Luftwaffe Aces: Zahlen, Daten, Fakten

15 572 142
Luftwaffe Aces: Zahlen, Daten, Fakten


Concluding the series of articles Luft Hansa – Luft Hansa – Wings of the Third Reich, Luftwaffe: Phoenix from the Ashes of Versailles и Third Reich Flying Schools: How the Luftwaffe Eagle Grew Its Wings and ClawsLet us once again evaluate the quality of training of German pilots who completed their training according to the scheme of the second half of the 1930s – early 1940s.



As a clear example, let's look at the combat biographies of several Luftwaffe pilots who are still considered among the most professionally trained and successful military pilots of their time.

Werner Mölders


One of the most talented fighter commanders aviation Luftwaffe. The first German pilot to surpass 100 confirmed aerial victories.


Werner Mölders (1913–1941)

During his service, he carried out about 330 combat sorties and achieved 115 aerial victories.

In 1931, even before the Luftwaffe was created, Mölders entered the Reichswehr General Officer School as an Offizieranwärter (officer candidate). At the time, this was the official title for future officers, not cadets.

In 1935, he was transferred to the newly created Air Force and completed the full course of military pilot training. He graduated from the Luftkriegsschule (military aviation school), then specialized fighter pilot training, where he mastered the Arado Ar.68 and later the then-new Messerschmitt Bf.109.

In 1937, he volunteered to join the Condor Legion in Spain, where he gained his first combat experience and won 14 aerial victories.

After returning from Spain, during the French campaign, he was first appointed commander of the I Group of the 53rd Fighter Squadron (I./JG 53), and at the end of September 1939 he was tasked with forming and leading the III Group of this squadron (III./JG 53).

At the end of July 1940 he took command of the 51st Fighter Squadron (JG 51).

Captain Werner Mölders commanded up to 40 aircraft and approximately 500 personnel. He himself continued to actively participate in combat operations and, from May to June 1940, scored another 16 aerial victories.


Photograph from 1940, immediately after another combat mission.

However, on June 5, 1940, his Bf.109 was shot down by a French Dewoitine D.520 fighter. Mölders parachuted out, was captured, and remained in French captivity until the French surrender at the end of June.

From July to November 1941, already on the Eastern Front, he shot down another 85 Soviet aircraft and became the first German pilot to surpass 100 confirmed aerial victories.


The fin of Mölders' Messerschmitt, bearing 101 personal victory markings. Photographed in the autumn of 1941.

Werner Mölders died on November 22, 1941, but not in aerial combat. While returning as a passenger on a Heinkel He.111 bomber from the Eastern Front (Crimea) to Berlin for the funeral of General Ernst Udet, the plane crashed while landing in Breslau.

At the time of his death, Mölders held the rank of colonel (Oberst) and held the general position of inspector of fighter aircraft of the Luftwaffe (Inspekteur der Jagdflieger).

However, in history Mölders was remembered not only as one of the most successful fighter pilots of his time. He is also credited with the development and widespread adoption of the "four-finger formation" (Vierfingerschwarm, literally "four-finger formation")—a dispersed combat formation of four aircraft that provided excellent situational awareness, a wide field of view, effective mutual support, and significantly better protection than the traditional three-aircraft formation.

Although the foundations of this tactic began to take shape during the Spanish Civil War and were developed by several German pilots, it was Mölders who played a key role in its refinement, practical testing, and widespread adoption by Luftwaffe fighter units. Subsequently, the Vierfingerschwarm formation was adopted by virtually all leading air forces worldwide and remains in use in various variations to this day.

Adolph Galland


Werner Mölders's main rival and close friend. One of the most famous German aces, he claimed 104 aerial victories. After Mölders's death, Galland succeeded him as general in November 1941.


Adolf Galland (1912–1996)

After graduating from high school in 1932, Galland applied to the German Commercial Pilots' School (DVS). The competition was colossal: out of 4000 applicants, only about 100 passed the rigorous ten-day testing, and only 18–20 students, including Galland, were allowed to fly. By the end of 1932, he had logged 150 hours of flight time and received his B1 and B2 pilot certificates.

In mid-1933, Galland and his comrades were summoned for a meeting at the Central Civilian Pilots' School (ZVS). Gentlemen in civilian clothes, with a steely glint in their eyes, confidentially explained the nature of the training: they would become the backbone of Germany's future military aviation.

Then there was an internship (military training) at the flight school in Grottaglie (Italy).

In the fall of 1933, Galland returned to Germany. Formally, he was listed as a civil aviation pilot for Lufthansa, but in reality, he was already a professional fighter pilot.

In February 1934, Galland joined the Reichswehr, where he underwent accelerated basic military training and education at the Military School (Kriegsschule) as an officer candidate (Fahnenjunker).

On October 1, 1934, he was promoted to lieutenant (Leutnant), and in January 1935 he was transferred to the officially created Luftwaffe.

In 1935, during a training flight, Galland suffered a serious accident. He suffered multiple skull fractures and severely damaged his left eye. Doctors declared him unable to fly again, but Galland memorized the visual acuity chart, successfully passed the ophthalmological examination, and returned to the skies.

From 1937 to 1938, he fought in Spain. He flew about 300 sorties in the Heinkel He.51, mostly ground-attack missions.


Heinkel He.51 Condor Legion

From 1939 to 1940, he participated in the Polish and French campaigns. In Poland, he continued to fly Henschel Hs.123 attack aircraft.


Henschel Hs.123

In April 1940, he secured a transfer to fighter aviation and shot down 14 aircraft in France.

During the Battle of Britain, he was appointed commander of the 26th Fighter Squadron (Schlageter). During six months of fighting over the English Channel and Great Britain, he shot down another 44 British aircraft, bringing his total to 58 victories.


On the fuselage of the Bf.109 E-4 was Galland's personal emblem - Mickey Mouse with a cigar and a hatchet.

In eleven months of 1941, Galland shot down another 38 British aircraft, increasing his tally to 96 aerial victories.


Avid cigar lover Adolf Galland in the cockpit of his Messerschmitt Bf.109 E-4/N (W.Nr. 5819). The aircraft was the only one in the Luftwaffe equipped with a special cigar holder and an electric cigarette lighter.

At the age of 29, in November 1941, following the death of Werner Mölders, Galland, with the rank of lieutenant colonel, was appointed general inspector of fighter aviation in the Luftwaffe, and by the end of 1942, he had become Germany's youngest lieutenant general. After this, he was banned from regularly flying combat missions, although he continued to fly on occasion.

At the end of the war, on Hitler's personal orders, Galland was tasked with forming a special fighter unit, JV 44 (Jagdverband 44), armed with the latest Messerschmitt Me.262 jet fighters.

It was joked about this squadron that the Knight's Cross was a mandatory part of its pilots' uniform. It boasted such legendary aces as Gerhard Barkhorn (301 victories), Heinz Baer (220 victories), and Walter Krupinski (197 victories).

Galland himself returned to combat missions and, flying the Me.262, scored eight more aerial victories before the end of the war.

Adolf Galland ended the war in battle.

On April 26, 1945, at approximately 11:30 a.m., he launched a group of twelve Messerschmitt Me.262s. Their target was American Martin B-26 Marauder bombers.

For reasons that remain unclear, Galland was unable to use unguided missiles against the bombers as planned. missiles R4M Orkan, therefore, attacked them with cannon fire, shooting down one B-26 Marauder and seriously damaging the second.

However, soon his Me.262, already damaged by bomber gunners, was shot down by an escorting P-47 Thunderbolt fighter. Galland was wounded in the right knee and face. Nevertheless, he managed to reach Munich on one failing engine and land the fighter on its belly.

In total, Adolf Galland flew 705 combat sorties and achieved 104 aerial victories, including eight victories in the Me.262.

After the war, he spent several years in captivity: on May 8, 1945, he surrendered to the Americans, but was then held by the British. He later went to Argentina, where he participated in the creation of the Air Force. Returning to Germany, he became a successful aviation consultant. Galland retained his pilot's license until old age and continued to fly light sport aircraft.

He died in 1996 at the age of 83.

Erich Hartmann and Gerhard Barkhorn



For true aviation history buffs and connoisseurs who read these lines, it would be enough to just name these names and write nothing more.

The most successful fighter pilots in the history of world aviation. Both completed virtually every level of training established by the Luftwaffe and became among the best testaments to the effectiveness of the German military pilot training system.

Erich Hartmann



Erich Hartmann (1922–1993)

In 1936, fourteen-year-old Erich began training at the Glider Club in Weil im Schönbuch, founded and led by his mother, Elisabeth Hartmann, one of Germany's first female pilots. The club enjoyed state support and was financed as part of a program to mass train young people for aviation service through the Flieger-Hitlerjugend (Aviation Hitler Youth). An active member of this organization, Hartmann became a glider instructor while still a teenager.

Between 1937 and 1939, he earned his motorized pilot's license under the auspices of the Nationalsozialistisches Fliegerkorps (NSFK)—the National Socialist Air Corps, which trained the Luftwaffe's reserves. He was called up for military service in the Luftwaffe on October 1, 1940.

In 1940–1941, Hartmann completed his initial military and flight training at Flieger-Ausbildungs-Regiment 10 (Neukuhren), after which he studied at the Second Air Force School (Luftkriegsschule 2) in Gatow near Berlin.

In late 1941 and early 1942, he continued his studies at the Jagdfliegervorschule 2, a preliminary training school for fighter pilots, where he mastered the basics of aerial combat and aerial gunnery.

During training, Hartmann demonstrated superb piloting skills and remarkable accuracy with his onboard weapons. During his first practice runs, he scored twenty-four hits out of fifty rounds fired at a towed cone—a result considered excellent.

From spring to late summer 1942, he continued his training at the Jagdfliegerschule 2 fighter school (Zerbst), where he literally perfected his skills in flying the Messerschmitt Bf.109 aircraft.

In August 1942, he completed advanced aerial shooting training in Gleiwitz.

In October 1942, with the rank of lieutenant (Leutnant), he completed the full fighter pilot training course and was sent to the 7th Squadron of the 52nd Fighter Squadron (7./JG 52), operating in the Caucasus direction of the Eastern Front.

For the first few months, he flew as a wingman for experienced aces Alfred Grislawski and Walter Krupinski. By the end of the war, Walter Krupinski had 197 kills to his credit, ranking 16th in the world. Alfred Grislawski had 133 official victories, ranking 36th in the world for kills.

Hartmann achieved his first aerial victory—an Il-2—on November 5, 1942, during his nineteenth combat mission. Over the next three months, he managed to shoot down one more aircraft.

However, by the summer of 1943, his performance had increased dramatically. In July, he shot down seven Soviet aircraft in a single day, and by August, his total had increased to 49 victories. In September 1943 alone, Hartmann claimed another 24 aerial victories.


Hartmann's tactic, perfected to the point of automatism, was the ambush strike. According to his own account, about 80% of the Soviet pilots he shot down never realized they were under attack.

“If you see an enemy plane, you do not have to immediately rush at it and attack. Wait and use all your benefits. Evaluate what order and tactics the enemy is using. Evaluate if the adversary has a lost or inexperienced pilot. Such a pilot is always visible in the air. Shoot it down. It’s much more useful to set fire to only one thing than to get involved in an 20 minute carousel without achieving anything. ”


Hartmann typically attacked vertically from below, out of the enemy's blind spot, or from above in a steep dive. He opened fire at extremely close range, 50-80 meters, and then immediately broke away from any pursuers.

In general, it is no coincidence that some Russian researchers of the history of the Great Patriotic War even dubbed Hartmann the “Cowardly Knight of the Reich.”

Hartmann avoided protracted maneuvering battles, considering them an unjustified loss of time and advantages.

He defined his tactics extremely succinctly: “Saw - decided - attacked - broke away».

It is written that throughout the war, Erich Hartmann was never shot down by an enemy fighter or by airborne gunners. However, he was forced to make emergency landings sixteen times due to damage caused by debris from downed aircraft, anti-aircraft fire, or technical malfunctions.

By the end of September 1943, Erich Hartmann already had more than 70 victories.


Hartmann and his Messerschmitt Bf.109G, callsign "Karaya 1." A heart pierced by an arrow, drops of blood, and the inscription "Ursci"—a romantic dedication to his beloved and future wife, Ursula Paetsch.

On August 19, 1943, during an attack on a group of Soviet Il-2 attack aircraft, covered by Yak-9 and La-5 fighters, his Messerschmitt Bf.109G was damaged by debris from one of the Il-2s it had struck. Hartmann was forced to make an emergency landing behind enemy lines, where he was captured.

Taking advantage of the favorable moment and displaying literally fox-like agility, he soon managed to escape and, having crossed the front line, returned to the location of his unit.

In 1944, Hartmann had to conduct air battles not only with Soviet aircraft, but also with the American Air Force, recording eight P-51 Mustang fighters to his credit.

By the end of the war, Hartmann had flown over 1400 combat sorties, fought in approximately 825 air battles, and officially claimed 352 aerial victories, 344 of which were claimed on the Soviet-German front. However, these figures should hardly be taken at face value. Hartmann's second flight log, which contained records of a significant number of his "victories," disappeared without a trace, a fact that still raises questions among historians.

Hartmann himself has repeatedly said that he considers his most precious achievement not the number of victories, but the fact that he did not lose a single wingman during the entire war.

After Germany's capitulation, Hartmann was sentenced to 25 years in prison by a Soviet court, but spent ten and a half years in captivity and was released in 1955.

In 1956 he returned to the Federal Republic of Germany and became the first commander of the fighter squadron JG 71 "Richthofen" of the new Luftwaffe.

In 1970, Erich Hartmann retired with the rank of colonel (Oberst). He later worked as a flight instructor and briefly performed in an aerobatic team with Adolf Galland.

Hartmann died in 1993 at the age of 71.

Gerhard Barkhorn


Gerhard Barkhorn was one of the most distinguished graduates of the German fighter pilot training system. He completed the full Luftwaffe training program and became the world's second-highest-scoring ace after Erich Hartmann. During the war, Barkhorn flew 1104 combat sorties and claimed 301 confirmed aerial victories, all but seven of which were achieved on the Eastern Front.


Gerhard Barkhorn (1919–1983)

On November 1, 1937, he volunteered for service in the Luftwaffe as an officer candidate (Offizieranwärter).

He completed basic military training, after which he studied at one of the Luftkriegsschulen (Luftwaffe air force schools). Prior to this, he had no prior flight training of any kind.

He completed his pilot training on 27 August 1939 and immediately, from 1 September 1939, continued his fighter pilot training at the Schleißheim Pilot School (Jagdfliegerschule Schleißheim), and from 1 December of the same year to 7 January 1940 he underwent further training at the Merseburg Fighter Replenishment Group (Jagdergänzungsgruppe Merseburg).

