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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by mirekw » 06 May 2009 20:51

Are there any sources/facts that back up that theory?
Juha I do not have any hard fact to confirme my theory, but this is quite logic. I do not think, that Slon-76 has any reason to manipulatte the 145. IAP documents, the same is/was with his commander. They do not have any real reason to hide the Sweedish success. After 17.01 it was not so big too.
So it is simple logical explanation of this case.
Sometime simplicity is very difficoult, :-)

There are many well know cases in psychologu or criminology, that the witness had seen, what they wanted to see, but very often it was not true near not even near the true. It is common human beheviour.

Regards,
Mirek W

John T
Member
Posts: 1187
Joined: 31 Jan 2003 22:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by John T » 06 May 2009 21:19

Slon-76 wrote:
Very true remark. As far as I know, Swedes arrived to Finland with rather arrogant plans. Including, meaning air support of a land forces. And in this connection it is very curious, than such reassessment of priorities for F19 speaks? In fact by and large on one of the mentioned below points with 12-th till 24th January of large strikes was not.
I believe, that change of priorities is connected to the general transition to defense of the Finnish armies on direction Salla. And it is possible and because of high losses at actions above a front line. But it means, that Swedes have completely lost for an active phase of the struggle in Finland!

John T wrote: 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)
IMHO, will more worthlessly dispose of the Swedish group it was impossible! To cover something with such forces - it is impossible. As in a role of interceptors you have estimated opportunities of Gladiators more than precisely.
"Fist" from 8-10 fighters - appreciable force to measures of the given site of front. As I-15bis and I-16 type 5 essentially did not surpass Gladiators under flight characteristics. But the Finnish command has preferred to break "fist" into separate "fingers" which by definition could not influence seriously struggle in air. In result at F19 smallest "efficiency" among the Finnish fighters units at optimum initial preconditions.
Frankly speaking, in a case with F19, IMHO, we have "mini-model" of all Finnish fighter aviation. Problems and mistakes same. Only in a case with F19 they have received simply grotesque forms. Interestingly, the Finnish command seriously trusted, what one fighter can protect Kemijarvi?
Slon-76
I do have some problems to understand how you asses air forces and the term efficiency.

What strategies do you see as effective when your own air force is
out gunned,
outnumbered by a factor greater than five to one
and in general technical inferior?

And what are the objectives of an air force?
Might different forces have different objectives even if they are fighting each other?

To me it looks like your assessments are based on a theory of attrition which might make sense between two equal forces but are not applicable in an asymmetrical situation.

Cheers
/John T.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 06 May 2009 21:24

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: There is also mention explaining the F19 tactics: "9-plane SB and DB formations had turned away when meeting a single Swedish fighter"
Otherwise, than imaginations or dreams of the Swedish pilots, I cannot name such application. I do not know any such case.
I think it is the question of combat report reliability.
Slon-76 wrote:In general I have Fulk's book, but in Swedish I do not read, and Finnish is given hardly. Therefore I translate therefrom only the parts necessary to me.
Mine is Finnish-Swedish bi-lingual :)
Slon-76 wrote:Well as a whole this history is perfectly combined with the Soviet statement of events. TB-3 Were have fired antiaircraft fire in area Kemijarvi, and the fighter attacked when bombers became on a fighting rate on Vickа. However about any Fokkers soviet documents do not mention. Only one "Bulldog".
Stange if they flied over Kemijärvi, the only AAA defended town there.
No mention straying to Rovaniemi?
Slon-76 wrote:Nevertheless brag of anything else Swedes cannot. Stories about regular scaring away of the Soviet bombers is 100 % of the FAIRY TALE. In Red Army the similar behaviour referred to "cowardice", and for it very strictly punished, including up to a death penalty. To Air Forces RKKA it is possible to present many claims, but regular mass cases of cowardice - not from their number.
Yes, if such "cowardice" took place, that could/would not have been written at the combat reports.
Slon-76 wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:I am confident, what exactly this tactics became the reason of that having made 460 fighting flights, the Swedish pilots have shot down only 7 bombers.(Really - it is less)
Swedish ratio shot down planes / combat flights might have been little worse than Finnish, but quite much better that Soviet.
I on your place would not be so is confident. ;)
Struggled against Swedes 145 IAP had "ideal" parameters: 3 applications - 3 real victories.[/quote] What I ment, was the ratio between shot down planes /combat flights.
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: If this type comparisons are important.
Why is not present? Tasks at LLv 26 and F19 - as a whole identical. Planes - too. In this case comparison of productivity - objective parameter of definition of efficiency.
The Swedish planes with their two-blade propellors (I earlier thought that they were Mk I ones,compared to our three blade Mk II ones, now I'm not sure at all... John T, which were they?) At least the Swede used ammo was inferior compared to the one used by Finns (F19 lack of amour piercing and incendiary ammo)

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Are there any sources/facts that back up that theory?
Though the question was not to me, but nevertheless I shall express.
Dear Juha! Well who about such things will write documents! :)
The documents are based on something.
What we here have seen are hypothesis
I'm not that interested on speculations, but on which facts the claims were found reliable.
Those I haven't seen.
Yet.


Regards, Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 06 May 2009 21:54

mirekw wrote:
Are there any sources/facts that back up that theory?
Juha I do not have any hard fact to confirme my theory, but this is quite logic.
theories often are.
mirekw wrote:I do not think, that Slon-76 has any reason to manipulatte the 145. IAP documents
Neither believe I.
mirekw wrote:the same is/was with his commander.
Hmmm....
Not all the Soviet combat reports in the Winter War correlate with the reality.
mirekw wrote:They do not have any real reason to hide the Sweedish success.
Hmmm...
What I've often noticed is that the Soviet enemy success often was reported to be lower than the Soviet one.


Rregards, Juha

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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 06 May 2009 22:20

John T wrote: Slon-76
I do have some problems to understand how you asses air forces and the term efficiency.

What strategies do you see as effective when your own air force is
out gunned,
outnumbered by a factor greater than five to one
and in general technical inferior?

And what are the objectives of an air force?
Might different forces have different objectives even if they are fighting each other?

To me it looks like your assessments are based on a theory of attrition which might make sense between two equal forces but are not applicable in an asymmetrical situation.
OK. I shall explain.

1. Tactics any victoriously for Swedes is not present in general. It is obvious from a ratio of forces.
2. In such conditions the only thing that it is meaningful to do - " to try to sell more dearly the life ", I.e. to try to put the enemy the maximal loss.
3. IMHO, the concentration of all group on protection of any one site could give the greatest effect. For example, lines Kemijarvi - Rovaniemi. It would allow to render to the Soviet bombers more serious losses => would increase efficiency of actions of group => would force command of the Air Forces of 9 armies to reckon with presence on the Finnish side fighters groups.
4. The variant chosen the Finnish command for Swedes has provided, at the best, " moral satisfaction ".

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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 06 May 2009 22:30

Juha Tompuri wrote: Hmmm....
Not all the Soviet combat reports in the Winter War correlate with the reality.
Hmmmm....
You know for sure, how was reality? :)
Juha Tompuri wrote:
mirekw wrote:They do not have any real reason to hide the Sweedish success.
Hmmm...
What I've often noticed is that the Soviet enemy success often was reported to be lower than the Soviet one.
And at whom occurs on another?


Rregards,

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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 06 May 2009 23:07

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: There is also mention explaining the F19 tactics: "9-plane SB and DB formations had turned away when meeting a single Swedish fighter"

Otherwise, than imaginations or dreams of the Swedish pilots, I cannot name such application. I do not know any such case.
I think it is the question of combat report reliability.
I think it a question of ambitions of veterans. One very much dear HSU has written in the memoirs that has shot down 7 Finnish planes in Winter war and has in detail described as it was. Though actually, I am confident, he so much at all did not see the Finnish planes.
It is much more pleasant to recollect, as from one your kind enemies ran up as hares, than to recognize, that you could make nothing with them... Psychology...

