Thread: .50 cal?
View Single Post
  #14  
Old 04-30-2008, 12:20 AM
*Buzzsaw* *Buzzsaw* is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kira View Post
He's just saying that you can't use pilot acounts as proof.
Salute Kira

Well, he's wrong. The USAAF, RAF, Luftwaffe, VVS, Regia Aeronautica, and Imperial Japanese Army and Navy all used pilots reports as the basis of awarding kills.

The USAAF and RAF also had the benefit of guncam footage to back those reports up.

Pilots from all sides overclaimed during the war but pilot reports were still the best source for accurate assessment of enemy losses.

There are over 300 pilots reports in the links I gave:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...r-reports.html

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...t-reports.html

If you take the time to read them, you might come to the understanding that there is a clear consistency in the reporting. No doubt some of the reports might be optimistic, but to suggest that all of them are false or unreliable is clearly nonsense, especially considering most of them were backed up with guncam footage, and confirmation from wingmen.

They all indicate the effectiveness of the .50 calibre.

Last edited by *Buzzsaw*; 04-30-2008 at 12:58 AM.
Reply With Quote