Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Steam Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo
- - - - -

Amount of aircrew of the 8th airforce in the ETO


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 24 Days
  • 113 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 05 August 2017 - 10:29 AM

To compleate on this posting:

#19:
The second world war was 'the great patriotic war" for the Soviet's. The naming reasons mainly in the the sacrifices of the civilian population. The statistics mention that of all male born in 1923 did only 20% survive the war :-o
This stands hard in the light of similar stastitic of RAF bomber crews, of wich 40% of all enlisted men during the war survived!
For the German U-boot crew became the stastistic 25%.
It was with other words twice as deadly to be a boy born in the 1923-Soviet as flying a RAF bomber throughout the entire war and even deadlier than being a German submarine crew :-o
[the submarine detail added later]


The numbers of the 8th airforce would be interresting to get into comparison.
However i've only been able to surf up the number of losses, being more than 26,000 sacrifies, wich ought to be compared to the total of flying crew to find it's place between the other percentages.
I've found the losses of heavy bombers for the entire ETO (@ 8th and 9th) wich would likely be fine for the comparison. But likely not without the total number of crews involved to create a percentage.

Does anyone here have access to the numbers or simply is a better (read: more persistant!) web-surfer than me?
As the American sacrifices above Europe certainly deserves to be mentioned beside the other percentages, it would be nice If any could help with the numbers!

Edited by Armand, 05 August 2017 - 10:34 AM.


#2 Kutscha

Kutscha

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,588 posts
  • Joined 12 Years, 11 Months and 11 Days
  • 118 topics

Posted 05 August 2017 - 11:20 AM

Armand, http://www.dtic.mil/.../u2/a542518.pdf

 

You didn't ask for but as a bonus, US Navy, https://www.history....graphs/nasc.pdf



#3 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 24 Days
  • 113 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 05 August 2017 - 04:33 PM

There's a lot of numbers in Kutschas links but till now Ive only found numbers at any specific time. But i have still much to read.

A detail i've come past during the surf is that the sacrifies of the 8th airforce was about 2,000 soles higher than the Marines in the Pacific :-o Wich leads to the same numbers/percentage for the marines If any might come past such!

#4 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 24 Days
  • 113 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 05 August 2017 - 05:16 PM

Found it!
At: http://www.taphilo.c...8aflosses.shtml12 lines before the section 'TRAINING':
"Around 135,000 men flew in combat in the 8th Air Force."!
A quick calculating results in a survival percentage of 80,75%, wich actually is surprising high IMO.
The link above have been edited with the number.

Edited by Armand, 07 August 2017 - 09:05 PM.


#5 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 24 Days
  • 113 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:27 PM

I came across the total casualities in the ETO to be 62,021 wich equals a surviving rate of 53% wich looks much more like the 40% of the RAF bomber command!
Following I have edited the number in the Patriotic war -posting in the Couriusities tread.

#6 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,295 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 3 Months and 11 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 11 September 2017 - 11:43 PM

I show:

 

1) B-17 with 12,731 built; 291,508 sorties; 640,036 short tons (2,000 lbs) dropped; 4,688 actually lost; 6,659 enemy kills claimed; 62.2 sorties per loss.

2) B-24with 18,482 built' 226,775 sorties; 452,508 short tons dropped; 3,626 actually lost; 2,617 enemy kills claimed; 62.5 sorties per loss.

3) B-25 with 9,984 built; 63,177 sorties; 84,980 short tons dropped; 380 actually lost; 193 enemy kills calimed; 166.3 sorties per loss.

4) B-26 (Marauder) with 5,288 built; 129,943 sorties; 169,382 short tons dropped; 911 actually lost; 402 enemy kills calimed; 142.6 sorties per loss.

5) A-20 with 7,478 built; 39,492 sorties; 31,865 short tons dropped; 265 lost; 11 enemy kills calimed; 149.0 sorties per loss.

6) A-26 Invader with 2,452 built; 11,567 sorties; 18,054 short tons dropped; 67 lost; 7 enemy kills claimed; 172.6 sorties per loss.

 

Data from: Table 7; American Combat Planes, by Ray Wagner.

 

The % lost per sortie can be calculated easily as 1/(sorties per loss) * 100.



#7 Kutscha

Kutscha

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,588 posts
  • Joined 12 Years, 11 Months and 11 Days
  • 118 topics

Posted 12 September 2017 - 12:06 AM

Do those losses Greg include losses by other Air Forces or just USAAF losses?



#8 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,667 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 24 Days
  • 113 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 12 September 2017 - 06:43 AM

I show:
 
1) B-17 with 12,731 built; 291,508 sorties; 640,036 short tons (2,000 lbs) dropped; 4,688 actually lost; 6,659 enemy kills claimed; 62.2 sorties per loss.
2) B-24with 18,482 built' 226,775 sorties; 452,508 short tons dropped; 3,626 actually lost; 2,617 enemy kills claimed; 62.5 sorties per loss.
3) B-25 with 9,984 built; 63,177 sorties; 84,980 short tons dropped; 380 actually lost; 193 enemy kills calimed; 166.3 sorties per loss.
4) B-26 (Marauder) with 5,288 built; 129,943 sorties; 169,382 short tons dropped; 911 actually lost; 402 enemy kills calimed; 142.6 sorties per loss.
5) A-20 with 7,478 built; 39,492 sorties; 31,865 short tons dropped; 265 lost; 11 enemy kills calimed; 149.0 sorties per loss.
6) A-26 Invader with 2,452 built; 11,567 sorties; 18,054 short tons dropped; 67 lost; 7 enemy kills claimed; 172.6 sorties per loss.
 
Data from: Table 7; American Combat Planes, by Ray Wagner.
.


I can't comprehend this due to the talk of the almost impossible goal of surviving 25 missions!?

#9 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,295 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 3 Months and 11 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 12 September 2017 - 07:01 PM

Those are U.S. losses only. The book is "American Combat Planes," and I'm not home right now. But I recall it is U.S. losses. What I can't recall is if that is entire war or ETO losses. I'll look when I get home and revisit here.



#10 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,295 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 3 Months and 11 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 12 September 2017 - 07:08 PM

Hey Armand,

 

There is no single aircraft in my post above that has a loss rate of less than 25 missions per loss. About 3 of 5 B-17s could reach 25 missions without an aircraft loss. That doesn't mean crewmen weren't killed. It means 3 of 5 planes made it home for 25 missions.

 

The A-26 Invader was a miracle. 7 of 10 would survive 25 missions.

 

I find it interesting that the B-24 and B-17 had almost exactly the same loss rate. Of course, they were flying over exactly the same territory with exactly the same defenses, so maybe that is not so surprising.

 

It also shows you that aerial defenses in WWII were definitely not toothless. Imagine how hard it would be today to survive 25 missions over the same territory!






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users