Juha Tompuri wrote: Stange if they flied over Kemijärvi, the only AAA defended town there.
No mention straying to Rovaniemi?
Vika it is enough near to Rovaniemi. Or I have not understood a question?
Juha Tompuri wrote: Yes, if such "cowardice" took place, that could/would not have been written at the combat reports.
And so 35 times? You in it trust?
9 SB = 27 person! And you think everyone will be silent, if the commander of a squadron will run away from one fighter?
Besides "Bulldogs" (what is "Gladiators" nobody suspected) at us for the decent plane did not consider, from what from him to escape?
Excuse, but it seems to me, that you in this case simply obstinately do not want to recognize obvious.

Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-7 wrote: I on your place would not be so is confident. ;)
Struggled against Swedes 145 IAP had "ideal" parameters: 3 applications - 3 real victories.
What I ment, was the ratio between shot down planes /combat flights.
I generally initially spoke about declared, instead of about real victories. With applications at Air Forces RKKA everything is all right was ;)

Juha Tompuri wrote:
The Swedish planes with their two-blade propellors (I earlier thought that they were Mk I ones,compared to our three blade Mk II ones, now I'm not sure at all... John T, which were they?) At least the Swede used ammo was inferior compared to the one used by Finns (F19 lack of amour piercing and incendiary ammo)
The main problem not in screws and patrons - and in the vicious tactics chosen for Swedes. The rest - not so essential trifles. IMHO.

Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Are there any sources/facts that back up that theory?
Though the question was not to me, but nevertheless I shall express.
Dear Juha! Well who about such things will write documents! :)
The documents are based on something.
What we here have seen are hypothesis
I'm not that interested on speculations, but on which facts the claims were found reliable.
Those I haven't seen.
Yet.
Without hypotheses there is no history. It is the fact which is not requiring for proofs.
Not all can be confirmed or denied documents.
The given assumption is based on a line of the facts, which from the point of view of logic (in this case) are most logically treated by mine so, instead of differently. At least, in it one does not contradict another.


Regards

Esa K
Member
Posts: 1254
Joined: 13 Jan 2005 13:49
Location: Sweden

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Esa K » 07 May 2009 12:55

Hi

And a fast input here too, if its to some use, theres a short text by C-F Geust on "F 19 according to Russian sources", the text is published in the Yearbook of the Swedish Air Force museum (Geust, Carl-Fredrik: F 19 enligt Ryska källor / pages 24-56 in: Ikaros : Flygvapenmusei årsbok, Linköping 1997). The text contains, among other things, a victory/kill/claim list wich in short is as follows:

17/1 1940 I-15bis from 2./145 IAP
1/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
20/2 1940 Two SB from 3./16SBAP
21/2 1940 DB-3 from 5 OSAP
21/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
7/3 1940 Two SB from 34 DRAE
10/3 1940 TB-3 from 1 TAP

And if my matematchical skills is somewhat OK this sums up as one fighter, and eight bombers.


Best regards

Esa K

(edited: bad spelling...)
Last edited by Esa K on 07 May 2009 15:52, edited 1 time in total.

Esa K
Member
Posts: 1254
Joined: 13 Jan 2005 13:49
Location: Sweden

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Esa K » 07 May 2009 14:43

:oops: A small correction of the list I tried to quote above...

...one of the SB:s 20/2 1940 was not lost, plane OK, gunner KIA.

Sorry not for checking better before quoting...


again

Esa K

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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 07 May 2009 18:49

17/1 1940 I-15bis from 2./145 IAP


About this "victory" already all is told. We delete?
20/2 1940 Two SB from 3./16SBAP
A small correction of the list I tried to quote above...
...one of the SB:s 20/2 1940 was not lost, plane OK, gunner KIA.
I have already sent a question for С. Geust about an origin of these data. On my data both planes have returned on the air station.
However the navigator who probably was taken prisoner has jumped out of one of them.
21/2 1940 DB-3 from 5 OSAP
It is an interesting history.
Originally, F19 applied for one shot down and one damaged DB-3. On the Soviet data, Swedes attacked SB from 3th squadron 5 OSBAP. The squadron has lost one bomber. Itself has reported on two shot down "Gladiators". From five "Gladiators" taking place in air two did not attack. It in accuracy repeats the Swedish version of fight except that "Gladiators" in a reality was not 5, and 4.
I.e. it is obvious, that the Swedish pilots simply not truly identified the opponent.
With DB-3 the history is more difficult. For impact on Rovaniemi took off 13 DB-3, but on road to the purpose six of them have turned back. Other seven according to crews bombed Rovaniemi. However, as is known, in it day seven bombers have struck on Swedish village Pajala. Hence, these DB-3 above Rovaniemiat all were not! And to lost by this group DB-3 Swedish "Gladiators" of the attitude have no.

The resume: on account F19 it was real 4 SB and one TB-3.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 07 May 2009 19:43

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Hmmm....
Not all the Soviet combat reports in the Winter War correlate with the reality.
Hmmmm....
You know for sure, how was reality? :)
Some cases I do.
As an example: did the Soviet bombers report that they were lost and bombed Pajala 210240?
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:
mirekw wrote:They do not have any real reason to hide the Sweedish success.
Hmmm...
What I've often noticed is that the Soviet enemy success often was reported to be lower than the Soviet one.
And at whom occurs on another?
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 7#p1318327
and
If I remember correctly, at 060140 Sarvanto case too.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 07 May 2009 20:03

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Stange if they flied over Kemijärvi, the only AAA defended town there.
No mention straying to Rovaniemi?
Vika it is enough near to Rovaniemi. Or I have not understood a question?
Yes Vika is near and small enough to the TB-3's accidentaly could have flown at Rovaniemi.
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Yes, if such "cowardice" took place, that could/would not have been written at the combat reports.
And so 35 times? You in it trust?
9 SB = 27 person! And you think everyone will be silent, if the commander of a squadron will run away from one fighter?
Besides "Bulldogs" (what is "Gladiators" nobody suspected) at us for the decent plane did not consider, from what from him to escape?
Excuse, but it seems to me, that you in this case simply obstinately do not want to recognize obvious.
Can't say anything exact at the number, and how the raports were written, but as Toivo Uuttu case http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 7&start=30 there were several Soviet planes there and no-one saw (including the pilot who was hit) Uuttu hitting the one I-16, but all(?) saw that I-16 being hit from AA-fire.
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:
Slon-76 wrote: I on your place would not be so is confident. ;)
Struggled against Swedes 145 IAP had "ideal" parameters: 3 applications - 3 real victories.
What I ment, was the ratio between shot down planes /combat flights.
I generally initially spoke about declared, instead of about real victories. With applications at Air Forces RKKA everything is all right was ;)
I answered to this your statement:
Slon wrote:I am confident, what exactly this tactics became the reason of that having made 460 fighting flights, the Swedish pilots have shot down only 7 bombers.(Really - it is less)
Compare to successes of "gladiators" from LLv 26.
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:
The Swedish planes with their two-blade propellors (I earlier thought that they were Mk I ones,compared to our three blade Mk II ones, now I'm not sure at all... John T, which were they?) At least the Swede used ammo was inferior compared to the one used by Finns (F19 lack of amour piercing and incendiary ammo)
The main problem not in screws and patrons - and in the vicious tactics chosen for Swedes. The rest - not so essential trifles. IMHO.
The performance of Swedish Gladiators was lower than Finnish and their ammo could not penetrate the Soviet plane armour nor (often) be able to set the Soviet plane self-sealing fuel tanks on fire.
Finnish had (some) such ammo that could do both (without them Sarvanto would not have been able to achieve the 060140 record).


Regards, Juha

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

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Slon-76 » 07 May 2009 20:09

Juha Tompuri wrote: Some cases I do.
The main word - "some"
Juha Tompuri wrote:As an example: did the Soviet bombers report that they were lost and bombed Pajala 210240?
About losses - yes, informed. And that crews DB-3 bombed Pajala, I think they and did not know.
Juha Tompuri wrote: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 7#p1318327
and
If I remember correctly, at 060140 Sarvanto case too.
As far as I know, with the message on fight 060140 - everything is all right in the Soviet documents. In general the Soviet operative documents anything essentially in the worse side from Finnish(at least that I saw), IMHO, do not differ. Simply they represent other point of view.

Regards,

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 07 May 2009 20:24

Esa K wrote:17/1 1940 I-15bis from 2./145 IAP
1/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
20/2 1940 Two SB from 3./16SBAP
21/2 1940 DB-3 from 5 OSAP
21/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
7/3 1940 Two SB from 34 DRAE
10/3 1940 TB-3 from 1 TAP
Thanks Esa.

17/1 1940 I-15bis from 2./145 IAP
Armed reconnaissance flown against Märkäjärvi-Salla by four Gladiators. While undertaking the reconnaissance, four I-15s were spotted at around 12:00. Fänriks (Pilot Officers) Roland Martin and Per-Johan Salwén opened fire at a distance of 400 meters. The Soviet aircraft dived and disappeared. The next day the Finnish radio-surveillance reported that a report from the Soviet fighter base at Kairala had been picked up. The report stated that at 12:10 on 17 January, four Finnish unknown aircraft had been spotted above Märkäjärvi on an easterly course. Lieutenant Benediktov forced landed at Märkäjärvi. The forward part of the aircraft was crushed and the pilot was wounded. Lieutenant Bondarenko made an emergency landing 14 km west of Kuolajärvi. The aircraft was destroyed but the pilot was unharmed. Russian sources claims that the aircraft shot down by Salwén was a I-15bis from 2./145 IAP flown by Lieutenant Bondarenko who was killed. The aircraft shot down by Martin (Lieutenant Benediktov) is not mentioned in Russian sources.
1/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
On the morning a three-plane group of Gladiators flew a combat air-patrol on 3000 meters over Rovaniemi. At 10:30 eight DB-3s and twenty-six SBs from 5 OSAP attacked Rovaniemi. They together dropped 23000 kg of bombs. The first group escaped but from the second group, a SB-bomber (s/n 15/59) from 3./5 OSAP was shot down by fänrik (Pilot Officer) Per-Johan Salwén 78km north of Rovaniemi. The crew of the SB with pilot, Lieutenant Boris M. Babkin, observer, Lieutenant A. U. Melnik and air-gunner, non-commissioned officer B. I. Batorin were killed. The wreck of the Soviet counted over two hundred machine-gun hits.
During the combat Soviet air-gunners reported that they shot down two enemy-fighters of eleven attacking, but F19’s three Gladiators didn’t sustain any losses.
This victory was the first bomber shot down by F19.

20/2 1940 Two SB from 3./16SBAP (one of the SB:s 20/2 1940 was not lost, plane OK, gunner KIA.)
F19 got an early morning alarm when a flight of SBs from 3./16 SBAP was reported on its way westward from Uhtua. A rote Gladiators with fänrik (Pilot Officer) Per-Johan Salwén and fänrik Gideon Karlsson scrambled at 08:40 from forward base ”Ulrik” at Uleåborg. They managed to intercept the attacking bombers 30 minutes later at Vaala at 2500 meters. Salwén hit two of the SBs before he run out of ammunition. The observer in the first SB Lieutenant A. Ja. Avrutskij misunderstood the instructions from the pilot and parachuted to become a POW. The aircraft managed to struggle back to base to do a wheels-up landing. Salwén’s fire and/or the wheels-up landing wounded the pilot Lieutenant Mihail A. Borshev and gunner Nikolaj A. Troshenko. The aircraft was a write off. The second SB was damaged and the tailgunner Aleksandr P. Popov was mortally wounded and died a week later on 27 February 1940. Gideon Karlsson also hit this second SB.
Salwén’s Gladiator was damaged with a bullet-hole in the wing from enemy return fire and a hole trough the propeller due a failing synchronisation.
Gladiator “E” got caught in a storm and crashed at Uleåborg during emergency landing and was a totally write-off. The pilot of this aircraft is unknown.
21/2 1940 DB-3 from 5 OSAP
21/2 1940 SB from 3./5 OSAP
Twenty-six SBs and thirteen DB-3s from 5 OSAP attacked Rovaniemi around 12:00. They together dropped 14600 kg of bombs. The returning bombers reported that enemy fighters shot down one SB and one DB-3, while air-gunners claimed two enemy fighters destroyed.
The enemy fighters were a four-plane group from F19, which was in the air. Two of the Gladiators had to return due to fuel shortage before any contact with the enemy formation. The two remaining Gladiators flown by fänriks (Pilot Officers) Arne Frykholm and Carl-Olof Steninger attacked the Soviet bombers and they shared the destruction of one DB-3 and one SB-2 south-east of Rovaniemi.
The DB-3 (“11”, s/n 391695), which landed pretty much intact 18 km north-west of Vuotso, had dropped its bombs over Pajala on the Swedish side of the border! The pilot Lieutenant Aleksej N. Isatshev was captured, but the observer, Lieutenant F. Zaprjagajlev and air-gunner, Sergeant Major V. F. Volkov were killed.
The damaged SB (s/n 5/95) from 3. Group was last seen leaving, trailing black smoke and didn’t return. The crew with pilot, Lieutenant Ivan D. Danilenko, observer, Lieutenant Aleksej A. Losev and air-gunner, Sergeant Major A. P. Petrov were reported missing in action.
Soviet air-gunner claimed two enemy fighters shot down but F19 didn’t sustain any losses during this combat.
7/3 1940 Two SB from 34 DRAE
Two SBs from 34 DRAE (long-range reconnaissance) of AG Spirin were shot down 65km southeast of Uleåborg. The aircraft were shot down at Vaala by fänrik (Pilot Officer) Einar Tehler of F19 and crashed at Utajärvi.
Both crews (Lieutenant Aleksejev, Sub Lieutenant Morozov and Sub Liutenant Segkin in one aircraft and Captain Grebennikov, Lieutenant Matsnev and Sergeant Major Lepika in the second) were killed.
Tehler who had been scrambled from Vaala reported that the combat took place above clouds against three SB-2s at 14:00-14:10. The right SB was hit first. White smoke evaporated at first, which changed over to black smoke. The aircraft began to lag behind its formation and stated to descend against the ground. He then attacked the left aircraft. His hits were good. During the combat, his Gladiator was hit in one of his fuel tanks and he had to return to Vaala. The return flight was dramatic and he was drenched in gasoline. He did a half-roll and prepared to force-land after he had turned of the fuel tap. When he passed below 400 meters, he re-opened the fuel tap and restarted the engine since he hadn’t found any good place to force-land on. He was able to fly his damaged fighter to forward base ”Ulrik” at Uleåborg. On the ground, the aircraft was examined and it was found that the bullet had penetrated the fuel tank and carried on into the compass in the cockpit.
10/3 1940 TB-3 from 1 TAP
The TB-3 squadron (ex 1 TAP) of Air Group Spirin attacked Rovaniemi and one aircraft didn’t return. This TB-3, flown by Sub Lieutenant Sergej T. Karepov was shot down by fänrik (Pilot Officer) Gideon Karlsson of F19, 5km east of Kemijärvi at 14.30.
The aircraft (s/n 22198) force-landed on the ice on Lake Murtoselkä. Five crewmembers were killed among them the pilot, the observer Lieutenant Nikolaj Vorobtshikov, the second pilot Senior Lieutenant Boris M. Kogan and Senior Lieutenant Kirill Shestihin. Three air-gunners were captured. These were Sergeant Majors Nikolaj Grigorjevitj Globa (24 years old), Aleksej A. Zatonov and Grigorij V. Zaharov.
Karlsson who was on a combat air patrol found surprisingly six TB-3s at 2000 meters over Rovaniemi and attacked them. The enemy aircraft turned around without dropping their bombs when he attacked. He concentrated on one of them and managed to damage it. It started to lag behind, dropped its bombs and descended, trying to find a place to force-land with all four engines damaged. Karlsson was forced to return to base after having been hit in the propeller. He had also almost exhausted his ammunition and returned to the rear base.
The enemy aircraft force-landed 5km east of the south end of Lake Kemijärvi. All of the crewmembers survived the crash but when they tried to put on resistance against Finnish ground troops, five of them were killed.
Quotes from:
http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/sweden_f19.htm


Regards, Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11531
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Re: F19 claims and losses

Post by Juha Tompuri » 07 May 2009 20:34

Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote: Some cases I do.
The main word - "some"
Yes, at least I can't claim being perfect :wink:
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:As an example: did the Soviet bombers report that they were lost and bombed Pajala 210240?
About losses - yes, informed. And that crews DB-3 bombed Pajala, I think they and did not know.
Actually I ment that did they report that they did'n know where they were flying and bombing.
Slon-76 wrote:
Juha Tompuri wrote:
If I remember correctly, at 060140 Sarvanto case too.
As far as I know, with the message on fight 060140 - everything is all right in the Soviet documents. In general the Soviet operative documents anything essentially in the worse side from Finnish(at least that I saw), IMHO, do not differ. Simply they represent other point of view.
If I have understood correctly, here is mentioned that the Soviet side (Ageev crew?) mentioned 8-9 Finish fighters there, of which 5 were shot down:
Taking into account the fact that the long-range bombers completed about 3500 combat missions (into [t].[ch]. 2530 of the composition [AON]-1), but Finnish PVO (Air Defense) had available not too large level intensities of losses it is possible to recognize sufficiently to high. Actually perished each fifth dB, which participated in the war. [Koe] that must be noted, also, in Finns's address. Their descriptions of battle do not determine the precise number of participated in it “Fokkers”. But if we take as the basis of [svedenya] of Soviet side (8-9 fighters), then claim [Ermo] [Sarvanto] to six biased machines seems improbable. One additional Soviet bomber in this battle brought down another ace, Per- Eric [Sovelius]. Sum into seven machines, most likely came out in Finns taking into account the surviving machine Of [ageeva]. According to the data of contrary side during the same day Of [sovelius] brought down one additional dB. This could be only aircraft of commissioner [Gramotkin], destroyed in the first battle. Nothing it is discussed in the Finnish descriptions and the losses or the damages of the attacked side. Only in the second battle Soviet side pretends to killing of 5 fighters. And nevertheless with all “but” Finnish arithmetic does not clearly contradict reality, and if the historians of our former enemy insist on what almost all dB brought down [Sarvanto] their this, after all, matter. Summing up the sum nevertheless necessary to note: in greatest confirmed air victory of the Second World War are much more errors and deficiencies in the suffered side, than bravery and the craftsmanship of that conquered. Apparently in this consists the riddle of triple “six”, and also many other similar cases.

Miroslav Morozov
(Article is published in the periodical of " History of [aviatsii]". № 1 in 2000)
A babelfish translation from here:
http://brummel.borda.ru/?1-10-0-0000003 ... 1168801577

Regards, Juha

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”