Author Topic: USSAF Statistics for 1944  (Read 3725 times)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #30 on: September 27, 2004, 07:40:04 AM »
Looks like many are using this site for their stats on their site.

http://www.ww2.dk/

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #31 on: September 27, 2004, 07:51:51 AM »
Yep,
It's conveniently compiled for you on the above site I linked.  

Crumpp

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #32 on: September 27, 2004, 10:10:22 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
About 4 months ago, Gscholz.

Started digging into the technical stuff on the FW-190A.  There are numerous myths about the aircraft that have been passed along and taken a life of their own.  Especially on this side of the pond.

The earlier versions are covered in detail but the later ones are glossed over by most texts.  

Managed to get a hold of some great sources including several which are closed to the public and bring to light lots of new information.  Since Sept 11th over 10,000 rolls of microfilm of captured Luftwaffe documents in storage have been cataloged that are in an archive closed to the general public.

I got in touch with pilots who flew the aircraft in combat and scored many victories in it.  Soon I will interview allied pilots who fought against it.

The design team for the FW-190 was amazing.  On a regular basis they met with pilots to discuss improvements in the design.  They even flew the plane in combat themselves as part of the factory defense flight.  Hundreds of "tweaks" were made to the design.  

The NASM just finished restoring an FW-190A9.  The man that headed up the project calls it the "Teutonic Bearcat" and in many areas he says it was superior both technically and in performance.

All of the pilots I have interviewed confirm that the FW-190A8 was the most nimble version of the FW-190A's.  The FW-190A5 was the worst performing version in regards to maneuverability.  It is the 190 equivalent to the first production version of the Bf-109G6.
Crumpp



Sounds interesting Crumpp, I'm looking forward to it. I suppose you're still in the planning stage, and that it will take you some time to write it. Finished by next year perhaps? Have you found an interested publisher for your book?
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #33 on: September 27, 2004, 04:20:48 PM »
Quote
Sounds interesting Crumpp, I'm looking forward to it. I suppose you're still in the planning stage, and that it will take you some time to write it. Finished by next year perhaps?


It's coming along.  Yes I am still researching.  It will be a while before it is ready.  Got plans to make a trip to Europe soon for research.  Every weekend I am taking a trip somewhere to conduct research and every night on the phone doing research.

BTW if you are interested in Original Luftwaffe reports, BMW reports, and Focke-Wulf manuscripts/reports let me know.  I can hook you up with some fantastic private collections.

Thanks for the vote of confidence.  I plan on making it worth your wait.    

Quote
Have you found an interested publisher for your book?


No, You interested?

Just kidding....

Crumpp
« Last Edit: September 27, 2004, 04:31:38 PM by Crumpp »

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #34 on: September 27, 2004, 04:59:56 PM »
Heheh, I'm in the printing industry, but not in the book department. ;)

Thanks for your offer, but I don't have the time for something like that now. I'll wait for your book.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #35 on: September 27, 2004, 07:14:03 PM »
Crumpp:
When you refer to the Jagdwaffe, are you referring to just the fighter arm of the Luftwaffe?
(Air to air, skipping ground attack then?)

If so, even 13.000 losses seem a tad low. That would give you much more losses to other causes.

Anyway, let me know, and I'll peek into it ;)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #36 on: September 27, 2004, 07:29:07 PM »
Quote
When you refer to the Jagdwaffe, are you referring to just the fighter arm of the Luftwaffe?


Yes, Only Air to Air combat losses.

13,000 breaks down to 120 fighter planes a month for the entire war.

Crumpp

Offline VooDoo

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 129
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #37 on: September 27, 2004, 11:36:09 PM »
I think your number reflects the entire Luftwaffe and includes A/C destroyed on the ground, Ack, etc, certainly not just the day fighters.
You wrong. Its dayfighters only. But yes - its losses from all reasons.

If not I have no idea where this number comes from.
I said you already.

Now in December the Jagdwaffe took some casualties. Use the back button at the bottom and check it out. Nowhere near 13,000. In fact nowhere near even a thousand.
Do you understand that 13.000 is not a month figure but for: jan feb mar may apr etc. I put all data from your link into Excel and got 572 dayfighters lost due to enemy action and over 500 due to other reasons. More than 1000. If you multiply it by 12 you'll get that 13.000 figure.

