'phased out' simply because no more were available. Combat attrition at 27th, 86th, 311th used up the limitd production run (500) of the A-36. The AAF Planning and Requirements division at AAF-Hq by mid 1942 was moving away from the Dive Bombing requirement (entirely - all theatres) so the future production contracts at NAA switched to P-51A (and Mstang II) - with the provison that the 1200 ship contract could be shifted to P-51B based on results at R-R and NAA XP-51B with 1650 engine. The version of 1650 (-1 or -3) for production P-51B was debated between Materiel Command and NAA and Planning and Requirements once again prevailed (probably at the Arnold level) s the decision was cast for 1650-3. Ergo no more expanded or even continued 1650-1 Spares past Fy 43. That meant that all 1650-1 projected for P-40F/L were 'poof - gone, hasta la Vista' for FY 44. The die was cast in mid 1943.
The NA-99 (P-51A) contract of 1200, was finished at 310, and funds moved entirely into NA-104 (P-51B-5), then into NA-106 (P-51D-NA). Then AAF cleaned up the differering contracts. Moved NA-106 contract funding into NA-109 and subsequent P-51D-5-NA's, as the original NA-99 contract for P-51A, P-51B-5/-10/-15 was over when the last P-51B-15-NA rolled out late Spring 1944.
The A-36 wing issue was a result of a structural failure due to 1.) a French pilot in training failing to deploy dive brakes BEFORE entering the dive, with 2x1000 pound bombs and tried to pull out (with bomb load) when the dive got way past safe speed, and 2.) another pilot in a dive - who overshot the target and pushed forward (past 90 degrees) trying to re-acquire target, then tried to roll out of his inverted dive - also with 2x1000 pound bombs. The AAF in it's infinite wisdom directed 'no more 1000 pounders' and 'wire the damn things shut' - which combat group ignored (successfully).
I'm still a little murky on actual US Combat ops with P-39 in MTO in 1944. True - used for convoy patrol, true used for CAS in strafing role in 1943. True, capable of 500 pound C/L bomb but that required very close proximity between airfield and target. The latter may have been feasible from Sicily to say, Salerno (1943) and maybe Anzio (early 1944). Do you have sources for US combat ops for P-39s in that period? I'm aware that 332nd brought P-39s to 15th AF in February 1944, but have seen a note that all 75 went to Italian AF in April. 99th was not yet assigned to 332nd.
As explicitly stated by noting it is for the units while under 9th Air Force and reinforced by the dates listed. The 9th Air force moved to Britain in the final quarter of 1943. The data is only for the time period given, to be compared to the totals derived from other sources for the same units and times.In general I think you may be missing all the claims for 1944 for the three groups you listed, out of the five US groups operating P-40s in the MTO who made confirmed victory claims.
As explicitly stated by noting it is for the units while under 9th Air Force and reinforced by the dates listed. The 9th Air force moved to Britain in the final quarter of 1943. The data is only for the time period given, to be compared to the totals derived from other sources for the same units and times.
There is a diffeence between Claims and Credits. For the 8th AF, CLAIMS were submitted By Group Intelligence after de-briefing each squadron's pilots making a Claim for 'destroyed - probable - damaged' along with combat film and encounter reports. CLAIMS were evaluated and processed by 8th AFVictory Credits Board, which then rendered a judgment of Victory Credit, recorded each Credit and sent copies back to the respective units, and thence to pilot.
The 8th AF Final Victory CREDITS for WWII were compiled and consolidated into a Report dated September 1945. The individual detaled transaction by pilot name, serial number and unit - for each transaction - was the primary source for USAF Study 85 - not the summary Report which stated totals and did not differentiate credits by same pilot in different unit. At the same time duplicate records were eliminated, misspelled name but same serial number were fixed. FS and Hq totals were fixed and finally a Fighter Group roll up could be accurately cast from Fighter Squadron and Hq individual records, and pilots received final 'official' victory CREDITS.
Frank Olynyk did his doctoral Thesis on his tedious cross checking of Encounter Report to VCB (if it existed) making sure that all the important data concerning name, rank, serial number and unit assigned for Each Credit, along it the type of AC flown as well as enemy a/c credited.
Examples include Kinnard and Stewart each CO's of 355th and 4th FG, and each flying with different squadrons/FGs before coming to 355th. Stewart for example received VC's for 1/2 Me 110 and 1/3 for He 177 with 328th FS/352nd FG before transferring to 355th FG where he got 7 air and 2 ground. In 8th AF VCB report his unit is listed as 355FG with 7.83 air and 1.5 ground.
Kinnard with 8 air and 17 ground is asociated with 355th (7 air 15 gnd) but he got 1 air plus 2 ground with 4th FG. To further complicate the summary, Kinnard received VC for 2 air, 9 ground as CO 354FS/355FG and 5 air, 6 ground as 355FG Hq.
Both are represented as 355th FG only in 8th AF VCB Final Report.
So in USAF 85 you will see the 354FS record correctly and the 4FG Hq correctly and 355FG Hq correctly recorded. The American Fighter Aces after several years of wrangling over pure air ace vs 'impure 8th AF combined ace', settled on USAF 85 and then on Frank Olynyk.
Anone purporting to present accurate Group level victory credits has his hands full if detailed information for actual victory CREDIT at the detail level of USAF 85 is not at hand and sourced - is wasting time.
I'm sorry, I don't buy this. A postwar analysis of claims may be useful to some degree (though again, at this point I think we can "Aim Higher" with cross-verified claims) but if you are looking at victory claims during the war, I think you have to accept the claims acknowledged during the war at the squadron, group / wing, or command / air force level. Because that is what all the other nations did.
Otherwise if you are comparing claims for USAAF P-38 units with claims for RAF Spitfire Mk V units or R.A. CR 202 units, and one set of figures is 'corrected' while another isn't, you are going to have a major discrepancy.
To this I would also add that postwar (or last day of the war) analysis which didn't include much if anything from Axis records is of limited value. Yes it makes sense to eliminate duplicate claims and so on, but we now know a bit more about the immense challenges faced when trying to verify air to air combat claims / credits.
We have also discovered errors and new data etc. since Sept 1945.
So while it's definitely a useful source, (and thanks for bringing it to my attention, I think I found a copy here for those other people interested. If there was a digitized / searchable version of this somewhere it would be really nice, but I couldn't find one yet)....
I don't automatically buy that USAF study 85 trumps all other sources. I am definitely certain that 481 victories for US flown P-40s during WW2 is an incorrect figure.
That said I'm glad to see evidence that the numbers I've found for claims by group are substantially off due to duplicates or for any other reason.
By the way, Lt Ed L Toppins, who I mentioned upthread, is credited in the cop of UAAF Study 85 linked four lines above (page 185 if I can make out the number on the font), with four confirmed victory credits in the MTO while flying with the 99th FS, the first on January 27 (which would have been with the P-40L) and then also on July 18, 20 and 26, which (I think) would be with P-51.
If you don't buy Report 85, you are barking up the wrong tree in here. I have an electronic copy of it, but it came from a source that asked me not to pass it on.
People who want to match victories with losses from the enemy are in fairy tale land. No fighter pilot who submits a claim for a victory knows if the wreckage is later recovered and use to make another aircraft flyable, and many wartime Axis records were lost in battle damage, in Germany AND Japan, who did not track things that same as other air forces and naval air arms.
You also never answered what YOUR numbers are and where they came from, other than shotgunning a few references here and there, while carefully avoiding saying where any particular numbers came from. Maybe post a data set with references? I'm not calling you out; I'm asking you to be specific. My intent is not to encourage or discourage. It is to get at a good data set. I already posted several in this forum, and it would be nice to see referenced data from someone else other than Bill Marshall (Drgondog) and me.
So, c'mon, post some data.
As an incentive, I attach a data set from Jan Safarik's website: Jan J. Safarik: Air Aces. The data are there for anyone to operate on.
Attached is a data set for the USA from thatsite, but parsed into Excel. I make no claim about it other than where I got it. I am responsible for the parsing into Excel.
For 8th AF you need to add Miller's Fighter Units and pilots of the 8th AF. It has some inaccuracies but overall excellent first source for victory CLAIMS on day to day ops and CREDITS on Unit Histories summary section. Also has Macrs for losses. Not everything in agreement with 85 but follows 8th AF VCB.Ok so here are the sources I used. Like I said, these are mostly published books. Some websites as well. Listed below by Theater.
This isn't 100% complete but it's a good chunk of what is in my library (and what I use online).
I used the general histories to get a baseline for what the operational dates were and so on, and an initial idea of what the numbers were supposed to be. I then checked these against the unit histories and the Osprey books, (often getting different numbers) and then I check these against the day to day operational histories by Shores and Claringbould.
I also listen to or read the pilot interviews and memoirs to get clues as to other things to look for, discrepancies to check etc.
General:
"The Army Air Forces in WW II" - Wesley Frank Craven
"Air Force Combat Units of WW II" - Herb Cohen
"Victory Roll: The American Fighter Pilot and Aircraft of WW2" - Dr William Wolf
MTO
"P-40 Warhawk Aces of the MTO" - Carl Molesworth
"Air War Europa: Chronology: America's Air War Against Germany in Europe and North Africa" - Hammel, Eric (1994).
"Fifteenth Air Force against the Axis: Combat Missions over Europe during World War II" - Mahoney - Kevin A
"The 9th Air Force in World War II" - Kenn C. Rust and George J. Letzer
"Twelfth Air Force Story in World War II" - Kenn C. Rust
"The Twelfth U.S. Air Force: Tactical and Operational Innovations in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, 1943-1944"
"The Twelfth and 15tth Air Forces" - Gerard Paloque
"Duel Series.: P-40 Warhawk vs Bf 109 : Mto 1942-44 (Osprey)" - Carl Molesworth
"Mediterranean Air War" series (day by day mission data) - Shores et al
33rd FG
"War Diaries of Sgt. Robert L. Covington: 60th Fighter Squadron" - Robert L. Covington
"The Fighting 33rd Nomads during World War II: A diary of a fighter pilot with photographs and other stories of 33rd Fighter Group personnel" James E. Reed
57th FG
"57th Fighter Group - First in the Blue" - Carl Molesworth
325th FG
"Aces of the 325th Fighter Group" - Tom Ivie
"Checkertails: The 325th Fighter Group in the Second World War" - Ernest R. McDowell
"Checkertail Clan: The 325th Fighter Group in North Africa and Italy" - Earnest R. McDowell and Willian N. Hess
325th FG Website - Link
Checkertails.org Website - Link
324th FG
"The story of a Fighter Pilot: World War II" - W. Sheldon Williams
79th FG
"The 79th Fighter Group: Over Tunisia, Sicily, and Italy in World War Two" - Don Woerpel
"A Hostile Sky: The Mediterranean airwar of the 79th Fighter Group" - Don Woerpel
332nd FG
"332nd Fighter Group - Tuskegee Airmen" - Chris Bucholtz
SOUTH PACIFIC
"The 5th Air Force" - Gerard Paloque
"South Pacific Air War" series (day by day mission data) Claringbould et al
"General Kenney Reports:: A Personal History of the Pacific War" - Office of Air Force History / USAF
"Airpower Employment of the Fifth Air Fore in The World War II Southwest Pacific Theater" - Major James A. Barr
"Pacific Counterblow: The 11th Bombardment Group and the 67th Fighter Squadron in the Battle for Guadalcanal (Wings at War Series)" - Office of Air Force History / USAF
49th FG
"49th Fighter Group" -Ernest R. McDowell
"49th Fighter Group: Aces of the Pacific" - William N. Hess
"Protect and Avenge: The 49th Fighter Group in World War II" - Steve Ferguson and William K Pascalis
Oral History interview Robert M. Dehaven - Link (museum of flight)
CHINA - BURMA
"P-40 Warhawk Aces of the CBI" -Carl Molesworth
"Bloody Shambles" series - Shores
"The Tenth Air Force in World War II: Strategy, Command, and Operations 1942–1945" - Edward M. Young
AVG
"The Lady and the Tiger" - Olga Greenlaw (original pre- Dan Ford version)
(multiple others - these are pretty easy to find)
Oral History interview David L. "Tex" Hill - Link (Museum of Flight)
23rd FG
"23rd Fighter Group: Chennault's Sharks" - Carl Molesworth
"Sharks over China: The 23rd Fighter Group in WW II" Carl Molesworth
80th FG
"Rough War; The Combat Story of Lt. Paul J. Eastman, a Burma Banshee P-40 and P-47 pilot" - Walt Shiel et al
(Burma Banshees website - Link, includes 88th, 89th, 90th and 459th FS pages, with photo collections from various pilots)
Interview Transcript Phil Adair Link - Library of Congress
Youtube Interview Phil Adair Link