SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Korean War air combat.

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Korean War air combat. (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=172536)

Korean War air combat.

This is one of my favorite aviation history subjects, and I've read several books regarding the Soviet pilots. The funny thing regarding this whole subject, is that both sides seem to brush off their own losses. both sides were claiming pretty high kill ratios. I wonder if most of the US kills were against Chinese fighters? It seems like the Russians liked to use them as the "bait":D for the US pilots. But also, the Russians had a wider variety of planes that they were engaging. So I can see how their kill tallies would be high. I think it would be accurate to see or hear from the Chinese records.
:hmmm:

Quote:

Claims

The numbers shown above, and used throughout, are claims, and are almost certainly in excess of the actual number of MiGs downed. During the war the USAF pilots claimed over 800 enemy planes. Postwar research revised that figure downward to 379, which closely matches the admitted Russian losses of 345. The Air Force has not disclosed, perhaps does not fully know, which pilot claims to revise, so the contemporary numbers stand, although, as in all claims for aerial victories, the claims exceed the other side's documented losses.
Adjusted Claims per Soviet Data

In the years since the breakup of the old Soviet Union, records relating to the Korean War have come to light. Aviation history researchers like Cookie Sewall and Diego Zampini have pored over these records and have been able to correlate Soviet records of specific aerial battles on specific dates, and thus documented certain over-claims by the USAF pilots. As noted above, over-claims have occurred in all wars and amongst all combatant nations. John Lundstrom similarly researched American overclaims versus Japanese air forces in WW2.
The adjusted claims shown here in no way detract from the heroic accomplishments of the aces. In any historical research, accuracy is all-important; without striving for accuracy (within the limits of resources, documents, archaelogical evidence, etc.) it is not history, it is merely story-telling.
The "Adjusted Claims" column represents a work in progress. As no Chinese archives have been opened up at this time, only USAF claims against Russian air forces have been reviewed. (In other words, the claims against Chinese air forces are counted here, without any challenge.) I hope to provide more documentation, identifying the dates and circumstances of the reduced claims. The "n.a" simply means that I have no information about any adjustments for that pilot; the USAF number should stand.

Russia:
http://www.acepilots.com/russian/rus_aces.html

US:
http://www.acepilots.com/korea_aces.html

Did anyone note this year marks the 60th anniversary of the start of the Korean War?

The Forgotten War.:nope:

Ironic we came very close to having a remake this year too.

F-86 Sabre...I have a soft spot for them. :rock:

As for hearing from Chinese records, I should imagine, given the human waves and the likelihood of staggering losses, the records have been heavily buried so that the public doesn't find out. Bad for morale and all that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1448183)

I'm not sure the Chinese casualties are as bad as sometimes made out to be. The Chinese troops that fought in Korea were mostly veterens of the Chinese Civil War and they used infiltration and encirclement tactics which proved, especially at the end of 1950, very effective at destroying and throwing back the UN forces despite the Chinese disadvantage in air power and heavy weapons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEED (Post 1448178)

Did anyone note this year marks the 60th anniversary of the start of the Korean War?

The Forgotten War.:nope:

No. I forgot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1448183)

That is most probably the case....and yes, a beautiful aircraft.

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/6977/sabre.jpg

Great post Jim!:salute:

I think it would be cool/interesting to make a movie about the Russian pilots there, from their perspective. All of their involvement there was supposed to be top secret.

The Korean Police Action was a United Nation's sanctioned effort that couldn't be called a war. It did however allow future US presidents to act without congressional approval to commit US forces. As political cover the congress approved the 'War Powers Act' of 1973, which is why the power of the presidency is what it is today. The UN and congress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man (Post 1448253)

So if the US didn't call it a war, it stops being a war, even for the Koreans themselves?

Very nice Jim, very nice indeed :yeah: I must carry on with my IL2 reskin of the....

Oh...maybe not, someone else has done one that looks a lot better than mine!

http://airwarfiles.homestead.com/fil...W_91FISweb.jpg
81st FIW 91st FIS, USAF Bentwaters Summer 1950 :rock:

And then, some fifty-sixty years later, an F-86 flies out of Bentwaters again (link provided because of large picture size):

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/3783/1004647.jpg

A very special moment :yep:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1 (Post 1448259)

So if the US didn't call it a war, it stops being a war, even for the Koreans themselves?

It wasn't the US which didn't call it a war. It was the UN which called it a police action. Which lead to the US politicos using legislation to allow presidents to wage war without declaration. I think that is my point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man (Post 1448287)

The UN intervantion was called a police action, that hardly means that the Korean War can't be called a war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1448281)

And then, some fifty-sixty years later, an F-86 flies out of Bentwaters again (link provided because of large picture size):

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/3783/1004647.jpg

A very special moment :yep:

How many are there in flyable condition?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna (Post 1448227)

That is most probably the case....and yes, a beautiful aircraft.

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/6977/sabre.jpg

What is the yellow one with the red star? Yugoslavia?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike (Post 1448296)

What is the yellow one with the red star? Yugoslavia?

Yes, it is

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1 (Post 1448295)

How many are there in flyable condition?

If wiki isn't lying, three.

One in Australia, one in Canada and the current oldest flying jet, the F-86A in my picture, in the UK.

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