Huh? Contact ratio is just that. The number in contact. You can further breakdown the contact ratio into contact with fighters, bombers etc...
Do you want to say that its from pilots and crews accounts !? Do you really believe that this 8,6 to 1 ration means something ? Remember that bomber crew overclaim thing ? Same here. Its not for historic work but for psychoanalytic. One german plane counted more than once, one didnt counted at all, pilot wanted to save his bellybutton and so have to tell nice stories at home about hundreds of huns. This ratio is meaningless.

The USAAF needed a 8.6:1 contact ratio
To lower this ratio USAAF needs only to stop its pilots from smoking weed. To rise it through the sky it needs only to find another sort of weed.

The real thing was 2 to 1 ratio. Means (US fighters launched) / (german fighters launched).
« Last Edit: September 27, 2004, 11:39:22 PM by VooDoo »

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #38 on: September 28, 2004, 06:47:47 AM »
Quote
Do you want to say that its from pilots and crews accounts !? Do you really believe that this 8,6 to 1 ration means something ?


It does not come from pilot's stories.  It comes from comparing effective sorties.
If your mission is an intercept, and you fail to make contact with the bombers, then you have to report to higher an "ineffective sortie".  Cross reference with Ultra intercepts, fighter claims, and other intelligence.

Quote
Do you understand that 13.000 is not a month figure but for: jan feb mar may apr etc. I put all data from your link into Excel and got 572 dayfighters lost due to enemy action and over 500 due to other reasons. More than 1000. If you multiply it by 12 you'll get that 13.000 figure.


http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/LWOB.html#Jagdwaffe

Do you understand that you are saying the Jagdwaffe was completely destroyed every month on the Western Front?

Quote
To lower this ratio USAAF needs only to stop its pilots from smoking weed. To rise it through the sky it needs only to find another sort of weed.


What??  A little heated debate is fine.  I appreciate your input on this subject Voodoo.  However lets not attack the bravery or competence of the men who fought these battles.

Quote
The real thing was 2 to 1 ratio. Means (US fighters launched) / (german fighters launched).


Doesn't mean a thing.  The USAAF is measuring the application of combat power at the tip of the spear.  The place it is needed.
You understand that the 8.6: 1 is an average taken over the whole year?
Only on a handful of missions did the Luftwaffe get out in strength.

Crumpp
« Last Edit: September 28, 2004, 06:51:17 AM by Crumpp »

Offline VooDoo

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 129
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #39 on: September 28, 2004, 09:13:20 AM »
If your mission is an intercept, and you fail to make contact with the bombers, then you have to report to higher an "ineffective sortie".
This kind of data could be found only in LW archives... Could you post some quoting from that document ?

Cross reference with Ultra intercepts, fighter claims, and other intelligence.
So... No direct data. Only guesses.

Do you understand that you are saying the Jagdwaffe was completely destroyed every month on the Western Front?
You are absolutely correct. Dont forget that losses were replaced by newly produced pilots/planes.

However lets not attack the bravery or competence of the men who fought these battles.
So I should trust bomber gunners claims...

Doesn't mean a thing.
Its raw combat power available to sides.

The USAAF is measuring the application of combat power at the tip of the spear. The place it is needed.
And such a bad ratio means that LW had problems with the  ability to direct its power into desired place.

You understand that the 8.6: 1 is an average taken over the whole year?
The more I understand this ratio the more meaningless it becomes...

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #40 on: September 28, 2004, 02:21:05 PM »
Jagdwaffe would have a similar meaning as "Fighter Command" right?
So this would be the losses of the whole 109's, 110's and the 190's (those being the bulk of the LW fighters) due to air-to-air combat in the entire war, right?
13.000...hmmm.
You have probably about 30-40.000 German fighters lost total in the war (Wild but somewhat educated guess). 13 out of 40 is rather a low rate I think, however, since I have nothing to compare with, I can't point that out so well.
The USAF and the RAF should perhaps have a lower rate, since they did a horrible lot of strafing, and the USSR should have a very much lower rate, since their role was primarily ground support. So, it boggles me a bit, that's all.
I have somewhere the LW losses in Poland, and the BoB, maybe even in France. I'll try to find it if it can be of any use.
Regards.
Angus
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #41 on: September 28, 2004, 05:34:16 PM »
What was the fate of the ~55000 109s and 190s? There only ~1300 servicable at wars end.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #42 on: September 28, 2004, 07:49:53 PM »
Quote
This kind of data could be found only in LW archives... Could you post some quoting from that document ?


Data is from the USAAF.  Not the LW.  Buy the book.

Quote
So... No direct data. Only guesses.


Again,  It is USAAF data.  

Quote
Crumpp says:
Do you understand that you are saying the Jagdwaffe was completely destroyed every month on the Western Front?


Quote
Voodoo says:
You are absolutely correct. Dont forget that losses were replaced by newly produced pilots/planes.


The Luftwaffe was NOT 80 percent destroyed for 6 months in a row.  You understand that there would be no such thing as a Luftwaffe veteran at those odds?
The USAAF Daylight bombing campaign took the highest rate of casualties of any branch of Service in US History.  They Averaged about a 3-4 percent casualty rate at it's worst.  This means by the time a guy finished 25 missions; he had a 75-100 percent chance of becoming a casualty.  3 out of 4 men who flew in 1943 became casualties.

Luftwaffe pilots flew until the war ended or they got killed.  Many of them have thousands of missions.  That is 40 tours in the USAAF.

Quote
So I should trust bomber gunners claims...


Totally different situation Voodoo.  Those gunners made those claims in good faith.  Have you ever fired a .50 cal in a flex mount at a target you see for a few seconds?  Ever time a WWII fighter gunned it's engine, the exhaust blew out a puff of black smoke.  Whenever the fighters shot it's weapons, the brass would come flying out the bottom and plumes of smoke off the muzzles.  I am sure it was easy to mistake the smoke and falling debris for a hit.

 
Quote
And such a bad ratio means that LW had problems with the ability to direct its power into desired place.


1. We are only talking a handful of times the Luftwaffe was able to launch in force.  You seem to think the Luftwaffe was launching 400 fighters a mission.  It was not.

2. Yes they certainly did have a problem making contact with the bomber stream.

a.  They had to fight through the Fighter Screen to get at the bombers.  Fighters that had the advantage of both numbers and altitude in most engagements. If they made contact. they had to fight their way out as well.  Interceptions were made with a USAAF fighter on their six.

b.  The Luftwaffe abbreviated pilot training was beginning to tell.  The post-43 pilots were not instrument rated and could barely fly the plane.  They took an almost 50 percent casualty rate to accidents!  If the weather was cloudy chances are the Gruppe would not make it through the clouds intact.  Scattered and unable to regroup in any strength, the Gruppe would be unable to intercept the bomber stream.

Quote
The more I understand this ratio the more meaningless it becomes...


Yeah I question your understanding of it too.

As an average there are encounters with a fewer fighters and ones with more.

In the words of Oblt. Dahl, Kommanduer JG3:

"November 1944's flying was the toughest I had been through in the whole war.  The odds were 20 to 1 and as much as 30 to 1 against us.  We were taking casualties everyday.  Our aircrew reinforcements were short on quality as they did not receive enough training.  And shortage of fuel was making itself more and more felt."

It was in December that the LW was able to launch a couple of good-sized interceptions.

Losses I have for the Western Front during this critical time period:

November = 404 A/C destroyed (total from all causes), 244 pilots killed or missing

December = 500 Killed or missing; 316 KIA from 23-31Dec. Allied bombing offensive and 136 KIA in the opening Ground Support missions of the Ardennes offensive.  35 taken prisoner, 194 wounded

650 Machines destroyed.

January 1945 - 255 casualties from Bodenplatte, 151 KIA
                         125 casualties for the rest of the Month, 18 KIA

680 machines destroyed.

At the end of January the Jagdwaffe reported 300 serviceable fighters.  Never again was it able to offer anything but paltry resistance.

The thousands of planes the Luftwaffe destroyed in 1944 accounted for a mere 2% of the Allied Armada.

Hardly the 1000+ a month the figure of 13,000 requires even for the year of 1944.

Quote
What was the fate of the ~55000 109s and 190s? There only ~1300 servicable at wars end.


Production Numbers!
Lets see:

Turkey
Romania
Hungry
Italy
Switzerland

I am sure I missed quite few user countries.

Crumpp
« Last Edit: September 28, 2004, 07:53:01 PM by Crumpp »

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #43 on: September 28, 2004, 08:11:34 PM »
Spain, Finland, Czechoslovakia ...
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
USSAF Statistics for 1944
« Reply #44 on: September 28, 2004, 08:23:37 PM »
So, the Jagdwaffe got destroyed with accidents and on the ground at a 2/3rd rate?
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)