Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shoot down totals

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • neilly
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2000
    • 800

    Shoot down totals

    [updated:LAST EDITED ON 21-11-01 AT 10:16 AM (GMT)]Hi All,
    In a recent discussion, on the pros & cons for the Mosquito, I raised the point of the number of enemy aircraft the Mosquito had shot down & wanted to know how it compared to recognised 100% fighters eg. Spitfire, Mustang, Me109 etc. However no one came back with any figures so now I'd like to know. So the question is:

    What are the total number of enemy aircraft shot down by a particular aircraft eg. Spitfire, Mustang, Me109, JU88 etc. or any other Allied or German aircraft? The area of conflict must be Northern Europe & between January 1942 to May 1945.

    I would like reference books quoted with any figures (no guess work!)given. If additional fighting areas are included ie. Mediterrean conflict, in figures this should be stated.
    This is an interest item not set up for one aeroplane is better than another type of topic. So get to them reference books & let me know

    Happy reading,

    Neilly
  • Ant.H
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2000
    • 3065

    #2
    RE: Shoot down totals

    Personally Nielly,I think you may be flogging a dead horse old chum.It is very difficult to know for sure any sort of tally for a particular type or individual person/crew.We end up going back to old chestnut of destroyed/probable/damaged claims.The point about these claims is that they are,for the most part atleast,just claims,rather than substantiated kills.Who is to say that an aircraft supposedly damaged doesn't go on to crash,or be declared a write-off on return to base.
    On the other end of the scale,an aircraft thought to be destroyed may return to base in repairable condition.These are just two of the many problems you have in substantiating victory claims.It would take years of research to find out anything like what you are hoping to establish,and even then there would probably be no way of substantiated a claim in all cases.
    I much prefer to look at things in a much broader sense.For instance,we all know that the Hurricane scored the majority of kills in the summer of 1940.So long as we bear in mind the Spitfires,Defiants etc,do we really need to know the EXACT figure?
    We also have to bear in mind that the total kills of a particular type doesn't always reflect it's effectiveness or technological significance.The Hawker Tempest scored relatively few kills,but that's not to say it was ineffective,or that it's pilots were lacking in ability.I simply don't see the point in trying to evaluate an aircraft's contribution by establishing some sort of league table.I'm not convinced that it says much.
    No offence nielly,I just think it is superfluous.Aeroplane Monthly recently published a statistical analysis of BattleOfBritan kills,losses etc,using theoretical mathematical calculations and the like.The point about this is that it is purely theoretical,and has no REAL meaning or factual clout.It struck me as something of a joke,not to mention a waste of some poor researcher's time!

    "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease." Sergei Sikorsky

    Comment

    • Ant.H
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2000
      • 3065

      #3
      RE: Shoot down totals

      I'd like to add to my previous post that I DO realise that you are not trying to claim the superiority of one type over another,but I think the fact is that it would always be unavoidably inferred.I don't think we can avoid concluding something's significance or credibility by it's results.It seems to be a natural flaw in us humans!
      "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease." Sergei Sikorsky

      Comment

      • neilly
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Jan 2000
        • 800

        #4
        RE: Shoot down totals

        Hi Ant,
        I guess you're right. I was just interested, having brought it up on a recent posting, prior to that I'd never given it much thought! I know the difficulties in verifying claims, & again you're quite correct.
        Best wishes,

        Neilly

        Comment

        Unconfigured Ad Widget

        Collapse

         

        Working...
        X