WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Interrested RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 7:49:03 AM

The germans racked up a lot of kills in the russian campaigne. The quality of the russian pilots was well not existing, their planes were outtaded and their tactics were even worse... US/UK/etc pilots had to go up against well trained and well equiped Germans or Japs. Also, the germans/jap just had fewer planes in the air to shoot down.

Quote Reply

WinsettZ RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 8:55:40 AM

Over-concentration: The Americans had so many planes in the air there weren't enough Germans to go around. Some of those Axis ace kills are probably sluggish bombers too. Bombers=ez The Germans were a bit outnumbered and were somewhat better targets, so newbie americans floating around in the sky were lots of targets, and also inexperienced ones as well. As for Germans against the UK, you can shoot down a plane many times over the UK. Pilot punches out and gets a new plane, you can shoot him down again. That's two kills already. Also, there was a small study about how people in WW2 were less...aggressive in engaging the enemy, something on the order of 20% of ground infantry weren't actively attacking enemy troops, fighters weren't attacking unless attacked first and so forth.

Quote Reply

Ulenspiegel RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 9:33:56 AM

East front: Most airfields were near the front and fights took place in low altitudes. Pilots could fly many sorties per day (Hartman 5 per day for weeks) and had usually good chances for contact. West front: Fights took place in high altitudes and it was more difficult to bring down a 4-mot bomber than to destroy a fighter. German, Russian and Japanese pilots were not replaced after a certain number of sorties, i.e. they made it or they died, so the surviving pilots were often very very good. Ulenspiegel

Quote Reply

Slade RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 10:18:24 AM

There are several reasons, some metioned previously. Others include differences in how kills are "confirmed". Remember it was relatively normal for the number of kills claimed by all sides to be greater than the raid count(including known escapes). At least the US, I don't know about UK, rotated vet pilots to the rear for training/cadre duties. Japanese Naval Aces and Fighter Units of WWII, Hata/Izawa/Gorham states that individual pilot kill records weren't offically kept after the middle of the Guadalcanal campaign. After that it was estimates or from people who kept records anyway when they didn't have to.

Quote Reply

gunner RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 10:46:08 AM

"There are several reasons, some metioned previously. Others include differences in how kills are "confirmed". Remember it was relatively normal for the number of kills claimed by all sides to be greater than the raid count(including known escapes)". This is true - I've read various sources that describe the frustration UK pilots (and their squadrons) felt when a 'kill' wasn't allowed by the bureaucrats. A kill had to be confirmed by a witness or the enemy or by retrieving evidence from wreckage. When several aircraft and even AAA might all be engaging a raid, one can imagine the difficulty of proving a kill. A pilot might get a half-kill for a plane seen to descend with disabling damage, but unless an impact is seen or found, he wouldn't get the fully monty. Officials never trust anyone. In the Luftwaffe, however, I understand a pilot's word was his bond (good old Prussian honour system at work there). Given the instances when crippled planes just managed to limp back to the English coast, against all the odds, it might just be that some of them where supposed 'certs' to the Germans who shot them up. Also remember that British fighter tactics were basically cr*p at the beginning of the Battle of Britain, allowing the experienced German staffeln to make mincemeat of them. British planes were largely concerned with attacking the bombers, which though easier to hit, would have been harder to bring down without cannon. So therefore, good tactics versus inexperienced fighters = more German aces; MG armed fighters against robust bombers = fewer confirmed kills. I'd be interested to learn how other nations verified their pilots claims.

Quote Reply

Slade RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 1:50:24 PM

In the US expierence I believe intercepted and broken enemy transmissons were used at times an where available to deny kill/damage claims. I know it was used for shipping losses and after the war for the Stragegic Bombing Survey to asses what worked and what didn't. The Axis powers, at least from what has been released, didn't consistently read high-level allied codes. Just to say it's not just a pilot thing, surface ship after action reports from the Guadalcanal campaing have similar problems. The night Hiei was damaged(sunk next day by aircraft) comes to mind, though the US lost its 2 ranking admirals in the opening minutes so confusion reigned.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 8:09:44 PM

>>Also, there was a small study about how people in WW2 were less...aggressive in engaging the enemy, something on the order of 20% of ground infantry weren't actively attacking enemy troops<< Other way around, actually -- only 20% or so of infantrymen armed with individual small arms fired their weapons in combat. The same study, if I remember right, found that crew-served weapons teams, AFV crews, and the like almost always engaged the enemy (possibly due to mutual interdepence and mutual monitoring of performance).

Quote Reply

Landser1944 RE:WW2 Aces - why so few allied air-kills ? 9/6/2003 8:25:34 PM

The german pilots also had to confirm their shoot downs by either the ground forces or another pilot who wittnessed it.

Quote Reply

AlbanyRifles Different Systems & Look at Pacific 9/6/2003 9:36:59 PM

US Army Air Forces pilots served a tour of 50 or 75 missions (depended on the theater) and were pulled out of fight to train new pilots. In the Axis, you flew unitl you died, were wounded or the war ended. And the Finnish, Slovakian and Romanians were attacking either Soviet aircraft or B-24s with no fighter escort until well into 1944. As for shooting down bombers, that may be true for the Brits, but the AAF pilots listed had almost totally fighter kills...there were not too many bombers for the VIIIth Fighter Command to shoot down from mid-43 to mid-44. And except for McCampbell, most of those Bong & McGuire kills were fighter air-to-air. Also, another interesting stat would be the number of German fighters shot down by gunners on B-17s, B-24s & Lancs. Now the 3 top US pilots earned their scores, in one tour, in the Pacific under very different circumstances than what their compatriots in Europe.

Quote Reply

Ulenspiegel German fighters shot down by 4-mot bombers 9/7/2003 3:15:31 AM

Until 1944 when long range escorts were available for the USAAF the loss ratio was about 1-2 fighters per total US loss (crewsize ~10, 4 of them "expensive" specalists) and many of the German pilots survived. (Claims of B-17/24 gunners in 1943 were of course much higher: 8-10 fighters per lost 4-mot). In addition the targets often did not have a real strategic importance for Germany. For example, the (in)famous Schweinfurt raids were almost useless, as the German production of bearings was already decentralized and sufficient stocks of ball-bearing existed. The picture changed dramatically in 1944 when the German fighter losses increased due to P-51 escorts and the bomber raids had a much higher strategic impact due to improved target selection (destruction of chemical plants which were important for production of synthetic fuel).

Quote Reply

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT