Kill Totals

[R Leonard]

And I’m not trying to slam you for repeating something you’ve heard or read elsewhere.

Simply I find it hard to believe that with squadron, group, and wing reports available in the National Archives or at the USAF historical repositories that someone can compile a count that is at variance with the “official results”. If someone has taken it upon themselves to credit “probables” as “confirmed” then maybe he could run up the numbers to the levels you recall.

The USAF conducted a review of the records in the mid-1950s and produced a list of credited victories in 1957. The results were different that those reported in the USAAFSD.

The Air Force counted WWII aerial victory credits for USAAF flyers, or Allied aviators who belonged to USAAF units. The action had to occur between December 7, 1941 and September 2, 1945. Only fighter pilots or members of night fighter crews were eligible. The enemy aircraft had to be airborne, heavier than air, manned, and armed. Destruction involved shooting an enemy aircraft down, causing the pilot to bail out, intentionally ramming the airplane to make it crash, or maneuvering it into the ground or water. If the enemy airplane landed, despite its degree of damage, it was not counted as destroyed.

When two or more of its fighter pilots shared an aerial victory, the Air Force divided credit among them. For example, if two fighter pilots destroyed an enemy aircraft, each of them earned half a credit (.50). The exception was night fighter crews. Each crewmember earned one full credit for each enemy aircraft destroyed. This resulted in two or three credits recorded for the destruction of a single enemy airplane in these cases

So, the USAAFSD reported aerial victories in the Pacific as 4,040 and destroyed on the ground as 1,080 (the numbers in my previous post omitted the 20th AF fighter results, mea culpa). The 1957 analysis dealt only in aerial credits and has nothing to say about airplanes destroyed on the ground. The total for the Pacific from the 1957 report was 4,883. The report list pilot, unit, date, and credit, including partial credits. This is 793 or 19.6 percent higher than the total from the USAAFSD, but still does not come even close to allowing for your source’s 5730 P-38 only Pacific Theater victories.

The irony here is that just about everyone else one might bump into in a forum such as this usually decries overclaiming in the officially reported results. As I alluded to before, I’ve never, ever heard of anyone claiming the official results don’t claim enough, especially in terms of being thousands short.

I'd still be interested in reviewing your source's data.

Regards,

Rich

[Erich]

I have seen a pic of the US 422nd nfs score board and it was 1 a/c = 1 kill, although the pilot and radar operator were given a kill apiece it was not added to the overall tally of the squadron. Besides I have the squadron microfische for all their kills and this confirms this besides the personal interviews with US nfs personell.
As to the Pacific I am not sure but at least for this squadron as well as the sister 425th it was the same for both; have the 425th nfs microfische as well. I was a friend for several years of the US night fighters association before the break-up of the group

Kopf hoch !

[Lightning Guy]

The shared kill method was not always excercised. It was mostly confined to the situation in Europe. If have read of a pair of pilots in the PTO who shared a kill. Their solution was to flip a coin to see who got the credit!

[R Leonard]

Just a reminder, not my analysis; I am only reporting how the USAF worked out its 1957 credits analysis as a matter of historical interest. Suggest that problems with the methodology of that analysis should be directed to the USAF.

Regards,

Rich

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by R Leonard

Just a reminder, not my analysis; I am only reporting how the USAF worked out its 1957 credits analysis as a matter of historical interest. Suggest that problems with the methodology of that analysis should be directed to the USAF.

Regards,

Rich

It's not worth fighting the Dept. of the Air Force after 60 years we - aircraft enthusiasts and still living pilots are the only ones who care. Incidently Art Heiden asked Martin Caiden to wright about the P-38 because, as a P-38 pilot, he wanted the record stated correctly. The resulting book is great, if not always kind to the P-38.

I know your not slamming me, It's also tough with so much said about the P-38 that's all over the board. I've also taken the 5730 and melded it with the frequent comment about the P-38 shooting the most Japanese aircraft down - my bad. I haven't found my source on the number (when I found it, more than once, I didn't expect to have to reproduce it nor did expect to have trouble finding it again). Here are some references I have found:

The Smithsonian "Lightning pilots downed more Japanese aircraft than pilots flying any other Allied plane" http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/areo...kheed_p38.html

Rand McNally Encyclopdia of Military Aircraft page 230: "War records attribute the P-38 credit for shooting down more Japanese aircraft than any other American aircraft"

The same reference a few pages later on the F6F: "An impressive story: of the 6,477 enemy aircraft destroyed in combat by this aircraft, as many as 4,947 fell victim to carrier based F6Fs." No differintation of ground kills but it shows the awareness of the magnitude of the P-38 statement.

Marten Caiden in his book "Fork Tail Devils - The P-38" Wrote " The P-38 shot down more Japanese aircraft than any other aircraft." Mr Caiden also notes that there was much combat damage to the records of the 5th Air Force.

I will run down the source of the 5,730 number.

Your skeptisism is welcomed, I would be to.

[R Leonard]

At least we know we're not beating up each other, we're beating up the information. Sometimes when posting back and forth it seems to look like the other way around ... shooting messengers and all that. 'Tis good to remind ourselves every now and then. That way when we get vociferous we, and thread followers, know that "it ain't personal, its just business."

I was afraid at some point someone would mention M Caiden. I'm inclined to dismiss about 75% of his writing as pulp, but that's just me. Have the same opinion of one or two others in the genre, as well. Too much "oh, golly, gee whiz, listen to this story" not backed up with data combined with a tendency to put words in people's mouths, IMHO.

Of course, I'm perfectly happy to admit the P-38 drivers in the Pacific shot down more Japanese planes than any other USAAF type.

Regards,

Rich

[wmaxt]

True.

That's not what the historians say - to each our illusions?

The Caiden book differentates between stories and not. The history on the P-38 is close to much that I've read but puts it in perspective both in fact and historicaly. The other books I don't know except that a lot of pilots/people close to the aircraft endorse, at least parts of them. The '91 copy right has a couple of corrections I think this one is pretty valid.

I'll stick with mine and try to find that reference.

Warren Bodie and Jeff Ethel have some books out there that are fair and also have data that has been archived the whole time. I, sadly, don't have a copy of any of them yet, but I will.

Ethel also has a great story where he flies the P-38 on the Flight Journal website. http://www.flightjournal.com/

Take Care.

[Lightning Guy]

I have Bodie's book. The only specific number I can remember him siting on P-38 kill is that the P-38 scored roughly 2,500 kills in the ETO.

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by Lightning Guy

I have Bodie's book. The only specific number I can remember him siting on P-38 kill is that the P-38 scored roughly 2,500 kills in the ETO.

Yes I got that one too. Somewhere recently, before I hooked up with you guys, I found the number 5,730 something for the Pacific. In the Med its 608 to 113 P-38s lost to ALL causes, (p-38online.com). When P-38 scores are refered to it's usualy (I dbl checked) refered to a variation of "The plane that shot down more Japanese aircraft than any other" the F6Fshot down 5.153? so it's in the 5,000+ range anyway. I will find the reference and I hope to identify for sure why there is such a discreapency in the Historical and the AAF numbers.

[Lightning Guy]

The only number I can remember seeing for the F6F is "over 6,000."

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by Lightning Guy

The only number I can remember seeing for the F6F is "over 6,000."

R. Lenard(sp), shown above seems to have done a lot of research on this, his number is 5,163. I have seen confirmed numbers for the Hellcat in that area before so I accept that. Part of the problem with the P-38 in the PTO is that many records were destroyed. Martin Caiden spent time with the 5th air force and it's records. He wrote that he found a, fire schorched, report on a Lt. Shubin where he got 4 -6 (I can't remember the number) that had never been scored though the fight had been right over the base and had hundreds of witnesses.

I guess that's why I get so adamant about the P-38, so many people look at a few planes in one place without training, support, being developed for a mission that was never imagined, in conditions never imagined against experienced pilots and planes in terrible odds and see the problems and not the fact that no matter how biased the data can be manipulated the P-38 still did the job And came out ahead.

Enough preaching to the chior.

[R Leonard]

You aren’t going to like this, but IMO this just an example of Caiden not really knowing what he was talking about. He finds a scorched report and assumes it was never counted. That’s not the way military reporting works. Trust me, military reporting is positively anal. If a report was submitted, you can be sure there was more than one copy, usually five or six. You can be sure it was examined by an intell officer and for sure by the squadron commander who would have to endorse it. Finding one burned copy of a report does not mean it was never submitted, that no ever read it and that a copy was never forwarded to higher headquarters. As far as his left out score is concerned, I show the following in my records, Shubin, Murray J.; AO00730638; 339th Fighter Squadron with the following:

2 Feb 43, one credit
7 Jun 43, one credit
16 Jun 43, five credits
10 Oct 43, two credits
and
27 Oct 43, two credits

Total for tour, eleven.

That’s from the USAF 1957 compilation and seems to be in line with other sources. Shubin started as a 2LT and was promoted to 1LT while still in combat. He rotated home and never returned to combat. He was promoted to Captain while on stateside duty. His awards included the Silver Star and the Distinguished Flying Cross. With how many did Caiden say he was credited? According to other sources, the action to which you refer was the action on 16 Jun. Shubin reported 2 victories and 4 probables, however ground observers confirmed that 3 of his 4 probables went in, giving him 5 in a day (DFC). His squadron was credited with 150 victories during its tour in the Solomons.

Regards,

Rich

[Lightning Guy]

The burned out report Caiden was refering to was not one for Murray Shubin. I don't have the book handy but I can assure you Shubin wasn't the man. The pilot Caiden referenced was someone I had never heard of.

[R Leonard]

Well, you guys know my opinion of Caiden. One charred copy of a report does not a lost report make. So who is the mystery pilot?

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by Lightning Guy

The burned out report Caiden was refering to was not one for Murray Shubin. I don't have the book handy but I can assure you Shubin wasn't the man. The pilot Caiden referenced was someone I had never heard of.

Your Right., It was William Sells.

R.L. - I never said it changed anything pertaining to scores (except to Sells family, maybe) but as an illistration of the diffuculty of pinning the PTO history of the P-38 down.