Soviet aviation suffered the smallest casualties in World War II from all the warring powers

The comparable losses of the air forces of all countries participating in World War II: http://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/205/813676-2.html Interestingly, it turns out aviation The USSR suffered the smallest losses from all the warring countries, and indeed ALL, both the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition and the "Axis powers".

And the data are:
In the first place - Japan: 60,750 killed pilots (well, this is understandable, "kamikaze", traditions of honor, etc.)
In second place - Germany: 57.137 killed pilots.
In third place - England: 56.821 killed the pilot.
In fourth place - USA: 40,061 killed the pilot.
And on the FIFTH, the last place - the USSR: 34.500 killed pilots.
Losses are even less than in the USA! Why?

Maybe the Soviet commanders hesitantly used the aircraft, "protected" it? Not! Aviation of the USSR used THROUGH more intensively than Germany - during the war years on the Eastern front, German aviation made 1 373 952 combat sorties, and the USSR aviation - 3 808 136 sorties!

This fact alone breaks into tales the legends of the Lapotny Roly, who, they say, is stupid, stupid and not too far to fight on equal terms with the "civilized Aryans" - for military aviation is always, then and now, the technical elite of the army. And a combat pilot is a unique fighter that combines the knowledge and intelligence of an engineer with the skills and reflexes of a professional Olympic-level athlete. Therefore, the main thing is to save the pilot, since compared to the cost of his training, the plane itself is a penny ...

However, the loss of the "material part" of the USSR is also not in the first place:

During the Second World War, the aircraft of the warring countries lost:
1. German Air Force: 85.650 aircraft;
2. Japanese Air Force: 49.485 aircraft;
3. Soviet Air Force: 47.844 aircraft;
4. USAF: 41,575 aircraft;
5. British Air Force: 15.175 aircraft.

(The number of lost cars is much smaller than the number of pilots killed by the British because, for example, the English Lancaster bomber had a crew of 7 people, and it was the British heavy strategic bombers who fought mostly with the British)

Yes, the USSR lost the most of the aircraft from the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition, but less than any of the enemy countries.

Comments

[Muvka]

That's where we got so many great pilots that the NATO people are afraid of. Genes ...

[avvg]

In a word - Our Grandfathers knew how to fight and fought with dignity!

[Thunderbolt]

Therefore, the main thing is to save the pilot, because compared to the cost of training it, the plane itself is a penny ...

Somehow it jars .... the pilot must be saved, because his life itself is precious, and the plane will make new "hardware". Of course, there is a cruel arithmetic of war, but somehow it is necessary to be careful with expressions.

[megafair]

And the aviation suffered significant losses in the first hours after the treacherous attack without having time to take off. But this is a separate topic. The main thing is that the above statistics shatters to smithereens all attempts to belittle the role of the USSR and overestimate the role of "allies". And all those who claim that the Soviet soldier did not know how to fight should re-read the historical facts;)

[vv3]

The topic is different, but no one suffered significant losses in the first hours. This tale was invented later to hide the complete lack of leadership in the Air Force. On June 1, 1941, arrests began, followed by the shooting of the high command of the Air Force. The last group was shot by Stalin's dogs on February 23, 1942. Teach and remember history, stupidity and cruelty cannot be hidden behind the figures of the article.

[asiat_61]

You write, complete nonsense, at least sometimes turn on your head. no one suffered significant losses in the first hoursIt turns out that some just walked forward without shooting. And others just walked back without shooting. Lack of leadership in the Air Force .. end of quote .. And when these stunned were shot a little, then for some reason Stalinist dogs.

[sever.56]

Friends, the most disgusting thing is that nobody needs such a truth in the West. And about our liberoids, such as Gozman (I hate to endure him) and there is nothing to say ... According to him, we paved the way to Berlin with corpses, and the Germans, all such educated and cool fighters, stacked our fighters in packs.
Recently I read how statistics of victories of aces pilots were kept by us and the Germans - it turns out that in order to take into account the plane you shot down, confirmation of several pilots participating in that battle was required, and, if possible, confirmation from the ground. The Germans considered downed planes differently: - An airplane shot down in a group, but not exactly determined by whom it was shot down, was written at all. The pilot, having just flown to the airfield from a solitary hunt, could say that he shot down at least five planes, and they wrote to him about it.
After this material, I realized where the Germans got so many pseudo-Aasses, who accounted for nearly five hundred shot down planes.

[cniza]

Quote: sever.56

Friends, the most disgusting thing is that nobody needs such a truth in the West.

They are afraid of her and carefully hide.

[tiredwithall]

Quote: sever.56

Friends, the most disgusting thing is that nobody needs such a truth in the West.

But there is WE.

[Ami du peuple]

Quote: sever.56

After this material, I realized where the Germans got so many pseudo-Oasis from,

"Pseudo-oses" are "five"! Pseudo-races are pseudo-races. By the way, I never had confidence in the objectivity of the results of the same "most effective fighter pilot of the Second World War" "Bubi" Hartman. The only one, damn it - in a little over two years to shoot down 352 enemy aircraft. And as I read in his memoirs, how he filled four Il-2 with one burst, I realized that he was a natural nonsense.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Ami du peuple

And as I read in his memoirs, how he flunked four IL-2s with one burst, I realized that he was a natural breh.

The declared "victories" of aces of ALL parties should be divided into 4. And then we will be close to the truth.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: stalkerwalker

The declared "victories" of aces of ALL parties should be divided into 4. And then we will be close to the truth.

Why? the Germans showed the result machine gun. It does not matter that after hitting, the enemy plane safely flew away, and did not crumble into atoms. Our demanded confirmation of other participants of the battle, or ground services. And about the Americans, the German fighters with their bombers were very reluctant to get involved in a battle. Imagine a few thousand flying fortresses, each of which is armed with seven machine guns and a cannon. This is shaped suicide for Messeur.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Mordvin 3

Why? the Germans showed the result of a machine gun.

Photo gun registers the fact of firing on the enemy's aircraft. But not the fact of its destruction. And if the plane went down, it is not a fact that he was shot down. As well as not the fact that the hit resulted in damage.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: stalkerwalker

Photo gun registers the fact of firing on the enemy's aircraft. But not the fact of its destruction. And if the plane went down, it is not a fact that he was shot down. As well as not the fact that the hit resulted in damage.

What am I writing about?

Quote: Mordvin 3

It does not matter that after hitting, the enemy plane safely flew away, and did not crumble into atoms

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Mordvin 3

What am I writing about?

So am I ... writing ...

[your1970]

that is, if he shot down three Messers, then one went to minus and ours had to give birth to him ?????

[yehat]

depending on which plane
Hartman went through the whole war on "thin", but what modification?
if bf109f2, then he definitely could not shoot down 4 il-2. Even one was problematic due to weak weapons.
if the Bf109g6 is 5-point with a set of hanging guns, then it could shave 1 IL-4 completely in 2 pass. Only if they were covered by fighter aircraft, it is unlikely that after that he would have left alive. the devil is in the details.

[Bakht]

There is a well-known phrase of German pilots about the IL-2 "You can't bite a hedgehog in the ass".

But this is only at the first meetings. When the Germans received the captured planes and studied them, it was not a difficult task to bring down the IL-2 to an experienced pilot. One messer could knock down several attack aircraft. Of course, not in one queue.
The weak point of the IL-2 was the oil pipe under the bottom. A short line was enough and the attack aircraft was doomed.

"In this, in particular, was clearly convinced on November 8, 1941, Oberfeldwebel G. Kaiser from the III group of the 77th fighter squadron, then fighting in the Crimea. After the day before he had failed to shoot down the Il-2, demonstrate to him effective Colonel V. Mölders, Inspector General of Luftwaffe Fighter Aviation, himself took up the methods of destroying attack aircraft. “Rapid turn,” recalls Kaiser, “and at an angle of 30 ° [not 20 ° or less!] his turn bites into the Russian attack aircraft in the cockpit area. The enemy plane immediately flared up and crashed. The next moment, his voice rang out: "Did you see how I did it? Attack the next one!
I performed his move, and the IL-2 crashed into the ground. "Repeat!" Almost like in a training battle: the same approach to the target, a short burst, and the third attack aircraft falls burning ""

[novobranets]

Quote: sever.56

After this material, I realized where the Germans got so many pseudo-Aasses, who accounted for nearly five hundred shot down planes.

These are just features of the Luftwaffe bookkeeping. If, for example, a group of fighters shot down a Soviet plane, then the victory was most often recorded on the leader, and there were cases that the whole group. In other words, four shot down one, recorded everything for victory, in total they shot down four. This is the kind of mess the "pedants" had.

[Awaz]

You are right here. I read about the German aces, like the memories of one who was not killed ... He was very interested in the topic of shot down planes. They originally wrote there really anything. Moreover, all the planes of the Red Army that ended up in the German rear, not even taking off, were quickly painted by everyone who wanted to. Then they initially wrote whatever, until the picture really began to look stupid, they began to demand proof. Moreover, the lured "aces" worked without proof. This guy himself, like about Hartman, told how he allegedly shot down either five or 10 Russian planes in one day, never once providing evidence and his own people had already begun to joke about it.
But no one particularly forbade them to lie on the eastern front, but on the western one, they could not lie so shamelessly, as the London newspapers reported losses and now, they were afraid to lie because of this. Therefore, German pilots falling from the eastern front to the western, sharply reduced the number of downed aircraft. And immediately increased how they fell on the Soviet front.

[yehat]

do not forget that the Germans received decent bonuses for the downed planes
attributing was trite profitable.

[max73]

respected, but do not you think that you are mistaken? And, the worst thing is that you preach your "truth" with foam at the mouth and without docks ... on aviation losses and there are a lot of open sources. Of course, two times, you couldn't study these sources ... three. Tell me, pliz, if you are so literate in terms of military history, about the loss of 11-kk in the spring and summer of 42 and about the loss of the opposing German troops (Wehrmacht)?

[Ros 56]

Yes, the USSR lost more than all aircraft from the countries of the Anti-Hitler coalition, but less than any of the opposing countries.

I would like to look at the losses of the arrogant Saxons with striped ones, be they on the eastern front.
Probably ours are healthier or something, at least Kozhedub laid such overloads that his eyes were climbing on the foreheads.

[veteran66]

Quote: Ros 56

Kozhedub laid such overloads that at the backdrops his eyes were poking over his forehead.

