Finnish Air Force claims and losses (fighter squadrons)

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11505
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha Tompuri » 03 May 2009 23:02

RS5, more detailed on losses:

I-15bis
8 in combat (7 by Finnish AAA, 1 by own bomber), 3 MIA, 11 accidents = 22 total

I-16
1 MIA, 4 accidents = 5 total

I-153
2 in combat (1 by Finnish fighters, 1 by Finnish AAA), 3 accidents = 5 total

SB-2
8 in combat (all by Finnish fighters) 5 MIA, 17 accidents = 30 total

DB-3
8 in combat (5 by Finnish fighters, 3 by Finnish AAA) 2 MIA, 7 accidents = 17 total

R-5
1 MIA, 4 accidents = 5 total

MBR-2
3 in combat (2 by own fighters, 1 by own ship AAA), 9 accidents = 12 total

R-6
1 in combat (by Finnish AAA) = 1 total

Regards, Juha

VG 33
Member
Posts: 36
Joined: 28 Apr 2009 15:32
Location: Paris

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by VG 33 » 04 May 2009 09:35

Unpolite and off-topic part deleted
Stay on topic.
/Juha

------------------------------------------------------------------------



Juha Tompuri wrote:
VG 33 wrote:.

Do you mean slon 76 sources are bad?
No.
Yours.
I used slon 76 and antero 59 sources.
But, what can you tell about my sources?
I let Slon answer
I used slon 76 sources from 08 Apr 2009, 18:30, and antero 59 sources from 03 Apr 2009, 17:42.
VG 33 wrote:
VG 33 wrote:Have you got better sources?
Some.
So, share them.

Already done.
What used sources are OK, "that you would say"?
Finnish archives for example.
So, have you got the complete list of the soviet planes crashed or landed on the finish side in winter war with precise location on the landshaft, type of plane, serial airframe number, serial engine number, regiment number, pilot's name, pilot's rank etc...?

AFAIK Harri hasn't published anything (having a very good website though) Keskinen as well as Stenman Have pulished two books with list of claimed/shot down Soviet planes, but they haven't published lists of the AAA and Navy successes.
Con you advice me something from them in french, english, russian, spanish? J don't read suomi.

VG 33 wrote:
A validated kill, a kill verified by the archives of the other side.
And so what, something is wrong with this terminology?
Too much depends on the state of the archives at different countries.
J really think you have english/understanding problems...

Being no fluent in WW, having no access to archives either russian, either finish, j'm just looking for information.
Anyway. Let's take a neutral example: Werner Moëlders claims in Spain with Condor Legion.

He has

1) 15 victory claims
2) 14 confirmed claims by german/nationalist side
3) 1 unconfirmed by german/nationalist side
4) 0 with unknown status

From russian/respublican archives, he has

5) 5 personnal confirm victories* (we can make shure that there were nobody else claims, until new documents will be found)
6) 9 shared victories,
7) 3 unconfirmed (no losses at all, the days and places he claimed)
8) 0 non verified (historians shaked everything)

-* I call confim victory, completly destroyed plane also a plane crashed or emergency landed during it's way back to base, even if restored afterwards.-


So comparing (crosspointing) pilot's claim and archival data from the other side we can say:

Some of his confirmed victories are also confirmed -validate i say, in order to avoid confusion- from the archives of the other side :3.

Some of unconfirm victories from its owm side, can be validated from the opposite archives: 1.

Studying opposite archives, you can also found traces or prouves of it's victories, even he did not claim anything: 1.

Collective victories are the big mess: 9. Nobody can say if it was his victories, or not. All we can can do it's to share the number of lost planes/number claims for statistical interests: 1/7.5.


Conclusion: confirmed Moëlders or Sarvanto etc claims does not mean they are validated.
Unconfirmed claims does not mean there were no kills at all. Archives could valid them.
Some pilots killed other planes, but never claimed their victories, being no shure in the in the results of their fire. It's quite rare but you can find a finish pilot in this case, i don't remember his name.

Reliability of the confirmation system and of the archival data is another question that should be threated separatly, i think. By corrolary, my method does not
Too much depends on the state of the archives at different countries
. at all.


VG 33

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11505
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha Tompuri » 04 May 2009 17:44

VG 33 wrote:
VG 33 wrote: I used slon 76 and antero 59 sources.
But, what can you tell about my sources?
Juha wrote:I let Slon answer
I used slon 76 sources from 08 Apr 2009, 18:30, and antero 59 sources from 03 Apr 2009, 17:42.
I already pointed out you the mistakes at the sources of your posts, pointed out you earlier by Slon.

VG 33 wrote:So, have you got the complete list of the soviet planes crashed or landed on the finish side in winter war with precise location on the landshaft, type of plane, serial airframe number, serial engine number, regiment number, pilot's name, pilot's rank etc...?
Never claimed i would have.
Often there were not much to find out of the shot down planes and pilots.

VG 33 wrote:
AFAIK Harri hasn't published anything (having a very good website though) Keskinen as well as Stenman Have pulished two books with list of claimed/shot down Soviet planes, but they haven't published lists of the AAA and Navy successes.
Con you advice me something from them in french, english, russian, spanish? J don't read suomi.
Here: http://www.kolumbus.fi/kari.stenman/ #26 & 27 for example.

VG 33 wrote: Sarvanto etc claims does not mean they are validated.
Don't have to be worried about Sarvanto.


Regards, Juha

Esa K
Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: 13 Jan 2005 13:49
Location: Sweden

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Esa K » 07 May 2009 12:53

Hi
Slon-76 wrote:Earlier was considered, that he was shot (has committed suicide). But Carl Geust spoke me, that he saw surname Andreev in the list POW.
Thanks Slon-76 for this further small input.
and, patrik.possi wrote:What i can see he is not among the POW who died during captivity during the winterwar, so if he was a POW we must find other reasons for his disappearance.
And thanks Patrik for checking this. And, if he did not die as POW, maybe he did not dissapear, but was among the repatriated POWs after the Winter War...?

Thanks and best regards

Esa K

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 01 Aug 2009 02:08

Very interesting tread!!!
Especially thanks a lot Slon-76, your info have been extremely interesting! I regret that I have not visited the site for a long time.

Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 01 Aug 2009 15:06

Hello Slon-76
I’d have numerous questions but to be reasonable I will ask only on Olli Puhakka’s claims.
From Keskinen and Stenman: Ilmavoitot/Aerial Victories (SIH 27), comments from other sources.
050140 11:30 Joutseno___ SB___41 SBAP
050140 11:35 Nuijamaa__ SB___ -
170140 14:10 Kavansaari_ SB___31 SBAP According to Suomen Ilmavoimat II p. 120 Finns claimed 7 witnessed, 3 unwitnessed, of which Puhakka 2, and 3 damaged, and VVS lost 6, 4 from 54 SBAP and 2 from 31 SBAP, according to your article, IMHO very good article, Soviet losses were 5 plus 2 crashlandings. IMHO the Arsenev’s SB can be counted as a legitimate kill, crashlanding badly damaged outside airfield. Of course also Finnish a/c which crash-landed but were repaired were legitimate kills for Soviet pilots/AA.
190140 14:30 Kiviniemi__ SB___24 SBAP
290140 16:00 Urjala_____DB-3_53DBAP, You seem to allocate this to Ehrnrooth flying FA-1 but Finns allocated it to Puhakka because he had fired at and claimed hits on a DB near Tampere while flying FR-76, which was the only cannon armed fighter of FAF, and Finns found shell hits on the upper surfaces of the crashed DB.
260240 15:00 Pyhtää_____I-16__149IAP, that isn’t on your list. In your list there is one on next day. There seems to be no Finnish claims but there is the the Malmivuo’s case, the loss of him and FA-12 above Utti above clouds and sounds of air combat heard on ground.
260240 15:00 Kotka_____I-152____ - On the other hand according to you this is altogether possible real kill but not absolutely sure, maybe AA.
110340 14:00 Elimäki____DB-3___ -

Do You agree? Can You add any info?

Thanks in advance
Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11505
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha Tompuri » 01 Aug 2009 21:53

Juha wrote: IMHO the Arsenev’s SB can be counted as a legitimate kill, crashlanding badly damaged outside airfield. Of course also Finnish a/c which crash-landed but were repaired were legitimate kills for Soviet pilots/AA.
IMHO a "kill" is a written off plane.
A repaired plane is a damaged one.

Regards, Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 02 Aug 2009 01:19

Hello Slon-76
noticed that you had in an earlier message allocated a DB-3 from 7 DBAP to Fiat on 11.03.40, so to Puhakka. Keskinen and Stenman in Suomen Ilmavoimat II had given 2 DB-3s from 7 DBAP to MS 406s from LLv 28, which made their claims 15.15 Finnish time, ie one hour 15min later than Puhakka made his.

Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 02 Aug 2009 01:26

Terve kaima
that's of course with hindsight clear-cut decision but the decision whether a plane was repairable or not was often a bit arbitrary and complete out of downer's control. And it depended besides of the technical officer making the decision also on airforce in question, on a/c type in question, even subtype, and time.

Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11505
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 Aug 2009 08:30

Hi Juha,
Juha wrote:Terve kaima
that's of course with hindsight clear-cut decision but the decision whether a plane was repairable or not was often a bit arbitrary and complete out of downer's control. And it depended besides of the technical officer making the decision also on airforce in question, on a/c type in question, even subtype, and time.
Often the fate of the shot at, escaped enemy plane, was complete out of the "downers" control
A "kill" is a loss, "crashlandings" could be categorized as "shot down"
Your theory of "kills" brings there a big "grey area" of determining which plane was "crashlanded" and which not.

Regards, Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 02 Aug 2009 12:52

Hello
How I’m thinking is that kills of the pilot of one side are not necessary same that total losses of the other side. So one’s claim accuracy is determined by if the claimed plane went down and was so badly damaged/pilot so badly wounded that he could not reach even the nearest own a/f. Or if the combat happened over enemy a/f the enemy pilot wasn’t able to get the plane down in one piece. Was the total loss or not to other side is another question.

I admit that my approach leaves a rather large gray area but IMHO reality isn’t totally black and white. Take 3 imaginary LW pilots, one had shot down a Spit Mk I in late summer 1940, the other two had shot down a Spit in autumn 1944, one a Spit LF IX and the other a Spit XIV, all Spits were after crash-landing at same condition but the LF IX was considered being wrecked beyond economical repairs because there were enough LF IXs around but Mk I and XIV were repaired because of there were lack of them in respective times. So only the 2nd LW pilot made accurate claim and the others overclaimed? Humans try to categorize a very complex reality but while that makes easier to try to understand the reality we same time lost parts of that reality.

The other Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 493
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Slon-76 » 02 Aug 2009 19:51

Juha wrote: Very interesting tread!!!
Especially thanks a lot Slon-76, your info have been extremely interesting! I regret that I have not visited the site for a long time.
There is no gratitude.


Juha wrote: Hello Slon-76
I’d have numerous questions but to be reasonable I will ask only on Olli Puhakka’s claims.
From Keskinen and Stenman: Ilmavoitot/Aerial Victories (SIH 27), comments from other sources.
050140 11:30 Joutseno___ SB___41 SBAP
050140 11:35 Nuijamaa__ SB___
41 SBAP at this time was at war in structure of the Air Forces of 9 armies. Puhakka has shot down two SB from structure of 1 squadron 54 SBAP (№ 1/218 and 11/93). Planes came back after impact on Mikkeli.
Juha wrote:170140 14:10 Kavansaari_ SB___31 SBAP According to Suomen Ilmavoimat II p. 120 Finns claimed 7 witnessed, 3 unwitnessed, of which Puhakka 2, and 3 damaged, and VVS lost 6, 4 from 54 SBAP and 2 from 31 SBAP, according to your article, IMHO very good article, Soviet losses were 5 plus 2 crashlandings. IMHO the Arsenev’s SB can be counted as a legitimate kill, crashlanding badly damaged outside airfield. Of course also Finnish a/c which crash-landed but were repaired were legitimate kills for Soviet pilots/AA.
Basically to me to add there is nothing, I have stated all in clause article.
In general it not article, and a piece of my work about operations 16 SBABr in Winter war where all are described its fighting starts.
This work was not published anywhere as this theme does not cause the big interest but if you read in Russian in us - I can send it to you. It will be possible interestingly.
190140 14:30 Kiviniemi__ SB___24 SBAP
According to the Soviet data, six Finnish fighters attacked six SB 24 SBAP which came back after impact on strengthening on northern coast of lake Suvantojarvi. One part left from the prosecution, the second has accepted fight. All three SB have been strongly damaged.One sat on air station Kasimovo. The second - has made an emergency landing at village Toksovo, the third was broke at landing to a wood at Rasuli. The gunner - radio operator was lost, the navigator has received wound.
Who exactly shot on the broken plane - to tell I am at a loss.
290140 16:00 Urjala_____DB-3_53DBAP, You seem to allocate this to Ehrnrooth flying FA-1 but Finns allocated it to Puhakka because he had fired at and claimed hits on a DB near Tampere while flying FR-76, which was the only cannon armed fighter of FAF, and Finns found shell hits on the upper surfaces of the crashed DB.
I think, here there is no contradiction. The matter is that group DB-3 (15 planes) flied this day to bomb Seinajoki. On a return way the group has lost the way and has broken up.
One plane (the commander of group of captain Pomazovsky) has made landing in Finland (the future VP-101), the crew is taken out by other plane. Four more DB-3 were missing.
From all group three planes have safely sat down only!
260240 15:00 Pyhtää_____I-16__149IAP, that isn’t on your list. In your list there is one on next day. There seems to be no Finnish claims but there is the the Malmivuo’s case, the loss of him and FA-12 above Utti above clouds and sounds of air combat heard on ground.
No, 260240 149 IAP losses of fighters I-16 had no, though in both starts a shelf had air fights. One sat I-16 in the air station not letting out the chassis. It is probably damaged in fight.
260240 15:00 Kotka_____I-152____ - On the other hand according to you this is altogether possible real kill but not absolutely sure, maybe AA.
In general it has been lost two I-15bis, but according to command a shelf both are shot down AA. One has fallen at island Narvi, the second - between Gogland and Lavensaari.
110340 14:00 Elimäki____DB-3___ -
In area Kouvola it has been lost two ДБ-3 7 DBAP. One is shot down by an antiaircraft artillery, other (lieutenant Bulov) - Fiat.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11505
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 Aug 2009 21:10

Hi,
Juha wrote:Hello
How I’m thinking is that kills of the pilot of one side are not necessary same that total losses of the other side.
Here we seem to disagree.
I wonder how these cases are handled "universaly"?

So one’s claim accuracy is determined by if the claimed plane went down and was so badly damaged/pilot so badly wounded that he could not reach even the nearest own a/f. Or if the combat happened over enemy a/f the enemy pilot wasn’t able to get the plane down in one piece.[/quote] So according to you Toivo Uuttu here got a "kill":
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 2938&hilit

Juha wrote:I admit that my approach leaves a rather large gray area but IMHO reality isn’t totally black and white. Take 3 imaginary LW pilots, one had shot down a Spit Mk I in late summer 1940, the other two had shot down a Spit in autumn 1944, one a Spit LF IX and the other a Spit XIV, all Spits were after crash-landing at same condition but the LF IX was considered being wrecked beyond economical repairs because there were enough LF IXs around but Mk I and XIV were repaired because of there were lack of them in respective times. So only the 2nd LW pilot made accurate claim and the others overclaimed?
Yes.
Wrecked beyond repair = "kill" IMHO
Specially there is a high risk at the overclaim if one doesn't see the plane actually going down to the ground.
If one can see the enemy plane making a forced landing, but the plane staying more or less OK, then the real claim should be damaged, not a "kill".
At many cases, only after the war (from enemy archives)the "kill" claims can be verified.

Regards, Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 02 Aug 2009 23:11

Thanks a lot for your answer, Slon!

Quote:” 41 SBAP at this time was at war in structure of the Air Forces of 9 armies. Puhakka has shot down two SB from structure of 1 squadron 54 SBAP (№ 1/218 and 11/93). Planes came back after impact on Mikkeli.”

So You allocate these two SBs from 54 SBAP to Puhakka, Keskinen and Stenman allocated them to Rimminen (at 11.35 at Noskua / Antrea) and to Paronen (at 11.50 at Kiviniemi).

Quote:” In general it not article, and a piece of my work about operations 16 SBABr in Winter war where all are described its fighting starts.
This work was not published anywhere as this theme does not cause the big interest but if you read in Russian in us - I can send it to you. It will be possible interestingly.”

Thanks a lot for the offer. I’m sure it is very interesting but unfortunately I cannot read Russia, I only know the Cyrillic alphabetic so I’m able to pick up units and aircraft types from text but that all. Have you ever thought to try to get your work published here in Finland? Or part of it as an article in a scientific journal or alike? For ex. Sotahistoriallinen Vuosikirja (Militaryhistorical Yearbook) contains sometimes articles wrote by Russian researchers. IMHO your “article” on 17.1.40 is very good.

So there was a loss on 27.2. after air combat over Kotka. The aircombats on that day I’m aware happened North of Kotka, over Utti airfield, that is the combat during which Malmivuo was killed in FA-12 and others a bit farer away, SE of Viipuri/Wyborg where there was no claims or losses.

If you would be so kind and answer an extra question, on 15.1.40 vääpeli Siltavuori from Koelentue flying FR-91 claimed a SB over Kangasala, a bit east of Tampere. He reported that after his guns malfunctioned in severe cold he smashed the rudder of the SB with his propeller and the bomber crashed into Vesilahti. Siltamäki was himself badly injured during the attack but managed to make successful emergency landing on the ice of Lake Pyhäjärvi. There seems to be no corresponding Soviet bomber loss. Have you seen anything on Soviet reports which would thrown light on this incidence?

Thankfully
Juha

Juha
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: 29 Sep 2005 10:38
Location: Finland

Re: Finnish Air Force claims and lossess (fighter squadrons)

Post by Juha » 02 Aug 2009 23:25

Hello Juha
Quote:"If one can see the enemy plane making a forced landing, but the plane staying more or less OK, then the real claim should be damaged, not a "kill"."

IMHO that is sometimes a tall order, because even the technical teams which evaluated the crashed planes were not always able to rate them correctly. IIRC out of 16 second hand/overhauled Bf 109G-2s Finns got from Germany, many of which were repaired after damages, at least a couple were originally rated written offs, ie rated to have suffered over 60% damage, by LW technical teams but the verdict was later overtuned and they were repaired after all.

On other subject, what is your oppinion on Bruun's LLv 26 book? I have seen only the original version, printed by ink bubble printer at the old Sota-arkisto, and that looked very promising. Is it worth of the price?

Juha

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”