PDA

View Full Version : La-7 kill ratio



Wildnoob
09-08-2008, 02:56 PM
anyone know wat was the kill ratio of the La-7 ?

I don't know how to wrote the correct word in english, but I mean it's relation of victory and death.

no doubth it was one of the finest figthers of WWII, but I don't know it's kill ratio.

Marcel_Albert
09-08-2008, 03:13 PM
According to Soviet sources , La-7 arrived at the front in early July 1944 , and until the end of the war , lost around 120 aircraft in combat and shot down more than 3000 Lufwaffe machines ( destroyed on the ground + air ) which gives roughly a ratio of 25:1 for the La-7 if the figures are correct and if we count the aircraft destroyed on the ground , more than 5500 La-7 were built .

Bremspropeller
09-08-2008, 03:35 PM
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/images/topguniceman.JPG

Wildnoob
09-08-2008, 04:04 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

ps : for both you guys

DKoor
09-08-2008, 04:09 PM
And LA-7 is modeled quite pesimistically in game according to this infohttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif.

Marcel_Albert
09-08-2008, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

ps : for both you guys

I don't understand sorry , just like his picture , i try to never provoke people or disrespect them especially in public, just meant to help , my source is a serious book "AL Lavochkin" written by serious people .Only internet confirmation i could find is here on a modelism website : http://www.swannysmodels.com/La7.html

Anyhow , anyone who has a knowledge of what was the airforce war in the East front from mid-1944 , the huge numerical unbalance , the qualitative advantage in skilled pilots of the Soviet side and the fact that most of Luftwaffe was more busy against the west by that time , trying with meagre strengths to prevent their civilians and cities to be bombed by incendiaries of the 4 engines bombers working night and day over Germany , knows or understand that by that time German air force also suffered heavy losses on the Eastern front , regardless of the figures , the La-7 shot down a very high number of German planes and lost few in the last 6 months of the war , it had exceptionnal performances up to 7000meters , Kozhedub , the highest scoring Allied aces in ETO , scored the majority of his 62-64 kills with this machine .

Wildnoob
09-08-2008, 04:47 PM
I understand you, Marcel.

I have to say that my only wish in the creation of this topic is to know more about the aicraft.

I know the La-7 by IL2, and I love it, altougth don't know much about it's performance in real life. GŁnther Rall for example, say in an interview that by many times the La-7 outrun it's aircraft.

I not gonna say nothing about your book, remaning neutral if this discution go further.

but have to say, I don't have nothing against the lufwaffe, I just creat this topic for curiosity about the aicraft.

Marcel_Albert
09-08-2008, 04:50 PM
No problem mate , it is just that IMO , Bremspropeller doubted the figures , and i would understand him cause i doubt them too , that 's why i initialy precised " "If the figures are correct" , because as we all know , a Cold war followed WWII and propaganda was on from all sides , but there is no doubt that this plane was an outstanding machine when it appeared and until the end of the war against a very weakened ennemy

Rall flew a 109G-4 if i'm not mistaken so it's understandable La-7 would outrun him , i think personally the German Dora was probably a good match for La-7 , but numbers and quality pilots were on the Soviet side by that time , cheers mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Wildnoob
09-08-2008, 05:06 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Metatron_123
09-08-2008, 05:47 PM
If allied and soviet alleged kill ratios are correct, then the Luftwaffe would be reduced to riding bicycles in 1945...

LEXX_Luthor
09-08-2008, 06:28 PM
Luftwaffe personel were riding bicycles by 1945.

ElAurens
09-08-2008, 08:24 PM
Precisely.

The Luftwaffe had plenty of aircraft to fly, but few good pilots, and even scarcer fuel supplies.

What the Germans (and to a lesser extent the Japanese) did to the Allies in the early part of the war, the Allies paid back ten fold at the end.

Buzzsaw-
09-08-2008, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Marcel_Albert:
According to Soviet sources , La-7 arrived at the front in early July 1944 , and until the end of the war , lost around 120 aircraft in combat and shot down more than 3000 Lufwaffe machines.

Soviet claims cannot be taken as reliable.

They claimed some 80,000 German aircraft shot down on the East Front in the course of the war, when the Germans reported losses approx. 1/5 of that amount.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 12:13 AM
The La-7 is just a further refinement of the La-5 series fighter. It is not some giant technology leap over its earlier desighn.

With that being said the LA-5 series aircraft were amongst the greatest feilded by the USSR. An already great aircraft was made even greater. It was still mostly made of wood, Something that most western countries had moved on from years prior. Givin the shortage of materials that is an understandable solution and the Russians did well with what they had.

But to say that this airframe was the superior plane in a 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2 or 4 vs 4 engagment against modern German, British and American aircraft is stretching it a bit. The fact is that by wars end all countries feilded top notch fighters of the highest caliber and only numbers and training made the differance in the larger scheme of things.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 12:15 AM
Oh and Brems....That TopGun referance was right on the money, My thoughts exactly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

joeap
09-09-2008, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:
Oh and Brems....That TopGun referance was right on the money, My thoughts exactly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Please, every time someone posts "Soviet source" the knee-kerk reaction is rejection or mockery.

ALL kill claims need to be taken with a grain of salt, even if some air forces were more stringent in accepting claims. You have to look at loss records, compare it to claims and loss records of the other side, in other words a scientific approach. Why do I even have to write this???

Bremspropeller
09-09-2008, 05:33 AM
A grain of salt?

A whole sack would do better here.

luftluuver
09-09-2008, 06:20 AM
It is my understanding that the confirmation of a Soviet kill was even more stringent than the LW's.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
It is my understanding that the confirmation of a Soviet kill was even more stringent than the LW's.

I know that the Luftwaffe's records have been stringently searched down to a fiber count of the paper that the kill claims were typed on!

Russia's WWII history has been alot of "Because we said so!"

I doubt very much that a very closed Russia following WWII would allow western researchers to verify anything.

alert_1
09-09-2008, 06:49 AM
La 5,5F,5FN hadnt rear mirror, La 7 got it..why? La7 was fastest a the best fighter in the world then, why REAR mirror? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Daiichidoku
09-09-2008, 06:49 AM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:
I doubt very much that a very closed Russia following WWII would allow western researchers to verify anything.

some thing change,.......... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

No41Sqn_Banks
09-09-2008, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
La 5,5F,5FN hadnt rear mirror, La 7 got it..why? La7 was fastest a the best fighter in the world then, why REAR mirror? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Propably because they were now so fast that they could see the opponent only when they had already passed it? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

joeap
09-09-2008, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Freiwillige:
I doubt very much that a very closed Russia following WWII would allow western researchers to verify anything.

some thing change,.......... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh well, I guess we can close David Glantz, John Erikson and Christer Bergstrom among a few others and never open anymore. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Freiwillige:
I doubt very much that a very closed Russia following WWII would allow western researchers to verify anything.

some thing change,.......... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh well, I guess we can close David Glantz, John Erikson and Christer Bergstrom among a few others and never open anymore. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Three names and none of them are Russian. You are citing to me European authors whom did not just take Russian claims into account without cross checking them.

I have read both volumes of black cross/red star......great read, very well researched, But I dont recall the VVS spanking the Luftwaffe with a 25 to 1 kill ratio anywhere in that war....never happened. Not in 41' not in 42' not in 43' not in 44' and again not in 45'!

The Luftwaffe has proven many times in 44' and 45' that they could easily wrestle local air superiority from the russian's.

joeap
09-09-2008, 11:19 AM
Point is they DO use Soviet sources (oh and Glantz is American). I never said to accept Soviet sources without cross-checking. It's just that so many Cold War myths still get put out there.

Honestly, though, how do we know there aren't no good Russian authors out there now? Over at the ACG and Russian Battlefield there is some good stuff out there.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
Point is they DO use Soviet sources (oh and Glantz is American). I never said to accept Soviet sources without cross-checking. It's just that so many Cold War myths still get put out there.

Honestly, though, how do we know there aren't no good Russian authors out there now? Over at the ACG and Russian Battlefield there is some good stuff out there.

What is ACG? Im sure that there are good russian authors but unless it is translated???

joeap
09-09-2008, 12:05 PM
Armchair General (http://www.armchairgeneral.com/) I mean we're already Armchair Pilots.