Kozhedub is my favorite hero, the second book I read about pilots in that war (the first is about Zakhar Sorokin, northern Maresyev). With regard to overloads, then on the "Fokker" they were stronger, due to its higher speed characteristics. No need to strike at urapatriotism, the Germans were also worthy fighters.

[Ros 56]

Quote: veteran66

Regarding congestion,

Overloads can be at Fokker or Lavochkin and depend on the speed of the aircraft and on the speed of movement of the control handle, the maximum overloads depend on the structural strength, let's say + 9, -5 for this aircraft. But what kind of overload the pilot will withstand, it depends on his individual health. I meant this, that Kozhedub withstood more than average. By the way, air battles at maximum speeds never fought, the head just fell off, the maximum was cut when it was necessary to catch up or run away, but there was straightforward movement.
In fact, find the DOSAAF flying club closest to you, they usually take a ride on an aviation day, ask them to spin 5-6 figures with you in the cockpit.

[veteran66]

Quote: Ros 56

By the way, air battles at maximum speeds never fought, just the head will fall off,

did not lead, but not because the head would fall off, but simply because, for example, the vaunted messer at a speed of about 600 km / h could not be easily controlled, and our planes too, but the "Fokker" could, respectively, and the overloads were higher on it. By the way, about Kozhedub, his ability to withstand overloads was made up of his physical strength, between flights he carried weights, he could apply the appropriate efforts to the handle, there were no boosters then (as, in any case, the book says)

[yehat]

Messer had some difficulties with the wings - at maximum dive speeds, their strength excluded any energetic maneuvering. Plus the survivability of the wing mechanization elements. For example, the slats often refused to overload, there were problems with the control of the tail rudder. I heard, but I don't know if it's true or not - they said that from overloads on the bf109, the chassis could stop being produced. The Germans rather cautiously flew at maximum speed on a "thin" one.

[veteran66]

Quote: yehat

some difficulties with wings - at maximum dive speeds

not only on a dive, remember Hartmann's famous parachute escape from the Mustangs. After the air battle, he tried to get away from the allies at maximum speed, but that was not the case, the speed of the "Mustangs" was higher than that of the "Messer", and there was no way to maneuver. So he had to unfasten his seat belts, open the flashlight and the handle away from him ...

[yehat]

I was rolled in the 90s at the training moment-21
most of all, I was glad not that I got on a plane, but that I did not have lunch

[iouris]

The term "pilot" is used unofficially in our country.
We should talk about “pilots” and “flight crews”.
Until mid-1944, the United States and Great Britain conducted intensive military operations against Germany by strategic bomber aviation. The crew of a massive strategic aviation aircraft usually exceeded 10 people. Of these, only 2 pilots ("pilots"). The crew of the mass Soviet aircraft is 1-2 people.

[veteran66]

Quote: iouris

The term "pilot" is used unofficially in our country.
We should talk about “pilots” and “flight crews”.

well, well, a connoisseur of the headquarters ... never from his father, his brother, their fellow soldiers and their friends heard the "flight crew", they usually said respectfully "pilots", and the songs were: "pilots, bombs -planes "," one evening, when the pilots, frankly, have nothing to do ... "

[iouris]

Civilians call all military men with blue collar tabs "pilots".
You should understand the main thing: in the USA and Great Britain, on average, for each downed plane there were (approximately) 12 lost crew members, and in the USSR - 1,2.
The author, citing statistics, should strive for objectivity.

[yehat]

Well, partly because in the USSR half of the fleet was single.
and 30 thousand IL-2 two or single.

[Bakht]

Statistics is a good thing if you set the tasks correctly and consider them correctly. This article has an interesting point - the number of sorties. It turns out that Soviet aviation made almost three times as many sorties. And the losses are half that of the Germans. Well, German losses must still be reduced. Almost all Soviet aircraft were lost on the Soviet-German front. But the Germans have a different arithmetic. So with a large number of departures, losses in aircraft are almost the same.
I would draw a different conclusion: Most of our sorties were not very productive. Again wrong. Departures of attack aircraft and bombers are not taken into account. After all, IL-2 was the most massive aircraft of the Red Army Air Force. And he is clearly not a fighter.

The article is somehow uninformative. Need a breakdown by departures of aircraft types. How many air battles were carried out, and how many attacks and bombings. You need to know the methods of using aviation by the belligerent countries. Soviet pilots were tied to their armies and fronts. The Germans used their aviation superintensively. German pilots were called "the most tired people in the war."

In general, the article is not very informative. And the figures given do not mean anything.

[papas-57]

"I would draw a different conclusion: Most of the sorties of our aircraft were not very effective." The goals of our and German fighters were different. Their fighters flew out to look for and shoot down the enemy. Our fighters made most of the sorties to cover their bombers and attack aircraft. And for poor cover, the flyers were not stroked on the head, they could have brought them under the tribunal. And the statistics given are hard to believe, as are the sky-high accounts of German and Japanese flyers.

[Bakht]

This also happened. But the main thing was in various methods of warfare. Soviet air armies were attached to the fronts. If the front is calm, then the Germans threw their planes to the active site. Our air armies were literally idle. They flew out to bombardment, cover and so on. That is, there were simply no goals and there was nothing to shoot down.
German squadrons actively maneuvered along the front and were in active sections. See the recollections of that Hartmann or Rudel. Rudel generally excelled everywhere. And near Leningrad and near Stalingrad, was on the Kursk, then in Ukraine. Different methods of using the air force. Well, how can a German aircraft be shot down if it is corny not at the front.

Then the Germans actively used free hunting (the same Hartmann). All his tactics were to climb, set from the sun, high speed when diving, strike from a short distance and escape. No carousels, no dogfights. But at Kursk he was ordered to cover the bombers and was immediately shot down. For the Soviet Air Force, the main task was to provide cover for attack aircraft and bombers. That is, work to win, not a personal account. This moment is well covered in the film and the book "Normandie-Niemen". The main thing is to complete the task, and it doesn't matter if you shot down an enemy fighter or not.

[Des10]

Thank you, for once, a sensible detailed comment.

[Warrior2015]

Quote: Bakht

Then the Germans actively used free hunting (the same Hartmann)

By the way, only those pilots who already had 10 or more victories were entitled to such a course of action, i.e. reached the rank of "ace" according to German requirements (7, then 10 victories, the allies from the First World War - 5 victories).

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Bakht

It turns out that Soviet aviation made almost three times more sorties. And the loss is half the Germans.

Everything is simple. The Germans, unlike ours, did not fly in bad weather.

[your1970]

"Everything is simple here. The Germans, unlike ours, did not fly in bad weather." - You just said a terrible thing for all rezunists, SCARY, no, not so - The scariest!!!!
At the moment, the total number of pilots is LESS than the number of pilots who can fly in SMU (difficult weather conditions). Moreover, for example, in the 90s helicopters had a ratio of about 1 (not) to 2 (with SMU). And this, taking into account modern means of navigation, communication, drives, and banal landing lamp headlights and airport lights.

IF our YEARS-and the Germans did not fly- then this directly speaks of much higher training for Soviet pilots.And this after the slogans about "Take-off-landing-front", "50 hours of flight", etc. Only highly qualified pilots could fly in bad weather with those navigation devices and communications, but it was just stupid to go to their airfield ..

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: your1970

Only highly qualified pilots could fly in bad weather with those navigation devices and communications, but just stupidly go to their airfield ..

That is how I did not think about it. I just read in my memoirs that the Germans, unlike ours, did not fly in bad weather.

[Artem Popov]

Quote: mordvin xnumx

I just read in my memoirs that the Germans, unlike ours, didn’t fly in bad weather.

Exactly the opposite.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Artem Popov

Exactly the opposite.

Give the facts.

[Artem Popov]

At warspot, I recently read about one of the operations on the eastern front and the fact was cited that, due to inclement weather, the Red Army did not make any flights at all, and made a few dozen Luftwaffes, mostly rescue ones.

Now I can't find an article, I've read a lot over the last week, but here is an excerpt from another, "Lotto" 5 out of 50 ", or a squadron for one ace":

“After a five-day“ dry ”period, Feldwebel Martinko, who in the early morning of November 11, reported about another Pe-2 shot down, was noted with a request, although Soviet bombers and reconnaissance officers had no losses. In the morning, there was bad weather in the area of ​​Soviet airfields, and it is doubtful that "Pawns" generally rose into the air.

The next day, for some reason, the imagination of the chief lieutenant Dukovats, who announced the downed DB-3, ran wild for some reason. According to his version, the Croatian ace attacked a group of five Ilyushin bombers covered by Airacobra, as a result one of them crashed into the Sea of ​​Azov near the coast. In this area, the Il-4 were in service with the 367th BAP of the 132nd NBAD, which did not fly during the day, there were no losses in this area and the naval Ilyushins. The "pawns" of the 366th ORAP also remained at the airfield. Only three Boston ships of the 30th ORAP of the Black Sea Fleet flew out on a mission, but soon returned due to bad weather conditions. "

And in general there is nothing strange in the higher level of flight skill of the Luftwaffe pilots, they had a raid dozens more times than military aircraft. The very fact that HUNDRED pilots of night aviation flew more than characterizes the level of the German flight school.

Well, I previously read that the Luftwaffe had more flexible cloud requirements, i.e. when the Red Army had already canceled flights, the Germans flew another hundred or two meters of lower cloud cover.

[Mordvin 3]

Thank you for the facts, but nevertheless, my grandfather, the tankman, said that they didn’t fly in bad weather.

[Artem Popov]

Nobody flew into very bad conditions. My message is that when our aircraft stopped flying, the Germans still clung to the lower edge of the region with screws.
From the very beginning, the Germans had full-fledged walkie-talkies on each aircraft, they used beacons, so they were not so afraid of losing their orientation.

[Artem Popov]

but how the Germans flew
https://books.google.ru/books?id=5WF_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT125&lpg=PT125#v=onepage&q&f=false

[your1970]

"the total number of pilots is" LESS "the number of pilots who can fly in the SMU (adverse weather conditions" - I'll get it right, I got sealed - the total number is naturally MORE than with the SMU

[Warrior2015]

Quote: your1970

IF our Germans DIDN'T FLY, then this directly speaks of the much higher training of Soviet pilots. And this is after the slogans about "Take-off-landing-front", "50 hours of flight", etc. Only highly qualified pilots could fly in bad weather with those navigation devices and means of communication, but it's just stupid to go to your airfield ..

Well, I don’t know where you have read such tales. Both sides flew in bad weather, and ours were smaller, and the Germans very actively used it for their attack aircraft.

[your1970]

All questions to a colleague:

Mordvin 3 (1) RU June 7, 2016 20:42 ↑
Quote: Bakht
It turns out that Soviet aviation made almost three times more sorties. And the loss is half the Germans.
Everything is simple. The Germans, unlike ours, did not fly in bad weather.

[Dmitry Potapov]

Quote: Thunderbolt

Therefore, the main thing is to save the pilot, because compared to the cost of training it, the plane itself is a penny ...

Somehow it jars .... the pilot must be saved, because his life itself is precious, and the plane will make new "hardware". Of course, there is a cruel arithmetic of war, but somehow it is necessary to be careful with expressions.

I agree, but it seems that the author wanted to say just that, he just didn’t put it that way, not everyone can be prepared.

[masiya]

All this dregs, everyone can consider from their own point of view, and from any angle, it’s clear only that the level of our WWII air forces is not worse, but an order of magnitude higher, and decent and allies, so there’s no reason to argue about the number of sorties, and the statistics more than to some extent demagogy, too many factors must be considered for an objective analysis - WHO IS BETTER, STRONGER AND EFFECTIVE ...

[Atlant-1164]

they did not have their own
Pokryshkin, Alexander Ivanovich and Ivan Nikitovich Kozhedub. Because they lost more than us.

[iliitchitch]

The losses were huge. But the Nippons suffered the most, the Nippon sufferers. Ask the Chinese and Mongols who the Japanese are. And the Americans suffered huge losses. Spent the money, poor things. Yes, what for stupid load, huh? Rewriting the results in pure form.

[Atlant-1164]

heroes for ages.

[Alexanderrr]

It is also worth noting that the Germans are not Aryans. But they, and especially the top of the Reich, really wanted to be Aryans and under this they brought up a falsified base. And under a slightly modified ancient symbol, the Aryans attacked the descendants of the Aryans. And attacked vilely and treacherously. I suspect - Hitler knew the truth and knew who he was attacking, and therefore he was ogreb, as the enemies of the Russian Land fenced as always!

[Berkut24]

I don’t want to say anything bad about our aviation and especially the pilots. Moreover, in the beginning of the 30s there was almost none of these. We started from scratch and from poverty.
BUT! I do not understand the strange statistics of the article, where it turns out that everyone fought against everyone. And if you collect statistics on the groups, as it was in fact Britons + USSR + partially the USA, it turns out that the Germans won 2 fronts better than anyone else.
Again, the saying that statistics is the second oldest profession comes to mind.

[masiya]

That’s for sure, in parallel with that old profession on earth, and the same friend - PROSTITUTION, whoever orders something and gets it ...

[Awaz]

Well, they did not fight almost on the second front. I will not describe in more detail, but the second front on earth looked something like this .http: //topnewsrussia.ru/geroicheskaya-vysadka-soyuznikov-v-normandii/
moreover, in Africa, the Germans were finished off by Soviet prisoners of war, who captured the main German airfield and finally depriving them of their reserves.
The British and Americans fought with the Germans throughout the war on a front with a width of one hundred kilometers. Yes, and the allies of the Germans bombed (as already mentioned above) selectively and mainly by a peaceful people, without touching strategic enterprises.

[Berkut24]

Well, there are two points. The first moment - "Battle of Britain". We learned our history, like the Great Patriotic War ... But the Second World War began earlier and the batch over England was not weak.
And the second moment - at the end of the 44th beginning of the 45th, the British and Americans literally hung over Germany. Rammed in black. Another thing is that the Germans had almost no more pilots and fuel left.

[your1970]

"But the Second World War began earlier and the batch over England was not weak."
half a year at the front, half a year you relax / upgrade your skills (English), nice thing ....

[Awaz]

I will give two examples. The first is about your favorite "Battle of Britain". We recall the Dunkirk operation (if you can call it that). The allies, not at all pursued by the Germans, fled towards Britain across the strait, abandoning all equipment and ditching a decent number of personnel.
And now the second one. Odessa 1941. The city is densely surrounded and shelled from all sides. But the Soviet authorities took out all the personnel with equipment without a single victim, and even steam engines were taken out of the port .. In one night, Karl !!!!
Well, for dessert - remember the collapse of the Allies under the Ardennes. As soon as the Germans decided to seriously fight these fighters, they immediately crossed their legs and fled to England. And they would have escaped, if not for the Red Army.
Well, the Allies did not fight with the Germans, they just pretended ...

[Warrior2015]

Quote: AwaZ

remember the collapse of the allies under the Ardennes. As soon as the Germans decided to seriously fight these fighters, they immediately crossed their legs and fled to England. And they would have escaped, if not for the Red Army.

A simple example is matching dates. The Red Army began to advance when the German offensive ALREADY drowned. Incidentally, due to the heroic resistance of the American infantry and anti-tank units. Then the tanks and aircraft pulled themselves together.

[Bakht]

Evidence of loss can be harsh reality. In 1941, the average life expectancy of an attack pilot was 3-4 sorties. For 10 successful assignments they gave the Hero of the Soviet Union. Is this talking about something? Only after the 43rd year they began to give for 40 completed tasks, and by the end of the war for 80.

To my shame, I only recently read about the Peresypkin family carriage. Very impressive article: Until death do us part.

http://www.yaplakal.com/forum7/topic1107768.html

[Tusv]

Quote: Bakht

Evidence of loss can be harsh reality. In 1941, the average life expectancy of an attack pilot was 3-4 sorties. For 10 successful assignments they gave the Hero of the Soviet Union. Is this talking about something?

That Ilyusha was single. When we realized that we can blindfold single people as much as we want, but there will be no more pilots, we took up our minds

[Awaz]

where is the quote from? from the same series that the squadron lives for three days. Yes ? count somehow your thoughts on the calculator ... and where would you get so many people?

[Bakht]

From order 299 of August 19, 1941, signed by Comrade People’s Defense I. Stalin.

For successful assault operations on enemy troops, pilots are awarded and presented to the government award:
for performing 5 sorties to destroy enemy troops, a fighter pilot receives a monetary reward of 1500 rubles;
for performing 15 sorties, the fighter pilot is presented to the government award and receives a cash award of 2000 rubles;
for performing 25 sorties, the fighter pilot is presented to the second government award and receives a cash award of 3000 rubles;
for completing 40 sorties, a fighter pilot is presented with the highest government award - the title of Hero of the Soviet Union and receives a cash award of 5000 rubles.

There is information on Wikipedia that in the 41st they gave for 10 sorties (according to other sources for 30).
In Drabkin's book "I fought in an IL-2" there is information that by the end of the war they were flying 80 sorties in an attack aircraft.
In the same book by Drabkin there are repeated statements by pilots that the losses among the shooters were very large. Almost every veteran says that he replaced 3-4 shooters.

[Awaz]

there is also logic. The death of a gunner on IL 2 is 99% death of an airplane. for all his vitality, he will not be able to get away from the fighter.

[Bakht]

Read Drabkin. This is not fiction. These are the memories of front-line pilots. I think they knew better the subject of our discussion. For some reason, I believe them more than everything that is written here.

[Mavrikiy]

Like all decent, I’m ready to cheer, cheers, but I don’t believe it. I looked at the links, but I’m not familiar with the topic will break my neck.
But unfortunately it was not like that. We darned holes and threw VVU cadets and "pilots" who made 9 takeoffs and 9 landings into the holes. From the remaining after 3-5 sorties, aces were obtained.
Therefore, the article is like hurray, hurray, but I don't believe it. On the other hand, an ideological sabotage is seen. Dogs, again run the circuit. (The loss of the Japanese was especially striking, "well, this is understandable," kamikaze ", traditions of honor, etc." That’s the shit. How many of these "divine breezes" were there? And where? To the sedimentation tanks? Alas, everything was wrong.

[Alex_59]

Quote: Mavrikiy

We darned holes and threw VVU cadets and "pilots" who made 9 takeoffs and 9 landings into the holes. From the remaining after 3-5 sorties, aces were obtained.

My grandfather went through the war from call to call as the chief of intelligence of the IAP of the Navy. Your words are wrong. First of all, they may give rise to a false opinion that "throwing into battle" unfired pilots was the norm, not the exception. And the truth is that, of course, there were such cases, but only during the most difficult period of the war - the end of 41st and 42nd years, and even then not all. After the 42nd, the preparation questions were fine-tuned. In particular, the IAP of my grandfather in 43 was withdrawn for replenishment and training in the rear for a period of more than six months. During this period, the regiment was replenished with pilots from the ZAPs, already trained and received in-depth training already as part of the line regiment. In the 41st IAP, my grandfather suffered heavy losses near Nikolaev and Ochakov, and was withdrawn to Yeisk for only a couple of months - there, there was no special preparation and rest, but this is the fall of the 41st. And already in the 44th in the Baltic ... There was already a machine for packing the Germans to the ancestors.

[uragan114]

Quote: Alex_59

. And already in the 44th in the Baltic ...There was already a machine for packing Germans to forefathers.

Well said. Plus.

[Alex_59]

Quote: Alex_59

In particular, in the 43 year, my grandfather’s IAP was launched for replenishment and training in the rear for a period of more than six months. During this period, the regiment was replenished by pilots from ZAPs, already trained and received advanced training already as part of the line regiment. In the 41th IAP, my grandfather suffered heavy losses near Nikolaev and Ochakov, and was withdrawn to Yeysk for a couple of months - there, there wasn’t much preparation and rest, but this is the autumn of 41. And in 44 in the Baltic ... There was already a machine for packing the Germans to the pro-fathers.

Here are the exact details. 9-IAP 11-th SHAD Air Force Black Sea Fleet
In battles with 22.06.41, Nikolaev, Ochakov
Withdrawn from the front of 09.41 by 10.41 to Yeysk
In the battles from 10.41 to 15.10.42, the defense of the Crimea, the departure to Anapa, Gelendzhik
Withdrawn from the front from 15.10.42 to 19.05.1943 in Abkhazia
In the battles from 19.05.1943 to 19.05.1944, the liberation of the Kuban, Crimea.
Relocated to BF between 19.05 and 03.06.1944
And so on. As you can see in the 41 year, the IAP rested and replenished for only a month, and at the end of the 42 year, it’s 7 months. Since the 43 year, it has not been reorganized at all and has not been set aside for replenishment - there was no need, losses were bearable. And in the second conclusion at the end of the 42 year, the grandfather managed to go to Samara, on vacation and find the family that he considered dead in the 41 year near Nikolaev. Those. even gave pilots time to travel on vacation.

