Military Review

Pokryshkin in the sky over the Big Tokmak

Pokryshkin in the sky over the Big TokmakOne day out stories 16 Guards Fighter Regiment

Every year, the Great Patriotic War recedes from us farther into the past, the memory of the immense heroism of our grandfathers, who saved Russia from destruction and won the Victory, is gradually being erased. Today gives a good opportunity to recall some of those who fought for the Motherland: Alexander Pokryshkin and his student and fellow soldier Viktor Zherdev. Let us turn to one combat day from the history of the 16 Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment, in which the pilots fought - 21 September 1943 of the year.

For Pokryshkin, that day was the most productive for the entire war: according to the results of two combat sorties, four air victories were entered into his account: 2 U-88 and 2 U-87. All downed airplanes are noted in the regimental documents (“Register of the downed enemy aircraft”, “Certificate of confirmation for downed enemy aircraft twice by the Hero of the Soviet Union, Lieutenant Colonel Pokryshkin AI.”) And in the submission to the title of three times Hero of the Soviet Union, compiled in Headquarters 9-th Guards Air Division. It would seem, everything is clear. Here and in the collection “Soviet Aces” compiled by M. Bykov, according to the sources, all four victories won by that day by Pokryshkin are indicated (there is a small inaccuracy only in relation to the place of the fall of one of the downed Yu-87) (Soviet aces. Victories of Stalin falcons 1941 – 1945. M., 2008. C. 408).

But as it turned out, not all modern authors are ready to count Pokryshkin on these victories officially recorded at his expense. Speech about A. Tabachenko, the author of a recently published book about 16 giap. Mark Tabachenko's inexplicable bias against Pokryshkin and point out a number of distortions and factual errors. Unfortunately, the “author's approach” - the distortion of facts, inaccurate knowledge of sources and bias - appeared when he described the 21 September 1943 fights of the year.

If Bykov in this case strictly follows the documents, then Tabachenko found nothing better than to question their objectivity, at the same time leaving Pokryshkin (who can no longer answer him) a number of accusations.

He doubted that Pokryshkin was beating U-87 on that day (at least one, or even both). Calling them "phantoms" and "ill-fated", Tabachenko leads the reader to the idea that the records of their destruction appeared in the regimental documents, either not without the participation of Alexander Ivanovich, or in order to "tighten" his battle account. That is, hints that these "phantom" Yu-87 were the result of postscripts.

The second charge (filed as either a version or a “conclusion-revelation”) is very close to the previous one. Tabachenko claims that Pokryshkin was assuming other people's victories. Referring to a phrase taken out of context and incorrectly interpreted from Konstantin Sukhov’s memoirs, he writes that following the results of the battle on September 21, its participants Zherdev and Sukhov “gave Pokryshkin one air victory”. And thoughtfully exclaims: “So, it means that not only Pokryshkin handed out the shot down planes to his wingmen, but also the wingmen“ handed over ”the shot down planes to the Pokryshkin fund! The deputy commander of the air regiment did not reach up to 50 destroyed German aircraft ... ”(Tabachenko AI Pokryshkinsky air regiment.“ Unvarnished ”battle chronicles. 16th Guards Fighter aviation regiment in battles with the Luftwaffe. 1943-1945. M., 2012.S. 219). In general, you are me, I am you. What is the logic of such mutual juggling with victories - the author does not explain.

The reason for the “reasoning” of Tabachenko was that in ZhUSS 16 giap for 21.09.43 Pokryshkin really recorded only two Yu-88, and marks about shot down Yu-87 appear later, and also that in the order for the regiment No. 088 “On payment of the monetary remuneration of the regiment’s flight crews for the enemy’s planes shot down ”there is no mention of the Baptyor pilots shot down by the pilot (Ibid. p. 218 – 224).

So maybe Tabachenko is right? Well, consider the events of that day based on all sources available to us.

So, according to the “Register of shot down enemy aircraft”, that day four victories were recorded at the expense of the regiment: 2 U-88 shot down Pokryshkin (pictured) (confirmed by the pilots participating in the battle, the first by Zherdev and Golubev, the second by Sukhov and Golubev ), another U-88 was dumped by Junior Lieutenant Popov. The fourth plane counted was the PV 189, which was destroyed by Lieutenant Labor. A record of the victory over one of the Yu-87, shot down by Pokryshkin, appeared in the Journal a few days later, on September 29 (confirmed by Golubev). Finally, in November (between 20 and 24 number) there was an entry about another Yu-87, counted as Pokryshkin as a result of the 21 battle of September (confirmed by Golubev and the Chief of Staff 133 KP, Major Solnyshkin; Tabachenko for some reason thinks that this is the confirmation for the first "Bast"). (TsAMO RF. F. 16 giap. Op. 206868. D. 3. L. 3 – 5, 11).

And what does the 16 Giap Battlebook say? About the first battle it says the following. Pokryshkin and Golubev were covering the ground forces. “At the end of the patrol they saw up to 15 Yu-87, who bombarded the beam east. Tiefenbrun with H-2500 mt. Battle order - a wedge of links. Major Pokryshkin attacked one group, did not observe the results of the attack. Slave ml. l.-t. Golubev observed flames and explosion on the ground. Presumably, this is a downed plane. After the first attack, some kind of guidance station broadcast, airplanes above you, to gain altitude 3000 m. The radio station’s order was fulfilled, but no aircraft were found. ” On September 29, when the downed record appeared in ZhUSS, an addition was made: “1 U-87 was shot down by major Pokryshkin. There is confirmation nsh 133 kp. The U-87 plane crashed in the area of ​​the north-east. B. Tokmak ”(Ibid. D. 1. L. 242 v. –243).

Two hours later, Pokryshkin made the second flight - this time as part of the four. The second pair consisted of junior lieutenants Zherdev and Sukhov. And then there was the battle, which is reflected in the memoirs of its participants - Pokryshkin and Sukhov, and captured in the picture of the pilot of the “fraternal” 104 giap Alexei Zakalyuk (in the top photo).

Pokryshkin describes how he shot down two Yu-88. The first one exploded from its fire, and our plane slipped through the fireball of the explosion.
Jumping out of the fiery cloud, the pilot looked around: “bombers were going to the left and right. One of them was burning, apparently it was struck by an exploding neighbor. Took in the scope of the extreme right and gave a turn. A jet of smoke escaped from the wing of the "Junkers". He spun around, fell at the peak and began to leave. I rushed in pursuit and finished off the second turn on the left motor (in the book “Know Yourself in Battle” Pokryshkin mentioned the place of his fall - the banks of the Molochnaya River - AM). Then he pulled his car up. “Junkers” fell to the right of me, set on fire by the Zherdev pair ”(Pokryshkin AI, The Sky of War. Novosibirsk, 1968. C. 318). We especially emphasize that Alexander Ivanovich in both his books speaks of an airplane shot down by our second pair. Tabachenko is silent about these words: it allows him to build a version that the plane shot down by Zherdev-Sukhov (which he, of course, did not find on their accounts at Bykov’s) and went to Pokryshkin’s account.

Pokryshkin believed that another "Junkers" was set on fire by an exploding bomber, but was not counted. By the way, Sukhov, describing the battle in detail, also mentions the fourth burning "bomber." The very first one brought down by Pokryshkin was swallowed up by a cloud of explosion. “To the right and to the left two more bombers are burning. And in front of the third can share their fate, if ... ". One of the first two was attacked by Pokryshkin, but this “third” one was captured by our couple. “Zherdev and I drove for a long time - to the very ground - that“ Junkers ”, in turn attacked him — either separately or in pairs. The shooter fought back violently. Fighter Zherdeva received several holes. Leaving, the "Junkers" yulil, slid, swooped down to the very ground, trying to even out above it and to shave away. But, apparently, the pilot did not calculate - and later snatched the car. It gave a drawdown - and, hitting the ground, it flared up and fell apart. ”(Sukhov KV Squadron leads the battle. M., 1983. C. 179). A little later we will return to this plane. Therefore, Sukhov (like Pokryshkin) believed that four planes were shot down in battle.

And how is this fight described in the cbd? The patrol was coming to an end when the presenter noted that from the west, “X. NUMX U-5 approached B. Tokmak / y /. Attack on them made from behind. As a result of Major Pokryshkin’s attack, the leader of the five U-88 exploded in mid-air. 88 people / eka / jumped with parachutes. Ml. l. Golubev knocked out 2 U-1 and he dived into his territory. He was chased by Major Pokryshkin and Jr. Lieutenant Golubev lit his right console and left engine. C / Amole / t fell burning south-zap. Molochansk "(TsAMO RF. F. 88 giap. Op. 16. D. 206868. L. 1 v. – 243). The text of the summary is given with preservation of punctuation, which in this case seriously affects its meaning.

So, one bomber shot down by Pokryshkin. Another shot down Golubev. Perhaps it was his Pokryshkin that he considered to be ignited by the explosion (although, as we remember, Sukhov mentioned two burning machines). And then ... Whether Pokryshkin chased after him, and Golubev finished off. Either Pokryshkin and Golubev chased, and the plane shot down Pokryshkin. And you can read part of the phrase as well (by the way, from the grammatical point of view, this option will be the most accurate, although, of course, wrong): Pokryshkin chased, “and ... Golubev lit his right-hand console” (here’s an example of how the fact depends on their correct presentation).

On the third bomber productive attack made Zherdev. He attacked the “remaining unit of Yu-88, as a result of the attacks, knocked out 1 Yu-88, which continued with the burning left plane and / d / t in the ranks. At this time, X-88 4 Yak-1 were attacked. Ml. Zherdev took them for Me-109, pushed aside and pulled away from the enemy. At this time I received an order from the leader to go home because of a lack of fuel ”(ibid.).

The regiment commander N. Isaev and the chief of staff J. Danish of doubts about the authorship didn’t have any victories: the Zherdevsky bomber was assigned to the wounded, and both counted "Junkers" were entered into Pokryshkin’s account without hesitation. And what is this third plane, "not recorded" Pokryshkin (in his words and Sukhov's words)? Perhaps the pilots believed that they were another Yu-88, "ignited" by the explosion. And perhaps it was about one of the morning Yu-87-x, the regimental headquarters that day was not read.

The offense of Pokryshkin becomes clear if one considers that one of the “laptezhniki” was really counted for him on the same day - only by a higher authority. This follows from the “Operational Reports of the 9 Headquarters of the Guards Fighter Aviation Division”.
There is also a confirmation of the words of Sukhov and Pokryshkin about the third Junkers, shot down by Zherdev.

The 265 21.09.43 16 flight report reads that 34 pilots performed 4 sorties on that day, conducted 6 air battles, which resulted in lossless 4 aircraft, of which 88 U-1, 87 U-1, 189 FV-X 2. Shot down: Major Pokryshkin 1 bomber /: / 87 U-1, 88 U-1, both fell in the Tiefenbrun area; ml. l-you Popov, Golubev on 88 U-1, burning bombers fell in the area Molochansk, Bol. Tokmak; ml. lt Zherdev 88 Yu-2, the plane fell and exploded 1 km. zap Molochansk; lt Labor knocked down 189 PV-20046, the plane caught fire in the air and sowing fell. zap Bol Tokmak ". “All downed enemy aircraft fell in the area of ​​cover and are confirmed by Kirichenko’s cavities” (Ibid. F. 1. Op. 14. D. 51. L. XNUMX).

What follows from the documents of the division headquarters? First, Pokryshkin’s 21 September already counted one of the two U-87s shot down by him. Why confirmation to the regiment came later than in the division, now do not know. If Tabachenko had bothered to turn to the operational reports of the division and would not have been so viciously addicted to Pokryshkin, he would not have to pathetically exclaim: “Okay, so be it, one“ patron ”with a grief in half was found” when he discovered the record in ZhUSS about him, made a week later (Tabachenko. S. 220). Not "found", but was counted on the same day!

Secondly, according to the results of the second battle, the division headquarters counted our pilots not two, but three shot down U-88. The bomber attacked by Zherdevov was commanded by division commander I. Dzusov and the chief of staff of 9 giad B. Abramovich was recorded at the expense of the division as destroyed. This aircraft also entered the report on the combat operations of the unit in September. If the headquarters 16 giap this month declared 9 destroyed U-88, then the headquarters 9 giad - 10 (TsAMO RF. F. 20046. Op. 1. D. 18. L. 112).

This is one of many examples of the fact that a combat day or episode may be reflected differently in documents of a regimental and divisional level.

A few days later, 26 of September, the same happened with respect to Captain Lukyanov, who was counted with division headquarters shot down in the Greater Tokmak Xe-111 area (reflected in operational report No. 270, and in the monthly report), while 16 headquarters didn’t have any victories did not count (ibid. D. 14. L. 56, D. 18. L. 112). On that day, the regiment declared four downed Heinkels (on the account of senior lieutenants Samsonov and Klubov, and junior lieutenants Zherdev and Sukhov) and one Me-109 (shot down by Captain Rechkalov), while the division headquarters counted "Messer" and five " Heinkel "(taking into account Lukyanovsky). Thus, the number of personal victories of Sergey Lukyanov will be equal to 17 (and not 16, as it appears in the collection of Bykov). But back to September 21.

The third point on which the operational report 9 of the hyads differs from the data of the 16 giap headquarters is that the victory over one of the U-88's (fallen near Molochansk) was awarded to Golubev, not Pokryshkin. (This is the only mention of his authorship: neither Yu-88 nor Georgy Gordeevich’s victories over aircraft of this type are mentioned in any document at all.)

What caused this decision is unknown. It is possible that at the headquarters of the division they considered that it was Golubev who shot down the plane. Perhaps the plane to the slave gave himself Pokryshkin. Due to a shortage of fuel, our couple landed at the airfield of their neighbors. There, the pilots refueled (at the same time having dinner). It is possible that from there the leader reported to the higher headquarters on the results of the aerial battle. By the way, Sukhov mentions that Pokryshkin reported to Dzusov about the fight even before his conversation with the regimental chief of staff (Sukhov. S. 182) In parentheses, we note that there were probably any incidents of the downed aircraft being recorded on the wingman. The fact that at least one of them could have taken place can be understood from the memoirs of George Golubev himself (Golubev GG Paired with the “hundredth.” M., 1978. C. 128 – 130). But this - by the way.

And perhaps, in determining the authorship of the victory at the headquarters of the division, an error simply occurred, as it sometimes happened. For example, in the operational report of the division for 02.09.43, it appears that Klubov was hit by two Me-109, whereas according to the ZhDB and ZhUSS 16, one messer was shot down by a giap and the second was recorded on Golubev. The situation is similar with the report for October 22: two "Messers" were assigned to the division by Labor, while in the regimental documents it means that Zherdev dumped the second "bad". In the famous battle conducted by Rechkalov's group 1 November, there is also a discrepancy: one shot down U-87 was attributed to Zherdev (division), while Golubev (regiment) shot him down (TsAMO RF. F. 20046. Op. 1. D. 14 L. 32, 83, 93; F. 16 giap. 206868 op. D. 1. 189 v. –191, 292 v. –294, 325 v. –326; D. 3. L. 3, 8, 10). Probably the September 21 bout is in the same row.

In any case, the regimental command counted the second Yu-88 to Pokryshkin immediately and without hesitation, which means it had all the reasons, regarding him as the real author of the victory.

The fact that the regiment commander Nikolai Isayev’s relationship with Pokryshkin was, to put it mildly, not the warmest, also speaks in favor of an unbiased decision.

So, comparing the data of the regiment and divisions, we conclude that already on September 21, that is, on the day of the battles, Pokryshkin counted three victories (Yu-87 and 2 Yu-88), and only 6 wins were recorded on the regiment . Thus, Tabachenko’s hints of additions, at least one of the “eighty-sevens,” are far-fetched and unsubstantiated, as is his statement that Zherdev and Sukhov “donated” the shot down plane to Pokryshkin. By the way, a week later, 29 of September, in a battle against the U-88 group, Pokryshkin gives Zherdev, a split off from the Junkers and shot down by him, and he lights the German plane and drives it to the ground, rightly marking the sixth victory there ( F. 16 giap. Op 206868 D. 1 L. 260 v. –262).

But what about the second Yu-87, which was recorded only in November (and then got into the "List of victories" and award materials for the third star)? Cases that the downed plane was carried at the expense of the pilot after days, weeks, and even months were not so rare. In the history of 16, this happened not only with Pokryshkin, but also with Rechkalov, Klubov, Karpov, Olefirenko, Trofimov, Tsvetkov, Berozkin - in 1943, and in 1944, and even in 1945, that is, with different commanders. It happened in the "fraternal" 100 and 104 giap.

There are many such examples in the history of other regiments. We present only one - from the combat activities of the 494 iap, which was part of a division that fought on another sector of the front (also flying on "aerobracks"). At the very end of December 1944, three WF-190 (one each) were brought to the accounts of Captain Videnkin and Junior Lieutenants Kulakov and Obotin, shot down by them in September-October, that is, two or three months before these records appeared in the ZhUSS regiment ( Ibid. F. 494 iap. Op 614529. D. 2. L. 10 v. –11). There was just an operational pause (just like at the beginning of 20's November numbers in the action band of the 9 giad) and they were confirmed.

According to the logic of Tabachenko, all such cases should be regarded as malicious registrations. It seems that such straightforward judgments, at least, suffer from simplification. But whatever the reason for the appearance in the ZhUSS of the record about the second Junkers brought down by Pokryshkin, this fact alone is enough to stop the speculation and leave this victory where it officially stays - on the pilot's combat score.

As for the last “argument” of Tabachenko - that Yu-87-e were not reflected in the order “On payment for the downed ones”, everything is simple here. The fact is that in this order, far from all the planes officially counted as Pokryshkin and also 13 pilots from the middle of April to the beginning of October are marked. So, Pokryshkin received a reward for 9 airplanes (5 U-88 and 4 Me-109, total 14 thousand rubles), shot down since April 20, although during this time 31 won a victory. Rechkalova was paid for just four planes (2 Me-109, U-88 and Xe-111) from 23 personal and 3 group (if you count from the same date). Lukyanov - for three (from 12), Tabachenko for two (from 5 + 1), Tsvetkov - for 2 (from 7). Fadeev, Teterin, Iskrin, Trofimov, Fedorov, Olefirenko, Chistov - for one (the number of victories counted by him for that period can be seen in the collection of Bykov). 100% was the result of only one of Alexander Samsonov: he was paid for both his victories gained in the 16 giap (Xe-111 and Me-109) (Ibid. F. 16 giap. Op. 296915. D. 1. L 168 – 171).

Tabachenko could not see this. And the fact that he refers to this far from complete (by personalities and all the more victories) order-statement as “proof” that Pokryshkin was credited with “phantom-unfortunate” Yu-87, says either his inability to work with sources, or the desire to adjust them to their own theories and to mislead the reader. Or about that and the other at the same time.

So let's summarize. According to regimental and divisional operational documents, the result of the 21 September September 1943 combat day for the 16 pilots was seven air victories won without losses. Four of them are on account of Alexander Pokryshkin.

10.00 – 10.55 U-87 Pokryshkin Tiefenbrunn

- // - Yu-87 Pokryshkin North-East. Big Tokmak

11.05 – 12.05 U-88 Popov Vesele

13.15 – 14.10 U-88 Pokryshkin sev. Big Tokmak

- // - Yu-88 Pokryshkin south-zap. Molochansk

- // - Yu-88 Zherdev zap. Molochansk

16.45 – 17.40 ФВ-189 Labor zap. Big Tokmak

Well, Viktor Zherdev’s battle account (in the photo), taking into account the victory he won on that day, will be such (information in bold type is missing from M. Bykov’s collection, or refined):

Zherdev Victor Ivanovich

List of air victories

16.04.43 1 Yu-87 south-zap. Crimean

30.08.43 1 Me-109 Blagoveshchensky

02.09.43 1 Me-109 Konkovo

21.09.43 1 U-88 zap. Molochansk

26.09.43 1 Xe-111 Sev. Mikhaylovka

29.09.43 1 U-88 Dniprovka - Ukrainian

01.10.31 1 U-87 Joyful

01.10.31 1 Me-109 sev.-zap. May Day

22.10.43 1 Me-109 sev.-zap. Burchak

28.11.43 1 U-87 Chuchak

16.07.44 1 U-87 Sushno

21.07.44 1 FW-190 south-zap. Kulikuv

21.07.44 1 U-87 zap. Verkhrat

Total downed aircraft - 13 + 0

13 was killed in January 1945 g., Shot down by enemy enemy anti-aircraft artillery, killed on the ground

That was the September day 69 years ago. We remember…

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergeev
    Sergeev 1 October 2012 08: 19
    Stop blackening war heroes !!! The author of the book Tabachenko himself would sit at the helm and try to bring down at least one vulture.
    1. carbofo
      carbofo 1 October 2012 20: 56
      In my opinion it is better to put him in a vulture, and then knock down a vulture :).
      So fair.
      1. Ratibor12
        Ratibor12 1 October 2012 22: 59
        Quote: carbofo
        In my opinion it is better to put him in a vulture, and then knock down a vulture :).
        So fair.

  2. mar.tira
    mar.tira 1 October 2012 08: 26
    Trishkin’s caftan cannot be worn at all! Someone just needs to be a man, and someone else is a hero! What to do, such is life! And not only in aviation.
  3. Sakhalininsk
    Sakhalininsk 1 October 2012 08: 30
    For me, this article is not a tribute to memory, but a veiled attempt to throw crap at the honored pilot who accounted for 59 officially confirmed enemy aircraft shot down, in addition, Pokryshkin made a huge contribution to the development of Soviet tactics of air combat.
    If the author is so pleased to search for fleas and non-docking, can it be worthwhile to study archives and the network about the reality of German victories? There are much more fiction and wonders.
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 1 October 2012 09: 45
      Actually, this author in his articles FOR Pokryshkin, so to speak, and in the archives he sat and sits ...
    2. Tirpitz
      Tirpitz 1 October 2012 09: 59
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      in addition, Pokryshkin made a huge contribution to the development of Soviet tactics of air combat.

      Everything is correct. He invented a "whatnot" and criticized triple flights (they were soon canceled). He also came up with a "barrel" air combat technique (or something like that - I don't remember) and the Germans were very afraid when he was in the sky, they warned all their own.
      I read his book "The Sky of War", I advise everyone very interesting.
      1. Alex
        Alex 31 December 2013 01: 01
        Quote: Tirpitz
        invented the "barrel" air combat technique (or something like that - I don't remember)
        EMNIP, in "The Sky of War" Pokryshkin called this technique "tub". During its execution, the plane slightly, but sharply lost speed and sagged down a little. As a result, the plane sitting on your tail suddenly appeared in front of you. Further, as the unforgettable Lelik said, "a matter of technology." By the way, again EMNIP, and he did not come up with the term either: this is how the pilots call the unsuccessful "barrel" and he spied on the maneuver during the flight of the replenishment to their regiment.

        I read this book in distant childhood, maybe I don’t remember what details, but I’ll say for sure: there is no boasting and self-praise (as in the memoirs of some marshals). On the contrary, the warmest memories of combat associates.

  4. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 1 October 2012 08: 37
    It is strange that after this article on the Century the ordinary srach did not rise!
    This article does not attempt to denigrate a well-deserved pilot, you read inattentively and probably do not know the background - this is one of a series of articles after which fans of the author of a famous book about Soviet aces come out in feces on their favorite site ...
    This author counted. that Pokryshkin was credited with extra planes, and his fans stand by the mountain for this statement, swords excrement in colossal amounts in all who doubt the genius of their gurus ...
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 1 October 2012 09: 46
      Minus should be understood as a gift from those who are not in the know? Although it is possible that just from those who are in the know ...
      If only I would clarify something ...
    2. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 1 October 2012 10: 10
      I may perceive the situation one-sidedly, but in fact, after reading the article, there was a real impression that the author was trying to bring the sludge to clean water.
      But since the author, he grabbed into the possibly shot down one, why didn’t he mention in the same article, but that the same Pokryshin has at least a dozen victories that could not be confirmed in accordance with the requirements for the enrollment of the shot down acting in the Soviet army.
      Actually, if he added a number of explanations and comments to his creation, he would not have received a negative for the article.
      1. Brother Sarych
        Brother Sarych 1 October 2012 10: 19
        This is a series of articles, they are interconnected ...
        1. Sakhalininsk
          Sakhalininsk 1 October 2012 15: 43
          Unfortunately I did not read this cycle, if I share the link I will be very grateful to you.
  5. 8 company
    8 company 1 October 2012 09: 45
    It is pleasant to read an article where instead of fabrications, personal interpretations and distortions of facts, a normal analysis of documents and convincing evidence are given. To the author, plus and a wish to publish more often on Topvar. As far as I understand, we are talking about fierce air battles in the Kuban, where Hitler’s aces were finally broken off. By the way, it was in this year that the situation with flight training began to change dramatically: in the USSR, it improved significantly, and in Germany began to decline significantly.
  6. Indigo
    Indigo 1 October 2012 10: 20
    But the essence of this day of the Second World War is one - grandfathers did not drift, did not pretend that they did not see, etc. - But they climbed into the fray with a dog to death, and to the extent of their strength and capabilities, everyone contributed their share to the Victory. For this they honor and praise! But to consider who and how much is not so important. Someone knocked down, and someone covered his back at this moment, someone changed the motor in the cold and someone on his stomach crawled under fire to the OT with a grenade.
    To dig into this now and look for some dirty insinuations is a spit in the back of grandfathers and for this it is necessary to beat the snout not in a childish way ...
    1. 755962
      755962 1 October 2012 11: 43
      Quote: Indigo
      But the essence of this day of the Second World War is one - grandfathers did not drift, did not pretend that they did not see, etc. - they climbed into the fray with a dog to death, and to the best of their abilities and capabilities, everyone contributed their share to the Victory.
  7. omsbon
    omsbon 1 October 2012 10: 27
    Bet one out of 59? And how much has Alexander Ivanovich brought down? What number did not get into magazines and does not have confirmations?
    I think a lot more!
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 1 October 2012 16: 38
      Quote: omsbon
      Bet one out of 59?

      More time will pass and the ammunition spent on downing start to count!
      Efficiency will be output!
    2. Denzel13
      Denzel13 2 October 2012 01: 39
      I already wrote on this topic:
      59 + 15 which were not taken into account for 1941, since they destroyed the regimental documents during the release + almost until the end of 1943, only those that were shot down over the territory controlled by the Red Army were considered (only occasionally the partisans confirmed), and Pokryshkin quite reasonably believed that it was more effective to shoot down planes the enemy before approaching the front line + those shot down over the sea were also not counted (remember his "hunts" on the Black Sea) + handed out to the wingmen. I read about the total figure 116, I remember where I will write the source.
  8. wulf66
    wulf66 1 October 2012 11: 36
    I wonder if this Jew-Tabachenko was paid in advance, or is he trying to earn 30 pieces of silver with his "historical" works from some foreign agent? The creature is shorter.
  9. datur
    datur 1 October 2012 12: 32
    yes this author on ... th - !!!! yes
  10. Gur
    Gur 1 October 2012 12: 52
    As it is sung in one song, "Premonitions did not deceive him," on the contrary, they deceived him. I thought praises and all that would begin now, and I think how without our "patriots" how without a spoonful of shit, how without pulling out skeletons, and the facts say the drunkard, the rapist and the murderer of the rockman, but no, they deceived my expectations. Since not everything that I have listed, then everything is definitely not a hero, an attorney, it would be necessary to add to the catchphrase that he himself shouted the expression "Akhtung in the sky Pokryshkin" so as not to scare the Germans, but to cheer himself up. A goat or a goat (Tabachenko) There remains only one question, when will they be rewarded according to their deeds, and to the extent they will be allowed to burn out over our history and memory?
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 1 October 2012 16: 44
      Quote: GUR
      "Akhtung in the sky Pokryshkin" he himself shouted

      You are wrong, because it is clearly audible, Max Ottovich personally!
    2. 1976AG
      1976AG 1 October 2012 19: 13
      Unfortunately, such people will always be there. They like to water others with shit. Usually those who are unable to do anything suffer from this, and to denigrate those who can no longer answer is doubly mean.
      1. Alex
        Alex 31 December 2013 01: 06
        Quote: 1976AG
        And to denigrate those who can no longer answer is doubly mean.
        But it’s quite safe and recently quite profitable.
    3. Ratibor12
      Ratibor12 1 October 2012 23: 02
      Quote: GUR
      "Akhtung in the sky Pokryshkin" he himself shouted,

      Burn !!! I'll burst now !!!! good
  11. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 1 October 2012 15: 16
    Alexander Ivanovich Poryshkin is a great pilot. I really liked his books. As a child, I just read. For example, "Know yourself in battle". Apparently Gebels' underdevelopment is haunted by the glory of the Russian army.
  12. wax
    wax 2 October 2012 00: 13
    The German aces, who had gathered hundreds of planes, and so praised by our external and internal enemies, were incapable of such fights: they hunted, and flew away from Pokryshkin.
  13. Krilion
    Krilion 2 October 2012 03: 59
    almost 70 years since the war ended .... it's time to finish the calculations already ....
  14. Yarbay
    Yarbay 2 October 2012 07: 11
    **** Tabachenko could not see this. And the fact that he refers to this far from complete (by personalities and even more so victories) order-sheet as “evidence” that Pokryshkin was credited with “phantom-ill-fated” U-87s, speaks either of his inability to work with sources, or about the desire to fit them into their own theories and mislead the reader. Or about both at the same time **** - I was looking for a sensation, but not there!
    1. Cynic
      Cynic 2 October 2012 18: 00
      Quote: Yarbay
      or the desire to fit them into their own theories

      Read your comment and comment Krilion for some association they made me remember a line from a children's song
      Once a plank two plank will ladder

      The author goes "Up the stairs leading down."
      Doubt in one's dignity is cowardly self-abasement.
      W. Shakespeare
  15. mind1954
    mind1954 3 October 2012 21: 18
    Once again, when I felt what war is, it’s his
    THE WARRIOR'S DIRECT AND HONEST statement: "I tried to shoot,
    first of all, the pilot "!!!
  16. sergey05
    sergey05 4 October 2012 12: 47
    And the Nazis called such people subhuman !!! fool