There's a subforum called the RKKA in WWII which ahs links to maps and material and stuff. Some Russians with access to information post as does one ex-US Army Colonel (collegue of David Glantz) named R.N. Armstrong who has written on the Red Army in WWII.

Here is a thread I started in 2006 which drops some names, yes all write in Russian. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Current Russian historians (http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39250)

Ahh yes Krivosheev has been translated. Did huge studies on casualties during WWII in the USSR, Overmans did from the German side.

Buzzsaw-
09-09-2008, 01:41 PM
Salute

The losses on the German side have been pretty well documented, from original sources, with the exception of a few months during the later phases of the war when record keeping fell apart.

The loss figures shown in these German documents, which were based on the administrative reports from the field from the Geschwader, were intended for Luftwaffe use, were not used as propaganda, and can generally be accepted as fact, just do not match the claims made by the Soviets. (there are some differences in loss reporting by the Germans though, as they normally only report deaths and wounds of aircrew, not loss of aircraft which might force land damaged, but whose crew are uninjured)

The re-writing and invention of facts to improve morale or encourage its combatants is well documented for all countries in WWII, the Soviet Union was not shy in this regard, one of the worst, if not the worst offender, and there is no doubt that the VVS encouraged its pilots to make claims, and approved claims which had no real basis in fact.

The Soviet VVS had terrible losses in the war, in their official history, they admitted to the loss of some 60,000 aircraft. Without a doubt, their claim of 80,000 aircraft destroyed was a facesaving gesture, which cannot be substantiated.

Claims by ALL sides in WWII were exaggerated.

The only reliable method of determining real figures for losses is to look at the administrative reports of each side for their day to day or month to month losses.

Sometimes the day to day reports can be matched up with claims, but more often, the number of claims exceeds the actual reported losses on the other side.

When looking at the major combatants in WWII, and comparing their claims to the actual losses suffered by their opponents, the Soviet Union, Japan and Italy stand out as countries whose pilots overclaimed by considerably more than pilots from the United States, Britain or Germany.

But even in the later three countries, overclaiming was the norm, rather than the exception.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 05:46 PM
Well I know that during the Battle of Britian the R.A.F. overclaimed by a large margin and that was known but accepted for the sake of morale.

I even read recently that gunnery skills in the R.A.F. were so poor in the middle of BOB due to pilot loss that the average pilot was lucky to score hits let alone shoot down something.

WTE_Galway
09-09-2008, 06:02 PM
Not all over claims are propaganda.

Sometimes an aircraft will make it back even though at the time it looked certain to be a kill. In other case a severely disabled plane claimed by pilot A will be attacked and finished off by pilot B who also makes a claim.

There will also be discrepancies between what each side calls lost. An aircraft making a wheels up crash landing in a field will be a definite "kill" for the opposing pilot. However if it crashed in friendly territory and the plane can be salvaged (even if it takes several months work) it will only be listed as damaged by the home side.

Marcel_Albert
09-09-2008, 07:37 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
there is no doubt that the VVS encouraged its pilots to make claims, and approved claims which had no real basis in fact.


When looking at the major combatants in WWII, and comparing their claims to the actual losses suffered by their opponents, the Soviet Union, Japan and Italy stand out as countries whose pilots overclaimed by considerably more than pilots from the United States, Britain or Germany.


This is not true at all according to everything i read and know , But i want to stress that i respect what is certainly your sincere opinion based on what you read and heard as well , so i don't want to create a argumentative war , but merely like to state my view just once on this subect , because it is quite surprising for me to read this and because it is certainly not the opinion of most European historians , but seeing how a few posters are quick to belittle anything Russian or Soviet in this thread , i don't think there won't be any fruitful discussion as there is political hostility to Russia/SU behind some people's post in this thread , so i'd like to just state my opinion and leave the last word to the most passionated among us .

German documents in 1944 are reliable in some areas , unreliable in others and especially at the end of the war when Soviet are in Germany , the confusion is so huge that countless of losses were never reported and at this time , it was chaos everywhere , for ground troops like for the air force personel , loss figures are still today a matter of discussion , but one thing is not debatable anymore , Luftwaffe lost more machines than they destroyed in 1944 Eastern front .

Secondly , the system of confirmation of Soviet VVS was the most rigourous of all (needed ground troops confirm , wreck or external confirmation ) and they never encouraged their pilots to overclaim ... Never seen one occurence of this , i know that some Soviet historians manipulated some figures after the war for propaganda purpose (cold war ) , but it was quite the contrary during the war , actually some pilots were punished severely for various disobey of the procedures and many kills made over sea or ennemy territory did not count . Overclaim happened to all sides (ask B-17 gunners for instance) as you said , but to put everything on their back by calling them worst offenders , i really don't think so , they were too busy liberating their land promised to slavery and had political police on their back checking their logbooks because Soviet air command wanted a very clear and objective idea of the losses they inflicted to the ennemy in order to take the right decision at the right time , this sources are not more , not less believable than nazi sources tbh , i'd personnally believe them more , cause no one could beat third reich in propaganda , especially in 1944 when morale was very low .

I also find hypocrit to take Soviet sources for their losses reports and use them in books , don't question anything , then dismiss their victory claims when it doesn't suit one's desire of interpretation of history , they are the one who faced and destroyed the majority of experten and nazi machines on their front at a time where their ennemy could put more planes in the air locally , had the best machines and the initiative of attack until 1943 , sure Soviet suffered great losses until late 1942-43 (majority destroyed on the ground for the first year of Barbarossa ) , but it is not like German didn't suffer some as well and afterwards it is clearly the other way around and Luftwaffe was progressively wiped out from the skies of the Eastern front by Soviet forces by mid-1943 (prior to Kuban , the Stalingrad of the Luftwaffe ) , in mid-1944 , about 40% of Luftwaffe ressources was still in the East to contain Soviet massive counter-attack and got annihilated , in less than 8 months retreated from Smaliensk to Berlin , lost Crimea, Hungary etc.. modern Russian reports shows it , and i don't think Luft or Usaaf claims are more believable than Soviet claims , Soviet wouldn't have an airforce by 1943 if you believed LW claims as well .

Then there is the myth ... well fed during the cold war , survived until today on some forums of nostalgics , to tell people in the west that Soviet were not as strong and succesful as they appeared to be , that they were just winning by numbers and mistakes of Hitler and couldn't do anything without US help .. many western historians telling lots of BS about the Great Patriotic war to belittle them and depict them as monsters , multiply rape figures , criticize the competence of their famous generals etc.. this was cold war and those "historians" had no access to files and had political aims in mind , nowadays things have changed a bit , many serious Russians have made great objective works and had access to the relevant archives , none of this works shows that Soviet overclaimed more than any other airforce though , they show however that Soviet air war with Nazi Germany was so massive and intense for 4 years that the probability of overclaim was higher than in the West since a lot more aircrafts were involved , shot down or scored victories

luftluuver
09-09-2008, 07:48 PM
1. During the period in question, a constant 21-24% of the Luftwaffe's day fighters were based in the East - but only 12-14% of the Luftwaffe day fighter "losses" occurred in this theater.

2. During this period, a constant 75-78% of the day fighters were based in the West. The turnover was enormous: 14,720 aircraft were "lost", while operational strength averaged 1364.

3. During this period, 2294 day fighters were "lost" in the East; the ratio of western "losses" to eastern "losses" was thus 14,720/2294 = 6.4 to one.

4. During this period, a constant 43-46% of all of the Luftwaffe's operational aircraft were based in the East. It should be noted that these included entire categories (for example, battlefield recce, battle planes, dive bombers) that were used exclusively in the East, because they couldn't survive in the West..

5. During this period, a total of 8600 operational aircraft were "lost" in the East, while 27,060 were "lost" in the West; the ratio of western "losses" to eastern "losses" was thus 27,060/8600 = 3.41 to one.

http://www.lesbutler.ip3.co.uk/jg26/thtrlosses.htm

Marcel_Albert
09-09-2008, 07:57 PM
Western front was also Much smaller , with a Much greater concentration of aircrafts , Eastern Front was from Kaukasus to Kaliningrad .. thousands of kilometers to cover .

Also operational use of Soviet aviation was different , Western bombed cities and civilians and was involved in a battle of attrition against Nazi German airforce specifically , Goering had to transfer many air units to the West as a consequence , the Soviet however VVS mainly covered their ground troop advance in 1944 cause their principal opponent was the Wehrmacht , this explains largely the differences in the figures

luftluuver
09-09-2008, 08:04 PM
Western Front was from northern Norway to Greece.

What do you think the purpose of the US 9th AF and British 2cd TAF was for?

Marcel_Albert
09-09-2008, 08:10 PM
I thought you were speaking of the last months of the war , of course the Western front was extremely important , i'd never belittle the huge contribution of Western forces and especially Western Airforces who bled white the Luftwaffe from mid-1943 , many people died for this and some of their graves are not 30km away from my home , just meant to put in evidence that figures of air losses during this period are not comparable cause the situations both West and East Air forces confronted were very different

HuninMunin
09-09-2008, 08:11 PM
During the time in question the eastern front was by far more concentrated on single spots.

luftluuver
09-09-2008, 08:41 PM
At the end of 1943 the EF was ~1500km long (straight line, Odessa to Leningrad).

The Western Allies were also fighting against Japan which the Soviets were not.

Freiwillige
09-09-2008, 08:42 PM
in 1944 the entire German military was on the defensive and the combined pressure of the two front air war was breaking the Luftwaffe's back.
But thats not to say that in 1944 the Luftwaffe was incapable of fighting.

WTE_Galway
09-09-2008, 08:48 PM
Just to show its not just an eastern front problem ...


Originally from Mike Spick. The Height of the Battle/Battle of Britain Salamanda 1990:

The Battle of Britain has been under the intense scrutiny of historians and others for half a century. Aided by hindsight, they have been able to raise various controversial issues. Criticism is all too easy for those who come after. To touch on but one issue, it is known that both sides overclaimed by a considerable amount. (The British claimed that they had destroyed 2,698 aircraft. The German claimed they they had shot down 3,058. Post war investigation proved that the RAF had actually shot down 1,733 German aircraft and that the Luftwaffe had shot down 915 British fighters.) No-one who has not experienced air fighting can possibly imagine the confusion. Neither can they judge. Relative scores are an effect, not a cause. What is clear is that the Battle of Britain was won by Fighter Command because it defeated the Luftwaffe in the battle to control the air over southern England.

Marcel_Albert
09-09-2008, 09:32 PM
never trusted wikipedia , especially on this subject (and also because this specific article support Buzzsaw point about Soviet being the worst overclaimers which i respectfully do not agree with ) , but wanted to post it anyway as it shows the sources and a few examples of overclaiming during WWII from all sides :

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

PraetorHonoris
09-10-2008, 04:13 AM
I won't engage the discussion about kills/claims... however, the number of 120 La7 lost in combat is sounds very low. Given in 1945 the Soviets lost ca. 1500 fighters in combat and 4100 in 1944, the claim of 120 combat losses of La7 raises questions at least.

http://pkka.narod.ru/airlosses.htm

Metatron_123
09-10-2008, 05:22 AM
Well I don't think that many were in service... More doubtfull is the kill claims in my opinion.

luftluuver
09-10-2008, 05:37 AM
When La-7 production ended in 1946 some 5,753 had been built. The first La-7s appearing in the late spring/early summer of 1944.

Kurfurst__
09-10-2008, 05:44 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
La 5,5F,5FN hadnt rear mirror, La 7 got it..why? La7 was fastest a the best fighter in the world then, why REAR mirror? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://mysite.pratt.edu/~rsilva/images/corillo2.jpg

Bremspropeller
09-10-2008, 06:21 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Freiwillige
09-10-2008, 06:29 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Metatron_123
09-10-2008, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Luftwaffe personel were riding bicycles by 1945.

I'll show you the allied aircraft loss list in the west for a single day in 1945.

I assure you there's no 'bicycle' listed in the cause column. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Obviously you are reffering to May 8 1945 and later. I do see your point.

VW-IceFire
09-10-2008, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by Metatron_123:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Luftwaffe personel were riding bicycles by 1945.

I'll show you the allied aircraft loss list in the west for a single day in 1945.

I assure you there's no 'bicycle' listed in the cause column. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Obviously you are reffering to May 8 1945 and later. I do see your point. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Are you sure? I mean throwing a bicycle at a plane would make a heck of a dent http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif