Pongo, all squadrons suffer attrition from non combat losses. This applies to the Luftwaffe as well as the RAF. In fact it probably applies more to the Luft in Poland, who were operating in more difficult conditions, often from unprepared bases. The 109 also had a notoriously high number of landing accidents. If you want to claim that the losses suffered by the RAF squadrons intercepting V-1s were accidents, fine. Remeber that the Luft would also have suffered accidents too. To claim that the RAF suffered only the normal number of losses they would have had in non-combat operations is silly.
The details of pilots lost are not even necessary to go into. If the Germans only lost 150 guys that is 5 squadrons of tempests.
The Germans lost 250 planes out of 2000. "50 crew dead out of 6500. 1 RAF squadron alone lost 17 planes, 3 lost at least 20% of their pilots. You maintain the that a 3% loss rate shows a higher risk than a 20% loss rate? I'm sorry I just can't understand your thinking.
I have often seen quoted that the most dangerous branch of any military force to serve in during the war was the German U-Boat crews. Over 50% of them were killed (28,000 dead). Yet in your view it was safer to be a U-boat crewman than a British civillian (about 50,000 dead through bombing)
Not they lost so many planes in so much time. They lost em to what?
I have a few individual descriptions of combats in the Polish campaign, but the majority of losses could well be down to accidents, if I follow your twisted logic.
What do you believe caused all these losses?
Were the RAF pilots involved particualary inept?
Look at that last sentence. It is rediculous.
My quote from Price totaly refutes it.
Your quote from Price says that if a pilot shot down a V-1 from distance he was safe. The pilots had a mission to carry out, intercepting V-1s. That was often incompatible with staying safe. Shooting at a V-1 from 150-200 yards makes it difficult to score a kill, they were very small targets. Many pilots got to closer ranges to shoot them down, others rammed them. Is that perfectly safe?
I am attempting to find the total number of losses suffered by those 12 squadrons during the 2 months (not 4) that most of them spent engaging V-1s. I think the figure of 17 lost planes in 2 months is rather larger than nomal attrition, if that had been the normal rate then the RAF would have lost 1500 aircraft in acidents alone during the BOB, on top of what the Luft managed to do.
If I ever do find a total figure I will come back and argue with you, as you will obviously accept nothing else. If you haven't discovered what percentages are by then it will be a wasted effort however, because as I said if every single pilot had been killed in the explosion of a V-1 you will still claim it to be safer than Poland because there were simply not enough RAF pilots in 12 squadrons to equal the casualties almost the entire Luftwaffe sustained in Poland.
