F19 claims and losses

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
mirekw
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 15:57
Location: Poland/Central Europe

F19 claims and losses

Post by mirekw » 01 May 2009 15:06

Split from http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &start=120 in order not this interesting subject to be buried at the "main" thread
/Juha

17/01/40 (Martin & Salwen, F19) -2
These victories "are frankly farfetched" on the basis of radiointerception. One of the "shot down" fighters was broke at flight to front because of a mistake of the pilot. The second - " has turned over through a nose " (at us it refers to скапотировал) at landing in the airbase. It have restored.
For the sake of justice I shall tell, that I do not know, whether Swedes had the attitude to this failure. The Soviet documents do not specify this moment. The place, at least, coincides.
Interesting, this case disturb me, so I would like to put and test it again. Why Sweden radio intelligence should colorize information? According it, two Soviet pilots from 145. IAP (of 4 I-15bis) had damaged planes, one of them force landed after light combats with 2 Gladiators. There are also know the pilots names: leytnant Benediktov (wounded after combat returned to the own base) and leytnant Bondarienko. The second one had force landed 14 km west of Kuolarjavii (maybe wrong written by me?) lake. This plane should be lost according this radio message (could not be pulled from landing place).
Why Slon do you strong believe there was nothing happened then? I know, you have not yet found any confirmation among Soviet papers, but it does not mean, that Sweden had made mistake (or wrong read the Soviet massage too)?

Some comment to this case?

Regards
mw

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: 17/01/40 2xI15bis of 145. IAP?

Post by Juha Tompuri » 01 May 2009 22:05

Greger Falk at his book En krönika om F19 mentions the following:
Four Gladiators were on a recce mission when they 12.00 o'clock noticed as many Soviet I-15 planes.
Salwen and Martin opened fire at distance of 400m, the Soviet planes dived and left the area.
Next day Finnish radio inteligence catch a Soviet radio message from Soviet AF base at Kairala:
"12.10 (170140) at Lake Märkäjärvi area four Finnish planes seen flying at 1000-1500m height, at direction 90. Type unknown."
"Ltn Benediktov landed at Lake Märkäjärvi, Plane nose crashed, pilot hurt. Ltn Bondarenko has made a forced landing 14km West from Lake Kuolajärvi. Plane destroyed. Pilot unhurt."

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 08:29

Hello!

Actually I on this already have told everything, that could.

1. Bondarenko has flied up from ice air station Kajrala. Gaining height he has overheated the motor and the engine has stopped. The pilot has planned of 2000 m from height and has made landing to the cut down wood at road in 14 km to the west Kuolajarvi (at that time – Salla). It has taken place BEFORE occurrence of Swedes in area Markajarvi (now – Salla).
2. Venidiktov has made landing in air station Mjarkjajarvi and at run has turned over. Because of what - I do not know. Can it is simple a mistake in piloting, can because of damages. But AG Filin’s fighters flied to that day on штурмовки much and four fighters have returned back with the holes received from fire from the ground. I.e. even if there were damages of Venidiktov’s plane, at all the fact, that they were put by Swedes.
3. At last. The Swedish pilots of victories did not declare. To shot down one - two "turns" from a distance of 400 m a fighter (and even simply to strike it) is very difficultly. The Swedish pilots were not so skilled and skilful fighters to do such focus. IMHO, the version much more plausibly sounds, that Venediktov’s plane has been damaged by fire from the ground (if at all has been damaged). In our case we have classical " pulling for ears " the information received from radiointerception to own achievements.

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 08:38

And still.
I saw the fighting report which was then intercepted with radio intelligence. (FR colonel Filin’s AG #025 18.00 17.01.40). There the reasons of loss of the Bondarenko’s plane are SPECIFIED. But for some reason at acknowledgement of "victory" to Swedes this circumstance have preferred "to not notice". I think, successes were simply very necessary for them to lift fighting spirit after heavy losses 12.01.40

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 May 2009 20:26

Slon-76 wrote:At last. The Swedish pilots of victories did not declare. To shot down one - two "turns" from a distance of 400 m a fighter (and even simply to strike it) is very difficultly.
Yes.
Slon-76 wrote:The Swedish pilots were not so skilled and skilful fighters to do such focus.
Hard to say. They were young, but had had more hours with their fighters than many Finnish pilots with their tool(s).
Slon-76 wrote:IMHO, the version much more plausibly sounds, that Venediktov’s plane has been damaged by fire from the ground (if at all has been damaged). In our case we have classical " pulling for ears " the information received from radiointerception to own achievements.
I must say that I don't remember reading grund fire claims on that day there.
Slon-76 wrote:I think, successes were simply very necessary for them to lift fighting spirit
Politically oriented claims were not used/needed.
Atleast on Swedish/Finnish side.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 21:06

Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:The Swedish pilots were not so skilled and skilful fighters to do such focus.
Hard to say. They were young, but had had more hours with their fighters than many Finnish pilots with their tool(s).
Hours of a strike, nevertheless, not the most exact parameter. I tried to estimate objectively fighting activity of Swedes in Finland and have come to a conclusion, that it was not very effective. At least in January.
On January, 12 four "Gladiators" cannot make anything with one I-15bis.
On 23-rd of January the four of "Gladiators" in fight with three I-15bis receives defeat.
For incomplete month F19 not having any serious REAL successes loses 25 % of the structure. IMHO, it is not so good parameters...
Thus the Soviet side till January, 18 at all had no superiority in strength above Swedes - in the advanced air station in Kairala was from 11 up to 14 serviceable I-15bis
Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:IMHO, the version much more plausibly sounds, that Venediktov’s plane has been damaged by fire from the ground (if at all has been damaged). In our case we have classical " pulling for ears " the information received from radiointerception to own achievements.
I must say that I don't remember reading grund fire claims on that day there.
Yes, I about it do not overlook...:)
But to declare ground means of air defence basically was not that. I doubt, that they reported on each hole.
Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:I think, successes were simply very necessary for them to lift fighting spirit
Politically oriented claims were not used/needed.
Atleast on Swedish/Finnish side.
Nevertheless I shall allow itself to not believe in it... Such "victories" were (and till now, probably, is) are characteristic for any Air Forces. I do not understand, why the Finnish and Swedish Air Forces in this case were exception.
Besides a politics here there is nothing. Here more likely psychology.
As here takes place not simply conscious "overclaims", and the victories "confirmed" with the opposite said (let this "confirmation" and was, to put it mildly, not absolutely correct)

Regards,

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 May 2009 21:37

Slon-76 wrote:Nevertheless I shall allow itself to not believe in it... Such "victories" were (and till now, probably, is) are characteristic for any Air Forces. I do not understand, why the Finnish and Swedish Air Forces in this case were exception.
There sure have been individuals at Finnish side (as everywhere) that have not been honest, but I believe that the Finnish democratic system, including the reporting and raport writing, itself was more honest and accurate than the Soviet one.

Regaeds, Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 21:56

Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:Nevertheless I shall allow itself to not believe in it... Such "victories" were (and till now, probably, is) are characteristic for any Air Forces. I do not understand, why the Finnish and Swedish Air Forces in this case were exception.
There sure have been individuals at Finnish side (as everywhere) that have not been honest, but I believe that the Finnish democratic system, including the reporting and raport writing, itself was more honest and accurate than the Soviet one.
Well, very much can be. Though to argue on a degree of honesty of this or that system - employment more suitable for the philosopher, than the historian (IMHO).
Though I believe, that in даном a case your thesis all the same "does not work". Both victories have been included not on the basis of official reports of pilots, and "from above".
I doubt, that all about what here it has been told earlier, did not understand command F19. And nevertheless, it has found possible to include to the pilots two extremely doubtful victories.
You can explain somehow on another it?

Regaeds,

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 May 2009 22:17

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: There sure have been individuals at Finnish side (as everywhere) that have not been honest, but I believe that the Finnish democratic system, including the reporting and raport writing, itself was more honest and accurate than the Soviet one.


Well, very much can be. Though to argue on a degree of honesty of this or that system - employment more suitable for the philosopher, than the historian (IMHO).
:)
I think this is also something that needs a thread of it's own.
Slon-76 wrote:Though I believe, that in даном a case your thesis all the same "does not work". Both victories have been included not on the basis of official reports of pilots, and "from above".
I doubt, that all about what here it has been told earlier, did not understand command F19. And nevertheless, it has found possible to include to the pilots two extremely doubtful victories.
You can explain somehow on another it?
I can try.
A day after the Swedish report of shooting to Soviet planes that after that left the area, a Soviet report of two planes going down was found out.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 22:24

Juha Tompuri wrote: I can try.
A day after the Swedish report of shooting to Soviet planes that after that left the area, a Soviet report of two planes going down was found out.
ОК. I quote myself.

I saw the fighting report which was then intercepted with radio intelligence. (FR colonel Filin’s AG #025 18.00 17.01.40). There the reasons of loss of the Bondarenko’s plane are SPECIFIED. But for some reason at acknowledgement of "victory" to Swedes this circumstance have preferred "to not notice".
What reasons?

Regards,

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 02 May 2009 22:40

Slon-76 wrote:ОК. I quote myself.

I saw the fighting report which was then intercepted with radio intelligence. (FR colonel Filin’s AG #025 18.00 17.01.40). There the reasons of loss of the Bondarenko’s plane are SPECIFIED. But for some reason at acknowledgement of "victory" to Swedes this circumstance have preferred "to not notice".
What reasons?
I haven't seen the report, but findind out that the Soviet plane of the unit attacked has been destroyed, and not relying in all details in that report, as it wasnt 1:1 to the Swedish pilots one.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Slon-76
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 16:56
Location: Moscow

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 02 May 2009 22:51

Juha Tompuri wrote:I haven't seen the report, but findind out that the Soviet plane of the unit attacked has been destroyed, and not relying in all details in that report, as it wasnt 1:1 to the Swedish pilots one.
Well. I believe, each of us in this case will agree to differ. Though once again заострю your attention that the reason of loss nevertheless has been specified in the report. To transfer in a staff of the Air Forces of 9 armies the cut down and ambiguous report - I do not see a reason.


Regards,

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11554
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 03 May 2009 07:18

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:I haven't seen the report, but findind out that the Soviet plane of the unit attacked has been destroyed, and not relying in all details in that report, as it wasnt 1:1 to the Swedish pilots one.
Well. I believe, each of us in this case will agree to differ. Though once again заострю your attention that the reason of loss nevertheless has been specified in the report. To transfer in a staff of the Air Forces of 9 armies the cut down and ambiguous report - I do not see a reason.
As I have understood, the Soviet report didn't mention the Gladiators opening fire against the Soviet planes, and the Soviet planes evading the scene after that, as was mentioned at Swedish pilot reports. That, and the AFAIK unknown Soviet claim of fire from the ground troops, might have led to questioning the (other) details at the Soviet report about the plane losses.

Regards, Juha

John T
Member
Posts: 1206
Joined: 31 Jan 2003 22:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by John T » 03 May 2009 11:19

mirekw wrote:Split from http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &start=120 in order not this interesting subject to be buried at the "main" thread
/Juha

17/01/40 (Martin & Salwen, F19) -2
These victories "are frankly farfetched" on the basis of radiointerception. One of the "shot down" fighters was broke at flight to front because of a mistake of the pilot. The second - " has turned over through a nose " (at us it refers to скапотировал) at landing in the airbase. It have restored.
For the sake of justice I shall tell, that I do not know, whether Swedes had the attitude to this failure. The Soviet documents do not specify this moment. The place, at least, coincides.
Interesting, this case disturb me, so I would like to put and test it again. Why Sweden radio intelligence should colorize information? According it, two Soviet pilots from 145. IAP (of 4 I-15bis) had damaged planes, one of them force landed after light combats with 2 Gladiators. There are also know the pilots names: leytnant Benediktov (wounded after combat returned to the own base) and leytnant Bondarienko. The second one had force landed 14 km west of Kuolarjavii (maybe wrong written by me?) lake. This plane should be lost according this radio message (could not be pulled from landing place).
Why Slon do you strong believe there was nothing happened then? I know, you have not yet found any confirmation among Soviet papers, but it does not mean, that Sweden had made mistake (or wrong read the Soviet massage too)?

Some comment to this case?

Regards
mw
I must say that Slon-76 explanation is one of two hypothesis.

1. The Swedes did disregard unwanted information and did chalk up two scores to restore Swedish morale.
That the Swedes where suprised of Soviet equipment and pilot quality is true and that took the notion of damning their own equipment. (No AP ammo, too slow aircrafts)
To prove this we have to find the F19 signals and look at the actual text.

2." Lost in transmission/translation"
Note that it was Finnish radio intercept.
So the message had to be deciphered(?) Translated between Russian and Finnish and the translated into Swedish.
The details why the aircrafts crashed could have been seen as less relevant for the translator who might not been that focused on who claimed kills but rather looked at it as two less enemies.



So we just have to go to Krigsarkivet and look at the signals files of F19.
(I'd beeen through parts of SFK's archive, so just give me a year or two :)
Or -check with Peter Forslunds new book on F19 -it's just released so I have not even seen it in the bookstore.


And I must admit that the way the F19 history by Falk describes the situation and it never explicit said that the soviets whent down by Swedish fire but rather
"F19 could thus register two more claims"

So I'm with Slon on the factual action and think it is rather probable that it was filtered within the Swedish/finnish comand structure.

Cheers
/John T.

John T
Member
Posts: 1206
Joined: 31 Jan 2003 22:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by John T » 03 May 2009 11:55

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:The Swedish pilots were not so skilled and skilful fighters to do such focus.
Hard to say. They were young, but had had more hours with their fighters than many Finnish pilots with their tool(s).
Hours of a strike, nevertheless, not the most exact parameter. I tried to estimate objectively fighting activity of Swedes in Finland and have come to a conclusion, that it was not very effective. At least in January.
On January, 12 four "Gladiators" cannot make anything with one I-15bis.
On 23-rd of January the four of "Gladiators" in fight with three I-15bis receives defeat.
For incomplete month F19 not having any serious REAL successes loses 25 % of the structure. IMHO, it is not so good parameters...
Thus the Soviet side till January, 18 at all had no superiority in strength above Swedes - in the advanced air station in Kairala was from 11 up to 14 serviceable I-15bis
Some notes to this
The Swede's claimed three fighters destroyed on the ground and one in the air on January 12.


To determine air force efficiency you have to look at the objectives for each side.
After the 12:th and for most of January,Swedish fighters primary mission where recon.

January 24 the order to provide Air defence of the cities Kemi - Tornio - Oulo(Uleåborg)
February 1 Rovaniemi is added to the list.

This means F19 where spread out like
Kemijärvi, Posio, Vaala 1 Fighter EACH
Rovaniemi 2-4 fighters
Uleåborg 2 fighter
And if possible one at Veitsiluoto.
The remaing fighters where dedicated to recce missions.

This made sense as Soviet Bomber formation most oftenly just turned back when encountering a single fighter.
(and as the Gladiators had to have height advantage to get near the modern Soviet bombers so the Swedes could not chase after a turning formation)


So comparing the Swedes defending a rather large area with around 8-10 operational Gladiators with only Kairala Air base is'nt really usefull.


Cheers
/John T

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”