hartmanns victories

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Ramirezzz

No FLYBOYJ , I don't think so. In fact Hartmann was far away from being a nazi or a hater of all Russian whatsoever.
But in the book there're some facts stated , which are not correct - that's all what I'm trying to tell.

And I'm trying to say that there are many who served with him and bore witness to his combat record - if there was anything false or extremely erred in his accomplishments those who served with him during the war and in the post war years would of eventually spoke up and possibly stated Hartmann's combat career was skewed, but that never happened. In fact most of the Hartmann "detractors" seem to come from France and Spain.

Again, I dont see many doing to same to Barkhorn or Rall....

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by JoeB

But I 100% agree with your implication, attempting such research is far preferable to just accepting official claim numbers and saying 'oh sure there were overclaims [but who really cares what they were]'.

Joe

I think that's always the goal Joe but as we know father time has dealt us a difficult hand in dealing with situation. I think it could best be said that Hartmann shot down a hell of a lot of aircraft but to attempt to diminish his score by more than half doesn't seem right, aside from questions raised by skeptics.

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

Hartmann shot down a hell of a lot of aircraft but to attempt to diminish his score by more than half doesn't seem right, aside from questions raised by skeptics.

If you can find out a likely range for the score, with a clear methodology, and without resorting to a lot of guesswork* and it comes out less than 1/2...then it is what it is. 50% was not low claim accuracy in WWII generally, though maybe Hartmann's was higher, I don't know. Anyway it's not an 'attempt to diminish' but simply finding out what really happened as best we can.

And it's not that the info doesn't exist to at least estimate that real score, it's that people who claim to have done it so far (one guy on various forums claimed to have found around 80 real victories for Hartmann IIRC) lack credibility themselves, IOW they perhaps *are* 'attempting to diminish' rather than doing objective research; and/or their methods are not transparent. But a lot of the necessary info does exist.

* that example I gave of Sutyagin doesn't have a lot of guesswork, it's fairly cut and dried given the methodology and assumptions I stated. It's a much easier case than Hartmann overall, but it also involves Soviet archival info, that part wasn't easy, but not impossible either.

Joe

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by JoeB

If you can find out a likely range for the score, with a clear methodology, and without resorting to a lot of guesswork* and it comes out less than 1/2...then it is what it is. 50% was not low claim accuracy in WWII generally, though maybe Hartmann's was higher, I don't know. Anyway it's not an 'attempt to diminish' but simply finding out what really happened as best we can.

And it's not that the info doesn't exist to at least estimate that real score, it's that people who claim to have done it so far (one guy on various forums claimed to have found around 80 real victories for Hartmann IIRC) lack credibility themselves, IOW they perhaps *are* 'attempting to diminish' rather than doing objective research; and/or their methods are not transparent. But a lot of the necessary info does exist.

* that example I gave of Sutyagin doesn't have a lot of guesswork, it's fairly cut and dried given the methodology and assumptions I stated. It's a much easier case than Hartmann overall, but it also involves Soviet archival info, that part wasn't easy, but not impossible either.

Joe

Agree 100% Joe but at least in the case with Sutyagin we were able to go look at US combat operations for the day and determine if "operational losses" could be attributed to air-to-air encounters and adjust accordingly but in the case of Soviet operations for that period I would guess such records were not accurately kept if they exist at all, just MHO....

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

... but in the case of Soviet operations for that period I would guess such records were not accurately kept if they exist at all....

For the Korean War Soviet records are in many ways more detailed than surviving US ones. On losses in particular there's more US info, true, because there are individual a/c records you can cross check with operational records. I haven't seen that for the Soviets though it may exist. However the Soviet operational records give the basics of how many MiG's lost, and pilot names, in particular combats, apparently pretty complete. It's lack of complete day to day records of Chinese and NK's that pose the problem in verifying US individual scores most of the time after Sept and Nov 1951, when Chinese and NK MiG's, respectively, became highly active.

If Soviet records in 1942-45 were as detailed and complete as Soviet ones in Korea you could estimate Hartmann's actual score, at least many incidents of his career. My understanding is that they are pretty detailed and complete in most cases. Without having tried it, I can't say for sure, but AFAIK it's doable. Again I think the key would be objectivity, and clearly providing the methods, assumptions you were using to deal with any ambiguities, and give all the details so others could truly evaluate the work.

