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