That and I seem to recall (read WAG) that the Germans began keeping score begining in the Spanish Civil War. I don’t know how many kills were amassed during that conflict, but I’ll wager it was fairly one sided on who got all the kills.
Most of the points already made… 6 years of combat vs. frequent rotation… inexperienced enemies, flying inferior aircraft… shooting down bombers… a lack of German or Japanese planes to shoot down in the latter days of the war… are all accurate.
The only beef I have is the comment that the P-38 was the only twin engined Allied fighter during WW11. The Mosquito (at least some versions of it), was a very effective fighter, and had the bonus of being less visible on radar as it was made mostly of wood.
Oh innocent youth! That was what was called a “movie camera” that shot “film”! Actually in aerial use for keeping score and whatnot, it was called a “gun camera”. (And yes, I shoot 16mm film! 
)
The Mosquito was a very capable aircraft, but it wasn’t a fighter. That’s the joke: That the P-38 was the only twin-engine fighter on the Allied side. (Credit goes to Bob Stevens for the cartoon I got that from, BTW.)
… that could fly home with one engine gone. (Oops!)
How much did the Dicta Boelke figure in to Germany’s successes? Since Boelke (a German) pretty much came up with standardized rules for air-to-air combat, it seems to me that the German Luftwaffe would be better trained in the art than would be the Americans at the time. In addition to the greater combat time for the average German pilot, the German Air Force had a longer history of air combat than did the Americans.
The Mosquito was designed to be a fast light bomber, but was in practice configured for many missions, including that of a fighter.
For coming home with one engine gone, the Allies also had the twin engine Bristol Beaufighter and the P-61 Black Widow (the “P” prefix indicating it was classed as a fighter - in truth it was a night fighter as opposed being a queen of the dogfights; used for ground attack as well).
In seeing Darwin’s Finch’s post, I’ll just note that the Allies soon abandoned their V-flight and adopted the German’s lead/wingman formation.
Aside from what everyone else said, there are a couple of other factors:
First, Soviet and German pilots spent a lot of time fighting and flying over their own territory. This meant two things: First, if a pilot was shot down, he had a good chance of not just surviving but making it back into ranks to continue flying. Some German Aces were shot down several times.
Second, flying over your own territory means shorter missions. A german fighter pilot could be scrambled, fly up and fight, land, and do it again on the same day. Maybe 2 or 3 times more on the same day. So the number of sorties they flew was phenomenal, especially since many of these pilots flew almost non-stop from 1939 until 1945. That’s six years of daily combat flying.
An American, on the other hand, typically flew extremely tiring and long escort missions, with limited fuel once over enemy territory. So it was hit and run. And if they were shot down, it meant spending the rest of the war in a POW camp, unless you got lucky and hooked up with the underground or something.
One other factor may be the types of missions flown. P-51’s, for example, were used for high cover for bombers. Their primary mission was to protect the bombers from fighters. The German fighters were free to scramble and attack at will.
But by far the biggest factor, IMO, was the weak opposition the Germans received at first, which allowed them to rack up lots of kills and gain valuable experience. By the time the Americans had decent airplanes, the Germans on average had much more experience.
The other major factor is that Americans were rotated out of the combat theater regularly, and the highest-scoring Aces were sent back home not just for training, but for fund-raising and morale tours. There were a few Japanese Aces that had higher totals than the highest American, but Americans were shooting down 10-20 Japanese for every American shot down, simply because the Japanese had to keep fighting until they were either dead or surrendered.
I’m not sure I’m adding to the discussion, but Sam Stone’s post caused me to recall a part of Saburo Sakai’s (Leading - I think #2 or #3 - Japanese ace from the war) autobiography wherein he related how, late in the war (I’m guessing defense of Okinawa, but could be wrong) he was the sole Japanese pilot still in the air when he was surrounded by U.S. Navy Corsairs. He was as tested as they come at the time and he described how in awe his ground-bound compatriots were as they watched him elude a number in the teens of Corsairs piloted by those he described as inexperienced.
He got away.
Experience is definitely a factor.
FWIW, both my grandfathers were pilots with the RCAF in Europe. My maternal grandfather, a Halifax bombardier and later pilot, saw a lot of fighters, and shot one down. This was in 1943 and early 1944.
My paternal grandfather, a Tempest pilot, didn’t get into the war until late 1944 and said he hardly ever saw a German fighter. When he did, they tended to flee ASAP, presumably figuring tangling with the huge Tempests wasn’t worth dying for.
As to the U.S. getting into the war late, let’s all remember that the best British ace, Johnnie Johnson, only had 38 kills. The best Canadian ace, Buzz Beurling, had 33. Lower ace totals were common to all the Allies.
All of the above were the major reasons, but there was also a lot of politics involved in keeping U.S.A.A.F. kills low. Many pilots that were approaching Eddie Rickenbacher’s World War I score and, later, pilots that were getting close to Dick Bong’s score were put on “milk runs” or rotated out of combat areas to keep them from surpassing the score of national heroes.
Johnnie Johnson? Buzz Beurling? Was there some rule about having an alliterative name?
No.
Sam Stone.
It is very important to realise that German Squadrons has designated senior pilots who with their experince and marksmanship were designated to make the kills. Other pilots in the squadron had the job of suporting them (protecting their six etc) so they could operate without interference.
This diffence in tatics means that a few pilots got very high scores.
Also recorded numbers of kills can also be wildly exagerated as anaysis of Battle of Britian scores has revealed.
You’re right, I should have included the correct name. I posted that way so others would know what it was.
What I find funny is that some of the pilots have x.17 kills. For example:
I can’t imagine 6 pilots simultaneously shooting down a plane together.
[nit]
He was over Iwo Jima against 15 Hellcats. He managed to lure them over the island’s anti-aircraft defences who drove them off. He landed without having received a single hit.
[/nit]
I have a book on my bookshelf called The Ace Factor by Mike Spick. Serious aviation fans should know Spick’s name from the numerous technical books and articles in such publications as Aviation Week he’s written over the years. He made an impressive study of air combat results from WWI to Viet Nam and drew some pretty insightful conclusions. I’ll sum a few up:
-
Regardless of nationality, 5% of pilots got 85% of kills. The number of aces in a given nation’s air force was pretty proportional from one nation to another. For all the Adolf Gallands, there was a pretty equal percentage of ham-fisted auger jockeys in the Luftwaffe as were in the RAF or USAAF. This kind of indicates that in the old seat-of-the-pants days, air combat skills were pretty instinctive rather than instilled. Whether that is true today’s whiz-bang computer jockeys is a matter of hot debate. Spick talks a lot about SA, or Situational Awareness, and how some have it and some don’t.
-
German pilots racked up an incredible number of kills for pretty obvious reasons once you look at the whole picture, only some of which I’ve noticed being discuused previously.
a. Their aircraft were really superior, but only on the Russian front. RAF and USAAF aircraft were equal or superior.
b. They operated in a target-rich environment. By 1944, the Germans were wildly outnumbered in the air, even in the East. This gave them more opportunity, per pilot, to meet and defeat an enemy plane, particularly the bombers, which were easy to intercept.
c. They did not rotate out but, rather, flew until killed or captured.
d. They flew more sorties per pilot per month than did western Allied pilots. Data for Soviet pilots is pretty sparse and suspect. There are rumors of 300+ victory aces in the Red Air Force that were “political undesirables” and quashed after the war. -
British pilots were in combat longer than their American counterparts, thus having more chances to rack up kills. They were also less often removed from combat after a given term of service. That is why their totals are higher than USAAF top totals, but not as high as the Germans’.
If anyone has any specific questions, I’d be happy to look them up.
Johnny L.A., I personally knew a P-61 pilot (now deceased) with 5 kills that would take exception to that statement. It may not have had the performance of the P-38 or even the Mossie, but it was designated as a dedicated fighter and did get a significant number of kills.