Joe

[FalkeEins]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

And I'm trying to say that there are many who served with him and bore witness to his combat record - if there was anything false or extremely erred in his accomplishments those who served with him during the war and in the post war years would of eventually spoke up and possibly stated Hartmann's combat career was skewed, but that never happened. In fact most of the Hartmann "detractors" seem to come from France and Spain.Again, I dont see many doing to same to Barkhorn or Rall....

article on my site on this subject, based on a Russian author's article that appeared in a French magazine, commented by French & German historians...

Hartmann's claims disputed ..352 victories ..or 80 ?

" While it is probably true that as many as one third of Hartmann's victories may never have been officially ratified - given a lack of witness statements or wreckage due to a constantly fluid front line - it is nonetheless equally the case that some 307 of his claims were forwarded to the OKL for ratification prior to December 1944, a process in itself directly implicating the pilot and leaving him open to investigation (claim annotated VNE-ASM) and/or non-acceptance of the claim (abgelehnt) - it goes without saying that his successes exposed him to potentially damaging scepticism among his own hierarchy.."

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by FalkeEins

article on my site on this subject, based on a Russian author's article that appeared in a French magazine, commented by French & German historians...

I forgot that was an actual article by Khazanov in the French magazine Fana de l'Aviation; I've also heard of him presenting that on web (I think), ie. said Hartmann's 'real' score was ~80. I haven't read the article. Anyway those are noted historians, Lorant and Ring commenting, but their comments don't IMHO to get to the heart of a proper critique of Khazanov. If as Ring states Khazanov has Hartmann's *claims* wrong in some cases OK that undermines K's general credibility, but in several of those comments he's saying Hartmann's claims exceeded what Khazanov gave for a give day, and he seems to imply Khazanov is not mentioning other German claims, both of which would tend to imply Hartmann's claims were *more* overstated on those days than Khazanov said, according to specific Soviet loss data Khazonov presumably presents in the article (he must I assume, or how could he possibly say specific Hartmann claims didn't check out?). The key issue is how complete, and how fairly analyzed, that Soviet loss data is, and the comments don't address that except with a generalization about 'the disparate and incomplete nature of Soviet archives'. What are some specific examples relevant to Khazonov's article? Hartmann's claims that reached OKL are available online (as well as those of unit-mates), that's not the big mystery.

The other comments are mainly about the confirmation process from the German side as it applied to Hartmann. The claim verification process on one side does matter, but apparently tight procedures do not gtee high claim accuracy. There can be complete documentation, witnesses, even reports of wrecks and still the opposing records, compiled in secret by the opponent, apparently detailed and complete, may simply not show the great majority of those claims as losses (that's consistently the case with apparently well documented Soviet claims in Korea v US losses, and again I'd expect any debate of my statement to deal w/ specific incidents in each side's records, generalities about the claim process on one side or 'character' of pilots aren't really the point, IMO).

I'm not defending Khazonov's article, and the page you link is useful. Those comments create some doubt about Khazonov's research. I'm just wondering if there's a more direct challenge to that article someplace in terms of the Soviet as well as German records Khazonov purported to compare.

Joe

[Ambush Commander]

This is a very interesting thread.

I am not very keen with Erich Hartmann. As far as i know there doesn' t exists a kill list, but the Abschussmeldungen exists. All what the so called experts know is a fragment of his 1943/1944 kills with arrround 80 or 100 kills listed. Not even the so often mentioned first 150 kills exists as a published list and till now nobody tries to check the Abschussmeldungen as this was done with the nightfighter kills.

I got my hands on the 43/44 list and it looks very strange to me. It seems that Hartmann took off and immediately got enemy contact and then he did not down only a single russian fighter, but 2 or 3 and that in some cases day after day. The russian pilots must be real idiots or as the Nazis said: Untermenschen. I can' t believe that.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

So you can not believe that Hartmann or any other German pilot could do that against the Russians?

Do you believe that Marseille could do it against the British? He shot down 17 in the one day!

What about the Allies, is not possible for an American or British or even a Russian pilot to shoot down 2 or 3 Germans on a single mission?

I dont understand why this is so hard for you to believe...

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Ambush Commander

This is a very interesting thread.

I am not very keen with Erich Hartmann. As far as i know there doesn' t exists a kill list, but the Abschussmeldungen exists. All what the so called experts know is a fragment of his 1943/1944 kills with arrround 80 or 100 kills listed. Not even the so often mentioned first 150 kills exists as a published list and till now nobody tries to check the Abschussmeldungen as this was done with the nightfighter kills.

I got my hands on the 43/44 list and it looks very strange to me. It seems that Hartmann took off and immediately got enemy contact and then he did not down only a single russian fighter, but 2 or 3 and that in some cases day after day. The russian pilots must be real idiots or as the Nazis said: Untermenschen. I can' t believe that.

What about Barkhorn, Rall, Baar and Stienhoff to name a few???????

[slaterat]

I think you mean to say that Marseille, claimed 17 kills in one day. DAF records only show the loss of 8 fighters that day. Other Luftwaffe units made claims that day too. Pro rating the days claims gives him less than 8 maybe only 3 or 4.

Slaterat

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by slaterat

I think you mean to say that Marseille, claimed 17 kills in one day. DAF records only show the loss of 8 fighters that day. Other Luftwaffe units made claims that day too. Pro rating the days claims gives him less than 8 maybe only 3 or 4.

I take your general point, Marseille was credited with this, Hartmann with that, but the question here is what happened, not what pilots were credited with. But, "Fighters over the Desert" by Shores and Ring gives the following somewhat different info about Marseille's 17 credits Sept 1 1942 (I cut/paste following summary from somebody else's post on another website, but I have the book and checked the info, it's pgs. 168-170)
=================
Marseille's first mission that day:
4 enemy fighters claimed shot down (at 0926, 0928, 0935, and 0938 hrs) with 80 cannon shells and 240 machine-gun rounds.
According to Shores/Ring, these were the pilots in the aircraft which Marseille claimed shot down: Lt Bailey (1 SAAF sqn) force-landed his Hurricane; Maj Metelerkamp (1 SAAF sqn) was injured and had his Hurricane badly shot up; F/O Matthews (238 sqn) had his Hurricane shot down; P/O Bradley-Smith (601 sqn) had his Spitfire shot down.

Marseille's second mission that day:
8 enemy fighters ("P-40s") claimed shot down( at 1155, 1156, 1158, 1159, 1201, 1202, 1203, and 1205 hrs). In addition to Marseille's claims, Lt Remmer claimed one P-40 on the same mission.
According to Shores/Ring, six British fighters were shot down during an escort mission for bombers.

Marseille's third mission that day:
5 enemy fighters claimed shot down (at 1847, 1848, 1849, 1850, and 1853 hrs). In addition to Marseille's claims, four enemy fighters were claimed shot down by other German pilots on the same mission.
According to Shores/Ring, five Hurricanes of 213 sqn and one Hurricane of 208 sqn that were shot down approximately at the same time probably are identical with at least some of the German claims on that mission.

Shores and Ring list a number of additional Allied fighters lost in combat in Egypt on 1 September 1942 - although it has not been possible to verify the exact time (hour & minute):

Sgt. Sowerby, 3 RAAF sqn, was shot down
5 SAAF sqn had four of its fighters shot down
2 SAAF sqn and 64 U.S. sqn lost three P-40s on one mission
According to Shores/Ring, some of these (at least one of 5 SAAF sqn's losses) are among the six fighters which were shot down when they escorted bombers and - probably - were encountered by Marseille on his second mission on 1 September 1942.

Due to Shores/Ring, the official Allied losses in North Africa on 1 September 1942 amount to 22 aircraft (9 Hurricanes, 4 Kittyhawks, 4 Tomahawks, 2 Spitfires, 1 U.S. Warhawk, and 2 Beaufighters).
=========
Total Luftwaffe fighter victories that day were max of 27 per OKL victory list, so Marseille's prorated score, without trying to figure out conflicting German claims one by one, and omitting the Beaufighters would be 17/27*20~12-13.

On other days it wasn't as good though. For example on Sept 15 the total German claims in the combats around 1800 were 21 (20 Kittyhawks+1 Spit), 7 Kittyhawks by Marseille; but only 6 Kittyhwawks were lost total, 2 others 'badly damaged' plus 2 Spits (at unknown time). One Kittyhawk was attributed to AA.

But as I said above, if *any* ace's score checks out at even 50%, that's almost surely better than the all-WWII average for all credited fighter victories.

Re: 'not belief' in Hartmann, it's not religion , it's air combat records on each side. We can either find enough reliably two-side documented incidents in Hartmann's career to get an idea of his real claim accuracy, or else we just don't have a very clear idea how many planes he really shot down.

Joe

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by slaterat

I think you mean to say that Marseille, claimed 17 kills in one day. DAF records only show the loss of 8 fighters that day. Other Luftwaffe units made claims that day too. Pro rating the days claims gives him less than 8 maybe only 3 or 4.

Slaterat

Even if you are right and it was only 3 or 4 you just proved my point that I was making...

Thankyou