During the training in fighter air science, the best instructors of the Luftwaffe worked with Barkhorn, but it turned out like in the song: “The teachers wasted their time with me..." - they assessed his abilities as "terrible».

One way or another, he completed his training and, with the rank of lieutenant (Leutnant), was sent to the 2nd Group of the 52nd Fighter Squadron (II./JG 52) on January 10, 1940.

As part of this unit, he participated in operations against Great Britain. Without achieving a single victory, he was shot down twice by the British.

Just over a year after beginning his combat service, having completed approximately 120 combat sorties, Barkhorn scored his first aerial victory on July 2, 1941, already on the Eastern Front. His example clearly demonstrates that even graduates of the German system, which provided an excellent foundation and had undergone special training, became true masters and aces in combat units, primarily thanks to their accumulated combat experience.

In fact, Barkhorn was somewhat fortunate. Despite the fact that, according to various sources, he parachuted or made emergency landings from damaged aircraft at least nine times, sustaining numerous injuries in the process, he returned to duty each time after treatment.


Gerhard Barkhorn inscribed "Christl", his wife's name, on the fuselage of his Messerschmitt Bf.109G fighter.

Barkhorn suffered his most serious and final injury on January 5, 1945, in Hungary, when his Bf.109G was hit in aerial combat. Barkhorn managed to land the plane, but suffered serious injuries and never saw combat again.

He ended the war with the rank of major and was captured by the Americans, but, unlike Hartmann, he was released a year later, in September 1946.

For about ten years he led a quiet civilian life, removed from aviation and the army.

In 1956, after the creation of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Germany (Bundeswehr), he returned to military service in the Luftwaffe and completed a conversion course for modern jet aircraft in Great Britain.

From 1958 to 1962, Barkhorn commanded the famous German fighter-bomber squadron JaBoG 31 Boelcke, which was the first in Germany to receive into service (to its misfortune) the then-new American F-104 Starfighter fighters.

In the mid-1960s, while testing the British experimental vertical takeoff and landing aircraft Kestrel (the prototype for the legendary Harrier), Barkhorn crash-landed and destroyed the aircraft. As the wounded pilot was being pulled from the cockpit, he muttered ironically, "302!"—a reference to the fact that he had officially shot down 301 enemy aircraft during the war.

He later held high staff positions in NATO structures and retired in 1976 with the rank of either major general or lieutenant general.

On January 6, 1983, Gerhard Barkhorn and his wife, Christl, were involved in a serious car accident. His wife died instantly, and the 63-year-old Barkhorn died from his injuries two days later, on January 8, 1983.

If we compare the beginning of the combat careers of Barkhorn and Hartmann, we can immediately come to the conclusion that the impeccable training system itself did not turn all flight school graduates into aces.

While Hartmann achieved his first victory just a few weeks after arriving at the front, it took Barkhorn over a year and around 120 combat sorties before he opened his account. But this German system provided an excellent foundation for even new pilots to become true masters, immersed in the realities of everyday frontline military life and gaining their first combat experience.

To conclude this story of the Third Reich's outstanding fighter pilots, I'd simply like to present the top ten most successful fighter pilots in the world, which includes exclusively German Luftwaffe pilots who fought primarily on the Eastern Front:


Thus, the Luftwaffe's elite fighter force consisted of approximately 470–480 pilots with at least 50 confirmed aerial victories. Of these, 102 pilots surpassed 100 victories, 13 surpassed 200 victories, and two surpassed 300 aircraft shot down.

Chronicle of a Dive Attack Plane


We will talk about the most successful pilot of the Luftwaffe bomber-attack aviation, who completed more than 2530 combat sorties.

Probably, Yulian Semyonov wrote about similar types: “A true Aryan, an excellent athlete, a strong Nordic character, impeccably fulfills his official duty, merciless to the enemies of the Reich»

Hans-Ulrich Rudel


Hans-Ulrich Rudel (1916–1982)

At the age of seventeen, Rudel joined the Hitler Youth. In the summer of 1936, he applied for officer service in the Luftwaffe and successfully passed the entrance exams. He then completed six months of compulsory labor service in the Reichsarbeitsdienst (RAD).

Imperial law required young men to participate in this program before military service:
"All young Germans of both sexes are obliged to serve their people in the Reich Labor Service».

On December 4, 1936, Rudel enlisted as a cadet (Fahnenjunker) at the 3rd Luftwaffe Air Force School in Wildpark-Werder near Berlin. In June 1938, he was promoted to Oberfähnrich—akin to senior warrant officer—and transferred to Graz-Thalerhof in Austria to train as a dive bomber pilot.

He then continued his training as an observer pilot at the air reconnaissance school in Hildesheim and graduated in January 1939 with the rank of lieutenant.

On June 1, 1939, Rudel began serving as an observer pilot in the 121st Long-Range Reconnaissance Squadron and, with this unit, participated in the Polish Campaign. Following this, in the summer of 1940, he secured a transfer to a Junkers Ju.87 dive bomber unit.

With the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War, Rudel fought on the Eastern Front with the rank of senior lieutenant, where he quickly acquired a reputation as an exceptionally daring and highly professional pilot.

Rudel is credited with inflicting a devastating blow on the battleship Marat at Kronstadt. A bomb dropped from his Ju.87 struck the forward main gun turret and detonated the ammunition. The battleship grounded in shallow water, although its stern remained above water for a long time.


An aerial photograph of the damaged battleship Marat.

In subsequent raids, Rudel was credited with damaging a cruiser and a destroyer.

Historians have different opinions on these episodes, but the fact of Rudel’s participation in these operations is beyond doubt.

From January to August 1942, he took virtually no part in combat sorties, being busy training and commissioning new crews.

On August 15, 1942, Rudel returned to the front again at the head of the 2nd Squadron of Sturzkampfgeschwader 2, fighting in the Caucasus and over the Black Sea.

On February 10, 1943, he became the first pilot in the world to complete his 1000th combat sortie.


Rudel's Junkers. Photograph taken in 1943.

On April 1, 1943, Rudel was promoted to captain for “special courage in the face of the enemy».

In the spring of 1943, during the battle for the Malaya Zemlya bridgehead, Rudel, flying a pre-production Junkers Ju.87D-3, equipped with two underwing 37-mm BK 3,7 cannons (based on the Flak 18 anti-aircraft gun) with six-round magazines per gun, destroyed a total of 70 Soviet amphibious landing craft. His aircraft was equipped with a special movie camera. This film was later shown for propaganda purposes in the German newsreel "Die Deutsche Wochenschau," in which even rafts, longboats, and motorboats were transformed into "Soviet landing craft", and even single shell hits were interpreted as "destruction».

In July 1943, he began flying the serial anti-tank modification of the Junkers Ju.87G, armed with the same 37mm cannons. According to German reports, Rudel set twelve Soviet tanks on fire in his very first combat mission. tanks T-34.

Today, there is serious doubt that this was indeed the case, but by that time Rudel had already become one of the main symbols of the Third Reich's war propaganda, and the Germans' faith in his "superhuman" abilities was unshakable.


Hans-Ulrich Rudel's Junkers Ju.87G "Stuka" dive bomber, equipped with underwing 37mm anti-tank cannons when the engine was started by a hand crank (crank).

On October 30, 1943, his official tally of destroyed tanks reached 100.

On January 11, 1944, after the destruction of his 150th tank, Rudel's Ju.87G was shot down.

On February 22, 1944, Rudel was appointed commander of the III group of Sturzkampfgeschwader 2, and on March 1 he was awarded the rank of major.

On March 25, 1944, he flew his 1800th combat mission. His name was mentioned personally in the Wehrmacht High Command reports on March 27 and 28 after, according to German data, he destroyed 26 Soviet tanks and several other armored vehicles in two days.

On August 6, 1944, Rudel's name appears again in a Wehrmacht report in connection with the fact that he "hit 11 tanks and thus raised the number of those hit by the onboard weapons tanks up to 300».


Rudel explains how to more effectively destroy the T-34

On August 19, 1944, Rudel's Junkers was again hit by anti-aircraft fire approximately 100 kilometers east of Riga, but he managed to land the plane practically on the front line - fortunately for him, on the German side.

On 1 September 1944, Rudel was promoted to lieutenant colonel (Oberstleutnant) and took command of the 2nd Assault Squadron Schlachtgeschwader 2 (SG 2) "Immelmann".

Despite receiving a severe bullet wound to the thigh on November 17, 1944, Rudel, after interrupting treatment, soon resumed flying ground-attack missions. By December 22, 1944, he had flown 2400 combat sorties and officially destroyed 463 tanks.

One important detail is worth noting here. The Germans meticulously recorded the destruction of targets, including tanks. However, in the German accounting system stricken the tank was often counted as destroyed, although in fact some of these vehicles were subsequently evacuated and returned to service.

On February 9, 1945, Rudel's Ju.87G was shot down by Soviet anti-aircraft guns. artillery near Frankfurt (Oder). Rudel himself suffered a serious injury to his right leg, but managed to land the burning plane again.

As a result of the injury, the lower part of the leg had to be amputated.

On March 25, 1945, Rudel returned to his squadron, and on April 4, despite the unhealed stump from the amputation, he began flying combat missions again.


On the right is Rudel, without the lower part of his leg, on crutches.

Over the next twenty days of April, according to German data, he destroyed another 26 Soviet tanks.

On May 8, 1945, Colonel Rudel and the remnants of his squadron flew from Bohemia to Kitzingen, Bavaria, where he surrendered to American forces.


A still from a short film shot on May 8th while already in American captivity. Rudel is pleased...

To summarize the literally horrific combat career of Rudel the Stormtrooper, it's enough to cite just a few figures. He was officially credited with destroying 519 tanks in 2530 combat sorties. In addition, he destroyed over 800 vehicles, over 150 artillery and anti-aircraft positions, four armored trains, numerous bunkers, bridges, and logistics hubs. Furthermore, Rudel claimed nine confirmed aerial victories. Or rather, those were his air gunners.

For most of the war he flew the Junkers Ju.87G Kanonenvogel, although in the last months of the war he also flew combat sorties in the anti-tank modification of the Focke-Wulf Fw.190.

During the war, Rudel was shot down thirty times by Soviet anti-aircraft artillery. He was wounded five times, but somehow survived each time.

In Buenos Aires, he created the Kameradenwerk organization, which provided comprehensive assistance to hiding Nazis, including war criminals.

This activity wasn't limited to material support. Its ideological component was equally important: Rudel regularly published articles in the National Socialist journal Der Weg ("The Path").

Rudel's activities were extraordinarily extensive. He served as a military advisor to several Latin American dictatorships, traded arms, worked at the Argentine Aeronautical Institute, and lobbied for import licenses and government contracts. He maintained close contacts with the cocaine barons of Bolivia, the regime of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, and the dictatorship of Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay.

In the Federal Republic of Germany, Rudel supported various right-wing radical organizations and parties. Moreover, in 1953, he ran for the Bundestag as the leading candidate of the right-wing German Reich Party (DRP).

Until the last days of his life, he actively contributed to the dissemination and preservation of Nazi ideology in the international arena.

At the same time, his "roof" was almost perfect. In South America, Rudel was "foreign representative" several German companies, including Siemens. Furthermore, he had influential Vatican officials behind him. Bishop Alois Hudal, one of the most notorious organizers of Nazi flight from Europe after the war, actively assisted him.

But fortunately, his time of service to the cause of National Socialism, to which he had dedicated his entire adult life, was short-lived. On December 18, 1982, Rudel died of a stroke at the age of 66.

He was buried in Germany, but the “denazified” Germans still distinguished themselves.

A scandal erupted at his funeral on December 22, 1982, when several Phantoms and one F-104 Starfighter of the German Luftwaffe flew over his grave in a tribute to Adolf Hitler's greatest attack pilot.

The Ministry of Defence's investigation report claimed that at the time, "routine training flights"that the military aircraft did not deviate from the predetermined course and flew"at some distance from this named territory».

That is, the people who claimed that planes flew over the funeral site, «succumbed to an optical illusion"...

The result without illusions


I remember when I was just a kid, my uncle Vasily Ivanovich Petrov, who fought throughout the war, was wounded many times, and was captured by the Germans, saying that Hitler's Wehrmacht was some kind of fantastic military machine, composed of superbly trained soldiers and the most advanced technology of the time. That this was also firmly woven into the fabric of the inhuman Nazi ideology, I realized much later.

While collecting material for the published series of articles, I tried once again to understand how our fathers and grandfathers were able to dismantle this murder machine literally screw by screw.

I absolutely do not want to compare the aces of the Luftwaffe with the heroic pilots of the Red and, later, Soviet Air Forces. I do not want to compare the performance characteristics of the aircraft of both sides or the methods for counting aerial victories.

Then, in 1945, through some superhuman effort, our Motherland achieved victory. Our Soviet people, at the front and in the rear, shattered that seemingly all-conquering and invincible military machine of Germany, and in essence, of a united Europe. They shattered it both in the air and on the ground.

Today, no one is trying to hide the fact that the world has launched the process of creating a new military machine for the 21st century, fueled by the wild ideas and ambitions of the past.

And I really want to hope and believe that my beloved Motherland will never again experience the horror that it had to endure in 1941.
142 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    31 July 2026 04: 10
    Write more. Why should we feel sorry for these infidels? (C) A.V. Suvorov.
    1. +6
      31 July 2026 12: 33
      Warspot.ru did a good analysis of Erich Hartmann's victories. They compared his claims for a certain period with data from our archives. I don't remember the exact numbers, but he claimed around 15 Soviet aircraft shot down, while our archives are 100% certain he shot down one aircraft, and possibly one in a group. Meanwhile, the claims of other German pilots in that sector during that period roughly matched our loss data.
      In short, he's a hero of the propaganda machine. And he's far from the only one.
  2. + 13
    31 July 2026 04: 45
    If the Stuka with cannons was so effective against Soviet tanks, why were only a few hundred of them produced?
    If German aces were so effective against Soviet pilots, then why, when transferred to the Western Front, did their effectiveness drop sharply against Western pilots?
    Inconsistencies, inconsistencies...
    1. + 13
      31 July 2026 05: 52
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      If the Stuka with cannons was so effective against Soviet tanks, why were only a few hundred of them produced?

      Because the Stuka's effectiveness depended directly on its pilot. Rudel was a phenomenon, and there can't be many of those. Expecting all Stuka pilots to be like Rudel was frankly foolish. Results depended on the average combat pilot, not the ace.
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      If German aces were so effective against Soviet pilots, then why, when transferred to the Western Front, did their effectiveness drop sharply against Western pilots?

