Why American aces had lower scores than anybody else

dedalos said:

When soviets put hartmann on trial for 345 kills did not had at their disposal the mysterious documents that were relieved in 1991? Why lost their time with an unimportant pilot?

Click to expand...

I've seen no record on what the Soviets based their "345" number on. They might have used some of their own records available at the time, they might have used some of the propaganda made about Hartman and lastly they might have used eye witness testimony, from Soviet and German sources. One thing for certain; the documents released in the early 90s used for research into Hartman's aerial claims were not made available to anyone until AFTER the Soviet Union fell.

I never read or heard anything derogatory about Hartman, his conduct while serving within the Luftwaffe during and after WW2, and by any of his peers questioning his claims. As mentioned, he was very vocal about the F-104 and the mission it was required to fly and was willing to put his later career on the line for what be believed in.

When I was working at the USAFA, we were operating TG-14 motor gliders (Ximango 200s), I wrote about my experiences about them on this forum on several occasions. One of the guys running Ximango at the time was a guy named "Pete" (his last name escapes me). He had a career in the USAF, flew F-104s and worked at Luke training Luftwaffe F-104 pilots. Pete knew Gunter Rall and Hartman and spoke very highly of both of them. Pete told me that Hartman was "very tough" during these years and could be very mean depending on the situation, but according to Pete, Hartman was "the best pilot I've ever seen or flown with."

dedalos said:

When soviets put hartmann on trial for 345 kills did not had at their disposal the mysterious documents that were relieved in 1991?

Click to expand...

That is an interesting point. You would think it would have been beneficial to the Soviet propaganda machine to try and discredit the big bad Nazi criminal

Or the facts wasn't of interest to that particular court and it was following the script.

The funny thing about the attacks on hartman is that despite his high score was not the best german fighter pilot . I could instantly name 30 more important fighter pilots of the lw. Both as commanding officers and fighting experiences.

The same van be said even more for backhorn. A good commanding officer but it took him over 1100 missions to claim his 301 kills. And he failed to score even a single kill on the western front

I instantly suspect anyone who says Hartmann wasn't a great pilot.

You can't fly 1,400 missions with 850 of them combat missions without being good. Low and intermediate-skilled neophytes were usually not very long-lived.

dedalos said:

The same van be said even more for backhorn. A good commanding officer but it took him over 1100 missions to claim his 301 kills. And he failed to score even a single kill on the western front

Click to expand...

This was from the same person who provided the information that I posted about Hartman with regards to Gerhard Barkhorn:

Out of 159 verifiable claims listed below, 106 of them show legitimate Soviet losses based on official TsAMO documentation, while 53 of them are clearly overclaims/damaged aircraft...
This gives Barkhorn an average 66.6% claiming accuracy.

It has to be noted that many of Barkhorns' claims resulted in DAMAGED aircraft, not actual losses

Jagdflieger said:

IMO that's just using another word for the same thing. Hartmann's high score rate (as described in the book, by himself and other sources and witnesses) was due to him not firing
his weapons before reaching 50-70m (not just in regards to IL2's). He also wasn't a dog-fighter were one easily looses oversight of a previously hit target. He was a cold calculating
fighterpilot who crept up at non suspecting pilots/aircraft's. At that distance watching an aircraft being hit and wrongly judging it to be out of action can't be explained or "excused"
by being overly optimistic.
It again comes simply back to the issue as to what validity those discovered Soviet records behold.

Regards
Jagdflieger

Click to expand...

Who testified about Hartmann's tactics? The source of Hartmann's tactics is his book, 'The Blond Knight of Germany'. This book is non-fiction, but it has received a lot of criticism from historians, and Wikipedia categorizes it as a historical novel, not a non-fiction. Has it ever been said that Hartmann really used such tactics from any other ace's testimony other than his book?
We can't trust his book.

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

Who testified about Hartmann's tactics? The source of Hartmann's tactics is his book, 'The Blond Knight of Germany'. This book is non-fiction, but it has received a lot of criticism from historians, and Wikipedia categorizes it as a historical novel, not a non-fiction. Has it ever been said that Hartmann really used such tactics from any other ace's testimony other than his book?
We can't trust his book.

Click to expand...

You're joking, right?!?!

First, what do you mean by TESTIFIED? Regardless of what Wikipedia says about this book being a "historical novel," it was written by two notable authors, Trevor J. Constable and Raymond F. Toliver. Although Constable was known about his work on UFOs, Toliver, that is COLONEL Toliver was a USAF pilot, test pilot and spent many hours in the post years interviewing and researching Luftwaffe pilots. Here's a photo of Constable, Toliver and HARTMAN from their other book "Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe"



If you want to know more about Raymond Toliver:



I suggest you do some research and even read the book before making such a comment!

