denbeste@BBN.COM (Steven Den Beste) (11/02/89)
From: Steven Den Beste <denbeste@BBN.COM>
[mod.note: Replies via email only, please; no followups. - Bill ]
An article posted here gave adjusted kill ratios for German and British
fighters during the Battle of Britain, which purported to show that the Germans
actually were shooting down more Brits than vice versa. The article attempted
to correct for a variety of factors which slewed the numbers, but I didn't see
a factor mentioned that I think is pretty important:
The German fighters were concentrating solely on hitting the British fighters,
whereas the British were primarily trying to knock bombers down, while
engaging the German fighters only when they had to. Would this not make the
kill ratios come out the way they did?
The numbers would have been far more credible if the kill rate of German
bombers were also given parallel.
Steven C. Den Beste || denbeste@bbn.com (ARPA/CSNET)
BBN Communications Corp. || {apple, usc, husc6, csd4.milw.wisc.edu,
150 Cambridge Park Dr. || gatech, oliveb, mit-eddie,
Cambridge, MA 02140 || ulowell}!bbn.com!denbeste (USENET)Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) (11/06/89)
From: Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz)
The biggest problem in trying to equate the different rate of
kills between the two sides in the war is the different methods
each had of recording kills. The Germans were much more lax
about this and were willing to take the pilots word on the
matter. They also accorded kills if the pilot observed his hits
to go home and the target was observed to fly off with visible
damage or smoke pouring from it. The British on the other hand
has a very strict system where by every "kill" had to be
witnessed by at least one other observer, either in the air and
more preferrably on the ground. In addition an aircraft was
credited as a "damaged" rather than a "kill" if the pilot didn't
actually see it explode or hit the ground.
This is why you have such big discrepancies in the number of
kills accorded British and German Aces. You have German aces
with kills in the hundreds and the best the British could produce
was in the tens. It is also why German claims of "kills" should
be treated with circumspection. Does anyone know how the
Japanese or the US forces accredited kills?
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
|
Brian Ross |Snail Mail:-
"Bill Bracket the self-made man who came|
in a a packet" | Brian Ross
----------------------------------------| Sociology Dept.R.S.S.S.
E-Mail Addresses:- bxr307@coombs.anu.oz | Australian National University
| CANBERRA,A.C.T.,2601,
bxr307@csc.anu.oz | AUSTRALIA
|hhm@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (herschel.h.mayo) (11/08/89)
From: hhm@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (herschel.h.mayo) In article <11162@cbnews.ATT.COM>, Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) writes: > > > From: Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) > kills between the two sides in the war is the different methods > each had of recording kills. The Germans were much more lax > about this and were willing to take the pilots word on the > matter. I'm sorry, this is totally incorrect. I suggest you read up on the subject. Horrido, Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe is a good place to start. Or try Hartman's biography, The Blond Knight of Germany. Larry Mayo
msmiller@gonzoville.East.Sun.COM (Mark Miller - Sun BOS Contractor) (11/08/89)
From: msmiller@gonzoville.East.Sun.COM (Mark Miller - Sun BOS Contractor) > > >From: Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) >The biggest problem in trying to equate the different rate of >kills between the two sides in the war is the different methods >each had of recording kills. The Germans were much more lax >about this and were willing to take the pilots word on the >matter. Check out a book called "The Messerschmitt Aces" (don't have the publisher's name here at work). In it, they show copies of the forms a Luftwaffe pilot needed to fill out to get credit for a kill. He had to tell just about everything - how many rounds, where he hit, damage assesment. He also needed witnesses. Also, unlike the Allied air forces, the Luftwaffe gave no partial kills. It was either full credit or nothing. One of the biggest misconceptions from the war is that the Luftwaffe propped up their claims of air victories. Only years later, when people started taking a more unbiased look at how the Luftwaffe conducted itself did they realize that the claims were true and usually quite well documented. -MSM [mod.note: If you've been following some of the claims I've reported in 50 Years Ago, you'll see that *publically* claimed kills are always exaggerated, by all sides. These propaganda figures are easily confused with the actual accredited kills. - Bill ]
animal@isis.rice.edu (Carl Rosene) (11/08/89)
From: animal@isis.rice.edu (Carl Rosene) In article <11162@cbnews.ATT.COM> Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) writes: > > >The biggest problem in trying to equate the different rate of >kills between the two sides in the war is the different methods >each had of recording kills. The Germans were much more lax >about this and were willing to take the pilots word on the >matter... >The British on the other hand >has a very strict system where by every "kill" had to be >witnessed by at least one other observer, either in the air and >more preferrably on the ground... Actually, as has already been discussed on *this* newsgroup, and according to all the reading I've done(e.g. Lee Deighton's "Fighter"), I am afraid Brian has this 180 degrees backward. Deighton discusses this at length. In order to compile his statistics he did not rely soley on RAF statistics of the time which often counted a single or no kill many times, but supplemented it with the numbers of downed German planes recorded by the civil defense forces who, after all, were able to just walk up and count them at their leisure. The British claims were way off. So were German claims. The difference is that the Germans knew they were lying. The RAF was in fantasy land. > This is why you have such big discrepancies in the number of >kills accorded British and German Aces. You have German aces >with kills in the hundreds and the best the British could produce >was in the tens. I think it would be very instructive to look at the length of careers of the aces. At the time of the Battle of Britain, RAF policy dictated that no squadron leader could be over 26. On the other hand, the commanders of entire German bomber and fighter groups flew on combat missions. Some of *them* rembered flying in the previous war with Britain. And at least one(don't ask me for the name) was an Ace in both. Additional factors include the lack of training of RAF fighter pilots at the time of BoB. when a lot of targets were in the air for A German to record his kills, the fact that the Germans were fighting on two fronts, allowing for a lot more missions, and the difference in relief policies of squadrons in combat. But I am sure there will be plenty more expert than I to elaborate on these. Carl Rosene Rice University-Computer Science Dept.