      The level of training and technical characteristics of enemy aircraft. Fighting a British pilot with seven months of training and 210 hours of flight time under his belt, especially in an all-metal Spitfire, is a different matter than fighting a pilot who has just barely mastered takeoff and landing skills in a half-wooden/cloth Yak-1.
      1. +7
        31 July 2026 06: 13
        Quote: Puncher
        Because the Stuka's effectiveness depended directly on its pilot. Rudel was a phenomenon, and there can't be many of those. Expecting all Stuka pilots to be like Rudel was frankly foolish. Results depended on the average combat pilot, not the ace.

        Rudel couldn't have been an order of magnitude stronger than a pilot with average training. And even if he had been, purely theoretically, 50 tanks destroyed per pilot would have been a huge advantage, one the Germans would have held on to to the bitter end. So, Rudel's 500 tanks are a sham.

        Quote: Puncher
        The level of training and technical characteristics of enemy aircraft. Fighting a British pilot with seven months of training and 210 hours of flight time under his belt, especially in an all-metal Spitfire, is a different matter than fighting a pilot who has just barely mastered takeoff and landing skills in a half-wooden/cloth Yak-1.

        Yes, but then why are the most successful Allied pilots Soviet?
        But this is not important.
        Which Yak-1 are you talking about?
        Hartmann only started to get going in mid-1943, when the Yaks were no longer what they used to be and the Las became FNs, or even 7s.

        So the fact that Hartmann shot down fewer than a dozen Western aircraft is an indication that Western pilots were significantly more powerful than Soviet ones? Well, the Airacobras are an American aircraft, if you know what I mean.
        So the huge bills of Hartmann and others are just as much crap as Rudel's 500 tanks.
        1. +1
          31 July 2026 07: 41
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Rudel could not have been an order of magnitude stronger than a pilot with average training.

          Can you prove that the average Stuka pilot had over 1000 combat sorties?
          Yes, but then why are the most successful Allied pilots Soviet?

          It all comes down to the reality of the count.
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Which Yak-1 are you talking about?

          Mmm... you don't know the Yak-1?
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Hartmann only got going in mid-1943, when the Yaks were no longer what they used to be and the Las had become FN-class.

          What have they changed in the construction materials?
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          So the huge bills of Hartmann and others are just as much crap as Rudel's 500 tanks.

          It's so convenient... I remember Lidiya Litvyak's analysis of the results on Tactical Media, based on the "declared and archived" scheme. The results confirmed one Bf 109G-4 #14999 "White 7" piloted by Unteroffizier Helmuth Schirra and one Ju 87D-3 W.Nr.2948 "S2+JN" from 5./StG 77, crewed by pilot Feldwebel Gerhard Weber and war correspondent Unteroffizier Heinz Hahn, flying as an aerial gunner, with the participation of regiment commander Lieutenant Colonel N.I. Baranov.
          1. +2
            31 July 2026 09: 47
            Quote: Puncher
            Can you prove that the average Stuka pilot had over 1000 combat sorties?

            Are you unfamiliar with the concept of "order"? That's ten times over. So, are you claiming that the average Stuka pilot had fewer than 250 sorties? Or even 100...
            Rudel was a very lucky ghoul, in terms of survivability, that's what his 2500 sorties show...

            Quote: Puncher

            It all comes down to the reality of the count.
            So you're confident in the authenticity of the Germans' accounts, but not the Soviet pilots'...

            Quote: Puncher
            Mmm... you don't know the Yak-1?
            Are you trying to convince me that the Yak-1 remained unchanged from 1940 to 1943? Or do you honestly believe that? Well, no, from 1942 onward, it had more powerful engines and improved aerodynamics. And the Yak-7, from 42 onward. And the La-5—did we forget? And that's from 42. Hartmann started racking up the numbers in 43.

            Quote: Puncher
            What have they changed in the construction materials?
            The Mosquito, the best light bomber of WWII, was a mixed bag. The Yak-3, the best light fighter of WWII, was a mixed bag. Is this news to you? The material, given its specifics, is not a death sentence.


            Quote: Puncher
            I remember Tactic Media analyzing Lidiya Litvyak's results according to the stated and archived scheme.
            Confirmed, is it like this?

            The 73rd Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment suffered no losses of aircraft or personnel that day...
            ...It is highly likely that pilots from 2. and 3./JG 52 participated in this battle on the German side, claiming victories over two Il-2s and one Yak-1 between 17:50 and 17:57.

            That is, there is no certainty as to who exactly fought against us in a particular battle...

            As I see it, you're diverting attention from the main point: why did Hartmann, fighting against Soviet pilots—let me remind you, in case you've forgotten—start racking up a huge score when the individual skill, tactics, and equipment of the Air Force became comparable to those of the Lufwaffe. But as soon as he encountered Western pilots, he plummeted.
            But elementary logic, based on the number and scores of aces among the Allies, also speaks of the comparable quality of our and Western pilots and aircraft.
            And this means that Hartmann's and others' accounts are inflated. By an order of magnitude. Unlike Litvyak's account, for example.
            1. +2
              31 July 2026 10: 33
              So you're claiming that the average Stuka pilot had fewer than 250 sorties? Or even 100...

              I suppose so. 100 combat sorties is quite a lot. 200 combat sorties is very fortunate. More than 500 is already extremely fortunate, 2500 is simply fantastic. Compare the performance of a fighter and an attack aircraft. Attack aircraft always have a higher probability of counteraction; either a fighter will try to shoot you down or anti-aircraft artillery will try to shoot you down, while a fighter might not even find an enemy in the air. For example, Rechkalov had 452 combat sorties, and 122 air battles. Compare this to Efimov's attack aircraft, which completed 288 combat sorties. In how many of them did he not have to dodge enemy shells and bullets?
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Rudel was a very lucky ghoul.

              That's the word, he was incredibly lucky. You can dispute his success rate as much as you like, but no one has ever tried to dispute his luck.
              So you're confident in the authenticity of the Germans' accounts, but not the Soviet pilots'...

              Of course not, everyone's exaggerating or wishful thinking. The Germans have an average of 1 to 2. Even so, Hartmann is the best. But we don't usually use it on ourselves when applying it to the enemy.
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Well, no, with 42 there are more powerful engines and improved aerodynamics.

              And how is it any better than the Messer? It still struggled to breathe above 4 km.
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              The Mosquito, WWII's finest light bomber, was a mixed bag.

              The Mosquito is all about altitude and speed, not maneuvers that bend the spars under G-forces. An all-metal aircraft will always be stronger than a composite construction aircraft.
              But as soon as it collided with the Western ones, it immediately dropped sharply.

              Because fighting in the east, he encountered enemies with inferior equipment. He could exploit his altitude advantage, something he couldn't in the west. He couldn't compare to an American in a Thunderbolt, who could outrun him at 10 kilometers and then give him the cold shoulder. He himself became a victim, because you can't fly for long on nitrous oxide, and the Thunderbolt has a turbocharger and fuel with an octane rating of almost 150.
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              The number and scores of aces among the Allies also speaks of the comparable quality of our and Western pilots and aircraft.

              You're counting by aces, but you should be counting by the average pilot. If your average pilot has his own kill count, then how can an ace have a high kill count? And if your average pilot has zero kills, then of course an ace will have a high kill count.
              For example, No. 249 Squadron RAF defended Malta, with an average of 25 pilots fighting there; a total of 120 pilots served on Malta. The unit claimed 245 enemy aircraft shot down. The best was George Frederick Beurling, who shot down 26 aircraft in 120 days, flying a Supermarine Spitfire Mk.VC. Wally McLeod was closer, with 13 kills, half as many as Beurling. Of the 120 pilots, 28 shot down five enemy aircraft, while almost everyone else had at least one kill.
              1. -3
                31 July 2026 11: 49
                Quote: Puncher
                100 combat sorties is quite a lot. 200 combat sorties is very successful.

                Of course, that's a lot. But not prohibitive. This is precisely the AVERAGE result. Specifically, combat sorties without combat.

                Quote: Puncher
                The Germans have an average of 1 to 2. Even so, Hartmann is the best.

                Well, yes.
                Following the week-long battle from May 30 to June 6, 1944, Hartmann claimed 35 victories (24 Airacobras and 11 LaGGs, primarily Yaks) and became the highest-scoring ace of the Battle of Iași. Of these claims, only one is unequivocally confirmed in Soviet documents, while another 6–7 Soviet fighters could, with varying degrees of probability, have been the victims of Hartmann, as well as other German pilots. According to the author, during the week-long battles near Iași, the "blond knight" shot down or destroyed no more than 4–5 Soviet aircraft, inflating his actual tally by 7–8 times.

                https://tacticmedia.ru/articles/khartman-nad-yassami-fantazii-v-pogone-za-mechami/?ysclid=ms8oc3h36i967109077

                Quote: Puncher
                And how is it any better than the Messer? It still struggled to breathe above 4 km.
                But the battles were fought at an average altitude of no more than 3 kilometers. And yes, let me remind you that we're talking about '43-'44-'45. What Yak-1?


                Quote: Puncher
                Mosquito is about altitude and speed, but not about maneuvers where the spars bend under overload.
                What about the Yak-3? It's getting ridiculous...

                Quote: Puncher
                Because fighting in the east, he encountered enemies with inferior equipment. He could exploit the advantage of altitude, something he couldn't do in the west.
                The battles continued up to 3, well, 4 km. By that time, the USSR had already fully echeloned its fighter formations by altitude, so zooming in under such conditions was dangerous. Especially against attack aircraft.
                There was no longer any advantage.

                Quote: Puncher
                If your average pilot has his own kill tally, how can an ace have a high score? And if your average pilot has zero kills, then of course an ace will have a high score.
                So what does this prove, do you even understand? That the Soviet Air Force shot down the Germans with only three, five, or a hundred aces?
                And yes, how do you explain this paradox:
                2/3 of the Luftwaffe fought in the West and Africa, with 70% of losses occurring in these areas.

                Despite the supposedly many times greater losses of backlash in the West, the scores of Western aces are more modest than those of the Soviet ones.
                Contradiction...
                1. MSN
                  +3
                  31 July 2026 13: 56
                  But the battles were fought at an average altitude of no more than 3 kilometers. And yes, let me remind you that we're talking about '43-'44-'45. What Yak-1?

                  That's not what it's called. The sky above 3 km was unconditionally surrendered to the Germans—that's what it's called. Hunters on the 109 would dive from 5 km, attack in this "combat zone on the Eastern Front" of yours, and then climb back up. Just like home. And the Ju-88s with the 111s would fly there too—at 5-6-7 km. Just like home. The fighting was only at 3 km. Pokryshkin's "shelf" is precisely the method of fighting. The upper echelon operated at 5 km. Although the Cobra isn't the best in terms of altitude, they tried.
                  What about the Yak-3? It's getting ridiculous...

                  Immediately after the war, all Yak-3s were grounded due to wings falling off. Didn't you know? Yes, and the Yak-1 was produced until July 1944.
                  1. 0
                    2 August 2026 07: 49
                    Quote: MSN
                    The sky above 3 km was unconditionally given to the Germans - that's what it's called. Hunters on the 109 would dive from 5 km, attack in this "combat zone on the Eastern Front" of yours, and then fly back up. Just like home. And the Ju-88s with the 111s would fly there too - at 5-6-7 km. Just like home. The fighting was only up to 3 km. Pokryshkin's "shelf" is precisely that method of fighting. The upper echelon was 5 km away and walked.

                    You contradict yourself in one paragraph. And bombing from 5 km away dropped sharply in effectiveness.
                    Both the Cobras and the Las confidently resisted both the Me and the FV at 5 km.
                    But that's not the important thing. What matters is that when attacking from above, Messerschmitts and FVs fall downwards, which, due to their altitude separation, creates problems for attackers when exiting the attack. That's only if we're talking about fighters; bombers and attack aircraft also need to be attacked.
                    But 5 km is still an average altitude. And at these altitudes, our planes flew confidently.

                    Quote: MSN
                    Immediately after the war, all Yak-3s were grounded due to wings falling off. Did you know?
                    No, why should I be privy to someone else's lies? The Yak-3 had wing skin problems, even to the point of destruction, but they were resolved at the start of its service. The French Yak-3s flew until 47, and the South Koreans until the mid-50s.
                    Yes, it was produced until 46. Why are you spreading some kind of nonsense?


                    Quote: MSN
                    Yes, and the Yak-1 was produced until July 1944
                    So, you are trying to convince that the Yak-1 mod. 1940 and the Yak-1 mod. 44 are the same machine?
                    Not surprised...
                    1. MSN
                      0
                      2 August 2026 15: 26
                      So, you are trying to convince that the Yak-1 mod. 1940 and the Yak-1 mod. 44 are the same machine?
                      Not surprised...

                      Well, if we look at pure performance characteristics, the difference is simply colossal. The maximum speed of the I-26-II model 1940 is 595 km/h. And the speed of the Yak-1b factory No. 13150 (September 1943) is a whopping 597 km/h. "A whopping 597" because these 597 are real; thanks to three years of improved cooling systems, the Yak-3 and Yak-1b model 1944 could finally fly without chronic overheating. At the same time, the VK-105PA model 1940 has a maximum altitude of 4000 meters, while the VK-105PF of the Yaks of the 1943-44 model is 2700 meters. And rightly so. Who needs that altitude? But at least there's more power at ground level. And not without sabotage. Two high-speed ShKAS (the ones Hitler had in his museum) were replaced with a single 12,7 BS. Well, that seems to be the end of the colossal difference. If anyone has anything to add, I'm always happy to hear it.
                      The Yak-3 had problems with its wing covering, even to the point of destruction, but these were resolved at the start of its service life.

                      The problem of mating metal spars to the wooden wing structure was never solved. It was resolved by switching to an all-metal wing on the Yak-9. The Yak-3 was being cut up at the time.
                  2. -1
                    2 August 2026 16: 06
                    Fairy tales. Even at the beginning of WWII, high-altitude MiGs existed, but they weren't in great demand; the Germans themselves preferred to fight at low and medium altitudes.
                    1. MSN
                      +1
                      2 August 2026 17: 38
                      Quote: Illanatol
                      Even at the beginning of WWII, there were high-altitude MiGs, but they were not in great demand; the Germans themselves preferred to fight at low and medium altitudes.

                      MiGs weren't in demand in 1941? That's not a fairy tale, it's nonsense. On June 30, 1941, six regiments of test pilots were created at the Air Force Research Institute and the People's Commissariat of the Aviation Industry and sent to the front. Two fighter regiments with MiG-3s, one attack regiment with the IL-2, two dive-bomber regiments with the Pe-2, and a long-range bomber regiment with the TB-7. The test pilots—the best of all the USSR—chose MiGs. Later, a reconnaissance squadron was formed, again with MiGs, and they were covered by LaGGs. And no Yaks.
                      MiG-3 production ceased for a very common reason in the USSR for abandoning production of any aircraft: a lack of engines. The AM was needed to produce the Il-2. For the same reason, the Tu-2 was not produced, even though it could have been sent to the front from the very beginning of the war.
              2. +1
                1 August 2026 11: 14
                We always need "leaders" who will set an example for others. This has been an essential element of propaganda since ancient times. It applies to all spheres. Creating the image of a "leader," if needed, is not at all difficult. One of the main rules: the "leader" should have a typical biography and be photogenic.
          2. +3
            31 July 2026 10: 14
            Quote: Puncher
            I remember there was an analysis of Lidiya Litvyak's results on Tactical Media according to the stated scheme and confirmed by archives.

            Have you even looked into these archives and to what extent they can confirm the downing of an aircraft? I'm familiar with this "new-fangled methodology." Using this "method," "new-wave historians" credit Kozhedub with 11 kills, and Pokryshkin (out of kindness) with... fellow As many as 14! And so on! I don't have time to write a long post, but this calculation method (even a first approximation) is, to put it mildly, for the feeble-minded. Forum members can figure it out themselves.
            1. 0
              31 July 2026 10: 57
              Quote: Proxima
              Have you even looked into these archives yourself and to what extent they can confirm the downed plane?

              I trust these guys. They're quite meticulous about these issues. Even though they're a patriotic resource, they don't try to embellish the facts or hide the negative aspects. They're not "new wave historians."
              Quote: Proxima
              I don't have time to write a long post, but this calculation method (even in first approximation) is, to put it mildly, for the feeble-minded.

              It's not about methodology, but about attitude. The enemy overstates, the allies overstate, but we're all honest. That doesn't happen.
              1. -3
                31 July 2026 11: 46
                Quote: Puncher
                The enemy overstates, the allies overstate, and we're all honest. That doesn't happen.

                Of course it doesn't happen! We had some padding too, but it's a drop in the ocean fellow "incomplete entries". Example: a group of fighters went to escort Ilyushins, and one fighter shot down a Messer. Not only was the kill not counted, but his combat mission was completely annulled. The reason? Il-2 losses to enemy fighters. And this guy wasn't at all to blame; he wanted to fire a burst at the Messer, but he hit it. It happens. request. Next. The plane crashes behind the front lines, that's it, it's all over! negative What confirmation? What partisans? They probably have nothing better to do! Moreover, even if it's on friendly territory, the pilot will have to indicate the crash site. Who will keep track of him in the heat of battle?! It's not easy to find an airplane on friendly territory either, especially in a dense forest or a swamp... And you have to remember that the pilot is liable to a considerable penalty for shooting down a plane. cash payment, and this is already theft with all the consequences! The finance chief must have ironclad evidence of the shootdown to avoid going to jail! It gets even worse. Vershinin, for example, wouldn't even let that pass. He wanted the slightly dismantled serial number of the downed plane! As Pokryshkin used to say, "This one was shot down for Victory." Very convenient: no need to pay Pobeda any money, and no need to bother searching for the plane either.
                But with the Luftwaffe, everything is much simpler! Fill out the forms correctly and maintain the camera angle (if there is one, of course).
                1. 0
                  1 August 2026 20: 03
                  There's a study comparing our claimed kills with German losses based on their records for the Arctic Front—it's an isolated area with few sorties, making it easy to compare. In reality, the ratio between claimed kills and actual kills was several times greater.
              2. 0
                31 July 2026 13: 37
                It's not about methodology, but about attitude. The enemy overstates, the allies overstate, but we're all honest. That doesn't happen.

                The thing is, Soviet propaganda operated autonomously and didn't need troop loss reports. For a commander, the appearance of an ace was a double-edged sword. An ace gained authority, and people had to listen to him. So a good commander treated his pilots' successes objectively, while a bad one, like one of Pokryshkin's division commanders, for example, didn't acknowledge them. And commanders were monitored; our system was designed to combat falsifications. Theirs, on the other hand, was focused on propaganda and extracting "funds."
              3. -1
                2 August 2026 14: 04
                The Germans, already in West Germany, conducted a detailed analysis of Luftwaffe losses, even using the German archives the Yankees had taken to the United States. Their data is roughly similar to Krivoshein's.
                The fact remains: the Reich suffered higher aircrew losses than the USSR. Only the Japanese suffered more German losses (but they also fought longer).

                It's all a matter of methodology. The Germans counted "air victories" not only for aircraft shot down, but also for those simply damaged. We counted only those shot down. And our pilots, unlike the Germans, didn't count enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground as personal victories.

                It's generally rather foolish to extol the achievements of those who ultimately lost the war. Only losers and their supporters wave their fists after a fight.
        2. 0
          4 August 2026 19: 44
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Rudel couldn't have been an order of magnitude stronger than the pilot.
          There is such a thing as talent, and it applies to both one's own and others'.
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          the fact that Hartmann shot down less than a dozen Western aircraft...
          Hartman, who considered his greatest achievement to be bringing fighters into combat with the stars from the USAF... he stepped aside.
          The article is controversial: why now? Why about Luftwaffe aces? And not Pierre Glosterman, for example? What was the source?
          And the most important omission: how did Hartman end up captured by the Americans and then serve time? the top ten In a Soviet prison? When talking about Hartman, this question should always be addressed… because it answers the question: why did he hate Americans until the end of his days?
          1. 0
            4 August 2026 19: 49
            Quote: Pete Mitchell
            How Hartman was captured by the Americans and then served time the top ten In a Soviet prison? When talking about Hartman, this question should always be addressed… because it answers the question: why did he hate Americans until the end of his days?
            And it also answers the big question: which Americans are allies? It would be useful for the Americans' allies to read his biography. that in history we are looking for a darkness of examples
      2. +1
        31 July 2026 08: 03
        Quote: Puncher
        Rudel was a phenomenon, and there can't be many of those. Expecting all Stuka pilots to be like Rudel was frankly foolish.

        Oh, come on! I'm more than sure that among the Luftwaffe's dive-bombers there were many more skilled aces than this die-hard Nazi. But His Majesty PR and propaganda do their job. It's just that Rudel managed to get into Marat. From there, PR takes over. Besides, he was very lucky to survive until the end of the war. A very suitable figure for propaganda for the dying Reich. good Hence 520 tanks, 800 vehicles (it turns out he single-handedly destroyed a tank army fellow ), a countless number of permanent firing points comparable to the Maginot Line... It's all clear, for German housewives and half-witted soldiers it's an idol to emulate, but why are they presenting this nonsense to us?! You, Puncher, believe it – that's your right!
        1. +2
          31 July 2026 08: 29
          Quote: Proxima
          I am more than sure that among the Luftwaffe dive-bombers there were many more skilled aces than this die-hard Nazi.

          Besides Rudel, Lieutenant Dr. Maximilian Otte (1179) and Major Herbert Bauer (1071), both of whom served in Immelmann, flew more than 1000 combat sorties.
          Incidentally, Herbert Bauer ended up on the battleship "October Revolution", but is much less known than Rudel.
          1. +2
            31 July 2026 09: 49
            Quote: Puncher
            Besides Rudel, Lieutenant Dr. Maximilian Otte (1179) and Major Herbert Bauer (1071) flew more than 1000 combat sorties.

            Oh, come on! I haven't done any counting, but I can tell you at least two off the top of my head. Kaubisch and Schubert. The latter has more sorties than the others you listed. And overall, there are about 40 Luftwaffe dive bombers who flew 600-1200 sorties. Almost all of them were awarded the Oak Leaves Cross. The lion's share, if they didn't survive, died in '45. So, a little over 1000—that's all a dive bomber could do for the entire war. Beyond that, the limit of human capabilities—you go crazy! fool And here you go, more than 2500 flights fellow And where? - Not for a walk, but to knock out 520 tanks, a bunch of armored trains, and a battleship, and everything else! drinks Don't you think, dear Puncher, that combat sorties are also were boldly attributed (for the sake of credibility)) in the Luftwaffe, as well as half a thousand tanks, 350 shot down, and so on?
            1. +1
              31 July 2026 10: 53
              Quote: Proxima
              that combat sorties were also boldly attributed (for the sake of credibility) to the Luftwaffe

              That's impossible. Every sortie is documented. Meanwhile, the technicians, who almost all survived the war, could easily claim it was all lies, since they prepare the sorties and know who's flying. After all, 1000 combat sorties and 2500 are a big difference.
              1. 0
                1 August 2026 09: 59
                So, starting June 22, 1941, Rudel was supposed to fly approximately 10 combat sorties a day without a break for lunch or dinner? And this despite the fact that he still managed to go on leave and spend several days in the hospital.
                But the technicians had to carry out pre-flight preparation of the aircraft, fill it with fuel and oil with water, since the Ju-87 engine was water-cooled, hang bombs, and equip the guns.
                In general, everyone worked only for him?
                1. +1
                  1 August 2026 13: 50
                  Quote: Grencer81
                  So, from June 22, 1941, Rudel had to fly approximately 10 combat sorties per day without a break for lunch or dinner?

                  Moreover, despite the weather conditions, and considering that it was shot down several times. laughing
                  1. -1
                    1 August 2026 14: 05
                    Moreover, only anti-aircraft artillery shot it down, and Stalin's falcons apparently did not even try to attack it, knowing that the Fuhrer's favorite was at the controls. laughing
                    1. 0
                      1 August 2026 14: 22
                      Quote: Grencer81
                      Moreover, only anti-aircraft artillery shot it down, and Stalin's falcons apparently did not even try to attack it, knowing that the Fuhrer's favorite was at the controls. laughing

                      Try shooting him down—he's quite the specialist. He "commanded," so to speak, a unit flying the attack variant of the Fw 190, and he himself flew the Stuka. Why would he? Maybe he really was as stupid as his colleagues said, unable to retrain on the Focke-Wulf? laughing
                      1. 0
                        1 August 2026 14: 41
                        Yeah, shoot him down and you'll end up in a folder labeled "Personal Enemies of the Fuhrer."
                        No, no one wanted to end up in that folder, so they didn’t touch the only recipient of the Reich’s highest award. laughing
                      2. 0
                        1 August 2026 15: 00
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        Yeah, shoot him down and you'll end up in a folder labeled "Personal Enemies of the Fuhrer."
                        No, no one wanted to end up in that folder, so they didn’t touch the only recipient of the Reich’s highest award. laughing

                        good good good good laughing
                2. MSN
                  +2
                  1 August 2026 14: 40
                  So, from June 22, 1941, Rudel had to fly approximately 10 combat sorties per day without a break for lunch or dinner?

                  Then Rudel would have 14,180 combat sorties. In reality, he has somewhat fewer.
                  1. -2
                    1 August 2026 16: 56
                    Quote: MSN
                    He has a little less, actually.

                    Well, he was just on vacation then, and it also rained a couple of times. That's why it was less, actually. laughing
                    1. MSN
                      0
                      1 August 2026 17: 00
                      Well, he was just on vacation then, and it also rained a couple of times. That's why it was less, actually. laughing

                      It used to be a serious resource.
                      1. -1
                        1 August 2026 17: 06
                        Quote: MSN
                        It used to be a serious resource.

                        And didn't you write all this nonsense about various Baron Munchausen? Every three or four years, this topic of the exorbitant bills of German pilots, tank crews, and artillerymen comes up... So the resources remain the same. Only the authors who pour from empty to empty change.
                  2. -1
                    1 August 2026 17: 22
                    Actually, Rudel went on vacation and sometimes even visited the hospital...
                    And we weren't always lucky with the weather.
                  3. 0
                    1 August 2026 17: 24
                    And all the technical staff worked for him 25 hours a day... laughing
              2. -3
                2 August 2026 13: 56
                It's certainly possible, and it's become quite a tradition. Registering a fake flight in the flight log is a piece of cake. The technicians were in on it; they got paid for the fake.
                On the other hand, German aces were sometimes forced to fly missions on behalf of "dead souls." German commanders understated actual losses, or reported them late, retroactively, which was simply profitable. After all, the "dead souls" were used to pay for supplies and supplies, some for the commander, some for the pilots who flew missions on behalf of those already dead. Everyone was in on it, a mutual responsibility.
                So, false identification was commonplace in the Luftwaffe. It flourished especially on the Eastern Front, which is understandable.
          2. +1
            1 August 2026 19: 38
            Herbert Bauer was hit by the Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya, but the damage it sustained was not as severe as that suffered by the Marat, which had been converted from a battleship into a non-self-propelled floating battery. It only survived because the water under its keel was 10-12 meters deep, not the minimum 100-120.
      3. -2
        31 July 2026 13: 28
        If there were many like Rudel, it would be unclear who to look up to.
        And it’s still not clear where the Russians got so many tanks from.
        Therefore, a phenomenon is one by definition.
        I think the phenomenal Rudel destroyed Soviet tanks on the battlefield so quickly that his comrades simply had nothing left.
        1. -3
          1 August 2026 13: 47
          Quote: Andrew_andr
          I think the phenomenal Rudel destroyed Soviet tanks on the battlefield so quickly that his comrades simply had nothing left.

          And so he alone flew the Stuka until the end of the war, when all his "comrades" had switched to the attack version of the FW 190. And he destroyed Soviet tanks so quickly that they entered Berlin. laughing I really can't stop laughing at these "experts". laughing
      4. 0
        1 August 2026 13: 43
        Quote: Puncher
        The level of training and technical characteristics of enemy aircraft. Fighting a British pilot with seven months of training and 210 hours of flight time under his belt, especially in an all-metal Spitfire, is a different matter than fighting a pilot who has just barely mastered takeoff and landing skills in a half-wooden/cloth Yak-1.

        What are you saying? Hastily trained takeoff and landing pilots? So what if these pilots, trained in seven months on an all-metal Spitfire, couldn't even come close to the second-highest number of victories of the half-wooden/rag Yak-1 pilots, who had hastily trained for takeoff and landing? Again, the German pilots' performance on the Western Front was lower not because they were facing more skilled pilots, but simply because everything was much simpler. The Germans had to fight over their own territory, and claiming to have shot down six Pe-2s in a single attack over Soviet territory was no longer an option; the planes fell on German soil. But here's the alternative: the pilots are trustworthy and held in good esteem by the command, so their claimed victories can be considered valid. So what if, during the specified period, no Soviet aircraft were recorded flying over this sector of the front by the pilots "in good standing" listed in the claim. A couple of years ago, the Military Archives reviewed claims by German pilots like Hartmann, Barkhorn, and others, detailing how many kills these "claimants" had shot down during that period, as well as how many of our aircraft were lost during that period. The results were not in the Germans' favor. I recall Hartmann claiming to have shot down six Soviet aircraft while covering a target in Romania in August 1944. He also specified the types of aircraft shot down: Yak-9, Airacobra, Il-2, and Pe-2. According to our data, the Black Sea Fleet Air Force did indeed strike a Romanian port that day. A flight led by a Hero of the Soviet Union, participating in clearing the skies over the target, spotted a pair of enemy fighters and rushed toward them. The enemy, not accepting combat, retreated into the clouds and subsequently made no attempt to attack the strike aircraft. The strike was carried out first by Il-2s, which suppressed the anti-aircraft guns, and then by Pe-2s. The strike aircraft were covered by fighters from the Black Sea Fleet Air Force, Avdeev's Yak-9 regiment, and Airacobras. Two Il-2s were lost to anti-aircraft fire. The crew of one was picked up by our boats. Two Airacobras, also from close cover, also escaped anti-aircraft fire. One of them made it to Saki airfield, where it was destroyed on landing; the pilot of the other was picked up by our boats. So, Hartman wasn't lying about the aircraft types.
        1. 0
          1 August 2026 17: 29
          Take, for example, Josef Priller, who was in the West throughout the war.
          He has just over 100 victories, but the most important thing is that almost all of them are confirmed from both sides.
          And if the battle took place over water, then it was possible to generally record hundreds of shot down in one battle.
          Whether it gurgled into the water or not, call the divers. laughing
        2. -1
          1 August 2026 20: 09
          So, in terms of the number of victories, these pilots, trained in 7 months on the all-metal Spitfire, couldn’t even come close to the second ten pilots who had been hastily trained in takeoff and landing on the half-wooden/rag Yak-1?

          Of the six top Soviet aces, four flew the Airacobra.
          1. 0
            2 August 2026 01: 42
            Quote from solar
            Of the six top Soviet aces, four flew the Airacobra.
            So what? They didn't start out fighting in Airacobras. Kozhedub fought in Lavochkin aircraft throughout the war.
            Moreover, neither in the USA nor in Great Britain, not a single pilot who fought on the Airacobra came close to their level.
            1. 0
              4 August 2026 16: 09
              Kozhedub - yes. And Pokryshkin, Rechkalov, Gulaev, and Glinka - Airacobra. Even though very few Airacobras were delivered - only about 5.
              1. 0
                4 August 2026 17: 37
                Quote from solar
                Kozhedub - yes. And Pokryshkin, Rechkalov, Gulaev, and Glinka - Airacobra. Even though very few Airacobras were delivered - only about 5.
                4952 out of 9584, more than half of what was released.
                And what do the RAF pilots who trained for seven months on all-metal Spitfires have to do with this? So what if the pilots you mentioned ended the war in Airacobras? They started out flying partially wooden planes: MiGs, I-16s, Yaks, and LaGGs. And they opened their accounts on these partially metal planes. Why didn't Pokryshkin transfer his division to La-7s? It's the end of the war, and by the time they retrain, the war will be over... Explain to me one thing: what does what our pilots flew have to do with RAF pilot training? What's the connection? And if we're talking about that, only four of the first ten Soviet aces ended the war flying Airacobras. Four on Lavochkin planes and two on Yakovlev planes.
          2. 0
            2 August 2026 14: 06
            It's appropriate here to cite the numbers of German kills the English gentlemen made with their Airacobras and the losses they themselves suffered. And why they refused to fly and fight in these Airacobras any longer, and why. laughing
            1. 0
              4 August 2026 16: 10
              on their "Airacobras"

              There the war was fought at other heights.
            2. 0
              4 August 2026 17: 40
              Quote: Illanatol
              It's appropriate here to cite the numbers of German kills the English gentlemen made with their Airacobras and the losses they themselves suffered. And why they refused to fly and fight in these Airacobras any longer, and why. laughing

              They dumped their Airacobras, along with their Hurricanes, on the USSR in late 1941. The USSR had no choice. Thanks to deliveries to the USSR, Bell stayed afloat.
      5. -1
        2 August 2026 13: 48
        It's not just about the Stukas. The USSR simply didn't have its own BBC, which would have effectively exposed the massive lies of the German aces.

        More fairy tales. No "takeoff and landing." Soviet pilots had excellent, multi-stage training.
        1. Aeroclub. From 1938 onwards, the Soviet Air Force accepted exclusively graduates of aeroclubs. Even at this stage, they mastered the notorious "takeoff and landing" technique. In terms of the number of aeroclubs and their graduates, the pre-war USSR was ahead of the rest of the world.
        2. Flight schools: VASHPO and VASHP.
        3. ZAP - reserve aviation regiment.
        4. Training in combat coordination directly in the military unit.

        The Yaks were superior to the Spitfires in terms of survivability and repairability.
    2. +6
      31 July 2026 07: 35
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      If the Stuka with cannons was so effective against Soviet tanks, why were only a few hundred of them produced?
      If German aces were so effective against Soviet pilots, then why, when transferred to the Western Front, did their effectiveness drop sharply against Western pilots?
      Inconsistencies, inconsistencies...

      The answer is basically in the article. Specifically, the level of pilot training. Sadly, the level of training our pilots received during WWII was well described by Leonid Bykov in his film "Only Old Men Are Going to Battle," specifically in terms of takeoff and landing. Regarding the cannon-armed Ju-87, several hundred is, firstly, a significant number! Secondly, not every pilot could use this weapon effectively. Thirdly, there was the Il-2 with a 45mm cannon, but it never went into production due to its enormous recoil. I can't resist adding that the first time I fired the GSh-30-2 cannon on the Mi-24P, it felt like the helicopter had stopped in mid-air!
      1. 0
        31 July 2026 10: 32
        Quote: Traveler 63
        Leonid Bykov in his film "Only Old Men Are Going to Battle", namely: "takeoff and landing"!

        Did he fight? And Hartmann had been racking up the numbers since 1943, which was already a turning point, and the average quality began to level out. Read the memoirs about how the young men were trained, very gradually, just after the winter of 43-44.
        Quote: Traveler 63
        As for the cannon-powered Ju-87, several hundred is, first of all, a significant number!
        Well, yes, out of 5700 Stukas, a whopping 274, including the converted ones, is a pittance. Even if the average pilot were an order of magnitude less effective than Rudel, that's 50 tanks per pilot...

        Quote: Traveler 63
        Secondly, not every pilot could use this weapon effectively.
        Well, of course, the answer is in the article. The level...

        Quote: Traveler 63
        And thirdly, there was the Il-2 with a 45mm cannon, but it didn’t go into production due to its enormous recoil.
        Not with a gun, but with guns, and 45 is not 37, but there were 37 mm ILs in quantity. +- 1000 units.
      2. -2
        1 August 2026 14: 53
        Quote: Traveler 63
        As sad as it is, the level of training of our pilots during the Great Patriotic War was very well voiced by Leonid Bykov in his film "Only Old Men Are Going to Battle", namely: "takeoff and landing"!

        And a young pilot, newly arrived at the regiment, practically dismantles a pilot who's been fighting for years in an air battle!? I'll say it again: Bykov's film, no matter how well-made, is full of crap about the training of our pilots. That's one thing. And a feature film, no matter how well-received by the viewer, isn't documentary evidence of any fact. How did the female pilots from the regiment, and later the regiment itself, fighting at that historic moment in the Kuban War, end up in the Kursk Bulge area? Haven't you thought about it? How did the Maestro, after making an emergency landing at a German airfield, manage to steal a fighter? Sorry, but Pokryshkin didn't master the Airacobra in two days; he had instructors, an operating manual, and all the necessary documentation at his disposal. And then he quickly jumped out of his wrecked plane—let's say he landed next to a parking lot where a fully loaded plane was ready for takeoff—jumped into the open cockpit, started the engine, and there he was, airborne. The next question is, who pulled the chocks out from under the wheels after he gave the command to turn the propeller? laughing The next moment, intense work is underway, planes are taking off, landing, technicians and mechanics are sweating away preparing the planes for the next flight. And then there's this plane, ready for takeoff, sitting there without a ground crew, uncovered, far from everyone, so conveniently that a Soviet pilot, making an emergency landing, quickly climbed into it and flew away? As someone who fired a GSh-30-2 from a Mi-24P, you should have somehow distinguished truth from director's fiction. Incidentally, not a single such fact was recorded during the Great Patriotic War. So the characterization of our pilots' training given in this film is nothing more than director's fiction. Just like Soviet filmmakers' love of showing Germans in their films, all armed with MP-38/40s. Which has about as much to do with reality as Bykov's statement about our pilots' takeoff and landing training. Learn to distinguish forget-me-nots from... as L. Filatov once wrote in his tale "About Fedot the Archer, a Brave Fellow".
        1. +1
          1 August 2026 20: 15
          About the fact that Maestro, having made an emergency landing at a German airfield, was able to hijack a fighter jet?

          He didn't hijack it. According to the film's plot, our forces captured a German fighter at the airfield, and he had the opportunity to figure out the controls on the ground. He'd probably studied the design of damaged German aircraft before—that would make sense.
          1. -1
            2 August 2026 02: 16
            Quote from solar
            According to the film's plot, our troops captured a German fighter at the airfield and had the opportunity to figure out how to operate it on the ground.

            Well, yes, well, yes. He made an emergency landing. He immediately, take this German plane, here, and that's how it is. We just took it in one piece and in good working order, refueled it, and serviced it... No less nonsense than with the hijacked one... I don't remember who wrote in their memoirs how a Messer flew to their airfield, hijacked by a Slovak pilot, and it was crashed on its very first sortie. And
            Quote from solar
            He had probably studied the design of damaged German aircraft before this - that would be logical.

            Where and when could he possibly have studied German aircraft design? Don't mistake wishful thinking for reality. These are two completely different things.
            Soviet aircraft mechanic David Simonov of the Black Sea Fleet restored a German aircraft for reconnaissance flights, despite the lack of spare parts and blueprints.
            There are a couple of photos, but nothing else concrete. And where are the Black Sea Fleet's aircraft workshops, and where did the Maestro fly? laughing
      3. +1
        2 August 2026 14: 14
        A film is just a film, albeit a talented one.
        By the way, let me remind you that the pilot (nickname - "Grasshopper"), to whom "Maestro" gave such a characteristic (takeoff and landing), immediately after the conversation takes part in an air battle and shoots down his first "Messer".
        But in reality (and this is a true story), yesterday's cadet shot down not one, but two German Messerschmitts in his very first battle. This is documented; the downed planes fell near our airfield. The identities of the pilots, their serial numbers, and so on are known.

        Both the "Kuznechik" and the "Maestro" were based on the real-life Soviet ace pilot Popkov (Bykov met him personally). And yes, he shot down two Germans in the first battle; Bykov simply cut down the sturgeon, and in the film "Kuznechik" he only shot down one.

        The Yak-9 with a large-caliber cannon also fought (against tanks).
    3. MSN
      +1
      31 July 2026 14: 18
      If the Stuka with cannons was so effective against Soviet tanks, why were only a few hundred of them produced?

      The Stuka with cannons was too specialized a plane. It could only be used without major losses against tanks that had broken through, escaping from the air defense umbrella on the front line. Such breakthroughs didn't happen every day. They decided that this much was enough.
      1. 0
        2 August 2026 06: 40
        Quote: MSN
        The Stuka with guns was too highly specialized an aircraft.

        Oh, hundreds of thousands of tanks—well, the Germans always wrung their hands over that. Isn't that a reason to ramp up production of an effective weapon to combat them? If only it were truly effective. And not just a phony, thanks to Rudel and his "accounts."

        Quote: MSN
        Such breakthroughs didn't happen every day. They decided that this much was enough.
        Since '44, they've been the only ones, isolated for tens of kilometers during the day in limited forces, separated from the main forces, and without air cover. During major operations, of course.

        Quote: MSN
        We decided that this much was enough.
        Of course they did, and it's noticeable. Because Rudel's calculations are inflated, and if an ordinary pilot were even an order of magnitude (ten times) less effective, they'd be churning out thousands of birds with guns.
        1. MSN
          +2
          2 August 2026 14: 46
          Oh, hundreds of thousands of tanks, well, the Germans always wrung their hands about this, isn't that a reason to increase production of an effective means of combating them?

          Now you're wringing your hands. Thousands of tanks are absolutely real. Almost 50,000 T-34s alone. Against 6000 Panthers and 8500 T-4s. And the USSR's medium tank losses were 80,3% of those available. And in numbers, 44,900. Offhand, that's about 10000 more vehicles than Germany produced in all armored vehicles. From armored personnel carriers and self-propelled guns to the Tiger B. You need to know history and respect it.
  3. +2
    31 July 2026 06: 08
    It's no coincidence that some Russian researchers of the history of the Great Patriotic War even dubbed Hartmann "the Cowardly Knight of the Reich." He defined his tactics extremely succinctly: "Saw—decided—attacked—disengaged."

    The author isn't an amateur, apparently, gathering information from the "higher levels." The boom-zoom tactic was used by everyone whose aircraft allowed it: the Germans, the British, the Americans, and the Japanese. After all, Pokryshkin's famous "Height - speed - maneuver - fire!" is essentially the same boom-zoom. What's cowardly about it? If your aircraft allows you to escape to a safe altitude after a strike, from where you can strike again, it's a sin not to take advantage of it. What's the point of those dangerous "Tach braids" when you can get to where the enemy's engine will choke, but yours won't?
    By the end of the war, Hartmann had flown more than 1400 combat sorties.

    During the war, Barkhorn carried out 1104 combat sorties.

    We will talk about the most successful pilot of the Luftwaffe bomber-attack aviation, who completed more than 2530 combat sorties.

    When the second one ironically states, "However, these figures are hardly worth taking unconditionally," he clearly doesn't remember what he said earlier. Our Pokryshkin flew over 650 combat sorties. He's an ace among aces who fought throughout the war. No one in the world even came close to Rudel's numbers. 2350 combat sorties is at the limit of human capabilities.
    Then, in 1945, with some superhuman effort, our Motherland won a victory

    The author fails to mention that this was not accomplished alone. The total irreparable losses of RAF personnel amounted to approximately 56,821 killed. Two-thirds of the Luftwaffe fought in the West and Africa, with 70% of losses occurring in these areas.
    1. Fat
      +2
      31 July 2026 19: 18
      Quote: Puncher
      No one in the world has even come close to half of Rudel's numbers. 2350 combat sorties is at the limit of human capabilities.

      Well, I completely agree. Pervitin was used en masse by the Wehrmacht (200 million doses from 1939 to 1945). Apparently, there were meth addicts in the Luftwaffe, too.
    2. +1
      1 August 2026 08: 00
      How many RAF fighter pilots exactly are included in the 56,821 killed?
      And where did you get the figure of 2/3 of the Luftwaffe fighting the entire war in the West and Africa, if the Germans often transferred their Luftwaffe units back and forth?
  4. +1
    31 July 2026 07: 09
    I won't argue about personal victories. I will say that Soviet and German fighters had different tactics! For a Soviet fighter, the main goal when escorting bombers was to give the bombers a chance to engage their target! Or, conversely, to prevent enemy bombers from accurately deploying their bombs! Kills are a secondary factor! At the same time (reading Hartman himself), the Luftwaffe's primary goal was diametrically opposed—meaning personal victories! And again, read Hartman: shoot down the weaker, better fighter from "around the corner"!
    1. +5
      31 July 2026 07: 54
      Quote: Traveler 63
      I'll say that Soviet fighters and German fighters had different tactics! For a Soviet fighter, the main task when escorting bombers was to give the bombers a chance to engage the target!

      The point is that our tactics lagged behind the Germans...we didn't even immediately switch to leader-wingman pairings, but flew in trios. The Germans had practically all squadron commanders who were active pilots, and they developed air combat tactics. It wasn't until '43 that Pokryshkin began to use more sophisticated methods, the so-called "Kuban stack," despite the fact that in '42 he was removed from his position as squadron commander and expelled from the party for promoting his tactics.
      We had a tactic of patrolling specific areas with fighters to provide cover, while the Germans concentrated their fighters and "cleared" the skies in advance of their bombers, unfettered by the cover of their attack aircraft. Due to their different speeds, our fighters escorting bombers sometimes left the fighters without fuel when it came time to repel enemy attacks. Moreover, most of our losses among attack aircraft and bombers were due to anti-aircraft fire; the Germans' troops were well protected from the ground.
      Then, towards the end of the war, the superiority in the number of our aircraft and the diversion of Luftwaffe fighters to the west and protection from Allied raids made it possible to use both clearing and escort simultaneously.
      1. 0
        31 July 2026 08: 04
        Once again, although I don't like to repeat myself: read Hartman! Then your questions will disappear!
        1. +5
          31 July 2026 08: 19
          Quote: Traveler 63
          Once again, although I don't like to repeat myself: read Hartman! Then your questions will disappear!

          I read V.I. Alekseenko's "The Soviet Air Force on the Eve and During the Great Patriotic War"...
          During the war, we trained 44,093 pilots...27,600 died in battle...
          On the Eastern Front, the Germans had only 30 percent of the air force after the summer of 1943. Our air force outnumbered the Germans by two to three times, which accounted for our victories on the ground. This was particularly evident in Operation Bagration, when Stalin assembled an air force of 6,000 aircraft against the 60 Luftwaffe fighters covering Army Group Center.
          1. 0
            31 July 2026 10: 32
            "During the war, we trained 44,093 pilots... 27,600 were killed in action..." – during the Great Patriotic War, about 130,000 aircraft were produced, about 16,000 were received under Lend-Lease, and 44,000 pilots were trained. How's that? Three aircraft per pilot? A discrepancy. stop
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. +1
              31 July 2026 11: 05
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              "During the war, we trained 44,093 pilots... 27,600 were killed in action..." – during the Great Patriotic War, about 130,000 aircraft were produced, about 16,000 were received under Lend-Lease, and 44,000 pilots were trained. How's that? Three aircraft per pilot? A discrepancy. stop

              Why the discrepancy? Rudel's example can explain...

              During the war years Rudel shot down thirty times fire from Soviet anti-aircraft artillery

              How many of his own planes did Rudel destroy? Of our aces, only Kozhedub wasn't shot down, and even he only changed planes a few times.
              1. +1
                1 August 2026 17: 24
                Quote: Konnick
                Kozhedub was not shot down and he changed several planes.

                Skomorokhov was never shot down, nor was his plane even damaged in aerial combat. They only changed planes when their service life was exhausted, when upgrading to newer equipment, and so on.
              2. 0
                2 August 2026 14: 20
                All Soviet pilots replaced their aircraft, and not always because of combat damage. It's simply that an aircraft (especially its engine) is subject to wear and tear, and its performance suffers. Therefore, experienced pilots transitioned to new aircraft and handed their worn-out ones over to newcomers, who then completed the final stages of their operational lifespan by undergoing the final training phase at their duty station.

                The Soviet Air Force lost more aircraft than the Luftwaffe, but fewer pilots. Thanks to our aircraft manufacturing industry, which spared the lives of pilots (especially the Il-2).
                1. 0
                  2 August 2026 17: 08
                  "They protected the pilots' lives (especially the Il-2)" is an unfortunate example. For every Il-2 pilot killed, three gunners were killed. The Il-2's tail was very weak; it was not uncommon for a machine-gun burst across the fuselage to cause the tail to fall off.
                  1. 0
                    3 August 2026 08: 23
                    Statistics say otherwise. Even if a two-seater Il-2 was shot down, the gunner had a 70% chance of survival. Well, yes, and the pilot loss rate is even lower, about three times less.

                    The Soviet Air Force lost more aircraft than the Germans (on the Eastern Front), but fewer crew members and pilots.

                    In terms of aircrew losses, the USSR was only fifth in WWII. The Japanese, Germans, Yankees, and British all suffered greater losses.
            3. 0
              2 August 2026 15: 56
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              What's that? Three planes per pilot? A discrepancy.


              No inconsistency, given the short service life of aircraft. Some could have changed as many as five aircraft during WWII.
        2. -2
          1 August 2026 17: 21
          Quote: Traveler 63
          Once again, although I don't like to repeat myself: read Hartman! Then your questions will disappear!

          It's better to read Ernst Theodor Amadeus Hoffmann's fairy tales. Although Charles Perrault wrote interestingly, too, and Anderson—after reading them, the questions disappear, too. But more modern storytellers don't write like that. Why am I saying this? It's just that in "Hartmann's Tales," I like the part where he fought the Mustangs. He sent everyone to the airfield so they wouldn't get shot down. And then he went off to kill them all alone, right over the airfield. It's a good thing Rambo was illiterate, otherwise, after reading this book, he'd cry with envy and bite his nails to the elbows.
      2. +2
        31 July 2026 08: 10
        Quote: Konnick
        It was only in 43 that Pokryshkin began to use more advanced methods, the so-called "Kuban shelving"

        Because it became technically possible. The Airacobra's radio allowed for group control at various altitudes.
        1. 0
          2 August 2026 16: 11
          In 1943, radio stations were also found on Yaks and Lavochkins.
      3. -1
        3 August 2026 08: 38
        Quote: Konnick
        The point is that our tactics lagged behind the Germans.


        But the USSR's overall air war strategy was more appropriate. Bombers and attack aircraft were the priority, as they inflict the greatest damage on the enemy. Therefore, the primary objective was to protect one's own attack aircraft and shoot down enemy attack aircraft. Fighters were secondary, serving only as a supporting force. This is why bombers predominated among German aircraft shot down on the Eastern Front, while fighters predominated among Soviet aircraft shot down. The final scoreboard showed which strategy was more advantageous.
        About half of the German fighter aces survived to the end of the war... but their native fatherland, the Reich, came to a bad end.

        Allies again... of course. More than 60% of Luftwaffe fighter losses and more than 70% of bomber losses occurred on the Eastern Front. And the relative paucity of German fighters on the Eastern Front is explained by the high level of losses; the Germans simply couldn't increase their force, no matter how hard they tried: fresh reserves couldn't cover the mounting losses.
    2. 0
      31 July 2026 08: 08
      Quote: Traveler 63
      If for a Soviet fighter the main task when escorting bombers is to give the bombers the opportunity to engage the target!

      Quote: Traveler 63
      And at the same time (reading the same Hartman) the main task of the Luftwaffe was diametrically opposite, that is, personal account!

      Luftwaffe tactics: Group 1 clears the skies above the target, Group 2 escorts the bombers, maintaining contact with them and engaging the enemy in combat.
      The fact that Hartman was engaged in clearing the skies should not mislead you.
      Quote: Traveler 63
      And again, read Hartman; knock down the one who is weaker and better from "around the corner"!

      Again, you don't understand the reason. After knocking down the lagging one, he returns to his previous position and continues the attack until he's noticed. If you hit him "head" right away, the enemy will scatter and things will get more complicated.
      1. -1
        31 July 2026 08: 40
        I don't even understand what you're talking about. "Clearing the skies"? What are you talking about? In 41-42, we had so many fighters that they could patrol? (Especially considering the fuel reserves; I have no data on the use of drop tanks at that time). I don't know where you trained, but I was always taught that the lead aircraft (aka the leader) is the priority, not firing at the "tails." Let me repeat: the main task of fighters is to support the bombers and prevent enemy bombers from reaching their positions! (At the very least, to prevent them from dropping bombs accurately.)
        1. +7
          31 July 2026 08: 52
          Quote: Traveler 63
          I don't even understand what you're talking about. "Clearing the skies"? What are you talking about? In 41-42, we had so many fighters that they could patrol?

          Do you think it was Zhukov and the fresh divisions who defended Moscow? Or that half of the Red Army Air Forces' fighter aircraft were covering Moscow? Besides providing cover, they also carried out ground attack missions and prevented the Luftwaffe from using their tactics of cooperating with ground forces, especially since in the autumn and winter of '41, the Germans found it much more convenient to take off from fixed airfields than from snow-covered field airfields. But when we drove the Germans back 200 km from Moscow, that's when we stopped... the range of Moscow's air defense aircraft didn't allow for the same level of support... Further combat operations in the spring and summer of '42 again demonstrated the Luftwaffe's strength with the defeats of the Crimean and Southwestern Fronts.
        2. +2
          31 July 2026 09: 48
          Quote: Traveler 63
          "clearing the sky"? What are you talking about?

          Let's say the Germans are flying to bomb a railway station. First, fighters fly in and block the air defense fighters. Bombers follow with cover because the blocking force is running low on fuel. At least that's how the Luftwaffe describes the actions. It's also been described that fighters block the airfield, preventing takeoffs and shooting down any that try. They can send hunters into the Stuka area, which look for something to destroy before arriving. If there is one, they engage. In any case, the enemy aircraft run out of fuel and are forced to leave, while the arriving Stukas operate unhindered. So, "free hunting" isn't just a mindless "kill-scoring" exercise. Besides all the above, it's precisely "free hunting" that allows for the disruption of reconnaissance aircraft, which is a crucial task.
          Quote: Traveler 63
          The main task of fighters is to ensure the work of bombers and not allow enemy bombers to reach their positions!

          You probably meant targets. Preventing "bombers" in an era of poor radar proliferation is no easy task, especially for attack aircraft that approach targets at low altitude. Try to spot them. Maintaining constant airborne surveillance requires a lot of aircraft and a lot of fuel. The main group is stationed at the airfield, ready for takeoff.
        3. 0
          31 July 2026 10: 12
          Quote: Traveler 63
          I don't know where you studied, but I was always taught that the priority is the lead plane, and not shooting at the "tails"

          In my opinion, this is fundamentally wrong. You need to hit the weakest, and that's usually the wingman. Once you've left the head without the tail, you can calmly take on the leader. Which is exactly what the Germans did. And with teachers like yours, I'm afraid we would have stepped on the same rake. This applies to intelligence work; for anti-aircraft guns, the head is the priority.
        4. +1
          31 July 2026 15: 54
          Quote: Traveler 63
          I don't know where you studied, but I was always taught that the priority is the lead plane, and not shooting at the "tails"

          Golden words! good You were taught correctly! But one thing! stop This is if the fighter wants to fulfill its main task - disrupt the targeted bombingBut if you're like Hartman—running a personal score while ignoring the rest of the bombers harassing the German troops—then yes, go for the kill.
        5. +1
          1 August 2026 17: 31
          Quote: Traveler 63
          I have no data on the use of PTB at that time)

          Drop tanks were used on the I-16, MiG-3, LaGG-3, La-5 of all modifications, and the La-7. Open a corner of the sky and you'll find the data. Or read monographs on various Soviet aircraft. The fact that they weren't used en masse, despite the availability of sufficient numbers, is another matter.
          1. +2
            1 August 2026 18: 38
            Quote: Fitter65
            PTBs were used on the I-16, MiG-3, LaGG-3, La-5 of all modifications, and the La-7. Open a corner of the sky and you'll find the data. Or read monographs on various Soviet aircraft.

            One can also recall the memoirs of Golubev the 13th, about the problems with the new model's drop tanks in October 1941 during the flight to Hanko:
            By eight in the morning, I was already at the airfield and, while inspecting the plane, I noticed the new drop tanks. The technician said these tanks would allow flight at speeds of up to 500 kilometers per hour. He would refuel them after the test flight. But I demanded they be refueled immediately.
            Above the airfield, I switched the fuel valve to the drop tanks. Only ten minutes passed, and the engine sputtered. The propeller spun idle. Clearly, there was no fuel being supplied from the drop tanks.

            The factory mechanic poked his finger into the end of the drain tube.
            — Look, there's a transport plug there; they put it in place before the tanks are sent to warehouses to keep moisture and dirt out...
            It all turned out to be ridiculously simple. And so it turned out that a simple mechanic from the workshop, as they say, outdid the entire engineering service of the aviation regiment and the various inspectors, whose fault it was that we pilots were almost court-martialed.

            Or how his group left Hanko for Kronstadt in December 1941:
            35 minutes in the air. What's this? Ilyin is drifting left. Why? Should I ask—no radio? Should I flap my wing? They hadn't agreed on that signal on the ground. Ilyin and his wingman are drifting off. A minute, two, and their lights are barely visible... I immediately thought, and as it turned out later, I was right, that Ilyin's drop tank had swung left.

            I patiently continue flying on course. The whole group is to the right, flying well. One plane comes within five meters of my wing. By the shape of the right external fuel tank, I determine that it is Tatarenko's. Ilyin's tanks are different in shape—cigar-shaped.
  5. +6
    31 July 2026 08: 24
    Great article.
    It is a pity that well-known personalities were chosen from among the Teutonic "experts".
    Rudel, Hartman, Mölders with Galland...
    One could look for a less media-friendly personality in the Teutonic "expert environment".
  6. +4
    31 July 2026 08: 54
    It was firmly sewn together by the anti-human Nazi ideology, I realized much later.

    While collecting material for the published series of articles, I tried once again to understand for myself how our fathers and grandfathers were able to disassemble this machine literally screw by screw.

    because they too were "sewn" and to be born "to make a fairy tale come true" was perceived (still) without irony... something that is probably missing today, but (also probably) is beginning to be revived, - and then - good luck!

    once again, thank you!
  7. +3
    31 July 2026 09: 09
    Here is a striking representative of the "family of Teutonic storytellers".
    Perhaps, if he had been shot down in an air battle by a Soviet pilot, he would have become "first", and Hartman would have been "second" in their "race for first place on the Olympus of the Luftwaffe"!
    Feldwebel Rudolf Müller (1920-1943) from the 6th Squadron (Detachment) of the 5th Fighter Squadron of the Luftwaffe (6.JG5) in the cockpit of a Messerschmitt Bf.109F-4 (WNr.10073) fighter at Petsamo airfield.
  8. -4
    31 July 2026 09: 10
    The Luftwaffe can safely be called Baron Munchausen's heirs. They were certainly decent fighters, but their achievements are greatly exaggerated. Furthermore, the convoluted victory counting system gave German pilots more than their share of wild imaginations. There are known cases of German pilots in Africa firing their ammunition into the sand and returning to the airfield to report victories and receive awards. The Hartmann story is a bit of a mystery. I read an article where this "grandson of the baron" claimed to have shot down five Soviet aircraft in one day, but the Red Army Air Force combat logs show no losses that day. In general, the articles are written far too complimentarily about these creatures that killed our people.
  9. +2
    31 July 2026 09: 41
    Read about the Anapa convoys. The Germans escorted convoys from Kerch to Anapa, and our attack aircraft attacked them. The website https://warspot.ru had a fantastic series of articles with detailed analyses of each episode, including approach diagrams, ammunition consumption, and so on, with analyses from both sides. Now, however, all that has been cut down, leaving only a fragment.
    The last article contained a summary table, and according to it, our attack aircraft destroyed ten times more watercraft than the Germans lost. The Germans also falsified the number of our aircraft shot down.
  10. +7
    31 July 2026 10: 15
    I read the comments and, smiling, am silently stunned: how many air war tacticians there are among us! laughing
    And what's remarkable is that the vast majority had never even sat at the controls of a Cessna...
    1. +4
      31 July 2026 10: 38
      Everyone imagines himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the side ...

      The very first and very alarming "signal" for the Red Army Air Force occurred during the May air battles near the Khalkhin-Gol River.
      Another brief skirmish was recorded on May 22. This time, the battle itself was confirmed by both sides, although the details were quite different. The Japanese claim that a Ki-27 patrol, the number of which was not disclosed, attacked six I-16s over Khalkhin Gol and shot down three aircraft without losses.

      According to our data, three I-16s and two I-15bis flew along the river when five I-96 appeared due to the clouds (as we used to call the Japanese A5M carrier-based fighter or “Claude” according to the allied code). In fact, there were no naval aircraft on Khalkhin Gol, and at first the pilots took for them the Ki-27 army fighters (Soviet designation I-97). The mistake was explained by the external similarity and the fact that the Soviet pilots met the Claudes many times in the sky of China, and the Ki-27 was a novelty for them. Around the beginning of July, when our aviators studied the enemy equipment well enough, references to the I-96 gradually disappear from their reports.

      Seeing the enemy, the pilot of one of the I-16 I.T. Lysenko broke off, rushed to the attack and was shot down. A burning fighter crashed to the ground, the pilot died. The remaining planes did not enter the battle.
      ...
      Early in the morning of May 27, a squadron of I-16s from the 22nd Fighter Aviation Regiment, commanded by Senior Lieutenant Cherenkov, redeployed to a forward airfield near Hill 752 (Mount Hamar-Daba). At 9:00 a.m., six "Ishas" led by the squadron commander took off to intercept nine I-96s (actually Ki-27s) spotted by a VNOS post near Lake Buir-Nur. The battle ended unfavorably. Cherenkov was shot down and killed, the wounded pilot Pyankov parachuted from the burning aircraft, and pilot Savchenko crashed while attempting to land the heavily damaged aircraft. The rest managed to land, but two fighters needed repairs. One of them was found to have 12 holes. The Japanese escaped without losses. The squadron flew another patrol mission that day. There were no further encounters with the enemy, but two aircraft were forced to make emergency landings due to engine failures. That night, four malfunctioning fighters were sent for repairs.
      1. +3
        31 July 2026 10: 44
        Everyone imagines himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the side ...
        Yeah. As a medievalist, I at least wore chainmail...
        1. +3
          31 July 2026 10: 53
          Putting on an I-15 or I-16, as well as an Me-109 or a Hurricane, is more problematic than putting on chain mail or plate armor.
          All that remains is theory without any practice.
          1. +3
            31 July 2026 11: 00
            Putting on an I-15 or I-16, as well as an Me-109 or a Hurricane, is more problematic than putting on chain mail or plate armor.
            Anything is possible if you really want it. Just ask Bolt Cutter. He was in a Spitfire.
            1. +3
              31 July 2026 11: 06
              They didn't let him into the Hurricane?
              And in "Gladiator"?
              That "Spit" was probably private property and not a museum exhibit.
              And I don’t know anyone with a personal fighter jet from the Great Patriotic War.
              1. +3
                31 July 2026 11: 15
                That "Spit" was probably private property and not a museum exhibit.
                A museum exhibit, indeed. In the "rotten West," history is treated somewhat differently. There, you can touch it. It's called "Living History"...
                1. +2
                  31 July 2026 11: 51
                  That's why it's called the "rotten West".
                  The only thing that makes me doubt is that they let him into the real Spit, and not the replica made for the museum.
                  1. +2
                    31 July 2026 11: 57
                    The only thing that makes me doubt is that they let him into the real Spit, and not the replica made for the museum.
                    You can ask him yourself on Violet.
                2. +3
                  31 July 2026 15: 20
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  A museum exhibit, precisely. In the "rotten West," history is treated somewhat differently. There, you can touch it.

                  That's right... I can give a more comprehensive example - in Hamburg I touched a submarine, a U-434 of the Tango class, bought in the 90s (to avoid being cut up) and restored to a running condition... With airplanes it's much simpler, I readily believe, knowing such an attitude...
                  and between Hamburg and Bremen, an Englishman kept a tank in his "garden plot", and an "auto mechanic" I knew (with a scrap garage, passionate about history, even wanted to buy a decommissioned Soviet seaplane, some kind of "B", but it didn't work out) repaired his gearbox
                  1. +2
                    31 July 2026 18: 00
                    During the submarine's "movement", was the conversation conducted in "Teutonic" or in "great and mighty"?
                    1. +4
                      31 July 2026 23: 52
                      Quote: hohol95
                      in "Teutonic" or in "great and mighty"?

                      in "Teutonic"... the Germans also know a thing or two about submarines :)
                      The visit is also in "Teutonic"... for local Germans, popularization, I've heard only good things about this vessel
                      1. +1
                        1 August 2026 07: 48
                        Then it’s clear why you were allowed on the U-boat.
                        One lady spoke Russian and was not allowed on a Japanese ship.
                        And she had a ticket for a tour of the ship.
                        Maybe she embellished this event in her blog, or maybe not...
                        The Japanese are unpredictable people...
                      2. +3
                        1 August 2026 08: 52
                        Quote: hohol95
                        Then it’s clear why you were allowed on the U-boat.
                        One lady spoke Russian and was not allowed on a Japanese ship.

                        After all, things have always been easier with Russian in Germany, and this seems unlikely (even in Bavaria)... I can't answer for the most recent past; perhaps the respected author can tell me what it's like now, but even 10 years ago, my colleagues, who came from the neighboring former GDR, remembered a few words from school and readily used them...
                        P.S. As far as I remember, listening to the presentation in "Teutonic" and speaking in Russian was not prohibited :)
                      3. +1
                        1 August 2026 17: 52
                        Sergei hi ,
                        "SW. author" gladly gives hints wink.
                        In folk "Teutonic"The majority of people don't care what language they speak. Many of the older generation remember a few phrases and words in Russian. Among the young, those who have the opportunity to learn Russian "by touch"—that is, when they love—and there are many of them, proudly display this knowledge. These are mostly words for "mother."
                        Everyone has their own experience, but neither I, nor my relatives, nor a lot of my acquaintances, despite the rabid official anti-Russian campaign, felt any changes in everyday communication.
    2. +4
      31 July 2026 10: 42
      And note, this is just the HISTORY section. The other sections are almost all Napoleons and Suvorovs.
      1. +4
        31 July 2026 10: 50
        In other sections
        It's a total disaster there!
      2. +1
        31 July 2026 10: 56
        Does anyone aspire to be king of Epirus named Pyrrhus?
        hi
        1. +2
          31 July 2026 11: 08
          Does anyone aspire to be king of Epirus named Pyrrhus?
          "Tatra" is trying to some extent.
  11. -6
    31 July 2026 13: 20
    The article is at the level of the 90s, when we reprinted books from the Cold War, but there was no adequate literature.
    Today, it's known that the Germans exaggerated their successes. For example, there's an excellent book by M. Morozov, "The Air Battle for Sevastopol 1941-1942." Comparing our losses with German claims reveals a discrepancy, sometimes dramatically overstating successes. This was especially true when aces appeared.
    The book deals with an isolated section of the front with a small number of aircraft, and all the documents, including ours, have survived. Therefore, the material is of high quality.
    The Germans downplayed their losses, especially in aerial combat. Their planes, for example, often collided in mid-air. Ours was less so, even though we didn't know how to fly, right? It's a paradox. And yet, our pilots and even aircraft weren't always destroyed after a collision.
    It's safe to assume the Germans borrowed their ace-creating technology from the British. Their ace, Marmeduke Pattle, shot down 51 aircraft in nine months. He first shot down Italian aircraft in Africa, then, at the start of the Balkans campaign, his tally rose sharply in combat with the Germans. Including 23 German and 2 Italian kills from April 4–20, 1941. Many times more than any of his fellow pilots. Pattle's other assets included his pleasant appearance and short, memorable surname. After his death, the British never produced any aces comparable to him. He would have been the top Allied ace if not for four Soviet pilots who surpassed him. It's hard to imagine how many aircraft Pattle would have shot down if he had fought for four years instead of nine months!
    1. 0
      1 August 2026 22: 28
      Today it is known that the Germans exaggerated their successes.

      It has long been known that both our people and the Germans overestimated their successes.
  12. +2
    31 July 2026 17: 15
    Obviously, the number of victories claimed by German aces is inflated, but hardly by a significant amount. Hartmann certainly didn't have 352, but he certainly had 230-260. The inflated victory counts occurred because a pilot's statement was taken as proof. Incidentally, it was different with us. A pilot's statement wasn't proof, but rather a report (message). Confirmation by at least one other channel was required. That's why Pokryshkin has 59 victories, but there's plenty of evidence suggesting over 70. Kozhedub, Gulaev, and a number of others—indeed, almost all of our aces—had more victories than officially claimed. Nevertheless, the fact remains—we were fighting against true professionals in excellent aircraft, and how right the author is that our ancestors wiped out such a force. Despite everything.
    1. +6
      31 July 2026 17: 36
      The Germans didn't take anyone's word for it either. Sometimes, when doubts arose about a "hero's" effectiveness, an outside "inspector" would be flown out specifically to check, whose sole task was to personally verify the veracity of the reports.
      We also had individuals who, seeing the wreckage of a German plane while flying past, shamelessly claimed it as their own. My father knew one such person; we served together in the same fighter regiment.
      War, all sorts of things happened, people are different.
      1. 0
        1 August 2026 08: 08
        So, what happened next? Were the "hero" credited for his "victories"? And where did the "inspector" get confirmation from? And after the "inspector" didn't confirm it, where did the "hero" go, to the penalty box?
        Only one case has been reported in history where Luftwaffe "experts" were found to have falsified their numbers. In Africa, Lieutenant Vogel's unit was disbanded after it was discovered they had been falsifying their numbers, but the "victories" themselves remained with the "heroes."
    2. +1
      1 August 2026 18: 46
      Quote: Glagol1
      Incidentally, things were different with us. The pilot's statement wasn't considered evidence, but rather a report (message). Confirmation of the fact was required by at least one other channel.

      And this system also had its own clever trick:
      Having personal indiscretion and attachment to Government awards, not satisfied with the two orders already received, comrade Fyodorov took the path of extortion and fraud, ascribing to himself non-existent military merit (15 personally shot down and 3 wrecked enemy aircraft).
      As a result of the insistent demands of Colonel FEDOROV, the commander of 6 IAK presented an award sheet for conferring the title of Hero of the Soviet Union on Colonel FEDOROV. When considering the award material in January 1944, I was refused representation.
      In the month of February 1944, the commander of the 6th IAK re-presented the award sheet with the application of certificates of downed enemy aircraft. Considering the award sheet and the certificates attached to it, I had a doubt about the correctness of the latter, i.e. whether certificates for the same downed planes were issued, only in different parts and persons. Having asked the Commander of the Air Force 3 on the merits of this question, I received an answer as I had previously assumed that Colonel FEDOROV showed exceptional dishonesty and fraud, attributing to himself twice the same aircraft shot down by him.
      © Lieutenant General Rudenko
      Former inspector of piloting technique of the 3rd Air Army and commander of a group of fines, Lieutenant Colonel, now Colonel FEDOROV Ivan Evgrafovich, during his entire stay on the Kalinin Front, according to combat reports and accounting data, shot down 8 enemy aircraft, which he was told by the Army Headquarters on March 5, 1943 and was Help issued. Confirming the reliability of this certificate, I inform you that all other certificates of the flight personnel of 157 and 163 fighter regiments and the GROMOV telegram confirm the same aircraft that are indicated in the final certificate of 5.3.1943 on the combat work of FEDOROV on the Kalinin Front.
      © Commander of the 3rd Air Army, Lieutenant General of Aviation Papivin
      Moreover, Fedorov was caught red-handed only because by that time he had really gotten on the command's nerves - and his applications began to be examined under a microscope.
  13. +3
    31 July 2026 19: 18
    On June 22, Hauptmann Heinz Bruttitz (commander of II/JG53, 37 victories) was shot down.

    Foreign-language Wikipedia -
    Heinz "Pitsch" Bretnütz (24 January 1914 – 27 June 1941) was a German Luftwaffe ace and recipient of the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross during World War II.
    ...
    In 1932, he enlisted in the Reichswehr, the German armed forces of the Weimar Republic.[3] In 1935, Bretnitz transferred to the newly formed Luftwaffe and underwent flight training and fighter pilot training at Döberitz.[Note 1] 
    On 1 July 1937, he was promoted to Leutnant (Junior Lieutenant). Following the formation of I. Gruppe (1st Group) of Jagdgeschwader 334 (JG 334 - 334th Fighter Wing) at Mannheim-Sandhofen Airfield in 1937, Bretnitz was posted to 1. Staffel (1st Squadron) of JG 334 under the command of Oberleutnant Werner Mölders.[5]
    Bretnitz volunteered for service in the Condor Legion during the Spanish Civil War. From late 1938 to March 1939, Bretnitz served with 2. Squadron of Jagdgruppe 88 (J/88 - 88th Fighter Group) under the command of Oberleutnant Joachim Schlichting.[6] In Spain, he claimed two aerial victories: on 6 November 1938, he shot down a Polikarpov I-15 fighter, and on 28 December, he shot down a Tupolev SB-2 bomber. For his participation in the Spanish Civil War, Bretnitz was later awarded the Spanish Cross in Gold with Swords (Spanienkreuz in Gold mit Schwertern) on 14 April 1939.[7] After returning to Germany, Brettitz was promoted to Oberleutnant (Senior Lieutenant), retroactively to 20 April 1938.[8]
    ...
    On 22 June 1941, the first day of the invasion, Bretnitz claimed to have shot down a Soviet Tupolev SB-2 twin-engine bomber. During the dogfight, his Bf 109 F-2 (serial number 6674) came under return fire from the bombers, damaging the aircraft and wounding Bretnitz. Bretnitz managed to make an emergency landing between Eržvilks and Nemakščiai. Although his aircraft was later recovered, Bretnitz died of his wounds on 27 June 1941.[25] Bretnitz landed behind enemy lines and was picked up and hidden by the local population.[26] After advancing German forces occupied the area, he was taken to a field hospital in Jurbarkas, where his leg was amputated. Due to complications and contracting tetanus, he died on 27 June 1941. He was initially buried in the German military cemetery at Insterburg, modern-day Chernyakhovsk. His mother and wife later traveled to Insterburg and cremated his body, transporting the remains to Mannheim, where he was reburied in the family grave.[27] Bretnütz was replaced by Hauptmann Walter Spies as commander of II. Gruppe of JG 53.[28]

    At the time of his death, the Hauptmann had 37 victories credited to him.
    2 in Spain, 34 on the Western Front (French and British vehicles) and 1 SB "shot down" by him on June 22, 1941.
    Western researchers have found confirmation of 30 aircraft shot down by Heinz Bruttnitz on the Western Front.
    A pilot with pre-war training!
    1. 0
      1 August 2026 08: 10
      It would be good to remember Major Wolfgang Schellmann, the commander of the German JG 26, who was shot down on June 22, 1941, in one of his first combat sorties, when he rammed the I-153 of Senior Lieutenant Kuzmin.
      1. +1
        1 August 2026 08: 15
        I wanted to point him out, but decided to choose other Germans.
        There are rumors about Shellman that he was shot down by debris from an exploding Soviet plane or collided with the downed plane due to his own error...
        1. +1
          1 August 2026 09: 49
          "Churchill came up with all this in 1918...."
          In reality, Schellman was shot down by Senior Lieutenant Kuzmin from the 127th Fighter Aviation Regiment by ramming his I-153. By the way, I mistakenly indicated JG26; Schellman was the commander of JG27 "Schlageter".
  14. +3
    31 July 2026 19: 32
    On August 25, Hauptmann Hermann-Friedrich Joppien (commander of I/JG51, 70 victories)
    Foreign-language Wikipedia -
    Hermann-Friedrich Joppien (July 19, 1912 – August 25, 1941) was a German Luftwaffe pilot during World War II, a fighter ace credited with 70 enemy aircraft shot down in approximately 270 combat missions. He claimed 42 victories on the Western Front, 23 of them over Supermarine Spitfires, with the remainder on the Eastern Front.
    ...
    On 25 August 1941, Joppien and his wingman, Lieutenant Erwin Fleig, engaged Soviet fighters and bombers near Yelnya, Bryansk Oblast, in the village of Krasnovichsky, Unechsky District, Bryansk Oblast, 20 kilometres (12 miles) southwest of Bryansk. During the ensuing engagement, Joppien was shot down and killed in his Bf 109 F-2 (Werknummer 9670) "Black" by a Soviet I-16.[2][15] 
    ...
    According to American historian David T. Zabecki, Joppien was credited with 70 aerial victories.[19] Matthews and Forman, authors of Luftwaffe Aces: Biographies and Victories, researched the German Federal Archives and found records of 59 confirmed aerial victories, as well as eleven unconfirmed ones. The confirmed victories include 32 on the Western Front and 27 on the Eastern Front.[20]
  15. +2
    1 August 2026 10: 01
    Since the Spanish Civil War, there's been a chaotic record of pilot victories. Initially, Soviet pilots didn't bother keeping statistics at all, suffering from the complete disorganization of their so-called "flight detachments." Eventually, when a coherent organizational unit with a Spanish flavor—the Squadron—was created, victories began to be recorded in a common pool, from which some had personal scores of 5-9 aircraft, either individually or in a group. The Germans initially seemed to have everything in order, but Mölders, with his four individual victories and fifty in a group, suddenly found himself with 14 personal victories. However, his Spanish allies didn't bother at all, taking credit for all the group victories of their regiments, so that some had 20-40 personal victories. At the same time, the Italians, who claim approximately 1000 victories over government aircraft, could have claimed 100 personal victories per ace, but I have not found such figures in the literature.
  16. 0
    1 August 2026 10: 57
    Quote: Proxima
    It gets even worse: Vershinin, for example, wouldn't even let something like that through. He wanted the slightly dismantled serial number of the downed plane!
    What if the downed plane crashed behind the front lines?
    The pilot must infiltrate the German rear, find the downed plane, unscrew the nameplate and return to the rear to show it and thus prove his victory?
    You've read too many fairy tales on the forums.
    Everyone inflated their victory counts: both our pilots and the Germans. Aviation historians have long acknowledged this fact.
    The only disputes are about how much they overstated and who overstated more.
  17. 0
    1 August 2026 11: 31
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    And this means that Hartmann's and others' accounts are inflated. By an order of magnitude. Unlike Litvyak's account, for example.
    Mikhail Timin talked about Litvyak's account in one of the videos on TM.
    According to Soviet primary accounting documents, she had either 4 or 3 aircraft to her credit, with 1 aircraft in the group.
    And after the war, the number 15 appeared out of nowhere.
  18. 0
    1 August 2026 17: 13
    The attributions of German aces can be debated endlessly, but that's not what I'm talking about now. Hartmann is famous as the only fighter ace to be caught by two opponents (Americans) and, without engaging in combat, to parachute out of an undamaged, fully operational aircraft. So he fully deserved the title of "most cowardly knight."
    1. +3
      1 August 2026 20: 01
      Vladimir hi,
      Since we are serious people and do not consider historical facts based on emotion or the "I heard what the guys said" approach, we will consider your comment based on several sources that described this incident. And these sources www2f.com, www.aviation-history.com, warbirdinformationexchenge.org
      What do we have with the goose?

      1. 'Was caught by two opponents (Americans)»
      Such an episode is indeed described in Hartman's biographies.
      In his last interview, Hartman described it this way:
      He tried to get to his airfield, counting on the help of anti-aircraft artillery, and performed sharp maneuvers to evade fighter fire.
      «but I ran out of fuel and had to leave the plane";
      landed approximately 6,5 km from its airfield
      .
      The American pilot most commonly associated with the episode, Lieutenant Robert J. Goebel of the 308th Fighter Squadron, 31st Fighter Group, allegedly passed close to Hartman, who was hanging from his parachute, taking pictures of him with a gun, and waved his wing.
      So, it happened at the end of June 1944 during the fighting over the oil fields of Ploiești, Romania.
      This was Hartmann's fifth battle against American fighters. Before he himself found himself in dire straits, he claimed two P-51s shot down. His Bf.109 was attacked and pursued by a group of eight Mustangs. During a protracted battle and attempted escape, he first ran out of ammunition and then fuel. He then parachuted out.

      2. 'Jumped out of a fully operational aircraft»
      In all the best-known accounts of this battle, the reason for abandoning the aircraft was a lack of ammunition and complete depletion of fuel, not fear of combat. The aircraft itself was not specificallycompletely intact and combat-ready».

      3. 'Not accepting the fight»
      According to the descriptions of the episode itself, the battle has already taken place.
      Hartman evaded superior enemy forces until he ran out of fuel. This doesn't seem like a situation where a pilot saw two enemies and immediately abandoned a serviceable aircraft.
      Hartman himself and his biography evoke absolutely no sympathy or admiration in me. It's a shame our guys didn't finish him off in the first few days of fighting. Whether his claimed number of victories actually matches that, no one can confirm or deny it today.
      But even if we divide them into five, these are dozens of our dead guys who remained forever young...
      Thus, the claim that Hartman was "was caught by two Americans and jumped out of a perfectly serviceable plane", hardly corresponds to the most widespread and published reconstruction of events.
      With deep respect
      Eugene
      1. 0
        1 August 2026 20: 34
        There's no desire to open a discussion; naturally, German sources describe the situation in purely positive terms. But here, as the Germans say, "Aussage gegen Aussage." He didn't get his nickname for nothing.
        1. +2
          1 August 2026 21: 03
          No, no, I don't argue at all.
          I just wrote what I found. drinks
          1. +1
            1 August 2026 22: 24
            You are absolutely right, we were not there, I read it too.
            By the way, you write very interestingly, including on historical topics. Would you like to shed light on the history of the now-popular guided glide bombs? I think few people know that the Germans began using them back in the 40s, for example, the Henschel HS-293. They even tried attaching a TV camera to it. laughing
            1. +1
              1 August 2026 22: 36
              Vladimir, I indirectly touched on this topic in the article.
              https://topwar.ru/280630-ne177-dotjanutsja-do-urala-chast-pervaja.html
              And thank you for your appreciation of my work!
              1. +1
                1 August 2026 23: 31
                Thanks so much for the link, I somehow missed it. Very interesting, the dark Teutonic genius did such things... And they used gliding guided bombs, even sinking British ships.
      2. -1
        1 August 2026 20: 52
        Not directly on topic, but regarding statistics: you've probably heard of the defender of the Schwerpunkt on Omaha named Heinrich Severloch. Well, when I encountered this case a long time ago, the number of Yankees he killed in that battle was estimated at 2000 (two thousand, in words) and no one disputed it. Over time, the number began to decline, and now it's not quoted at all. 2000 is unrealistic, and no one knows how many. Now, the subjunctive mood: if Hartmann had counted 300 Americans downed, what would people be writing now? The question is rhetorical.
  19. +1
    1 August 2026 17: 20
    Werner Mölders became commander of JG51 on July 19, 1940, with a simultaneous promotion to major, but the squadron in the Luftwaffe was roughly equivalent to an air division in the Red Army Air Forces and had 100-120 aircraft in service. 40 aircraft were in an air group, which was equivalent to an air regiment.
  20. +1
    1 August 2026 17: 39
    Thanks for the interesting post!

    Both "Offizieranwärter (officer candidate)" and "officer candidate (Fahnenjunker)" are used.
    What makes these "officer candidates" different?
    1. +1
      1 August 2026 17: 59
      Novel hi , I explain.
      Offizieranwärter (OA)
      Offizieranwärter is the general status of a military service member undergoing officer training.
      That is, OA is not a rank, but a category of military personnel.
      It includes all future officers, regardless of what stage of training they are at.

      Fahnenjunker
      Fahnenjunker is a specific military rank (Dienstgrad) that an officer candidate receives after starting service and fulfilling certain requirements.
      For example, in the Bundeswehr the sequence looks like this:
      Offizieranwärter (officer candidate status)
      Fahnenjunker (first officer candidate rank)
      Fähnrich
      Oberfähnrich
      Leutnant
      Thus:
      every Fahnenjunker is an Offizieranwärter;
      but not every Offizieranwärter is already a Fahnenjunker, because he may be at an earlier stage of training.
      Historically, the Wehrmacht had a similar system:
      Offizierbewerber (officer candidate);
      Fahnenjunker;
      Fähnrich;
      Oberfähnrich;
      then Lieutenant.
      Therefore, if the document says:
      Offizieranwärter Müller - this means that Müller is an officer candidate, without specifying his specific rank.
      Fahnenjunker Müller - this means that he already has a certain military rank in preparation for an officer's rank.
      In other words, Offizieranwärter is a status, and Fahnenjunker is a rank within this status.
      This is why both terms can be found in German documents and they are not interchangeable.
      Thank you for rating this article!
      1. +1
        1 August 2026 19: 40
        Thanks for the detailed answer!
        I had a thought that you had made a mistake when writing, but I pushed it aside because my brain didn’t trip over anything else, and that’s why I asked.
  21. -2
    1 August 2026 18: 00
    Quote: Fitter65
    Quote: MSN
    It used to be a serious resource.

    And didn't you write all this nonsense about various Baron Munchausen? Every three or four years, this topic of the exorbitant bills of German pilots, tank crews, and artillerymen comes up... So the resources remain the same. Only the authors who pour from empty to empty change.


    We use arithmetic, and sometimes mathematics, frequently. We use Russian constantly.
    But sometimes we remember history.
    Maybe that's why some authors "beat around the bush every three or four years"? So that history isn't forgotten.
    Did the German aces really score that many victories? I don't believe it.
    Were their names used for propaganda purposes, especially since 1943? I believe it.
    The Germans were trained better than ours? I believe it.
    Well, if our grandfathers (in my case) had fought like the French, then now it would not be WWII, but God knows what.
  22. -1
    1 August 2026 22: 48
    [quote=Proxima][quote=Puncher]The enemy is overestimating, etc.
    But with the Luftwaffe, everything is much simpler! Fill out the forms correctly and maintain the camera angle (if there is one, of course).
    They told me in my youth how they made money doing photomontage in Germany... My grandfather served with the enemy, and I worked in Germany in the 90s.
  23. +1
    2 August 2026 08: 46
    *Six Junkers bombed the train
    Economically, calmly, businesslike.
    A woman gave birth, muffling the old woman's moan,
    Who wanted to be killed instead of her grandson*

    Rudel recalled in his memoirs that he received a hit in the leg and others that knocked down his *thing* from the crew of an IS tank, who used a DShK anti-aircraft gun mounted on the turret.
  24. AVP
    0
    4 August 2026 13: 18
    So, if 10 people shot down 2500 planes, how did they manage to lose? Well, the answer is obvious – pis da bo ly. Although most of them really did know how to fly.
    Standing out here is the windbag Hartmann, who sometimes managed to draw 15 planes per sortie, and the windbag Rudel with his insane number of "combat sorties" and "500 destroyed tanks."