FLYBOYJ said:

You're joking, right?!?!

First, what do you mean by TESTIFIED? Regardless of what Wikipedia says about this book being a "historical novel," it was written by two notable authors, Trevor J. Constable and Raymond F. Toliver. Although Constable was known about his work on UFOs, Toliver, that is COLONEL Toliver was a USAF pilot, test pilot and spent many hours in the post years interviewing and researching Luftwaffe pilots. Here's a photo of Constable, Toliver and HARTMAN from their other book "Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe"

View attachment 664079

If you want to know more about Raymond Toliver:

Toliver, Raymond F. | Gathering of Eagles Foundation

goefoundation.org

I suggest you do some research and even read the book before making such a comment!

Click to expand...

The Blond Knight of Germany was criticised by historians Ronald Smelser and Edward J. Davies in their work The Myth of the Eastern Front as one of the key works that promoted the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht". They described the book as a "hallmark of romanticization", with its "insidious" title that suggested medieval chivalry that "not only fails to characterize the conduct of the Wehrmacht during the Soviet-German war, but, indeed, marks its opposite".[2]​

The historian Klaus Schmider notes that the authors are "sympathetic" to Hartmann, and that the book "tip over into out-and-out hero worship".[3]​

The historian Jens Wehner notes that the German-language version of the book, released in 1971 as Holt Hartmann vom Himmel! Die Geschichte des erfolgreichsten Jagdfliegers der Welt, was immensely popular in Germany, but contained serious flaws in terms of presentation of historical realities. These included the uncritical borrowing from the Nazi propaganda elements of the Fliegerasse ("aces") and stereotypes about the Soviet Union. According to Wehner, the latter could be traced to the prevailing attitudes during the Cold War. Further, the political and social consequences of World War II were completely ignored.[4]​

The Blond Knight of Germany - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

​
i have this book and i don't think this book is historically correct​

FLYBOYJ said:

You're joking, right?!?!

First, what do you mean by TESTIFIED? Regardless of what Wikipedia says about this book being a "historical novel," it was written by two notable authors, Trevor J. Constable and Raymond F. Toliver. Although Constable was known about his work on UFOs, Toliver, that is COLONEL Toliver was a USAF pilot, test pilot and spent many hours in the post years interviewing and researching Luftwaffe pilots. Here's a photo of Constable, Toliver and HARTMAN from their other book "Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe"

View attachment 664079

If you want to know more about Raymond Toliver:

Toliver, Raymond F. | Gathering of Eagles Foundation

goefoundation.org

I suggest you do some research and even read the book before making such a comment!

Click to expand...

This book was written in 1970.
Naturally, he wrote down all his statements without facts and verification.
As with the books of German generals, isn't it inevitable that there will be a lot of personal opinions?
Keep in mind that German military blitzkrieg tactics were studied based on the memoirs of German generals, but in fact there was no blitzkrieg tactics in the ww2.(check Blitzkrieg-Legende)
If the book had been written in the 2000s, a clear verification would have been made, but the book was written in 1970 without any verification.
this book is valuable, but all of the contents are not considered true at all.

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

The Blond Knight of Germany was criticised by historians Ronald Smelser and Edward J. Davies in their work The Myth of the Eastern Front as one of the key works that promoted the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht". They described the book as a "hallmark of romanticization", with its "insidious" title that suggested medieval chivalry that "not only fails to characterize the conduct of the Wehrmacht during the Soviet-German war, but, indeed, marks its opposite".[2]​

The historian Klaus Schmider notes that the authors are "sympathetic" to Hartmann, and that the book "tip over into out-and-out hero worship".[3]​

The historian Jens Wehner notes that the German-language version of the book, released in 1971 as Holt Hartmann vom Himmel! Die Geschichte des erfolgreichsten Jagdfliegers der Welt, was immensely popular in Germany, but contained serious flaws in terms of presentation of historical realities. These included the uncritical borrowing from the Nazi propaganda elements of the Fliegerasse ("aces") and stereotypes about the Soviet Union. According to Wehner, the latter could be traced to the prevailing attitudes during the Cold War. Further, the political and social consequences of World War II were completely ignored.[4]​

The Blond Knight of Germany - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

​
i have this book and i don't think this book is historically correct​

Click to expand...

I see you did a Wikipedia search which can be as accurate as a blind man throwing darts! What you posted here is nothing more than individuals taking offense of a book being written about a "NAZI" pilot. This article, like your statements have absolutely no bearing on Hartman's war record, confirmed or unconfirmed kills or the story of Erich Hartman!!!!

You do realize that Constable and Toliver actually interviewed Hartman, probably in person when they wrote this book?!?!?

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

This book was written in 1970.

Click to expand...

The only bearing that has on this is now is we can compare TsAMO documentation released during the 1990s to what was written about Hartman, which is exactely what is being done here!!!

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

Naturally, he wrote down all his statements without facts and verification.

Click to expand...

100% False! There was some documentation by the post-war Luftwaffe acknowledging many of Hartman's clams, and there were also plenty of eye witnesses (to include Hartman's crew chief and fellow pilots as well as Soviet sources to verify much of the information in the book and to include what Hartman went through while he was in Soviet captivity

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

As with the books of German generals, isn't it inevitable that there will be a lot of personal opinions?

Click to expand...

What book of "German Generals"?!? This was Hartman's story in his own words told to Constable and Toliver. BTW the last time I looked Hartman was not a general!!!!!

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

Keep in mind that German military blitzkrieg tactics were studied based on the memoirs of German generals, but in fact there was no blitzkrieg tactics in the ww2.(check Blitzkrieg-Legende)
If the book had been written in the 2000s, a clear verification would have been made, but the book was written in 1970 without any verification.
this book is valuable, but all of the contents are not considered true at all.

Click to expand...

What does "blitzkrieg tactics" have to do with Hartman?!?! It seems you have no idea where he fought, what units he was with and the people he fought with or against!!!

I suggest you re-reading his book and explore operations by JG 52.

If you say the book, "The Blond Knight of Germany" is inaccurate about Hartman's Tactics and other things, here's his last interview, much of what he says is exactly what was written in The Blond Knight - I suppose you're going to say this isn't accurate either!?!?


In the mean time, since you like quoting Wikipedia - this is what Eric Brown said about Hartman (I wonder if you're going to say this cant be trusted either!).

When the decorated British test pilot Captain Eric Brown asked Hartmann how he had accomplished his total, Hartmann remarked, that along with firing at close range, inadequate Soviet defensive armament and manoeuvre tactics allowed him to claim a victim in every attack.[43]​

Clayton Magnet said:

That is an interesting point. You would think it would have been beneficial to the Soviet propaganda machine to try and discredit the big bad Nazi criminal

Click to expand...

Unless you're trying to convict him of crimes, in which case you're going to fluff up the numbers.

buffnut453 said:

Unless you're trying to convict him of crimes, in which case you're going to fluff up the numbers.

Click to expand...

And that's the quagmire when researching Hartmann. You had a Russian first reveal that he felt Hartmann only had about 70 or 80 kills but yet the former Soviet Union convicted him of destroying 345 aircraft!

ROK-BIRDMAN said:

The Blond Knight of Germany was criticised by historians Ronald Smelser and Edward J. Davies in their work The Myth of the Eastern Front as one of the key works that promoted the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht". They described the book as a "hallmark of romanticization", with its "insidious" title that suggested medieval chivalry that "not only fails to characterize the conduct of the Wehrmacht during the Soviet-German war, but, indeed, marks its opposite".[2]​

The historian Klaus Schmider notes that the authors are "sympathetic" to Hartmann, and that the book "tip over into out-and-out hero worship".[3]​

The historian Jens Wehner notes that the German-language version of the book, released in 1971 as Holt Hartmann vom Himmel! Die Geschichte des erfolgreichsten Jagdfliegers der Welt, was immensely popular in Germany, but contained serious flaws in terms of presentation of historical realities. These included the uncritical borrowing from the Nazi propaganda elements of the Fliegerasse ("aces") and stereotypes about the Soviet Union. According to Wehner, the latter could be traced to the prevailing attitudes during the Cold War. Further, the political and social consequences of World War II were completely ignored.[4]​

Click to expand...

Anything can be criticized - so no exception towards Hartmann's book or any other war-book dedicated towards individuals or certain groups.

Hartmann clearly stemmed from a Bourgeoisie family - the archenemy of the communists and vice versa. As such also his persistent resistance towards NKWD manipulation and
additionally getting to know that system for 11 years first hand during his POW time. The book wasn't about what atrocities the Wehrmacht committed in Russia, but about Hartmann's
personal experience and actions. Naturally he (as anyone else) despised/condemned the action of Soviet troops that he had personally witnessed towards German refugees. Nowhere does the book state that only the Soviets/Russians committed such crimes.

