Average number of kill per squadron - VVS

[PeZook]

Finding detailed information on Soviet VVS/PVO fighter squadrons in WW2 is pretty difficult, so I decided to ask here.

The information I am looking for is the number of kills per fighter aviation regiment during WW2. Alternatively, if such information is too hard to come by, an estimate of the number of enemy kills an average Soviet fighter regiment could be expected to achieve in frontline service.

[K. A. Pital]

Linka for a breakdown of reported kills by regiment.

Be aware, however, that the reports of the fighter regiments increased their own victory count essentially five- or sixfold, if not tenfold. Total German losses in air combat in the East would be around 10-15 thousand at most. Thus on the average a fighter regiment would be expected to down around 20 to 50 planes (the latter in the case of a good regiment), me thinks. That's a super-raw estimate, but it seems to be more or less correct. However, only 150 or so regiments went through the entire war - the other half or so of the units didn't survive the whole duration of the conflict. I would say a surviving and intensively used regiment would have a tally of 100-150 downed planes. Some outliers of course would have counts of 200 or more real victories, but those were usually intensively used regiments that incorporated aces and very good pilots and cannot be considered average.

In a nutshell that's it.

[PeZook]

Thanks, Stas! This is way better than I ever expected to get

[Zinegata]

Are those just air-to-air kill claims, or do they include air-to-ground? Western Allies tended to destroy a lot more planes that were simply caught on the ground.

[K. A. Pital]

Air to air. As one could guess, less German planes were destroyed on the ground by Soviet aviation than they were by the advancing Army and their artillery barrages.

[Sea Skimmer]

The Soviet air force was never that big on attacks on the German rear area in the first place after very heavy losses doing so in 1942. Most missions that did occur took place at night which is not conductive to attacking airfields. Not really surprising, the limited armament of most VVS aircraft was not well suited to the role and the Germans tended to husband air power deeply behind the lines and very well defended by flak.

Soviet statistics are going to be skewed in any event, because the VVS had a policy of forming elite regiments of top pilots for both fighters and bombers, then using them enmass to support major operations. So that would have diluted the effectiveness of the average unit. Germans did the same thing, the US and British generally did not aside from a handful of elite RAF bomber squadrons.

[K. A. Pital]

I gave the real statistics too though. You can't down more planes than were physically downed.

[khursed]

This is the best ace of all time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann

I would think that the German's use of their pilot until they died in combat, helped higher tally.

The American and British had better overall quality, because they rotated their best pilot home to train the next wave.

Also at the end of the war, Germany and Japan barely had enough fuel for their normal operation, let alone training new pilots.

As for the soviet information you're asking, I must say it's been very hard to get good reliable numbers from that side of the war.

[khursed]

To give perspective, this dude is way down the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Kozhedub

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wo ... lying_aces

The list is instructive.

[K. A. Pital]

Hartmann shot so much because there was so much more to shoot. Soviet aviation losses compare with German ones as 3:1 by a conservative estimate, since Soviet aviation was in an inferior position throughout the war; it was meant to support the Army's offensive and not much more than that.

[PeZook]

I don't think Soviets even had a doctrine for strategic air operations for much of the war, did they? Soviet aviation did seem set up awfully similar to the Luftwaffe.

[K. A. Pital]

I don't think Soviets even had a doctrine for strategic air operations for much of the war, did they? Soviet aviation did seem set up awfully similar to the Luftwaffe.

The doctrine was developed in 1942, but wasn't followed even in 43.

[Sea Skimmer]

The Soviets focused almost all air operations within 20-30km of the FEBA, which fit well with the strengths of the Il-2 attack plane and Pe-2 dive bomber that made up almost the entire offensive force of the Soviet air force. Its kind of hard to carry out a strategic doctrine with planes with such light payloads, not much Soviet commanders could do about that really. Even for a light bomber the Pe-2 was small, smaller then even a Do-17Z or A-20 Boston. Some bombing of railway junctions seems to have taken place, but it doesn't even seem to have been normal to bomb German airfields except via night harassment units.

Hartmann flew ~1,400 combat missions which was his real talent, saying alive that damn long in action! Same reason Hans Rudel racked up some many AFV kills with his 2,500 combat missions. These guys just refused to die; it helped that the squadrons around them acted as a bodyguard. The Germans also had a lot better flak, which did not help the Soviet air situation.

[K. A. Pital]

Soviet night pilots survived way more than those working in the light of day too; one of them flew around 1000 combat missions for example.

[Zinegata]

Hartmann flew ~1,400 combat missions which was his real talent, saying alive that damn long in action! Same reason Hans Rudel racked up some many AFV kills with his 2,500 combat missions. These guys just refused to die; it helped that the squadrons around them acted as a bodyguard. The Germans also had a lot better flak, which did not help the Soviet air situation.

Is this also the secret of the top-scoring German Panzer aces? Simply refuse to die and keep on fighting year after year?

[Sea Skimmer]

Generally yes, and they tended to be long serving men from the prewar Heer or SS so they had a serious amount of experience before they ever saw combat, helping them avoid being killed while still a noob. Plus the heavier German tanks and assault did really dominate the battlefield in certain action. Problem is they tended not to escape said battlefield from breakdowns and being too slow or for the Tiger, not nearly enough fuel. I read a paper someone put together on kills by German Tiger tank battalions, turns out even by German claims they only killed about 4.4 tanks per Tiger lost to all causes. This is not very impressive when a Tiger cost as much as three Mark IV tanks that had very good odds of destroying one or two T-34s before they died or were otherwise lost themselves. But if you had a few lucky guys last through multiple actions they really could cut the opposition to pieces.

Tank aces were never as common as air aces though. An ace pilot with a good plane really could just keep himself alive with good situation awareness, in ground combat you have stuff like mines and artillery and concealed anti tank guns that its impossible to fully avoid. You also needed a good crew, and good crews around you, which is harder to manage then the Luftwaffe policy of grouping good pilots together. Rudel though, who was shot or force down 32 times, always by ground fire or mechanical failure, including multiple crashes behind enemy lines, and had both legs amputated on top of it. He was just freakishly unkillable. Give him Rambo as a tail gunner and things would get real interesting.

[Zinegata]

I read a paper someone put together on kills by German Tiger tank battalions, turns out even by German claims they only killed about 4.4 tanks per Tiger lost to all causes.

Yeah, and even those kill claims are rubbish. A Spanish author was actually able to interview Carius in May 2012, and Carius emphatically told him that he only killed 100-odd tanks, and the 150+ claim was rubbish created by Nazi Propaganda. He talked to Knispel's crew and they also said their real score for 60ish insted of the 100+ claimed.

[Sea Skimmer]

Many if not most of those tank ace claims are not reflected in the unit war records, but records are generally spotty. Amusing thing though, the highest claiming Tiger tank battalion was also the last one formed in IIRC late 1944. It claimed something like 1700 kills, when battalions in action since 1943 were claiming around a thousand.

[Zinegata]

Many if not most of those tank ace claims are not reflected in the unit war records, but records are generally spotty. Amusing thing though, the highest claiming Tiger tank battalion was also the last one formed in IIRC late 1944. It claimed something like 1700 kills, when battalions in action since 1943 were claiming around a thousand.

That sounds lik Karl Korner's SS battalion, with Karl Korner claiming the incredible feat of destroying 39 Soviet tanks in one engagement by his lonesome (he claims he would have killed more, but he only had 39 shells). If you look at actual Soviet loss records, this means he killed more tanks than were actually lost by three Tank armies in one month.

Sorry, I'm bitter about this subject because of idiot Panzerwaffen fanboys who insist on treating these kill claims as unassailable "facts".