Top Allied Fighter pilot of WW2

[Yves]

On explanation to the fact that Germans had higher kill numbers is that there were many more allied aircraft than German aircraft. Thus allies pilots had far fewer opportunities to shoot down German aircraft. Less potential target per pilot for the allies. Moreover, only the best German pilots survived and those accumulated far greater actual combat experience than the allied pilots as they had many more actual fights than the allied pilots.

Late war German pilots coming out of the flying schools went down in scores, while a small highly skilled and dwindling elite made up for most of the victories, while the Allied had a huge and growing number of well trained pilots.

Yves.

[blackfire]

Late war German pilots coming out of the flying schools went down in scores, while a small highly skilled and dwindling elite made up for most of the victories, while the Allied had a huge and growing number of well trained pilots.
.

Hitler once said ultimately all war is economic.

[krichter33]

As far as the German scores are concerned I believe they are quite accurate, and they have been verified by a number of diferent historians.

Top German Aces:

(East)
Erich Hartmann - 352
Gerhard Barkhorn - 301
Gunther Rall - 275

(West)
Hans-Joachim Marseille - 158
Heinz Bar - 124 (221 total)
Kurt Buhligen - 112

Top Japanese Aces:

Hiryoshi Nishizawa - 87
Yamato - 80
Sugita - 70
Saburo Sakai - 64

Top Finnish Aces:

Einno Juutilanan - 94
Hans Wind - 75
Einno Luukanan - 56

Top American Aces:

(Pacific)
Dick Bong - 40
Thomas McGuire - 38

(Europe)
Robert Johnson - 28
Frances Gabreski - 28

Top U.K. Aces:

Marmaduke Pattle - 51
James 'Johnnie' Johnson - 38
Pierre Clostermann (French) - 33
Adolph 'Sailor' Malon - 32

Top U.S.S.R. Aces:

Ivan Kozhedub - 62
Alexander Pokryshkin - 59

[Victor Nitu]

To a Romanian peasant who ploughed by horse, a tank was completely unfamiliar and alien.

No wonder the top ranking ace was a prince then.
However, the bulk of the army and of the air force was made up of men of poorer origin, who did not had to much contact with machines, but had a passion for them.

[Florin]

Only a few countries were sufficiently advantaged for much of their population to be readily adaptable to the demands of high tech weaponry - and not just aircraft, but tanks etc. as well.

One of the less remarked side effects of the mass tractorisation programme of the USSR in the 1920s and 30s was to make a lot of its peasants familiar with the technical manifestations of the industrial world. To many a Russian peasant soldier a tank was comprehensible as an armoured caterpillar tractor. To a Romanian peasant who ploughed by horse, a tank was completely unfamiliar and alien.

Cheers,
Sid

Hi Sid,

Your message simply made me to return to write in Feldgrau, maybe earlier than I intended.
Considering that about 80% of Romanians were involved in agriculture, and reporting to the 19,000,000 Romanians living altogether, this meant 3,8 millions Romanians involved in manufacturing, services and intellectual activities.

As in the Romanian Army the tanks were numbered by hundreds, and not by tens of thousands like in the Russian Army, I do not see what difference made the fact that most, but not all, of the Romanian peasants used horses for their ploughs, and many, but not all of the Soviet peasants used tractors and not horses. Moreover, most of the Romanian peasants were recruited for infantry. In aviation, armor/tanks and mountain units, the percentage of professionals with permanent paid jobs (like my grandfather) was much higher than the infantry filled with peasants.

Well, in a way we were like the Japanese you mentioned: we had some high class pilots, which very often proved non-replaceable when they died. And now, it would be comic if it wouldn’t be tragic… Should we consider ‘Bizu’ Cantacuzino, with his 60 victories, as the second allied pilot, because of the 9 months when Romania was the 4th Ally, or an Axis pilot because of the years when Romania was the third in the European Axis?

[Victor Nitu]

Should we consider ‘Bizu’ Cantacuzino, with his 60 victories, as the second allied pilot, because of the 9 months when Romania was the 4th Ally, or an Axis pilot because of the years when Romania was the third in the European Axis?

Nope, we cannot.
He scored the majority of his kills against the VVS and only a few against the Luftwaffe, mostly because opportunity lacked.

[avvocat]

[quote="Kameraden"]Hi

Can anyone please tell me who was the Top Allied Fighter pilot of WW2?

thanx

Ivan Kozhedub the best allied fighter ace with 62 kills
Dick Bong was the best us fighter ace (40)
but the best uk ace was Marmaduke pat Pattle (a south african) with 40 or 50 a/c shot down
Best regards

[Max-]

On explanation to the fact that Germans had higher kill numbers is that there were many more allied aircraft than German aircraft. Thus allies pilots had far fewer opportunities to shoot down German aircraft. Less potential target per pilot for the allies. Moreover, only the best German pilots survived and those accumulated far greater actual combat experience than the allied pilots as they had many more actual fights than the allied pilots.

Yves.

If that's the case why didn't Allied airmen shoot down large numbers of German aircraft when the Germans had superior numbers? Why weren't there any 50+ kill-British aces during the Battle of Britain?

Aces like Erich Hartmann scored in the last 2 years of the war when the Soviet VVS was growing stronger than ever. He did not participate in early war killing sprees against poorly trained and organized Russian pilots.

If you will, read accounts by American pilots who encountered Erich Hartmann over Romania and observed how he blew several Mustangs out of the sky.

Avvocat: Historians have shown that Pattle's 50+ victory tally was exaggerated. An example would be when his squadron engaged Italian planes in Greece (or some other location) and claimed 11 shot down, including 2 by Pattle, when in fact the Italians lost only 3.

[Max-]

..