If someone want's to write a book about Wehrmacht atrocities - they should have interviewed and written about my Aunt who was a Wehrmacht-nurse and firsthand witnessed e.g.
the SS and Wehrmacht-actions during the Warsaw uprising in 44.

The book isn't about a historical documentation of WW2 but simply about one particular Luftwaffe pilot. Hartmann might have been a hero to some people, like HJ boys collecting newspaper clips about Luftwaffe aces, but in general he wasn't even known to the German public, since he was never handed/paraded around through the public as other propaganda favored Aces such as e.g. Barkhorn. He actually did come to fame in the general German public due to this Book in the 70's.

Hartmann also made no secret of his conviction - that he is fighting for Germany and against it's enemies. He had also mentioned that even before he joined the Luftwaffe his father
already made it clear that Germany is going to loose this war. Since he was a talented and enthusiastic glider pilot it was obvious to him, that he would join the Luftwaffe and not the
U-Boot, Tank, Infantry or SS branches of the Wehrmacht or would wait to be drafted.

The "romanticism" about pilots only comes in via the fact that the book does not describe the horrors or pain of a downed pilots experience meeting his likely death at the end.
Since it would be very difficult to interview these victims. In the movie BoB one can witness the horror of a burned/surviving RAF pilot.
But Hartmann never witnessed such an occurrence - even though he could certainly imagine it - but the book isn't about what he might have imagined but simply about what he experienced.

Regards
Jagdflieger

Jagdflieger said:

IMO that's just using another word for the same thing. Hartmann's high score rate (as described in the book, by himself and other sources and witnesses) was due to him not firing
his weapons before reaching 50-70m (not just in regards to IL2's). He also wasn't a dog-fighter were one easily looses oversight of a previously hit target. He was a cold calculating
fighterpilot who crept up at non suspecting pilots/aircraft's. At that distance watching an aircraft being hit and wrongly judging it to be out of action can't be explained or "excused"
by being overly optimistic.
It again comes simply back to the issue as to what validity those discovered Soviet records behold.

Regards
Jagdflieger

Click to expand...

Wasn't part of his tactics also to break off and climb up to a safer altitude after delivering his attack? I doubt that he always had opportunity to carefully watch his victim going down and crash.

dedalos said:

Alleid aces actually had better scoring rates than the german aces

Click to expand...

Scoring rates are reliant on the veracity of claims equally as much as the actual score. It would also be an individual thing, not something you can apply as a trait specifically to Allied or German aces.

Werner Shroer is credited with 114 victories in 197 missions; even if he were only 50% accurate that would still be a very good rate. However, it puzzles me, as it seems he served the entire war or most of it, and yet he only flew 197?

There was also a German pilot whose name escapes me, that was credited with 71 victories in 70 missions on the Eastern Front. It would be interesting to see how his claims stacked up against Soviet loss records.

Stig1207 said:

Wasn't part of his tactics also to break off and climb up to a safer altitude after delivering his attack? I doubt that he always had opportunity to carefully watch his victim going down and crash.

Click to expand...

yes - this issue was already addressed. - but this issue wouldn't just apply towards Hartmann

Regards
Jagdflieger

Hi,

Hartmann's full tally was officially recognised by the Luftwaffe, and claims were officially submitted in daily operations reports. See the attached from 7 March 1945.

And as I previously wrote, the Soviet records are comprehensive, and all losses are listed. Wartime Soviet unit records are available at this site: Память народа::Поиск документов частей. Type in иад for fighter division, and you will get thousands of results.

Cheers,
Andrew A.

Clayton Magnet said:

Are you suggesting that the Germans assumed they were winning the war because they had some pilots with high kill totals?
I don't think they were that stupid. The trajectory of the war would have been quite obvious for anyone on the front line by 1943-44 at the latest

Click to expand...

Yes, I am saying the were absolutely that stupid. Right to the bitter end, they were standing up squadrons of their wunderwaffe crewed by'experten' who they fondly imagined would sweep the clouds of allied aircraft from the skies.


Mein Fuhrer! Today our staffeln of experten shot down 12 American Bombers!
Mein Fuhrer! Today the Americans came back mob handed and bombed our expetens airfield with 400 bombers!

FLYBOYJ said:

And that's the quagmire when researching Hartmann. You had a Russian first reveal that he felt Hartmann only had about 70 or 80 kills but yet the former Soviet Union convicted him of destroying 345 aircraft!

Click to expand...

To be fair, the Soviet Union would charge you with destroying a car if you walked out in front of it!