[a housewife]

Yes, the Germans staged a hammer drill over Kuban! Thanks to the pilots and your grandfather as well!

[Artem Popov]

Arranged, but themselves prayed. At warspot there was a detailed analysis of actions, by the day, with the name of the pilots on both sides. Soviet pilots inflated their victories by an average of 6 times.

[fzr1000]

Zilch? Sure?
According to Naito Hatsaho in suicide attacks in 1944-45. 2525 sea and 1388 army pilots were killed, and of the 2550 Kamikaze missions, 475 were successful.
Even if you take half of these figures, then for a year this is a lot.

[staryivoin]

Quote: stalkerwalker

Follow the link to the original site (von_Hoffman), I assure you - you will be disappointed ..

Follow the link yourself !!! Take the level of combat training of the Luftwaffe and Soviet pilot. Remember how many planes you did not manage to save on the first day of the war. I do not completely deny the content of your posts. But the truth is in one thing, then they sat at the controls of the Soviet aviation during the battles of the Second World War to prove their strength and skill by convincingly demonstrating this to the "Goering fleet". There are plenty of examples and literary sources on this subject. You just need not take one article or link for the whole truth. Comrades on the site correctly write - do not believe everything that the WEST is now writing about the Great War. For this they pay, and those who pay need such a truth to wash away the memory of the feat of the SOVIET people. In general, something like this.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: staryivoin

Follow the link yourself !!!

And send you, stern bullfinch warrior?

Quote: staryivoin

Comrades on the site I write correctly

With such comrades it’s good to win victories on the couch.

Quote: staryivoin

There are plenty of examples and literary sources on this subject.

That's it. Full of. These pseudo-patriots do not read Tokma. They are ready to tear with their teeth those who put the Yak-1 below Bf-109 in their performance characteristics.
So, and you do not get sick. And then again declare that Rotmistrov in July 43rd, 500 tigers and panthers burned ...

[overb]

Quote: staryivoin

Remember how many planes did not have time to save on the first day of the war.

On the ground? Relatively little. More talk about them, it was something in the ranks of more than 30 thousand.

[Awaz]

the Germans already in 44 there was a serious shortage of fighter pilots. They began to retrain bombers in fighters, filling bombers with people from the street ... This is a well-known fact.

[firefighter]

informative. cleverly. but try to find supporting links. HOPE this is not a linden tree. Our pilots are always the best !!!

[gelezo47]

These were our grandfathers and grandmothers ases in the sky! ....

[Jackking]

It is interesting to read the authors who, just give me a clue, will start pouring slops to their own country - they were not too lazy to calculate the lend-lease, the availability of aircraft on June 22, issue. And, cheers, they pressed the rashka on the truth - it’s important that it had lost a hundredth. Hooks, which, even if opponents don’t water their shit, will find shit tubs to water their dumb head ...
They probably think that the USSR ended the war under zero whole planes, but the Nazis and Anglo-Saxons they loved started the war with zero planes and did not lose them at all during the war ...

[Lens]

The losses of the Luftwaffe were calculated in a very original (but correct in my opinion) - the plane returned to the base and the damage caused to it was calculated as a percentage. Then either repair or write-off. Many of our pilots declared victories, and historically it turned out that after, "bad memory, bad" returned to duty. The journalists of the "Aviation and Time" edition cover these topics very carefully in their articles. They do not take numbers from Wikipedia, but work with archives, eyewitness memories. So, according to their conclusions, the losses of the Germans must be divided by two and the victories of our pilots, unfortunately, too. Especially such blunders became frequent after the "break" in the Second World War. While 41 required multiple confirmations, 44 required a few words of follower confirmation. I didn't follow the links. I believe that the numbers there will match. But this is how Rezun-Suvorov's data can be taken at face value - he also did not take data from the ceiling. He just jerked slightly and ... Voila!

[PHANTOM-AS]

Quote: Lens

Many of our pilots declared victories, and historically it turned out that after, "bad memory, bad" returned to duty. The journalists of the "Aviation and Time" edition cover these topics very carefully in their articles.

For starters, you would familiarize yourself with how enemy aircraft shot down were recorded in the USSR Air Force.
They believed the Hans at their word, so they did not even have shot down, but only "wounded", besides, shot down in the group were attributed to each participant of the battle separately, i.e. one shot down could sign up for three.
In our aviation, everything was many times more complicated, only the shot down ones were written to the personal account only (and not in the group). At the expense of the downed aircraft, several confirmations were required, from the participants in the battle and, necessarily, from ground services.
Strictly speaking, in Soviet pilots, many air victories were simply not taken into account, for example, when the enemy was shot down over the territory occupied by the enemy, and there was no one to confirm the victory.

"From the very first day of the war, yesterday's locksmith of the Krasny Profintern plant, Pavel Mikhailovich Kamozin, was at the front. He took part in battles on the South, Transcaucasian, North Caucasian and other fronts. During the war years, he made 200 sorties, shot down 36 enemy aircraft personally and 13 in group battles. In 1943 he shot down an aircraft that was guarded by 6 Messerschmitts. Then 18 fascist generals and officers were killed. "
http://airaces.narod.ru/all1/kamozin1.htm

[Alexey RA]

Quote: PHANTOM-AS

In our aviation, everything was many times more complicated, only the shot down ones were written to the personal account only (and not in the group). At the expense of the downed aircraft, several confirmations were required, from the participants in the battle and, necessarily, from ground services.

Yeah ... and even here there were balls that brought confirmations from several parts and gave out one victory for several. And this only surfaced when such pilots were too buried:

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.
For the unworthy behavior of a senior officer, expressed in extortion and fraud, as well as unsatisfactory work as a division commander, I petition for the removal of Colonel FEDOROV from his post and for his appointment with demotion.
Commander of 16 VA Lieutenant General of Aviation S. I. Rudenko 7.04.1944/XNUMX/XNUMX

[Artem Popov]

Only for some reason, a analysis of the statistics of victorious reports of the same battles over the Kuban shows a six-fold excess of the victories declared by Soviet pilots over real results (Luftwaffe railway transport). The German pilots claimed THERE about twice as much as the losses in the railway units of the Soviet units were taken into account, but the Germans took VICTORIES, rather than BROKEN, so that it was more than excusable to them, and if half of those killed reached the airfield, the Germans were generally crystal clear ( especially since the film camera will not let you lie)

[Artem Popov]

the Germans registered not shot down, but victories in aerial combat, so nothing needs to be calculated there.

[Alex_59]

I fully believe in such statistics, because I was personally involved in calculating the losses of ship personnel on the eastern front for the USSR and Germany + allies. Duck, the numbers overturn some stereotypes, for example, about the devastating 41st year and, in general, about the concept of blitzkrieg. For example, because in 4 months and 9 days of 45, the USSR sank more ships and vessels of Germany than in 41, in 6 months and 9 days, Germany sank ships and ships of the USSR. And we have stereotypes based on films and books - such as "Torpedo Bombers" and others. The tragedy of the destruction of transport ships with civilians is very much emphasized there, and this is indeed a tragedy, but the revenge of the red army was even more stunning and difficult for the Germans. And there are still people who, for example, believe that the Soviet Navy was helplessly pressed to the shore and was inactive, and the Germans dominated the sea until May 9, 45, which is completely refuted by statistics. It was just that the Soviet Navy had developed an ideal victory mechanism by the 45th year, a steam roller, which was not idle at all, but did with the Germans what he wanted and when he wanted, it was just that the basis of this mechanism was naval aviation and not battleships and other crew members.

[Artem Popov]

Yeah, only the Germans drowned combat-ready destroyers-cruisers-battleships, and the Navy aviation drowned auxiliary vessels and training ships.

[Arct]

And for some reason all would-be commentators like to count "numbers" with many zeros, but do not like to look objectivity in the eye. They wrote about the mass of Soviet aircraft destroyed on the ground - at least they remember it. Who else had something like that? Nobody. But why did they forget about the monstrous accident rate of 1942 and early 1943, caused by OBJECTIVE reasons? Who else from the belligerent countries massively transferred production? Nobody. But accidental losses also go into statistics. Well, about the "experts" of the German aviation has long been tired of talking. If they managed to engage in postscripts in the battles over Great Britain and Africa, what can we say about the Eastern Front. And the edits of 46-47 are ridiculous when the downed P-5 and Po-2 were replaced in the restored documents with Ily, Yaki and Migi ...

[Artem Popov]

"About the mass of Soviet aircraft destroyed on the ground" - for the most part a myth.
"Who else from the belligerent countries massively transferred production" - Germany, and, unlike the USSR, transferred the entire industry, not part.

[demiurg]

Quite real numbers. By the end of the war, and the "extra" aircraft and crews appeared only then, for every front-line Il-2 / Yak-3 / La-7 there were 2-3 in reserve. In 41-42, cars from the factory went to the front. And at 44 no longer. Any front-line vehicle must use up its resource before replacement. Otherwise, the car will not be written off.
By the end of 44, there were simply no goals for so many planes.
And the number of dead pilots. Many pilots replaced 2-3 cars. Someone was less fortunate.

[Filxnumx]

Quote: Vladimirets

Quote: demo

Those. The Germans, after they were kicked out of the USSR by ours and driven to Berlin, suddenly transferred several air armies to the west and allowed the USSR Air Force to dominate the sky.
What they did not understand at all what it threatens with?

I will not say for sure now, but, in principle, this is logical. On the eastern front, the Germans dealt mainly with our Wehrmacht front-line bomber and attack aircraft. In the west, the Allies with the help of DB destroyed Germany's industry. What was more important for the Reich?

I completely agree with you. The German command (OKL) considered the main threat to be the strategic bomber aviation of the allies and kept the main fighter forces on the western front. This can be seen in the number of aces who fought there and in the number of new and experimental aircraft. And against the Soviet aviation, the minimum necessary forces acted to carry out containment of our offensive. And even despite this imbalance, the air battles on the eastern front were very fierce. But even so, the main article of losses of Soviet aviation is accidents and missing persons. So V.I. Alekseenko (military engineer, test pilot), on the basis of archival data from TsAMO, published a very remarkable table of comparative losses of our aviation for 1944, separately for fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, and separately for reasons of losses: shot down by enemy fighters, shot down anti-aircraft guns, lost in accidents and disasters, destroyed at airfields, written off due to wear and tear, and also "did not return from a combat mission", that is, disappeared without a trace. So, if you do not take into account the losses in flight schools and training regiments and written off due to wear and tear, all losses from the enemy's influence are brought into one column, then the following picture is obtained for front-line aviation:
1. Shot down by the enemy: fighters - 906; bombers - 121; attack aircraft - 723.
2. Lost in accidents: fighters - 1430; bombers - 299; attack aircraft - 733.
3. Did not return from the combat mission (the cause is unknown, missing) fighters - 2630; bombers - 594; attack aircraft - 2999.
And it’s only for airplanes. Yes, of course, not all the crews of these more than 6 thousand missing planes died, may have been captured (Soviet prisoners of war were both in the 44th and 45th years), but the reasons for the loss of about half of the planes and their crews are still unknown . And this is provided that more than 90% of all sorties were carried out to cover troops, that is, in front of our infantry, over the front line or in tactical depth. Some researchers have a version that in the missing were recorded dead in plane accidents in order to hide the true state of accident in the Soviet Air Force due to poor training of the flight personnel and poor condition of the aircraft itself due to the fact that aircraft factories and military representatives with them, performing the plan for gross output did not particularly pay attention to build quality. Which, in general, looks quite believable. But can anyone have other versions?

[Jackking]

there are versions - instead of digging in the manure and finding the facts of the "wrong" victory ("... to hide the true state of accidents in the Soviet Air Force due to poor training of the flight personnel and the poor condition of the aircraft itself due to the fact that aircraft factories and military representatives with them, fulfilling the plan for gross output, did not pay much attention to the build quality.), grief experts must shut up, and people living today should just remember to honor the memory of the GREAT ANCESTORS who crushed the fascist reptile. AND DO NOT ATTEMPT TO REWRITE HISTORY !!!

[Comrade Glebov]

Eyes opened, honestly. +

[Alekseev]

Quote: Militon

You can’t deceive statistics

Yes sir!
Therefore, the author of the article would need to make clarifications: the losses of aircraft brought by him are common losses or combat losses?
The USSR, according to the General Staff (a study led by General Krivosheev), lost for the war 106.4 thousand aircraft (total loss), including 46.1 thousand combat losses.
Those. 60.3 thousand cars failed due to accidents, disasters, wear and tear, etc. reasons.
And what about "them"? It's not clear from the article ...

[Cartalon]

We ingeniously consider the enemy’s combat losses as general, shouting cheers

[akims]

The Germans themselves wrote in memoirs that despite the enormous losses in the aircraft at the beginning of 1941, the Red Army managed to maintain flight personnel. And then intensification of production, Lend-Lease deliveries, pilot training. And the Germans knocked out strong pilots by 1943, on the contrary, aces appeared in our country. Somewhere like that.

[Thinker]

I’m reading such a damn article, and even fall under the table with laughter, Germany fought against England from the age of 39, then back in Italy, France, AFRICA, only what is it worth !!! - in Russia !!!! - Against the USA, England , USSR !!! - on an ongoing basis without interruption 6 !!! years !!! one at the European theater of action against 3 hefty states in economic importance. Countries like Finland as assistants and Italy are cat's tears. Luftwaffe solved all the main tasks! !! - Are you comparing Cho there? -And this despite the fact that neither England in full-6 years nor America, especially Russia did not undergo bombing of factories all this time !!! And Germany-factories bombed the entire depth of the territory !!! Like factories in Hungary, France, etc. !!! Do not grind rubbish !!! If the USSR would have bombed the entire depth of the territory for 6 !!! - Years !!! and at the same time she would have had to fight all these 6 years against 3 such states, then I would see what would be our loss then !!!

[alstr]

In fact, in the USSR, the lion's share of factories was bombed, because was in the European part. Moreover, a significant part of them was lost or did not work at full strength all 41 g.
And the bombing of Germany (factories) is 43-44 years. Before this there was no bombing, because England had to protect its sky.

[Artem Popov]

Let's just say that the bombing of the same GAZ did not force to evacuate it to the Urals, but the bombing of the German plants forced to completely transfer and disperse production.

[ecolog]

GAZ was bombed mainly by spot, irregularly and by a small number of bombers. And then it was sensitive. If the raid were carried out (God forbid) in the English style of the 1000th Harris, then there would simply be nothing to evacuate

[Ami du peuple]

Quote: Denker

If the USSR would bomb the entire depth of the territory 6 !!! - Years !!! Russia has not been bombarded by factories all this time !!!

Where the hell, the whole depth of Soviet territory to bomb? To Kamchatka? The entire military-industrial potential of the Union was concentrated in the west, to the Urals. Many enterprises were lost in the first year of the war, many were evacuated deep into the country (which also undermined the production of armaments - while the plant will fully work in a new place ..). And this is much worse than the damage from the bombing. Which, incidentally, the Germans really began to feel only after 1943, when the Allies took them seriously.
Once again I am convinced that you are an incorrigible liar, the red fox Denker ...

[Pinkie F.]

Immeasurable respect for our pilots of that war. To all: "zheltorotikam" (s), who perished in the first battle, and aces. Everyone. Descending - respect for allies. Respect for the enemy.
I have no reverence for "statistics". The numbers suck as much as Rudel's memoir. Tinkering with the current new accountants in "aircraft-sorties / losses / number of shot down minus registration" in general and .. iotism. Banal blunt postmortum phallometry.

[PHANTOM-AS]

Simonov has very good about attack pilots when the front-line soldiers awarded with Hero Stars simply drank their rewards to the usurer-georgian. The guys knew that they were unlikely to survive until victory, hence the attitude towards the awards.

[PHANTOM-AS]

Somehow our grandfathers fought!

[Romanenko]

Very strange statistics, I don’t know whether or not to believe, as a result, Germany and Japan lost all military and almost all military transport aircraft, but the ratio of numbers on the conscience of the author of the article is understood.

[Todessichel]

The pressure on the moss of plasticine heads is increasing every day.
The column of delirium in the thermometer of a sane society smoothly approaches 38.8.
The patient is being introduced more and more new doses of antimysiotics. Doses are equine.
The neighing of patients, too.
Enema is prescribed and a breathtaking laxative called Brain IvredebgI, after which the contents of the head go to the place of rubber injection.
We are waiting for the continuation of treatment ...

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Todessichel

We are waiting for the continuation of treatment ...

You, Fox, gaps, do not be fooled.

[certero]

Almost everything can be proved with statistics. For example, the above numbers show the "patriots" well enough that the Americans fought with great tension. And that in some sorties the losses were higher than in the USSR for attack aircraft. This is to understand what happened then to fight the Americans, it would be a terrible enemy.
These numbers also show that the USSR fought quite skillfully, no matter how much they liked the myths about "filling the enemy with corpses."
Conclusion: war is always terrible and it is better to do without it. And for this, the army and navy must be strong, and the country rich and comfortable for the people. Then the adversary will have less temptation to attack, and people have more desire to save this life.

[Artem Popov]

Rather, it shows that the USSR fought non-intensely. And if you look at the ratio of the number of fighters in the Luftwaffe on the eastern front and the Red Army, it will immediately become clear that it was not we who caused the Germans losses.

[Mestny]

Quote: sever.56

guns, the most disgusting thing is that no one needs such truth in the West. And about our liberoids, such as Gozman (I hate to endure him) and there is nothing to say ...

Yes, even Gozman is not needed here.
Right here, on this site, commentators flew in, flapping their wings, they say "can't be" and "get out".
Please note that the information in the article is only controversial, that is, it requires additional clarification. But many are already clear. They have no doubt that this is all lies - precisely because it is not possible once again to establish a mantra that everything was bad in the USSR.
Well, that is, as I understand it, if the statistics were presented exactly the opposite, with disastrous results for the USSR, would these citizens have no questions about the reliability of the source?
At the same time, note that they position themselves as "real" patriots and fighters against narrow-minded "hurray" -patriots for the Real Truth. By the way, like our rotten liberals - lovers of the American State Department and similar "democracy". They use literally the same arguments.
And this is on a patriotic, unlabeled site.

And the manuals were updated quite deftly, I must say.

[TsUS-Air Force]

Well, if you start from the title of the article, you can take into account all those airfields in the Baltic states that were completely destroyed in the early days of the war. but if you do not take them into account and keep statistics just sometime later then ...

[PHANTOM-AS]

Here is an interesting movie!

[hohol95]

And what are the losses of the following countries participating in the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War: Italy; Croatia; Bulgaria; Slovenia; Spain; Romania; flyers from Flanders (on the side of Germany); Hungary; Air Force ROA (on the side of Germany); Poland; Czechoslovakia Denmark; Norway; Greece; Yugoslavia; France; Holland!!!

[hohol95]

And remind everyone of the percentage system for accounting for damage and decommissioning of aircraft that existed in the 3rd Reich! At which a plane with damage of about 50% was considered a perfectly fit combat unit! After a short-term repair - converted to medium-term - long-term - cancellation of the aircraft! Those still had Hermann Goering's bureaucrats and hookers!

[hohol95]

And what are the losses of the following countries participating in the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War: Italy; Croatia; Bulgaria; Slovenia; Spain; Romania; flyers from Flanders (on the side of Germany); Hungary; Air Force ROA (on the side of Germany); Poland; Czechoslovakia Denmark; Norway; Greece; Yugoslavia; France; Holland; Finland!!!

[Mestny]

Quote: sever.56

guns, the most disgusting thing is that no one needs such truth in the West. And about our liberoids, such as Gozman (I hate to endure him) and there is nothing to say ...

Yes, even Gozman is not needed here.
Right here, on this site, commentators flew in, flapping their wings, they say "can't be" and "get out".
Please note that the information in the article is only controversial, that is, it requires additional clarification. But many are already clear. They have no doubt that this is all lies - precisely because it is not possible once again to establish a mantra that everything was bad in the USSR.
Well, that is, as I understand it, if the statistics were presented exactly the opposite, with disastrous results for the USSR, would these citizens have no questions about the reliability of the source?
At the same time, note that they position themselves as "real" patriots and fighters against narrow-minded "hurray" -patriots for the Real Truth. By the way, like our rotten liberals - lovers of the American State Department and similar "democracy". They use literally the same arguments.

And the manuals were updated quite deftly, I must say.

[DimerVladimer]

In the scientific community, it is not enough to say “I swear by my mother”.
And to call the article material - based on information from the forum - it's like OBS (one grandmother said).
In any society of history buffs, proof of the origin of numbers is required.
For me this "material" - without links to serious sources (and these are not reprints from the Internet or forums) - has no value.

[arlekin]

Articles have already appeared that the military casualties of the USSR are less than those of Germany. Now it turns out that fewer aircraft have been lost than any other WWII participant. What's next? It turns out that in other types of troops, in artillery, armored vehicles "losses are not so high" (c)? Did the USSR take part in the war in general, or did it somehow hook it?
Yes, in Russia it is rare in which family there is no one who died in that war, from my father's side out of several people who went to the front, no one returned. I read the memoirs of veterans, including from the series "I fought ..." by Isaev, and I do not believe in "little blood, mainly on foreign territory." It was a terrible war for us, they paid a terrible price for the victory, demography still reverberates.

[stranger-3]

Do you have other data or you do not agree with the statistics provided in the article, only dissatisfaction is visible from your post. Share specifics, otherwise why write.

[stranger-3]

Do you have other data or you do not agree with the statistics provided in the article, only dissatisfaction is visible from your post. Share specifics, otherwise why write.

[Idiot]

For the period from 22.06.1941. on 10.05.1945/106/400 The USSR Air Force was lost: 46 100/88 300 (combat losses in brackets) aircraft. Of these: combat aircraft - 43 100/18 100, training, transport and others - 3 000/138 500. During the specified period of time, the Air Force received - 170 aircraft, resource - 600 aircraft (with available on 22.06.1941. ). The percentage of losses during the war is 27% of the resource. Air Force personnel losses: 39 people, including the command personnel - 100 people. The figures are somewhat inaccurate, since, on the basis of the order of the NCO from 35/919/22.12.1940. № 0362 "On changing the order of service by the junior and middle commanding staff of the Red Army Air Force", part of the personnel was graduated from the schools as sergeants (until 1943). I found a link about the irrecoverable losses of servicemen who did not have officer ranks, but held officer positions - 122 people (given that such statistics were kept, I admit that the dead servicemen who were in officer posts, but did not have officer ranks, especially those who graduated from military schools , nevertheless, were taken into account in the losses as officers. The above figure - 905 122 people, I think, refers to other branches of the military, where promising privates and non-commissioned officers were appointed to command positions. Accordingly, flight personnel - sergeants, 905 3 people died). In all types of troops, during the whole war, 181 officers were killed. Based on the fact that the greatest losses of the Air Force fell on 1. - 023 people (088% of the number of combat crews of the active army), and in 1943. - 8 people (255%, respectively. I did not find any information for other years), I think the number of irrecoverable losses of the Air Force in 39,2 people is close to real (approximately 1942 people on average per year - 6-178 combat losses, about 24 will be non-combat losses). In general, with combat losses of 39 vehicles (it was then that the crews were most likely to die), the losses of flight personnel of 100 people are convincing. I don't know anything about the German losses - the devil will break his leg there. Half of their pilots are listed as dead in the West, while they are buried in the East. All their memoirists are godlessly lying. If you want the truth - read V. Dymich "Merry hunting in the east of Europe". Or someone else. Don't read Müller Hildenbrandt. Especially before bed ...

[DimerVladimer]

Quote: pft, fkb

All their memoirists are godlessly lying. If you want the truth - read V. Dymich "Merry hunting in the east of Europe"

Dymych points out the shot down German pilots, each of which has a lot of shot down - that is, the Germans fought, as it were, to put it mildly - nevertheless efficiently.
Before being shot down - everyone had dozens of shot down Soviet planes (if you do not go into the statistics of German calculations).

[Awaz]

There is another reliable fact - this is Normandy-Neman. For the entire time they participated in the hostilities on the Soviet front, they lost about 40 people (I can be wrong, I write from memory) Even if we consider that they fought from the end of 42, even with 43 they still had a slightly different attitude towards them, but having made some amendments, one can roughly calculate the losses of similar units of the Red Army.

[Bakht]

Have you had pilots in your regiment who have flown since 1941?
Our regiment began to fight in 1941 on the Kalinin Front on the R-5 and almost completely died. One or two people remained, and they left; someone to the academy, someone else somewhere. When I came to the regiment, there were no pilots who would have fought since 1941. After the reformation of the 621st, the ShAP fought near Stalingrad. These pilots, too, almost all died, and some - when I was already flying. By 1945, the regiment was approached by the personnel participating in Operation Bagration.

[a housewife]

Quote: your1970

your1970
(1)

Today, 00: 14

↑ ↓ New


“Everything is simple here. The Germans, unlike ours, did not fly in bad weather.” - Now you said a terrible thing for all rezunists, SCARY, no, not so SCARY !!!! At the moment, the total number of pilots is LESS than the number of pilots who can do it. fly in SMU (adverse weather conditions). Moreover, for example, in the 90s, the ratio of helicopter pilots was about 1 (not) to 2 (with

Like this? Is the total quantity less than a part?

[a housewife]

I do not know what statistics anyone has, I know one thing - our "untrained, poorly equipped army with unusable weapons and stupid command" beat everyone. It is a fact.

[Voodoo]

... unfortunately a HUGE price ((

[Idiot]

It should be understood that a combat pilot has been preparing for years, his loss is more painful for the Air Force than the loss of a car, because machines in the distant distant workmen tirelessly work, - just give them a resource. In addition, our products, as a rule, were rougher, simpler, cheaper than German ones, and required fewer man-hours for their production. Yes, the resource of the motors was small, they could collapse in the air from overloads. But we did more of them, even more than we lost. And we trained more pilots in number, our pilots sat in spare parts for months - they waited for cars. And in spare parts not only ate vodka, they also studied there. Experienced fighters, after being shot down and wounded, had the opportunity to heal and hone their skills. After all, at the front there were plenty of cars (thanks to a separate allies, primarily for aluminum) and pilots. And after 1943. The flyers who had not yet fought, who had several thousand flight hours each, rolled from the inner districts to the front for glory and orders. And after all, many of them were really afraid that not a single Hans would be shot down during the war, since there would not be enough for everyone. Read Pokryshkin. In 1942, when the Germans moved to the Caucasus, his regiment had time to rest and bring up the young. And the Germans could not afford this. As they began to plow like Karla's dads on June 22, they did not climb out of the cabins throughout the war. Because they died more often than they had time to learn something. Those who are now called aces are epistolary bullshit. Squadron "Green Hertz" (green heart) ours called "green ass". They didn't respect them at all. Hartmanov was invented by Goebbels. It's like the Yankees' captain America - came, defeated everyone. Woe to the country that needs heroes! .. The Luftwaffe of the 1944-1945 model. - these are juvenile suicide bombers of the take-off-landing level. They were afraid of the fog, not like "Ivanov". Conclusion - the combat losses of the USSR Air Force, like the combat losses of the Luftwaffe, given above are real, I personally have no doubts ... [/ quote]

[complete zero]

No one had invented Hartman ... and despite the postscript (well, God attributed 200 to him) ... the residual result is still impressive ... and this suggests that pilot Eric was, as they say from God ... another thing is that to compare the pilot level only by the number of shot down WRONG

[DimerVladimer]

[quote = pft, fkb] Those who are now called aces are epistolary bullshit. Squadron "Green Hertz" (green heart) ours called "green ass". Not respected at all. Hartmanov was invented by Goebbels. It's like the Yankees' captain America - came, defeated everyone. Woe to the country that needs heroes! .. The Luftwaffe of the 1944-1945 model. - these are juvenile suicide bombers of the take-off-landing level. They were afraid of the fog, not like "Ivanov". Conclusion - the combat losses of the USSR Air Force, like the combat losses of the Luftwaffe, given above are real, I personally have no doubts ... [/ quote] [/ quote]

You're dramatizing.
Asa German - were really productive. - Even if we halve their victories due to exaggerated statistics of accounting for victories, they are still very large.

Do not forget that our fighter regiments suffered heavy losses of young pilots - mainly in the first battles. The average pilot who survived 10 battles could already navigate in the air and had a chance to survive.

[complete zero]

then you need to keep separate statistics for each type of aircraft ... if the memory serves for 50 sorties, the pilot of the Sturmovik was assigned a hero of the Soviet Union ... but here (as a percentage of ALL heroes attack aircraft there were NOT MUCH) 5-10 sorties

[Artem Popov]

"And in spare parts they ate not only vodka, they also studied there"
but the fact of the matter is that they did not study. During the war, there were much more pilots in training than in the active aviation, the problem was in the industry - it could not provide engines, so it saved the motor resources for battle, and in training the pilots studied in theory and, at best, on old decommissioned aircraft. "Studied" for YEARS, read memoirs - who spent as long as they studied, bombarding with reports about the transfer to the front. The same Kozhedub continuously asked for a combat unit, from the very beginning of the war, and got there only in March 1943! And this is not an ordinary pilot, but an instructor, head and shoulders above other pilots. And still, in the very first battle, he was confused and was shot down right over the airfield.

[Zloy ork]

Thank you to the author! I would also tell you about the strictness of accounting for downed enemy aircraft in the USSR, the prohibitions on "free hunting" and, on the contrary, how the Nazis counted fire engines instead of downed aircraft, so the article would be six on a five-point scale.

[Voodoo]

The article, in fact, does not reflect anything. Some incoherent numbers. What does the author want to show??? Aviation losses in World War II?? Perhaps German aviation suffered greater losses than Soviet aviation, but do not forget that for Germany the Second World War began in 1939, and for the USSR in 41. What did the Battle of Britain, Africa, etc. cost for Germany? And then the Luftwaffe fought on the Western Front, and on the Eastern Front, and again in Africa. The losses of the USSR were exclusively on the Eastern Front. Let the author, if he can, cite the losses of the Luftwaffe and the USSR Air Force only on the Eastern Front, then somehow we can talk about the effectiveness of the warring parties. But as far as I know, the Luftwaffe is the most effective of all the warring powers in World War II. And efficiency, as you know, consists of many components, and not a bare comparison of numbers.

[BAI]

The loss of pilots can be explained very simply: fighters fought only over their own territory, bombers (except for several raids on Berlin (by single aircraft)) did not fly further than 80 km. All German sources confirm the fact that Soviet aviation did not create problems not only in the deep, but also fairly close to the rear. All other combatants flew either over enemy territory or at a great distance from bases, aircraft carriers, etc., so if something happened, it was very difficult for the pilot to return.

[jurijsv]

It should also be taken into account that part of the Soviet aviation at the beginning of the war was destroyed at airfields, i.e., the planes did not even take off

[AKsvlad047]

If the statistics in this article are correct, then we are handsome, and if not, then we are still handsome, I just believe in it, we won, and weak and unprepared pilots simply could not do this!!!

[sogdianec]

Quote: captain

On May 9, 1945, there were about 47 thousand in the USSR Air Force. combat aircraft.voenhronika.ru›…vtoraja…vojna_sssr…aviacija…god…1… If we subtract 114500 aircraft from 47300 on May 9, 1945, it turns out that we lost 67200 aircraft.

Too primitive calculation. Resource wear, non-combat losses, obsolescence. Or will you say that the surviving I-16s of XNUMX flew until the end of the war? How many flight hours were aircraft engines designed for?

[complete zero]

According to the memoirs of the pilots, there were no particular problems with replacing internal combustion engines in the regiments... the engines were not spared

[Paul zewike]

Statistics is a tool that everyone uses as they wish. Everyone will find theirs. The genetically modified ones will foam at the mouth to prove that German pilots are aces-knights (and will find their source), and Soviet pilots are quilted jackets. The jingoistic patriots will prove once or twice that our pilots are supermen (and will also find some statistics). The most important thing is that there was a Red (Soviet) army in Berlin. And fascism was defeated.

[iouris]

We're wasting our time.

[Ghermesus]

How “patriots” and liberals love to exaggerate in numbers. History is repeatedly remembered by all sorts of truth-tellers who open the eyes of everyone, such as the same Solzhenitsyn, for whom every second person from the USSR was in concentration camps or was killed by the NKVD (read personally by Stalin and Dzerzhinsky). Only the statistics of official documents, which are now classified as “Sov.secret”, speak of other figures, and these truth-tellers appear as liars and hypocrites. Who wants the truth, look for it on the pages of archival documents.

[Polito]

I don’t share the author’s delight. The victory came at a high price. On the eastern front, for every one German plane shot down, there were three of ours shot down.

[tracer]

Back in 1988, we stood from school with wooden machine guns as a guard of honor at the eternal flame and a monument to fallen soldiers in one of the northern cities of Russia. For some reason, it was my grandfather who came up to me with a wand, his jacket with orders rang like chain mail. For some reason he spoke to me. He is a pilot, they shot him down and he returned again to “beat the Germans.” He said how hard it was to emerge victorious from the battle. But he beat them, our pilots beat them so that “pieces flew.” I will never forget his story. And I first heard about the “one for three” rifle in the late 70s from a blacksmith at my grandmother’s in the village of Nikolai Kostiv. He never talked about the war, but I heard this story when they were having a feast at their house. Not quite understanding what it was and what it was about, I asked my mother who also heard it. She explained. It shocked me so much that I still remember it. So these are not “tales of democrats”; they were not even in sight at that time. Yes, our equipment was worse than the German one, and it was sorely lacking at the beginning of the war, but in my opinion this in no way diminishes the greatness of the feat of our soldiers and officers who knew that they were going to death, but survived and won.

[DimerVladimer]

Quote: tracer

And I first heard about the “one for three” rifle in the late 70s from a blacksmith at my grandmother’s in the village of Nikolai Kostiv. He never talked about the war, but I heard this story when they were having a feast at their house. Not quite understanding what it was and what it was about, I asked my mother who also heard it. She explained. It shocked me so much that I still remember it. So these are not “tales of democrats”; they were not even in sight then

My grandfather also fought with one rifle between three people near Smolensk, he did not get a rifle, in this “battle”, or more correctly, the beating of unarmed people, he was captured. - Now on this forum, especially smart people are pointing at me that this is a MYTH and it was all invented by liberals in the 90s.
Particularly smart people are trying to prohibit telling the truth about the war - to leave only the good...

[gregor6549]

When we talk about losses in aviation, we need to clarify whether we are talking about the loss of only personnel or about equipment too. And the personnel includes not only pilots, but also everyone who fought in aviation units. Those. If we take into account all the losses, the statistics will be completely different.

[ddd1975]

Thank you. Interesting information... even unexpected.

[complete zero]

yes nonsense...(this is a rut)...with all the admiration for the courage (and skill) of the pilots of our Red Army Air Force, the losses were simply huge...(I don’t know about the Japanese and American Air Forces) but the losses in relation to the Luftwaffe there are an order of magnitude more of us...the level of mid-level pilots was quite HIGHER (only after the opening of the front in the west...the shortage of good pilots began to take its toll, and the training time in flight schools was reduced)...and still until the last day of the Luftwaffe war- remained perhaps the best aviation structure of all the warring parties... And the Hans had high-quality “material parts”

[trenkkvaz]

How people love to fit disproportionate statistics into good conclusions, comparing soft with warm.
The number of combat sorties of our aviation is compared with the number of sorties of another country's aviation.
This is despite the fact that the structure of this very aviation and the tactics of use are completely different.
As part of this comparison, for example, they compare the night sorties of corn workers and the flight of a strategic bomber.

[geologist]

Large losses of our aircraft, especially on the ground in 1941 - about 22 thousand. in 6 months were, in my opinion, the result of a catastrophic retreat of the troops, but in Leningrad, with its stationary airfields, the losses were comparable to the losses of the British during the “Battle of England”. The Germans suffered similar losses during the Battle of Stalingrad. One Budanov raid is worth it!

[sibiryouk]

The surname of the commander of the tank corps is BADANOV (Budanov “distinguished himself” in Chechnya).

[Yereke]

we must not forget that many planes were destroyed at the airfield at the beginning of the war due to the blitzkrieg

[Artem Popov]

they weren’t, it’s a myth, it’s high time to grow out of Soviet fables.

[DimerVladimer]

"The losses are even less than those of the United States! Why?"

The numbers need to be checked.

Well, in general, counting the losses of pilots and drawing conclusions from this about who is cooler is not constructive.
For example, American losses include the entire crew - including gunners - all included as pilots and the loss of one B-17 bomber with a crew of 10 people (ship commander, 2nd pilot, navigator (nose turret gunner), bombardier (nose turret gunner), flight engineer ( top turret gunner), radio operator gunner, ventral turret gunner, side gunner (left), side gunner (right), tail turret gunner) - and there were quite a few such losses in 1943 - 1944.
The same B-24 Liberator (Crew 7-10 people),
B-26 Marauder (Crew 7 people),
B-25 (Crew 6 people).

The raid on October 14, 1943 was soon called “Black Thursday”[36]. Of the 291 Fortresses that attacked, 59 were shot down over Germany, one sank in the English Channel, 5 crashed in England and 12 were scrapped due to battle or landing damage. A total of 77 vehicles were lost. From 2 900 crew man 650 did not return to base, some of them were captured. 5 were killed and 43 were wounded from the aircraft returning to the airfields, 594 were reported missing. Only 33 B-17s returned undamaged - That's ONE failed raid!

The 8th Air Force lost 176 bombers in October 1943[37]. The 8th Air Army suffered almost the same large losses on January 11, 1944 during the attack on Oschersleben, Halberstadt and Braunschweig. 60 B-17s were shot down[38][39].
The third raid on Schweinfurt on February 24, 1944 was later called the "Big Week". Escorted by P-51 Mustangs and P-47 Thunderbolts equipped with drop tanks to increase their range, only 11 of the 231 B-17s involved in the operation were shot down.[40] escort fighters made it possible to reduce the percentage of losses from 30 to 7, only 274 B-17s were lost in 3 combat missions during Big Week.

In Soviet aviation, on average, 1 Pe-8 was built per month and the losses were the same 1 Pe-8 per month - in total there were from 17 to 27 Pe-8s in good condition, that is, there is no need to talk about any impact on the statistics of these aircraft.
IL-2 (crew 2 people)
Pe-2 (crew 3 people)
DB-3F (crew 3 people) but the number of aircraft built (about 1500) cannot be compared with the same B-25 (almost 10000)
Tu-2 (crew of 4 people) end of the war - very few took part, while this type of bomber suffered the least losses (end of the war after all).

Therefore, losses speak more about the intensity of the use of aviation than about its effectiveness.

For example, less than 70% of combat missions of USSR fighter aircraft ended in air combat - specific tactics of use - for example, combat patrolling or loitering in a cover area - waste of motor resources and fuel - useless flailing in the air. Often, as soon as the group of Soviet fighters covering the ground troops left, the Germans could bomb the same thing, they had a higher organization of air force control, often the Germans provided cover for their troops “sluggishly” or did not get involved in the battle at all, not having an overwhelming superiority in forces or boom -zoom and “left the battle” - hence the relatively small losses of Luftwaffe fighter aircraft on the eastern front.

[Ka-52]

"The losses are even less than those of the United States! Why?"

This is the main question!
Some contradictory conclusions and arguments. You describe the losses in detail American bombers, and since there were few Soviet bombers, you don’t take them into comparison, but then point out the losses of attack aircraft, much more of them were released (it’s a pity that they don’t have crews as large as the Americans), instead they pointed out the shortcomings application of Soviet fighter aircraft compared to the "Germans" and conclude that

hence the relatively small losses of Luftwaffe fighter aircraft on the eastern front.

[DimerVladimer]

Again, the losses of aircraft/pilots may not coincide. If the pilot was not killed, he could jump out over his territory and fly again.

Near Murmansk, both our and German pilots were shot down many times - 5-7 times, came out of the tundra to their own (fortunately there was no continuous front line) and continued to fight.

The Americans in the Pacific had a system for rescuing pilots; they were picked up by destroyers or flying boats. For the Japanese, one shot down over the ocean was usually doomed.

[complete zero]

you also need to take into account the survivability of the airframe... among the Americans (and the Germans) survivability was almost in the first place (unlike the Japanese and, alas, ours)... that’s why they pulled it home (on their word of honor and one wing)

[Cresta999]

The author of the article encroached on the sacred! To the liberal opinion, the assertion that Stalin is a tyrant and destroyer of the army!!! How is it that Ivan is not a lapotnik?! What are you saying?! It's a pity for the author - they'll kill you for doing this. Especially sofa experts.

[Kostadinov]

Material losses are not just lost aircraft, but their cost.
Average Yak, more than two times cheaper than average Meser with a parity of 6 rubles = 1 Reichsmark by 1943.
The cost of American aircraft is still many times higher. (Parity 11 rubles = 1 dollar 1943)
It is also impossible to equate one Po-2 loss to one Heinkel, B-17 or Lancaster.

[overb]

Quote: Kostadinov

Average Yak, more than two times cheaper than average Meser with a parity of 6 rubles = 1 Reichsmark by 1943.

And the same average Yak is twice as expensive as a Messer at an exchange rate of 1,5 rubles = 1 Reichsmark by 1943.
How is the real exchange rate known in a country where everything was set voluntaristically, i.e. "volitional decision"?. And money had a very relative value. With exactly the same decision, the mustachioed Katso assigned the number of losses. Which had nothing to do with the real ones.

[Kostadinov]

of course

Quote: overb

Quote: Kostadinov

Average Yak, more than two times cheaper than average Meser with a parity of 6 rubles = 1 Reichsmark by 1943.

And the same average Yak is twice as expensive as a Messer at an exchange rate of 1,5 rubles = 1 Reichsmark by 1943.
How is the real exchange rate known in a country where everything was set voluntaristically, i.e. "volitional decision"?. And money had a very relative value. With exactly the same decision, the mustachioed Katso assigned the number of losses. Which had nothing to do with the real ones.

At an exchange rate of 1,5 rubles = 1 Reichsmark, the internal product of the USSR in 1943 (without occupation of the territory) will be 420 billion rubles/1,5 = 280 billion Reichsmarks, i.e. 2,5 times higher than the domestic product of the 3rd Reich (110 billion Reichsmarks) which included the Czech Republic, Silesia, Austria, Elsace and Lorraine, the Baltic states and so on.
So we have no other way out, and regardless of Stalin’s will, we must admit that the internal product of the USSR in 1943 was half that of the 3rd Reich and parity The ruble exchange rate then was 420 billion rubles = 60 billion marks or 7 rubles = 1 Reichsmark.

[sp44]

The statistics of our losses given in the article are questionable, I will give only one figure: IL-2 - 36 units were produced during the war years. Of these, more than 183% were lost. How many aircraft of other brands were lost? What about lend-lease? About 90 aircraft were delivered under lend-lease alone; the return of those remaining after the war was meager. Conclusion: our losses in aviation (17 aircraft) do not correspond to reality.

[sibiryouk]

Only combat losses of about 50 are given. There are also as many losses as a result of flight accidents (various accidents, catastrophes, etc.). The accident rate of the Soviet Air Force is about 000%.

[Zefr]

Quote: Alesha

Rezuna read?

What does Rezun have to do with it? Rezun writes that the USSR was going to occupy Europe and build communism there. This is lyricism and manipulation. I'm talking about tactical formation. And it COULD be used offensively. Does anyone deny this? The objection begins: “The army was really unprepared...”
But if there are orders to “counterattack with a decisive blow...”, then there was confidence that it was possible to counterattack, and it was possible to advance.

[Kostadinov]

Balance of German aviation in World War II (German):


Gesamtstärke 01.09.1939
~ 10.000
Neu gefertigt vom 01.09.1939 to 31.03.1945
~ 113.609

Sum ~ 123.609


Verluste vom 01.09.1939 bis September 1944
94.500
Verluste bis März 1945
~ 6.000
Ergibt Gesamtstärke Ende März 1945 Summe ~23.109



Die letzte statistische Unterlage für die Stärke der Luftwaffe liegt vom September 1944 vor, sie betrug:


Gesamtbestand:
30.976
Davon Verbande:
12.231
Schools:
9.738
In Werften plus Reserve-Bestände:
2.305
other:
2.768
Reparatur-Industrie:
3.934
http://www.luftarchiv.de/

Since the 3rd Reich underwent unconditional surrender, it lost ALL aircraft - 123 until the end of March 609 and an unknown number that the industry produced in April 1945. Everything was destroyed or went to the winners as trophies.

[Kostadinov]

The US Army Air Force alone lost 65164 aircraft in the war, for all reasons, from December 1941 to August 1945. Among them, 772 B-29s, 14280 B-17s and B-24s, 8479 B-25s and B-26s, 26743 fighters, 14890 others.
Cost in 1944 B-29 $605360, B-17 $204370, B-24 $215516, Mustang $51572, Thunderbolt $85578.
Only the loss of the B-17 and B-24 is more expensive than all 106 Soviet aircraft (losses in the war of all aircraft and for all reasons).
Of course, we must add the losses of the fleet and marine corps.
Only combat losses of US Air Force personnel in the war amounted to 40061 killed and 63568 captured.
It should be added that training one US Air Force pilot is an order of magnitude more expensive than training a Soviet pilot.

[U crop]

It’s better to compare the combat losses of the Red Army Air Force and the Luftwaffe on the Eastern Front to complete the picture))

[Kostadinov]

Quote: U-krop

It’s better to compare the combat losses of the Red Army Air Force and the Luftwaffe on the Eastern Front to complete the picture))

Only combat losses are more difficult to compare and there is no point, but we’ll still eat.
If surrender is excluded only by the irreversible loss of combat aircraft from enemy influence on the Eastern Front, the loss of the Luftwaffe and its allies is at least 15000, the loss of the USSR is no more than 45000. The cost of combat losses on the two sides is approximately equal. The number of flying personnel irretrievably lost in battle (killing and captivity) is also approximately the same.
In the West, the irrecoverable loss of combat aircraft on both sides from enemy influence is approximately the same - about 30000 aircraft, but the cost of lost aircraft and the number of lost aircraft personnel of the Western allies is much higher.
At the end of March 1945, the Luftwaffe still had 23000 aircraft, including more than 10000 in combat units. The industry produced more and more jet vehicles that consumed scarce fuel. The Luftwaffe was not completely defeated in the air. The Luftwaffe was destroyed irrevocably on the ground by the Red Army with some assistance from the Western Allies.

[Dzafdet]

Quote: stalkerwalker

Quote: Ami du peuple

And as I read in his memoirs, how he flunked four IL-2s with one burst, I realized that he was a natural breh.

The declared "victories" of aces of ALL parties should be divided into 4. And then we will be close to the truth.

No . you have to divide by 6 or 7. and that’s the only way. One German pseudo-ass shot down 57 planes in our country, and when he was transferred to the West, in the same time only... THREE...

[Dzafdet]

Quote: Denker

I’m reading such a damn article, and even fall under the table with laughter, Germany fought against England from the age of 39, then back in Italy, France, AFRICA, only what is it worth !!! - in Russia !!!! - Against the USA, England , USSR !!! - on an ongoing basis without interruption 6 !!! years !!! one at the European theater of action against 3 hefty states in economic importance. Countries like Finland as assistants and Italy are cat's tears. Luftwaffe solved all the main tasks! !! - Are you comparing Cho there? -And this despite the fact that neither England in full-6 years nor America, especially Russia did not undergo bombing of factories all this time !!! And Germany-factories bombed the entire depth of the territory !!! Like factories in Hungary, France, etc. !!! Do not grind rubbish !!! If the USSR would have bombed the entire depth of the territory for 6 !!! - Years !!! and at the same time she would have had to fight all these 6 years against 3 such states, then I would see what would be our loss then !!!

Here's just one small note: the Germans widely used saboteurs. and they acted very effectively. "Did you read it in August '44"? But this is what the censors missed. What didn't you miss? The boss told us at a lecture. how during the war saboteurs blew up a warehouse with shells in Chelyabinsk. The six-meter pillars flew like stakes, so he said. When asked to tell in detail, he remained silent... We won the war. This means our warriors and our equipment were better. We won it economically too. And regarding your laughter: everyone somehow forgets about Czechoslovakia and its economy, but in vain!

[Artem Popov]

1. Who was supposed to shoot it down? The Luftwaffe on the eastern front had from 1000 (at the very beginning of the war) to 400 fighters. This is despite the fact that the Reich air defense alone in 1943 included 900 fighters (twice as many as on the entire eastern front)

2. Intensity of use. We read “Loyalty to the Fatherland” by Kozhedub, how they did (!) 3 combat sorties a day on the Kursk Soul. And German pilots did up to 10.

3. Range of use. A little bad weather means entire fronts of the Red Army cannot fly. Well, how can you lose pilots and aircraft if you don’t fly for WEEKS?

The root of all these problems was the same - the life of the motors. The industry could not produce the required number of aircraft engines, enough for training, for combat operations, and for the production of new aircraft. They saved resources on training pilots (of whom there were plenty), and trained more in theory. As a result, not only did the pilots fly worse, orient themselves in the sky worse, but in bad weather they generally sit better on the ground, but they will immediately get lost in low clouds. The combat units had reporting, standards - so many aircraft should be in service, but be so kind as to write a report for each absent one. The motors also arrived according to the standard, there was a shortage! As a result, a logistical puzzle was born - it was necessary to fight, but in such a way that there would be enough engines, while reducing losses as much as possible - they scold them for them, they might even remove them, but they don’t scold them for inaction, who would blame the weather. So they fought only in good weather and little by little, in order to stretch the engines longer.

[proskurin.igor2018]

In the first hours of the War, the Germans used a new product called variable turbocharging on their aircraft. They installed piston-type compressors on their planes, with centrifugal sensors, which, depending on the altitude of the aircraft, worked so that the higher the altitude of the aircraft, the higher the rotation speed of the compressor. If our fighter came at the tail of a German, he quickly gained altitude, broke away from Ours due to the new aircraft, and, taking advantage of the advantage in altitude, attacked him from above. A couple of weeks later, this German new product was installed on all of our aircraft. But during this time the Germans killed almost all of our aces. And it would take a lot of blood to regain air supremacy. If not for this new product, the Germans would have been defeated in 1942.

[ImGayLoveKids]

This is a fact, I don’t argue, Soviet aviation was very effective, but German losses are so terrible not because “These Germans are as stupid as Siberian felt boots” as they like to show them in American and Russian films, the air front of the USSR was not so extended, + USSR Quite good aviation was supplied from the USA and there were few problems with its quality, and our own was good.
The Germans didn't have this
They fought in the air with 39, first with the Poles, then with the French, then the English Channel, England, Africa, after the entire war protecting the sky from the British and every year more and more pressing on the Americans, the Soviet Union, so it’s not surprising 80k, in addition, as adequate historians probably know, Germany was losing on all fronts due to a lack of resources, this was also the case in aviation. However, until 1943, German aviation showed its best performance, but broke down in the USSR and in the skies over Germany itself. I would even say that German aviation (fighter) was the best, definitely until 1943.