The thread title changed
/Juha
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The combat statistics of Flight Regiment 3 (LeR 3) show that its pilots achieved as many as 182 air victories while losing only 6 in air combat during the period of 21.6.-7.7.1944. This gives to the pilots of LeR 3 staggering kill/loss -ratio of more than 30:1. During the day of 28.6.1944 alone the pilots of LeR 3 claimed as many as 43 enemy planes destroyed and suffered just one loss! With all respect to Finnish fighter pilots I have little difficulty to believe that stats is 100 % correct or the claims that Finns were actually underclaiming and there should be even much more air victories to be added to the tally.
When one studies the combat records of other intense air battles like the records of Battle of Britain the normal phenomenon is that there is lots of double- or triple claiming made in perfectly good faith. With the combat stats above I´m tended to believe that there might be some overclaiming in Finnish air victory records during the June-July period 1944. If I remember correctly Finnish air victory records of Winter War and early Continuation War were more strictly confirmed than those by later Continuation War. And thinking of the very intense situation of those critical days of June/July 1944 I guess that the very strictness of the confirmation process of air victories was not the very first priority.
There is of course problem with Soviet loss statistics and their reliability compared to Finnish claims - according to Soviet daily reports their fighter units at Karelian Isthmus lost 34 La 5 fighters during the period of 9.6. - 17.7.1944 and this includes also those La 5´s lost in air combat against German detachment Kuhlmey. In total Soviet IAP units at the Finnish front lost by estimate about 150 La 5 fighters during the years 1943-1944 for all causes ( including losses against both Finnish Air Force and German Kuhlmey fighters, planes shot down by enemy AA + accidents). Finnish air units and Finnish AA however claimed together in total to have destroyed some 200 - 215 La 5 fighters (big majority of this figure credited to Finnish fighter units).
With these figures in mind the Finnish air victory records are probably not 100 % free of overclaiming. As far as I know there is not a combat record of any air force of world without some overclaiming and I do not believe that Finnish combat records would be exceptionally free of overclaiming. Overclaiming of some 3:1 has been very normal in WW2 and this might be applicable also to some Finnish claim records. Even with the possible 2 or 3:1 overclaim ratio Finnish fighter pilots of LeR 3 would have achieved as many as 60-90 air victories and very respectable 10-15:1 kill/loss -ratio during relatively short period of 21.6.-7.7.1944.
Of course there might be underclaiming cases when some enemy plane claimed as "probable" or "damaged" was actually destroyed (or written off by enemy due to combat damage), but overclaiming has been statistically been much more common. Why we should think that Finnish air victory stats would be very different from the general international pattern of airwar stats unless we take Finnish air combat stats granted just for national pride?
Also I would like to make some comparison with "confirmed" / "unconfirmed/probable" air victory criterias of Finnish Air Force with those of RAF/US/Luftwaffe records. In British/US records the combat results were given usually by the formula "confirmed - probables - damaged" - this would make Finnish top ace Ilmari Juutilainen´s record as following (IIRC): 76 confirmed + 18 probables + 10 damaged. I would say that Juutilainen´s record is 76 air victories + 18 probables if we use the common US/British criteria, but not 94 "confirmed" air victories as often claimed. If I´m wrong, please correct.
When it comes to fighter veterans of all air forces, very many of them have claimed that they shot down more than officially confirmed. That is just human - almost all ace pilots thought (in good faith) that they shot down more enemy planes than they actually did or can really be confirmed. I do not believe that Finnish fighter pilots were much different of others in this regard.
Sources: Suomen Ilmailuhistoriallinen lehti 3/1995: Portinhoikan pommitus 30.6.1944 by Kari Stenman and Suomen Ilmailuhistoriallinen lehti 2/2014: Lavotshkin La-5 Suomen rintamalla by Jukka Raunio
Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 1944
-
Gamle Lode
- Member
- Posts: 52
- Joined: 27 Mar 2014, 13:35
- Location: Finland
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Juutilainen says in an interview, in a television programme made about him in the late 90's, that his claim was something like 126 (could be in youtube or at least someone has it on VHS). The score 94 was never a "claim" but the number he was granted by the data analysis and it has during these years become the official figure. As long as we operate with estimates and generalizations only, we'd better not to believe anything but just keep waiting until we see the hard evidence.
Since the Finnish own loss statistics are done by plane-by-plane method, the loss to all causes reveals that only about half of the total losses occur due to direct enemy activity. In Risto Pajari's book Jatkosota ilmassa he gives the number of Finnish planes losses during 1941-45 as 423 which is quite a high amount in my opinion. This number 423 breaks down to:
85 shot down by enemy planes
67 shot down by enemy AA
22 "never returned home"
23 was destroyed on ground in raids
18 to other causes
combat losses: 215
97 lost in accidents during missions
54 lost in pilot training
57 lost to other causes
non-combat losses: 208
total losses 423
If we assume that the 150 lost La-5's were flown in equal circumstances, this comparison would provide that only 30 La-5's was lost in aircombat during 1943-44 against Kuhlmey and HLeLv's 24, 26 and 34. Considering that Juutilainen got most of his kills during this very period, it would totally put his score to a new light and probably delete the entire score of likes Katajainen, Luukkainen, Wind, Lehtovaara etc.
Since the Finnish own loss statistics are done by plane-by-plane method, the loss to all causes reveals that only about half of the total losses occur due to direct enemy activity. In Risto Pajari's book Jatkosota ilmassa he gives the number of Finnish planes losses during 1941-45 as 423 which is quite a high amount in my opinion. This number 423 breaks down to:
85 shot down by enemy planes
67 shot down by enemy AA
22 "never returned home"
23 was destroyed on ground in raids
18 to other causes
combat losses: 215
97 lost in accidents during missions
54 lost in pilot training
57 lost to other causes
non-combat losses: 208
total losses 423
If we assume that the 150 lost La-5's were flown in equal circumstances, this comparison would provide that only 30 La-5's was lost in aircombat during 1943-44 against Kuhlmey and HLeLv's 24, 26 and 34. Considering that Juutilainen got most of his kills during this very period, it would totally put his score to a new light and probably delete the entire score of likes Katajainen, Luukkainen, Wind, Lehtovaara etc.
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Soviet daily combat reports of the fighter units at the Finnish front (by 9.6.1944) confirm that they lost at least 34 La-5 fighters in air combat or shot down by enemy AA during the 9.6.- 17.7.1944 over Karelian Isthmus, so their accumulated losses of La-5´s must have been higher than just 30 at the Finnish front during 1943-1944. The damage and accident losses were at the same period at the same front recorded as 28 La-5 according by Soviet records. (Raunio:"Lavothskin La 5 Suomen rintamalla" - Suomen Ilmailuhistoriallinen lehti 2/2014, p. 11-12)
Soviet fighter regiments equipped with La-5 at Finnish front on 9.6.1944 were: 159, 191, 195, 400, 401, 415, 450, 706 IAP and 3,4,10, 11 GIAP. The total losses of these units were as high as 470 during the years 1943-1944 (including combat losses, accidents and all other causes). The portion of Finnish front of these losses would be around 150-160 according to Jukka Raunio (cited article above). If the amount of accidents and othern non-combat losses of total losses would be about 50 % as it is in the case of Finnish aircraft losses, this makes the number of combat losses of the above listed La-5 equipped Soviet air units at Finnish front in the years 1943-1944 being somewhere around 80. Compared to Finnish claims against La-5´s (215 in total, of which 200 credited to Finnish fighters) that would make the possible oveclaim ratio being somewhere between 2:1 and 3:1.
That is not much less and not much more than the rather normal "average" overclaiming in airwar. It would be comparable to the claims of famous "Flying Tigers" (AVG) against Japanese: 297 Japanese planes were destroyed by the records of AVG, of which 115 confirmed by Japanese loss records. Some AVG veterans thought that AVG could be credited more destroyed enemy planes than those confirmed in the official records of AVG: including all the "probables" they claimed that as many as 500 - 600 Japanese planes were destroyed and that Japanese diminished their losses in official unit records in order to hide their true losses.
Equally we could claim and indeed some have claimed that Soviets were in equal way diminishing their combat losses in their official unit records and that Finnish fighter pilots could be credited with more destroyed Soviet planes than those confirmed by official Finnish records. Some "probables" and "damaged" Soviet planes may indeed end up to be destroyed when verifying by Soviet loss records but equally some "confirmed" by Finnish side may end up not to be confirmed by Soviet records or any other 100 % evidence.
I have doubts specially on those claims when Finnish HQ has confirmed the air victory claim without demanding the testimony of other pilots or ground observers or other evidence than the pilot´s own account. In some cases it may even be that the pilot actually has not claimed to have seen the enemy plane destroyed but it was nevertheless considered as destroyed by Finnish HQ. The more "relaxed" the confirmation process was the more likely it was that "probables" ended up to be "confirmed" - my impression is that during the Continuation War the confirmation standards of Finnish Air Force became more relaxed and less precise than during Winter War. And pilots of course were happy when less burocracy was involved with air victory claims and they did not complain if "probable" became "confirmed".
But this is all speculative of course. In any case claims and their confirmations were made in good faith and thus ended up to official records which stand up today. The true figure of Soviet planes destroyed by Finnish action is somewhere between the Finnish claims and those so far verified by Soviet loss records.
Just a curious remark from the "other side": there may be a case when a Soviet fighter pilot achieved a rare "double kill" against Finnish fighters in one combat but probably claimed just one and thus "underclaimed". With this I mean the case of Bf 109 plane MT 227 (flown by Sarjamo, Lelv 24) which was shot down by a La-5 of 159 IAP (IIRC, would be interesting to know the name of pilot) on 17.6.1944 - the debris of MT-227 fell upon the MT-229 (Nissinen, also Lelv 24) which went down as well and both Finnish pilots were killed. One could argue that MT-229 and Nissinen were also lost due to enemy action of La-5 but did the Soviet pilot know that he made it accidentally "two" on that day?
Soviet fighter regiments equipped with La-5 at Finnish front on 9.6.1944 were: 159, 191, 195, 400, 401, 415, 450, 706 IAP and 3,4,10, 11 GIAP. The total losses of these units were as high as 470 during the years 1943-1944 (including combat losses, accidents and all other causes). The portion of Finnish front of these losses would be around 150-160 according to Jukka Raunio (cited article above). If the amount of accidents and othern non-combat losses of total losses would be about 50 % as it is in the case of Finnish aircraft losses, this makes the number of combat losses of the above listed La-5 equipped Soviet air units at Finnish front in the years 1943-1944 being somewhere around 80. Compared to Finnish claims against La-5´s (215 in total, of which 200 credited to Finnish fighters) that would make the possible oveclaim ratio being somewhere between 2:1 and 3:1.
That is not much less and not much more than the rather normal "average" overclaiming in airwar. It would be comparable to the claims of famous "Flying Tigers" (AVG) against Japanese: 297 Japanese planes were destroyed by the records of AVG, of which 115 confirmed by Japanese loss records. Some AVG veterans thought that AVG could be credited more destroyed enemy planes than those confirmed in the official records of AVG: including all the "probables" they claimed that as many as 500 - 600 Japanese planes were destroyed and that Japanese diminished their losses in official unit records in order to hide their true losses.
Equally we could claim and indeed some have claimed that Soviets were in equal way diminishing their combat losses in their official unit records and that Finnish fighter pilots could be credited with more destroyed Soviet planes than those confirmed by official Finnish records. Some "probables" and "damaged" Soviet planes may indeed end up to be destroyed when verifying by Soviet loss records but equally some "confirmed" by Finnish side may end up not to be confirmed by Soviet records or any other 100 % evidence.
I have doubts specially on those claims when Finnish HQ has confirmed the air victory claim without demanding the testimony of other pilots or ground observers or other evidence than the pilot´s own account. In some cases it may even be that the pilot actually has not claimed to have seen the enemy plane destroyed but it was nevertheless considered as destroyed by Finnish HQ. The more "relaxed" the confirmation process was the more likely it was that "probables" ended up to be "confirmed" - my impression is that during the Continuation War the confirmation standards of Finnish Air Force became more relaxed and less precise than during Winter War. And pilots of course were happy when less burocracy was involved with air victory claims and they did not complain if "probable" became "confirmed".
But this is all speculative of course. In any case claims and their confirmations were made in good faith and thus ended up to official records which stand up today. The true figure of Soviet planes destroyed by Finnish action is somewhere between the Finnish claims and those so far verified by Soviet loss records.
Just a curious remark from the "other side": there may be a case when a Soviet fighter pilot achieved a rare "double kill" against Finnish fighters in one combat but probably claimed just one and thus "underclaimed". With this I mean the case of Bf 109 plane MT 227 (flown by Sarjamo, Lelv 24) which was shot down by a La-5 of 159 IAP (IIRC, would be interesting to know the name of pilot) on 17.6.1944 - the debris of MT-227 fell upon the MT-229 (Nissinen, also Lelv 24) which went down as well and both Finnish pilots were killed. One could argue that MT-229 and Nissinen were also lost due to enemy action of La-5 but did the Soviet pilot know that he made it accidentally "two" on that day?
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
It is my understanding that the "relaxed" period lasted from the early 1942 to the summer of 1943, after which Lundqvist and Pajari began to demand either that the wreckage was found or there was a witness for the victory. Many of the claims made between June and December 1941, but where the claim was not accepted were often re-examined if the wreckage was later found during 1942.durb wrote:The more "relaxed" the confirmation process was the more likely it was that "probables" ended up to be "confirmed" - my impression is that during the Continuation War the confirmation standards of Finnish Air Force became more relaxed and less precise than during Winter War. And pilots of course were happy when less burocracy was involved with air victory claims and they did not complain if "probable" became "confirmed".
http://digi.narc.fi/digi/view.ka?kuid=4891737
ILMAVOIMIEN ESIKUNTA
YE-osasto
5.8.1943
Koskee: ilmavoittojen hyväksymistä.
Liittyy: lentorykmenttien ilmataistelukertomuksiin.
Koska ratkaistavakseni saapuneissa ilmataistelukertomuksissa todistajitta saavutetut ilmavoitot alkavat arveluttavassa määrässä lisääntyä sellaisissakin tapauksissa, jolloin torjuntalennolla olevan parven kaikki koneet ovat taistelun aikana toimineet samalla alueella, katson aiheelliseksi, suurvaltojen ilmavoimien omaksumaa kantaa seuraten ja haluamatta epäillä lentäjien vilpitöntä pyrkimystä pysyä ilmataistelukertomuksissaan totuudessa, tiukentaa voimassaolevia ilmavoittojen hyväksymisvaatimuksia seuraavasti.
Annetun ilmataistelukertomuskaavakkeen kääntöpuolella olevat ohjeet jäävät muuttamattomina voimaan lisäyksellä, että
a) varmasti tuhotuiksi hyväksytään vast'edes ainoastaan ne tapaukset, jolloin koneen tuhoutumisen ohjeiden edellyttämällä tavalla on todennut vähintään yksi sivullinen todistaja tai koneen jäännökset löydetään.
b) todistajitta tapahtunut "varma tuhoaminen" hyväksytään vast'edes ainoastaan "vakavasti vaurioitetuksi", kun ampujan perustelut ovat riittävät ja vakuuttavat ja a.o:n lähin esimies lausunnossaan saattaa todennäköiseksi, että k.o. ilmataistelu on voinut tapahtua parven (tai partion) muiden ohjaajien tai iv.elinten sitä näkemättä.
Joskin näiden uusien ohjeiden käytäntöönotto voi aiheuttaa laskun ilmavoimien voittotiliin ja joku lentäjä määrätyssä tapauksessa voi joutua luopumaan oikeutetusta ilmavoistostaan todistajien puuttuessa ei ole epäilystäkään siitä, että näin menetellen saadaan oikeampi kuva vihollisen ilmavoimien toidellisista tappioluvuista rintamillamme, mihin maapuolustuksemme etuja ja tulevaisuudenmahdollisuuksia ajatellen ehdototmasti on meidänkin osaltamme pyrittävä.
Ilmavoimien komentaja:
Kenraaliluutnantti J. F. Lundqvist
Ye-osaston päällikkö
Everstiluutnantti R. Pajari
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Interesting document - shows that the "kill/loss" -stats were not interesting only for historians but also very important information for the wartime commanders. However even the most strict procedures do not eliminate the overclaiming and even with the strict Luftwaffe standards there could be overclaiming of 2:1. The more intense the combat is and more there are planes involved in combat by both sides, more chances there are for overclaiming. The combat period of 21.6.-7.7.1944 over Karelian Isthmus was very intense and likely caused more overclaims than periods of lesser aereal activity. This can be seen in the scale of combat as reflected by the number of claims: 182 air victories were recorded in the period of two and half weeks over limited area of Tali-Ihantala. During the whole Winter Winter - period of 105 days - confirmed Finnish air victories were 196 (or 218). I do not have access to Soviet records but it would be interesting to compare their losses to Finnish claims for example during the day of 28.6.1944 when Finns claimed 43 air victories at the Karelian Isthmus (most spesifically Tali-Ihantala locations).
The combat losses of Soviet fighter units were at least sufficient to diminish their ability to prevent Finnish and German air operations against Soviet ground troops at the Karelian Isthumus during the critical period of late June/early July of 1944. Finnish fighters together with German Kuhlmey Detachment were able to achieve something like local air dominance during critical air operations which is supported by the fact that Finnish bombers were not lost in air combat during 21.6-17.7.1944 over Tali-Ihantala area although the bomber units of LeR 4 were very active (only one air recoinassence Pe-2 was lost to enemy fighters in 27.6.1944). Finnish and German bombers (+ground attack planes) were able to reach the target areas at Tali-Ihantala and bomb with rather good results and relatively small own losses. To my knowledge this was recognized by the Soviets who noted that the growing scale of enemy air activity was causing problems to their ground operations. This was something that Soviet fighter units should have been able to prevent but which they were unable to do.
The combat losses of Soviet fighter units were at least sufficient to diminish their ability to prevent Finnish and German air operations against Soviet ground troops at the Karelian Isthumus during the critical period of late June/early July of 1944. Finnish fighters together with German Kuhlmey Detachment were able to achieve something like local air dominance during critical air operations which is supported by the fact that Finnish bombers were not lost in air combat during 21.6-17.7.1944 over Tali-Ihantala area although the bomber units of LeR 4 were very active (only one air recoinassence Pe-2 was lost to enemy fighters in 27.6.1944). Finnish and German bombers (+ground attack planes) were able to reach the target areas at Tali-Ihantala and bomb with rather good results and relatively small own losses. To my knowledge this was recognized by the Soviets who noted that the growing scale of enemy air activity was causing problems to their ground operations. This was something that Soviet fighter units should have been able to prevent but which they were unable to do.
-
Juha Tompuri
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 11563
- Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
- Location: Mylsä
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
durb wrote:There is of course problem with Soviet loss statistics and their reliability compared to Finnish claims - according to Soviet daily reports their fighter units at Karelian Isthmus lost 34 La 5 fighters during the period of 9.6. - 17.7.1944 and this includes also those La 5´s lost in air combat against German detachment Kuhlmey. In total Soviet IAP units at the Finnish front lost by estimate about 150 La 5 fighters during the years 1943-1944 for all causes ( including losses against both Finnish Air Force and German Kuhlmey fighters, planes shot down by enemy AA + accidents).
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... t#p1925097John Hilly wrote:If I have understood correctly, if a damaged plane crash landed on some Soviet air field and was a total write off, the Soviets didn't count the plane lost in combat.
Regards, Juha
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Hannu Valtonen has touched the subject in his books (Pohjoinen ilmasota 1996 and Luftwaffen pohjoinen sivusta 1997 and the conclusion seems to be that there was as much "air" in Finnish air victory records of Continuation War than there in general was in other records. Of the 397 combaf claims of Finnish and Kuhlmey fighters in June 1944 only 146 are those which can be confirmed with some certainty - similar pattern as in the combat claims of Luftwaffe in North Finland/Norway area. (Pohjoinen ilmasota, s. 146 - there will be considerable Finnish overclaiming even if we take in account the possible Soviet "anomaly" of combat-damaged and forced-landed planes ending up to non-combat losses.
The overclaim ratio about 3:1 was nothing remarkable or exceptional - it was fairly common in WW2 and Soviets overclaimed more (the problem was recognized in Soviet Northern Fleet Aviation which gave a spesific order to its fighter pilots that it was forbidden to represent any nonexistent air victories - as a result they represented more accurate claim records than other Soviet air units).
Without gun cameras I guess that no more accuracy could be reached and all air victory claims tend to have more "air" than actually destroyed planes. However even with "dimished" air victory record Finnish air units and Kuhlmey were able to achieve efficient combat results vs. Soviet air units and ground troops during the critical period of late June/early 1944 as stated above.
The overclaim ratio about 3:1 was nothing remarkable or exceptional - it was fairly common in WW2 and Soviets overclaimed more (the problem was recognized in Soviet Northern Fleet Aviation which gave a spesific order to its fighter pilots that it was forbidden to represent any nonexistent air victories - as a result they represented more accurate claim records than other Soviet air units).
Without gun cameras I guess that no more accuracy could be reached and all air victory claims tend to have more "air" than actually destroyed planes. However even with "dimished" air victory record Finnish air units and Kuhlmey were able to achieve efficient combat results vs. Soviet air units and ground troops during the critical period of late June/early 1944 as stated above.
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
This is true, after going through air combat at all theatre in the WWII, I believe an overclaim rate of 3:1 or 4:1 was a norm
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Double or triple claiming in dogfight has been fairly common in air combats of large scale. This probably applies to very many Finnish air victory claims. Also the question about shared victories between different individual pilots is interesting as shared/group claims have been a rich source of confused and inflated air victory records (for example in Soviet air units). Still I believe that Finnish claims are much more accurate than Soviet claims (which seem to contain more fantasy).
When it comes to actual Soviet losses, I think that one should have confidential and unpublished Soviet air unit records at hand. The old official Soviet warhistory and public material of Soviet times are dubious because that stuff was modified for propaganda purposes (for example I find such source as Soviet "Baltic Fleet Journal" as a source of combat history of Soviet Baltic Fleet Air Force VVS KBF dubious/incomplete because it was public material and therefore under censorship - I would dig further and go for unpublished unit records of VVS KBF). When one analyzes unpublished Soviet archive material, the loss records of Soviet air units are probably much more accurate and one gets reasonably reliable info.
However there are always some people who do not trust any Soviet material and find Finnish/German claim records being always more accurate about Soviet combat losses of WW2 than any Soviet loss records. I know some Finnish airwar history enthusiats who accept the Soviet air combat loss records gladly and only in thoses cases when Soviet loss records confirm Finnish claims or show that the combat-damaged Soviet plane was actually destroyed/written off. But when it comes to those cases when Finnish air victory claims can not be verified from any Soviet records these people find Soviet air unit records "incomplete" or not telling the "whole truth" (=the Finnish version of events).
When it comes to actual Soviet losses, I think that one should have confidential and unpublished Soviet air unit records at hand. The old official Soviet warhistory and public material of Soviet times are dubious because that stuff was modified for propaganda purposes (for example I find such source as Soviet "Baltic Fleet Journal" as a source of combat history of Soviet Baltic Fleet Air Force VVS KBF dubious/incomplete because it was public material and therefore under censorship - I would dig further and go for unpublished unit records of VVS KBF). When one analyzes unpublished Soviet archive material, the loss records of Soviet air units are probably much more accurate and one gets reasonably reliable info.
However there are always some people who do not trust any Soviet material and find Finnish/German claim records being always more accurate about Soviet combat losses of WW2 than any Soviet loss records. I know some Finnish airwar history enthusiats who accept the Soviet air combat loss records gladly and only in thoses cases when Soviet loss records confirm Finnish claims or show that the combat-damaged Soviet plane was actually destroyed/written off. But when it comes to those cases when Finnish air victory claims can not be verified from any Soviet records these people find Soviet air unit records "incomplete" or not telling the "whole truth" (=the Finnish version of events).
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
There is only one incident where the witness said the pilot scored more planes thet he actually claimed. That was July 2nd 5 or 6 kills by Lieutenant Kyösti " Kössi " Karhila.
Witness on the ground said Kössi shot 6 IL-2s and Kössi himself claimed just 5.
Official records from Russia don't object the possibilty that Kössi actually shot 6.
Kössi was officially credited with...zero kills.
Witness on the ground said Kössi shot 6 IL-2s and Kössi himself claimed just 5.
Official records from Russia don't object the possibilty that Kössi actually shot 6.
Kössi was officially credited with...zero kills.
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
The problem with even the unpublished soviet archive material is, that one indeed can not trust them. Some might be fairly accurate while others more or less so - or even falsified. So which ones to trust and which ones not - that's the problem.durb wrote:Double or triple claiming in dogfight has been fairly common in air combats of large scale. This probably applies to very many Finnish air victory claims. Also the question about shared victories between different individual pilots is interesting as shared/group claims have been a rich source of confused and inflated air victory records (for example in Soviet air units). Still I believe that Finnish claims are much more accurate than Soviet claims (which seem to contain more fantasy).
When it comes to actual Soviet losses, I think that one should have confidential and unpublished Soviet air unit records at hand. The old official Soviet warhistory and public material of Soviet times are dubious because that stuff was modified for propaganda purposes (for example I find such source as Soviet "Baltic Fleet Journal" as a source of combat history of Soviet Baltic Fleet Air Force VVS KBF dubious/incomplete because it was public material and therefore under censorship - I would dig further and go for unpublished unit records of VVS KBF). When one analyzes unpublished Soviet archive material, the loss records of Soviet air units are probably much more accurate and one gets reasonably reliable info.
However there are always some people who do not trust any Soviet material and find Finnish/German claim records being always more accurate about Soviet combat losses of WW2 than any Soviet loss records. I know some Finnish airwar history enthusiats who accept the Soviet air combat loss records gladly and only in thoses cases when Soviet loss records confirm Finnish claims or show that the combat-damaged Soviet plane was actually destroyed/written off. But when it comes to those cases when Finnish air victory claims can not be verified from any Soviet records these people find Soviet air unit records "incomplete" or not telling the "whole truth" (=the Finnish version of events).
Some people believe, that only the published records were propaganda while the unpublished were not. This is simply not true.
Why? Like in the other countries the performance/victories/losses of a unit/individual/commander equalled success/unsuccess in ones military career also in the USSR. However unlike in the West it also sometimes meant the difference between life and death. One should remember, that only a couple years earlier tens of thousands of soviet officers were purged - which everybody well remembered. Especially in the Winter War but also in the early years of the Continuation War hiding losses/failures and exaggerating successes as well as possible was essential for your own health.
Also the fact that the soviet book-keeping was often very poor did not help the accuracy nor trustworthiness. The commanders - nor anybody else - often simply didn't now exactly what they had, what they got nor what they lost - especially in the Winter War/early Continuation War. Of course the official records were made, but - like in the USSR in general - they did not always have a lot to do with the reality.
I just read "Raaka tie Raatteeseen" (The brutal road to Raate) by Teemu Keskisarja. There he convincingly reasoned (with the sources), how the official, previously unpublished soviet loss records now used by the modern soviet historians - and now often blindly accepted in Finland - simply can not be true, as Stalin himself also stated at the time. I have no difficulty to presume that this was also the case with the soviet air force.
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Well, as far as the year 1944 is concerned, that is not correct. Reports of strength and losses in the Leningrad Front were kept regularly (every day if we talk about personnel losses) and in good order. Generally speaking staff discipline and overall level of staff work creates an impression of considerable improvement compared with say 1941. As for verification of aircraft losses that can be easily done by balance method: the number of airplanes on 1 July must be equal to the respective number on 1 June plus the number of new planes received minus all departures including losses.Karelia wrote: Also the fact that the soviet book-keeping was often very poor did not help the accuracy nor trustworthiness. The commanders - nor anybody else - often simply didn't now exactly what they had, what they got nor what they lost
-
Juha Tompuri
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 11563
- Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
- Location: Mylsä
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
What type of plane loss was categorized as a combat loss?Art wrote: Reports of strength and losses in the Leningrad Front were kept regularly (every day if we talk about personnel losses) and in good order.
Regards, Juha
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Common Soviet definition: shot in air combat, shot by ground weapons, not returned from combat missions, destroyed on airfields.
-
Juha Tompuri
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 11563
- Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
- Location: Mylsä
Re: Finnish air victories (LeR 3) on 21.6.-7.7.1944
Thanks, how about this?Art wrote:Common Soviet definition: shot in air combat, shot by ground weapons, not returned from combat missions, destroyed on airfields.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... t#p1925097John Hilly wrote:If I have understood correctly, if a damaged plane crash landed on some Soviet air field and was a total write off, the Soviets didn't count the plane lost in combat.
Regards, Juha