|
Greetings Matthew & List Members, I checked out the Soviet Korean War claims in the website, and it is limited both in the number of claims from other sources and the time span it covers. The list available on <http://www.korean-war.com/sovietunion.html> is much more detailed and accurate--from the Soviet perspective! As I've mentioned on the list before, the Soviets claimed many more kills than they actually got (as did USAF pilots). In tracking Soviet-era documents from the divisional level up to the corps level, one finds that a number of claims at the lower level are not substantiated by the higher command level. Even confirmed kills from the 64th Fighter Air Corps were inflated. on May 8, 1952 Georgii Lobov sent a ciphered telegram to STAVKA (Vasilevsky, Zhigarev & Krasovsky) explaining the various factors why "our units have overestimated by more than three times the number of enemy F-86s lost." In addition to the reasons Lobov, himself a WWII ace and combat pilot in Korea, stated, I think that characteristics of the MiG-15 and USAF jet types contributed to erroneous claims on both sides. The USAF's standard move when jumped from behind (snap roll to a split S and haul butt at low altitude) would result in an uncontrolled spin in a MiG-15 and thus many an escaping UNC pilot was marked as killed when they managed to get away and fight another day. Early in the air war the USAF did not realize that the MiG-15 was very difficult to shoot down with a few hits from .50 caliber MGs. This probably more than you wanted Matthew, but thanks for pointing out the site. I'll take a look at the other links as well. I hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving and the holiday season continues in the same vein. Regards, Mark O. ---------- From: "Matthew M. Aid" <mmaid@starpower.net> To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Communist Perspective on Air War in Korea Date: Tue, Dec 5, 2000, 2:35 AM I found this very interesting article on the Soviet, Chinese and North Korean perspective on the air war in Korea from 1950 to 1953. Commentary from list readers would be much appreciated. |