Bf 109F info

[Angus]

Charon

[Viking]

Humble is just doing his "troll the luftwaffles" again.

[humble]

It took you awhile to get here....

1st, I've always stated that the 109 was the best plane in the world at the time of its introduction....by a wide margin.

2nd, The 109's development peaked with the F4 and went down hill after that...

3rd, continuing emphisis of the 109 after the F series contributed greatly to the demise of the luftwaffe...

I'm not "anti luftwaffe"...I'm just "pro reality"...

It's a factual statment that the luftwaffe itself officially asked for the 109 to be retired and the G.55 (or C 205) to replace it. This is a well documented historical fact...

It's a historical fact that the germans suffered a tremendous loss in april/may 1943 at the kuban bridgehead. A loss so staggering that its placed on the same level as Midway by military historians. This was a loss where the cream of the luftwaffe was matched against the VVS on even terms and soundly beaten.

The reality is that the 109 was a good plane, nothing more. As the war progressed the planes shortcomings were more and more telling....

[Angus]

"1st, I've always stated that the 109 was the best plane in the world at the time of its introduction....by a wide margin."--
That means a 109D(?) vs a SpitI and Hurry I, as well as a P36, I-16 and maybe some French aircraft?
While the 109 is really good there, - superior by a WIDE margin is something I would question. BTW, I put some of the better, rather than most common front line aircraft of 1939 or so as a comparison.

"2nd, The 109's development peaked with the F4 and went down hill after that..."--
Well, as a highly maneuverable aircraft, a dogfighter to the death, yes. I guess that most of the old LW aces will agree on that.


"3rd, continuing emphisis of the 109 after the F series contributed greatly to the demise of the luftwaffe..."--
Just  second. It was a competible aircraft, easy on the maintenance, cheap and known in manufacture, known by the bulk of pilots.....getting out of emphasis actually with investments getting into all other sorts.....I think the demise of the LW had many other heavy sources than staying with their 109.

"It's a factual statment that the luftwaffe itself officially asked for the 109 to be retired and the G.55 (or C 205) to replace it. This is a well documented historical fact..."--
Never heard that. Sources? Would that have been a manufacture issue,- routing of engines (have read somewhere that you had Italian airframe production ready by the numbers but no DB's), or some logistic/political issue?

"It's a historical fact that the germans suffered a tremendous loss in april/may 1943 at the kuban bridgehead. A loss so staggering that its placed on the same level as Midway by military historians. This was a loss where the cream of the luftwaffe was matched against the VVS on even terms and soundly beaten."

I do not know the numbers there. It was a fight allright. But the LW forces already had much of their cream on the W-Front as well as in the desert.  Bear in mind that although the incredible LW scores occured in the east, the LW was however not loosing at the same rate. LW lost roughly the same aircraft to the RAF air-to-air as on the eastern front in 1944. (according to LW loss records).
More things to this, is that at the Battle of Stalingrad and later (I belive) at Kursk, - the LW transported aircraft OFF the Eastern front into the med. Stalingrad and the Tunisian share the same campaign as well as Kuban-Kursk to the forthcoming Italian campaign.
Always was looking for LW losses in 1943, so E-Front figures would be nice to see.
Was the 109 a good plane? Oh yes. And a fast one. As with some others, however there were shortcomings. BUT THE KILLING RECORD GOES THERE....109.

[humble]

The early 109 had mixed armorment and superior performance (neg G carb)...both later corrected in spitfire...

1943 trials have been posted here numerous times and easy to google

Kuban was a blood bath for the germans...lots posted but heres a link to one account from the german side...

 Kuban

I'm not aware of many german units going west in feb/april 1943...later yes.

[Meyer]

Originally posted by humble


It's a historical fact that the germans suffered a tremendous loss in april/may 1943 at the kuban bridgehead. A loss so staggering that its placed on the same level as Midway by military historians. This was a loss where the cream of the luftwaffe was matched against the VVS on even terms and soundly beaten.

Oh really? How many aircraft and/or pilots lost the Lw there, and how many the soviets?... should be easy for you, since it's a 'historical fact'

[humble]

Originally posted by Meyer
Oh really? How many aircraft and/or pilots lost the Lw there, and how many the soviets?... should be easy for you, since it's a 'historical fact'

Hmmmmm....

why not just read up on it yourself and make an informed decision. your comment is on par with saying the US didnt get hammered at pearl harbor, the battle of the bulge was a german victory or that pickett secured a tactical victory at cemetary ridge.

[Meyer]

The problem is that all I've read on the subject doesn't even approach to point the conclusions that you made, so why don't you tell me what do I have to read? Or is it that you don't have the information to support your claims?

Come on, such a 'historical fact'.. how hard can't it be?


I think that the casualties suffered by the USN at Pearl Harbour are well known, and also that the attack on the Ardennes failed, and.. well I don't know much of the ACW, but anyway, this has nothing to do with the issue: the Lw and Soviet losses over the Kuban area . Show us that.

[humble]

So why dont you show me what you've read, put the URL's up. I've linked a dozen or more at various times. If you look in this thread you'll see a 1st hand account from a well recognized german ace....

"Grislawski immediately was briefed of the situation. III./JG 52 had recently been shifted to Taman Airdrome from Nikolayev in the Ukraine, where it had been re-equipped after its heavy losses in equipment during the retreat from the Terek sector down south in the Caucasus. II./JG 52, based at Anapa, had held the positions in the air over the Kuban bridgehead since February 1943; its pilots had shot down a large number of Soviet aircraft, but it also had cost the Gruppe severe losses."

" One of the II. Gruppe's pilots, Leutnant Helmut Lipfert, later recalled: "Things did not go well for II Gruppe at Anapa. There were few contacts with the enemy but many losses. And it was not just the beginners and young pilots who failed to return, but some of the old hands as well." It was obvious that the Soviets were gaining in on the German fighter pilots' initial advantage in air combat"

"Although the Germans had concentrated a powerful air corps in the Kuban Bridgehead, achieving a numerical superiority, they were unable to assume control of the air as during the previous years."

" But although the most experienced fighter pilots continued to achieve impressing victory scores--II./JG 52's Leutnant Heinrich Sturm was credited with five kills on 20 April--the air fighting grew more and more difficult each day. The Soviets were bringing in a steady flow of new aviation units, and they started to achieve a numerical superiority in the air. It also was evident that the Red Air Force had concentrated some of its most skillful airmen to this sector"

These are obviously recollections from a single perspective but seem to correlate well with all historical accounts.


"In many ways, the Russian use of air power in the battle of

Stalingrad and the follow-up campaign at the Kuban bridgehead stands as

a watershed period with respect to organization, implementation, tactics,

and tenacity. During the period from November l9, l942, to February 2, l943,

four Soviet Air Armies and the Air Force for Long-range Operations27

(AFLRO) flew nearly 36,OOO sorties in direct support of the defense, and

eventual counter-attack, at Stalingrad. From April l7 to June 7 of that year,

the Soviet Air Force finally established complete air superiority in driving

the Germans from the Caucasus region. It is difficult to grade the

performances of the two air forces at this point in the war - a depleted and

overstretched Luftwaffe which was facing a robust and ever-increasing Red

Air Force, but the fact remains that by all German accounts, the Soviet

pilots performed admirably by the mid-point of the conflict."

This is an excerpt from a white paper on the Russian airforce  
here

One of hundreds you can find online that reference Kuban at some point.

The bottom line is simple, Kuban is where the russians confronted the luftwaffe and for the 1st time stopped them cold on "even" terms. In the beginning the germans had 2 to 1 superiority in numbers and by the end of the campaign the luftwaffe was no longer combat effective.

If you want to continue this then post links to what you "read" and give me an alternate perspective.

[Meyer]

[qupte]snip[/quote]

So you don't have the losses... so much for the historical fact

Yes I'm sure that the fight was heavy there.. but where wasn't it?

Here, some info from the Axis forum:

Some info about losses Bf 109 during April 17 –June 7 1943 over Kuban bridghead.
Units:
II./JG. 3, III./JG. 3, I./JG. 52, II./JG. 52, III./JG. 53, 13.(Slow.)/JG. 52, 15. (Kroat.)/JG. 52
Total losses:
Destroyed in air fight – 28 Bf 109
Destroyed by antiaircraft fire (guns) – 5 Bf 109
Non combat losses – 5 Bf 109
Destroyed from another reasons – 5 Bf 109
Damaged:
Damaged in air fight – 20 Bf 109
Damaged by antiaircraft fire (guns) – 9 Bf 109
Non combat damaged – 9 Bf 109
Damaged from another reasons – 18 Bf 109.

The mostly losses were in II./JG. 52:
10 Bf 109 (W/n 13688, 14309, 19251, 19454, 19489, 19525, 19527, 19550, 19709, 19745) were destroyed in air fight.
2 Bf 109 (W/n 19748, 19758) were destroyed by antiaircraft fire (guns)
2 Bf 109 (W/n 14470, 19512) were non combat losses
2 Bf 109 (W/n 13469, 14729) were destroyed from another reasons
10 Bf 109 (W/n 19335, 14822, 14956, 19440, 19700, 14847, 19444, 19735, 19598, 19769) damaged in airfights.
1 Bf 109 (W/n 13720) damaged by antiaircraft fire
3 Bf 109 (W/n 19235, 19920, 19744) non combat damaged
2 Bf 109 (W/n 19344, 14966) damaged from another reasons

Source: article from magazine: "Aviation and Time", N5, 2005
Oleg Kaminskyi - Messerschmitts over Cuban,
archival source: BA-MA: Gen.Qu.Mstr. 6. Abt.;'Flugzeugverluste und Unfalle bei fliegenden Verbande" (3.4-2.7.1943) Rl 2 III/1188-1190.

So, you have, over a 50 day period, a total of 43 destroyed 109s in five and half Gruppen. Of these, 28 in aerial combat...those are the "tremendous losses/blood bath" were you talking about? Doesn't seem too high to me.

And yes, the II./JG52 was the one having the most losses, and it is understandable the concern of Lipfert/Grislawski, etc, at that time.

[Meyer]

Originally posted by humble


The bottom line is simple, Kuban is where the russians confronted the luftwaffe and for the 1st time stopped them cold on "even" terms. In the beginning the germans had 2 to 1 superiority in numbers and by the end of the campaign the luftwaffe was no longer combat effective.
.

Missed this.. the 'no longer combat effective' Luftwaffe, dominated the skies over Kursk later that year..

[humble]

OK, show it to me......

This is another good overview on the kuban in that a tremendous amount of fighting was done by lendlease equipped VVS units....

This is an article focused on the 1st spitfireVb equipped regiment...

Spits over Kuban

[Meyer]

Appendices  Table 1. Combat work of the 216th SAD from 1–10 May 1943

Looks like the 16 and 57 GIAP alone shot down in ten days more fighters (31) than the Lw lost in fifty (28).. amazing. Perhaps the overclaiming have something to do with it

Will post about Kursk tomorrow, GN.

[humble]

Originally posted by Meyer
[qupte]snip

So you don't have the losses... so much for the historical fact

Yes I'm sure that the fight was heavy there.. but where wasn't it?

Here, some info from the Axis forum:

 

So, you have, over a 50 day period, a total of 43 destroyed 109s in five and half Gruppen. Of these, 28 in aerial combat...those are the "tremendous losses/blood bath" were you talking about? Doesn't seem too high to me.

And yes, the II./JG52 was the one having the most losses, and it is understandable the concern of Lipfert/Grislawski, etc, at that time. [/B][/QUOTE]

LOL...

so your claiming a total of 28 combat losses over that period....

OK...lets start with the 16th Gaurds IAP....

The regiment began combat operations on 9 April, at the very beginning of the battle for the Kuban. This campaign is considered pivotal in the history of Soviet VVS. Over the course of two months of intense battles with the best fighter squadrons of the Luftwaffe, Soviet pilots won strategic superiority in the air. Approximately 1100 German aircraft were destroyed, some 800 of them in the air. Western historians call this battle the "Stalingrad" of the Luftwaffe.

"The pilots of the regiment fought combat operations of a corresponding nature with German fighters. The outcome of the battles in April: 289 Airacobra and 13 Kittyhawk combat sorties, in which were conducted 28 aerial engagements. Shot down were Bf-109E-14, Bf-109F-12, Bf-109G-45, FW-190-2, Ju-88-4, Do-217-1, and Ju-87-1. Of these, Guards Captain A. I. Pokryshkin shot down 10 Messers, Guards Senior Lieutenant V. I. Fadeev 12-Bf-109s, and Guards Senior Lieutenant G. A. Rechkalov 7 Messers and 1 Ju-88."

Now whats interesting is that these are all claims on the russian side of the air battle. Only claims where the plane actually came down were counted at that time...

"This delineated parsing of Messerschmitt kills by model is explained by the fact that in this period Soviet pilots received official credit only for aircraft downed over Soviet-controlled territory. Those destroyed on the German side of the front line were not counted, as a rule. Because of this method of counting, A. I. Pokryshkin, for example, was "shorted" 13 German aircraft (by the end of the war his actual score was 72 kills but of these only 59 were counted officially). A pilot received credit for an enemy airplane destroyed after confirmation by ground forces of its fall, with a tally of its location, type, and number. Frequently the ground unit removed and sent to the air unit the engine data plate."

So just from April 9th till the end of the month we have a single unit with 71 confirmed 109 kills as well as 20+ claimed but unconfirmed. In fact the top 3 aces in this one unit claimed more 109s then you say were lost in the entire period in question.

If we look at a second well regarded unit 45th IAP (later 100th Guards) we find the following....

"April aerial combats were particularly successful, when the pilots had a firmer grasp on their airplanes and tactics. During that month I. I. Babak shot down 14 fighters, Lieutenant Boris Glinka 3 fighters and 2 bombers, Senior Lieutenant Dmitriy Glinka 5 and 1, Sergeant I. Kudrya 5 and 1, Lieutenant N. Lavitskiy 1 and 2 respectively, and Senior Sergeant V. Sapyan 2 fighters. The regiment suffered losses as well, because its opponents were the "cream" of the Luftwaffe. 15 April 1943 is considered the "black day" of the regiment: D. Glinka and V. Sapyan were shot down at around 1300, and Senior Lieutenant M. Petrov and Sergeant Bezbabnov in the evening at around 1900. Erich Hartmann, a relatively new fighter pilot in III/JG 52, shot down one of the "evening" Cobras (41-38451 or 42-4606). This was the seventh kill (and first Airacobra) of the future top German ace of World War II, who finished his career in Soviet captivity with a score of 352 kills, some 345 of them on the Eastern front.

Altogether during two months of intense aerial combat over the Kuban, pilots of 45th IAP shot down 118 German aircraft, losing 7 Airacobras shot down and 8 damaged in combat or in accidents, 1 P-40E shot down and 1 destroyed in an accident. The regiment had the best results in the theater and was quickly, already by 10 May, re-equipped with new models of the Airacobra: P-39L, M, and N. The surviving intact old P-39D-2s (138416, 429, 456, and 458), P-39K, and P-40Es were handed off to the 16th Guards IAP and 298th IAP."

We have 30 fighter kills (no specific breakdown I could find)....

I have no clue who compiled your "list" but its complete fiction. Kuban was a meat grinder in whcih the luftwaffe lost over 1000 combat airplanes. No question that the russians absorbed tremendous losses as well. 28 planes would have been a good week loss wise....




source

[humble]

Originally posted by Meyer
Looks like the 16 and 57 GIAP alone shot down in ten days more fighters (31) than the Lw lost in fifty (28).. amazing. Perhaps the overclaiming have something to do with it

Will post about Kursk tomorrow, GN.

your clueless....