shootdownstatistics
Hi
Do enyone know where I can find any numbers on how many victories different aircraft-models won during WWI.
I have searched the net and you find some here and some there but never the complete picture not on any AC.
But there must be some sort of statistics on this. If not official so unofficial. You easily find statistics on the aces but not on the AC-types.
I am mostly interested in the fighters on both sides.
Hopfull that there are someone with a load of intell
P-G
For the Germans. Records usually do not record the type aircraft the German pilot used that is why there are in some cases 2 or 3 types listed.
1/ AEG C.I
1/ AEG G
1/ Albatros
2/ Albatros C.I
1/ Albatros C.II
1/ Albatros C.X
57/ Albatros D.I
66/ Albatros D.I or D.II
1/ Albatros D.I or D.II or Fokker D.3 or Halberstadt D.III
54/ Albatros D.II
33/ Albatros D.II or D.III
2/ Albatros D.II or Halberstadt D.II
7/ Albatros D.II or Halberstadt D.II/III
19/ Albatros D.II or Roland D.I
891/ Albatros D.III
4/ Albatros D.III, D.V or Pfalz D.3
2/ Albatros D.III (OAW)
115/ Albatros D.III or D.V
4/ Albatros D.III or D.Va
1071/ Albatros D.V
21/ Albatros D.V or D.Va
1/ Albatros D.V or D.Va or Pfalz
20/ Albatros D.V or Fokker Dr.I
10/ Albatros D.V or Pfalz D.III
5/ Albatros D.V or Pfalz D.IIIa
546/ Albatros D.Va
23/ Albatros D.Va or Fokker D.VII
8/ Albatros D.Va/Pfalz D.III/IIIa
25/ Albatros D.Va or Pfalz D.IIIa
1/ Albatros W4
2/ Aviatik C.I
7/ DFW C.V
5/ Fokker D.
3/ Fokker D or Halberstadt D.II or D.III
1/ Fokker D.I or D.II or D.III
8/ Fokker D.I or D.II or D.III or Halberstadt D.III
7/ Fokker D.III
6/ Fokker D.III or Halberstadt D.II/D.III/Roland D.II
5/ Fokker D.III or Halberstadt D.II or Roland D.I
2572/ Fokker D.VII
1/ Fokker D.VII (OAW)
2/ Fokker D.VII or Fokker Dr.I
237/ Fokker Dr.I
5/ Fokker Dr.I or Albatros D.V
3/ Fokker Dr.I or Albatros D.Va
17/ Fokker Dr.I or D.VII
142/ Fokker E.
6/ Fokker E.I
1/ Fokker E.II
20/ Fokker E.III
2/ Fokker E.III/D.III/Halberstadt D.II/Roland D.I
3/ Fokker E.IV
6/ Fokker F.I
5/ Friedrichshafen FF 33H
3/ Friedrichshafen FF33L
1/ Friedrichshafen FF43
13/ Gotha
3/ Halberstadt CL.II
1/ Halberstadt D.
3/ Halberstadt D.II
58/ Halberstadt D.II or D.III
16/ Halberstadt D.II/D.III/Fokker D.III/Roland D.I
1/ Halberstadt D.II or D.III or Roland D.III
8/ Halberstadt D.II or Fokker D.3
13/ Halberstadt D.III
7/ Halberstadt D.III or Fokker D.III
2/ Halberstadt D.III or Roland D.II or Albatros D.III
9/ Halberstadt D.III or Roland D.II
15/ Halberstadt D.V
2/ Hannover CL.II
1/ Hannover CL.IIa
1/ Hansa-Brandenburg LW
9/ Hansa-Brandenburg W12
5/ Hansa-Brandenburg W29
2/ LVG C.I
43/ Pfalz D.III
5/ Pfalz D.III or Albatros D.Va
191/ Pfalz D.IIIa
1/ Pfalz D.IIIa or Albatros D.Va or Roland
5/ Pfalz D.IIIa or Fokker D.VII
5/ Pfalz D.IIIa or Fokker Dr.I
35/ Pfalx D.XII
1/ Pfalz E.I
1/ Roland C.II
17/ Roland D.II
2/ Roland D.IIa
4.5/ Rumpler 6B1
14/ Rumpler C.I
4/ Rumpler C.IV
2/ Siemens-Schuckert W D.III
1/ Siemens-Schuckert W D.IV
John Snelling what is the source of that data?
Steve, I coulda guessed some one was going to ask me that question. Sorry, long forgotten.
But I found it it was from a guy named Frank Olynyk
Last edited by john snelling; 09-24-2014 at 14:47.
John, very impressive. Is this information culled from a variety of sources over a period of time? Thanks for sharing this with us. While not really useful for myself, I still am impressed that someone would have this info. Though I suppose I should have known that someone here would. 'Drome never ceases to amaze me.
British Western front only:
Camel = 1,407 Destroyed, 1,305 Out of control, 106 Balloons = 2,818 claims
SE5 = 1,371 Destroyed, 1,100 Out of control, 170 Balloons = 2,641 claims
Bristol F2b = 743 Destroyed, 768 Out of control, 10 Balloons = 1,521 claims
Nieuport = 248 Destroyed, 384 Out of control, 60 Balloons = 692 claims
DH4 = 164 Destroyed, 351 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 515 claims
FE2 = 211 Destroyed, 270 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 481 claims
DH9 = 195 Destroyed, 222 Out of control, 4 Balloons = 421claims
Dolphin = 191 Destroyed, 141 Out of control, 10 Balloons = 342 claims
Triplane = 100 Destroyed, 211 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 311 claims
Pup = 116 Destroyed, 182 Out of control, 4 Balloons = 302 claims
Spad = 118 Destroyed, 178 Out of control, 3 Balloons = 299 claims
DH2 = 87 Destroyed, 80 Out of control, 5 Balloons = 172 claims
RE8 = 105 Destroyed, 47 Out of control, 2 Balloons = 154 claims
1˝ Strutter = 57 Destroyed, 83 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 140 claims
DH5 = 39 Destroyed, 56 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 95 claims
BE2 = 42 Destroyed, 39 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 81 claims
Snipe = 29 Destroyed, 22 Out of control, 2 Balloons = 53 claims
FE8 = 27 Destroyed, 22 Out of control, 1 Balloons = 50 claims
Morane = 18 Destroyed, 20 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 38 claims
AW FK8 = 17 Destroyed, 12 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 29 claims
FB5 = 11 Destroyed, 14 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 25 claims
Martinsyde = 7 Destroyed, 17 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 24 claims
Bristol Scout = 5 Destroyed, 11 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 16 claims
Unknown = 3 Destroyed, 5 Out of control, 2 Balloons = 10 claims
BE12 = 5 Destroyed, 2 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 7 claims
Avro = 2 Destroyed, 1 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 3 claims
Sopwith Baby = 0 Destroyed, 1 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 1 claim
FBA = 1 Destroyed, 0 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 1 claim
O/400 = 0 Destroyed, 1 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 1 claim
RE7 = 0 Destroyed, 1 Out of control, 0 Balloons = 1 claim
Other interesting data:
Spad VII and XIII victories:
France: 927
USAS: 302
RFC: 118 (destroyed only)
Belgium: 14
Total: 1,361
Nieuport series victories:
France: 556
USAS: 192
RFC: 248 (destroyed only)
Belgium: 37
Total: 1,033
The total do not include Russian, Italian, Romanian other minor countries totals.
The gap between Bristol Fighter and Nieuport is interesting. It is because the bumber of them? Any chance to statistic of shoot downs / one plane?
This list just made Siemens-Schuckert one of the historically most useless mini in the game...Originally Posted by john snelling
Thank you for a fascinating topic - who says statistics are boring?
Bruce
I am not a WWI historian by any means, but from some recent reading I've done - specifically a Bloody April and Aces Falling by Peter Hart, which I take to be fairly representative of modern interpretations - these numbers have to be taken with some large grains of salt:
- All claims are just that - claims - and under subsequent scrutiny many have proven to be inflated when compared to recorded losses by the other side. In the case of the British, especially so.
- The air war in late 1917 and through 1918 was on a scale much greater than anything that came before it. There were many, many more aircraft flying at this time than at any time prior. The absolute numbers of aircraft lost by all sides at the end of the war were much higher than that which would have been possible earlier in the war, as there simply weren't as many planes flying. Hence the kills attributed to later types are correspondingly higher in an absolute sense - even though their relative effectiveness might have not have been that much different than that of earlier types.
- Because of the above, these figures on their own fail to convey how relatively effective the earlier aircraft were, which flew in much less crowded skies but may have been comparatively lethal, for their time, to later types. I.e. the Fokker Scourge - significant at the time it occurred, but in terms of absolute number of aircraft destroyed, relatively minor compared to the losses which would follow in Bloody April and later.
Anyways I have no doubt that there are people much more knowledgeable about these facts than I am. But I don't think the above observations are overly controversial, and regardless, there's probably a good deal of broad strokes truth in the figures, even if they are not precisely accurate.
Last edited by surfimp; 09-24-2014 at 16:05.
Steve you are correct. All stats should be taken with a grain of salt. The authors of stats did so in good faith.
Incredible stats, but i have to agree with Steve. As WWI is called "The First Great Air War" numbers of planes were greater than never before. Of course it was still not "so" much (compared to today or WWII for example) but in late war it was. So possibly some salt as you said were added there.
Thanks
Nick
You have to remember that the Siemans-Schuckert's appeared comparatively late in the war and tended to be used to defend against bombing raids by 'The Independent Force RAF'.
I have quoted this before but there is a poem about the Siemens-Schuckert. I found it in 'First of the Many - The story of the Independent Force, R.A.F.' by Alan Morris Phase III chapter 8. It is attributed to Capt. Waterous D.F.C.. It goes
"It's not the Pfalz or the Fokker scout,
It's the Siemens Schuckert that we worry about.
They do fly high - with the beaucoup speed,
And we can thank our stars it's pilots they need."
Last edited by Naharaht; 09-24-2014 at 19:56.
So the ideal would be to either look at the Kill/Loss Ratio, or Monthly Kills By Type, or some kind of index based on both. Factor the Munchkin Machines and the Fledgling Flyers out of each other's comparisons and get a more accurate picture.
I don't deny any that, and verses are full of respect. Personally, I like Siemens Schuckert. But, this statistics is very rough to it. Technically, if one flies Siemens Schuckert and in one game scores 2 victories, in a way (s)he changes history
After looking at the numbers again I surprised how ineffective the rear gunners were.
This was some amazing data great help, thanks!!!
There are some facts that make my eyebrow rise.
Compere Ac destroyed by the Camel, Dolphin, Triplane, pup and SPAD!! I asume that Spad in this case is both the VII and XIII.
I just found the gap between the Camel and the Spad....well BIG!!
There where around 5500 Camels, 8500 Spad XIII and 6000 Spad VII built and if you ad them together.... 5500 - 14500.
And compered with the triplane (150 or so built), the pup (just under 1800 built) and the dolphin (ca 2000) 118 confermed shootdowns for the SPADs are not that a big number.
Do antone have some figures on the Fokker DVIII?
Loop - the figure you're looking at is only for British SPADs, not all SPADs, that's why it's so low. As for the D.VIII, I've not seen a firm figure, but it's virtually none - the D.VIII gets lots of hype, but made virtually no impact in combat.
Not surprising. Until later in the war, rear "gunners" were given little if any gunnery training. I can't recall when the RFC/RAF started that, and have no info on French or German training practices. Most histories I've read concentrated on pilot training.
Moreover, the observer had other duties to work on, often while the plane was being attacked (bombing, photo op etc.). And trying to shoot, with changing deflections, while his pilot was doing his own dodging around didn't make for good accuracy.
Probably 1
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Well now it makes more sence. The French did most of the fighting with the Spads AND the Nieuports. Somehow I missed to read #7 from John. Must have been blind....
Aboute the DVIII (I fully agree upon the "over"hype), it did earn some victories. The last in the war for instance. I don't have a figure but what I have read it must have been 10-15 at least.
There are some german figures that I find od to. The SS DIII and IV. 3 victories together (but then only aboute 200 built). And the Roland CII just 1. This is very interesting indeed.
You need to look at what counted as a kill though - the Germans consistently under-claimed, as they didn't count a kill unless it was witnessed and/or wreckage found (a much higher "burden of proof" than the British required - most British "out of control" claims probably made it back safely....) so their real figures were generally higher than the statistics indicate. I suspect the SSW's particularly poor figures may be connected with its main use - when you're intercepting DH4s and DH9s at best part of 20,000 feet, the likelihood of your kill being witnessed / tracked all the way down to its eventual crash site is poor. (Ie. confirmed as an actual kill, not a "he went down trailing smoke but that doesn't prove it was a kill".)
It must be very hard to find the right troop soldier who can witness the victory even in low altitude... Other pilots must be better choice.
I believe the German troops were encouraged to report downed aircraft, with some description of the attacker. Here's where the German pilots' practice of individualizing their planes paid off.
With static lines, it wasn't that hard to figure out where you were when you did what you did
For the Kest units defending the Fatherland, yes much harder since most of the troops were at the front.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
On the other side, it must be a nice. trip to the rear area for.the.lucky witness (or at least a bottle of wine from pilot)
With so many variables that it must be near impossible to reach any sort of definitive, reliable, or even meaningful conclusions. What does seem to be clear is that the longer serving, more numerous aircraft are most likely to have the highest tallies but then we should expect that...How many victories different aircraft-models won during WWI ?
When I started this thread I was after the exact numbers (just because of these problems). No, more what level they landed on. If it were 100 victories or 500.
I'm a birdwatcher and when the birds migrate in the spring and autumn we try to estemate the number of migrating birds. If it is 500 or 558 migrating birds of a specific species doesn't matter. Only the big picture.
And that is what I'm after here to. If 150 Triplanes downs 100 enemies that is a very succesfull design to me.and if 14000 Spads downs 1400 enemies that is still good.
Then there is the servicetime and the kill/loss-ratio. But this is fun reading.
I see what you're saying but even then it seems accuracy could be suspect. Fun though !
Simple way to factor success: # of kills /# of months in service. Boiling it down to an Avg Kills/Month puts the long and short servers on equal footing.
If it was simple it would have been done. Claims v kills is out of whack, pilot quality, location, opposition, opportunity and the variable list goes on - so many of the base figures are suspect that the best you can hope for is an indicator. For instance, as I understand it, they can't even say how many Nieuports were actually built in WW1 due to record loss !
The fact we do not know how many Nieuports were built is amazing. They destroyed the records so the Germans could not get them during WW2. But somebody should have remembered them even if it was just a rounded number.
read: type of aircraft, pilots killed, pilots killed in action(percentage; the higher the percentage usually means the safer the aircraft).
Camel 831, of which 424 in action (51%)
SE 5a 286, of which 207 in action (72%)
RE 8 815, of which 451 in action (55%)
BE 2 508, of which 292 in action (57%)
DH 4 460, of which 333 in action (72%)
BF 2B 424, of which 289 in action (68%)
DH 9 390, of which 270 in action (69%)
FE 2 344, of which 212 in action (62%)
Strutter 211, of which 162 in action (77%)
AW FK 8 186, of which 123 in action (66%)
Pup 114, of which 41 in action (36%)
That Pup number really stands out. The Pup was suppose to be a real easy aircraft to fly, I guess the landings were really tough or engines were real bad.
John, you're the man
These numbers on pilots killed in action. Are they also "British western front only"?
Do you have simular figues on loss of AC? (I know I'm asking a lot but you seem to be a well of knowledge
Last edited by LOOP; 09-26-2014 at 03:56.
We can somewhat factor this too... British aircraft compare on the British system, German on the German, and we only compare "within same service".
Thank you for your kind words.John, you're the man
These numbers on pilots killed in action. Are they also "British western front only"?
Do you have simular figues on loss of AC? (I know I'm asking a lot but you seem to be a well of knowledge
Those are total for the war.
That seems to be it.
Yes
It was also used by the training squadrons once considered 'obsolete' for front line service so likely a higher incidence of accidents can be attributed due to that.
But that still wouldn't take into consideration how many more aircraft were flying in the last year of the war versus the earlier periods.
There was simply much, much more to shoot down, and many more planes to do the shooting. Flights of 5-10+ aircraft (and more) became common, whereas earlier they were lucky to get 3-4 in the air at the same time.
Again, the "Fokker Scourge" didn't result in the loss of that many aircraft, when compared to how many that would be lost later, but it was bad enough - for its time - that it became a cause celebre in the British media and is remembered to this day as a dark period for the RFC.
Anyways it's just a point that I think is worth remembering; in its day, the Eindecker was as fearsome, if not moreso, as the D.VII. And likewise the Nieuport and Tripehound, whose relative superiority - as short-lived as it may have been - inspired wholesale copying of their designs by the Germans.
So the numbers alone are interesting but can't tell the whole story.
Good thread though and lots of fun to read. Thanks all!
Numbers are just numbers!!!! I still love them. They allow you some insight.
I had not been following this thread, but now having read it I am going to give John a big pat on the back for the effort he put in to satisfy Pers insatiable quest for knowledge.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks