Doctor Tiihonen split the offensive to two parts:Art wrote:For the period 10-20 June or else?tramonte wrote:Doctor Tapio Tiihonen recalculated Soviet loss figure for Vyborg offensive and found them almost twice higher than those given by Krivosheev ( some 31 00 while Tiihonen: 52 000 + 8 000 reinforcement troops).That's too large a number.there are lots of reasons to estimate Soviet losses in Karelian Isthmus been at least 135 000
1) Operation Vyborg (9-20 June) giving losses of Soviet forces: 52 000 + 8 000 for reinforcements
2) Operation Kotka (aim to Kymi river): from 21 June to late July 44
Total losses of all were according his study: 189 000. Tiihonen strongly criticized and official loss reports. In short he counted battalion level Soviet losses compared them regimental official loss figures and found those loss figure matching not at all. He then checked regimental level losses and compared them to official loss figures of divisions. The didn't match at all. They were all downplayed. So there there was cumulative downplaying process.
In short his analyze was that 2+3+2 can't just be 4 (regimental level). And 4 +4 +4 just can't be 9 (divisional level). 7+6+7 is still 20 even official report is claiming 9. The more Tiihonen checked those official loss figures and recalculated them the more near the loss figures (KIA+WIA+MIA) came to irreplaceable loss figures. And in the end one just can't rotate death persons.
"Decision at the Isthmus 1944" was the doctoral thesis of Tiihonen, Helsinki University. The year was - i think so 1999. It's his university study and i have never seen his raw data. Professor Turtola was one of his opponents and i guess he has had opportunity to check that raw data of Tiihonen.
Krivosheev did admit Soviet losses been in Svir-Petrozavodsk Offensive about 64 000. When comparing Finnish loss share: Karelian Isthmus 68% versus 30% in Karelian Front (and 2% elsewhere) there are indeed option to estimate Soviet losses in Karelian Isthmus been 145 000. So far nobody in Finland have made critical deep going study of Krivosheev's estimates of Svir-Petrozavodsk Offensive.
As always there is third possibility: both Tiihonen and Krivosheev don't have real numbers. Krivosheev having loo low and Tiihonen having too high. For instance did Tiihonen study issues like dysentery epidemic during summer of 1944 causing lots of troubles (and losses, short or long period) for both Soviet and Finnish forces?