First Jet vs Jet Ace

After soviet documents were declassified some years ago, we know Jabara was not the first jet vs. jet ace:

The release of Soviet records in the 1990's has permitted us to get a look at the other side of American claims. I received the following e-mail from Sr. Diego Zampini, an Argentine expert on the Korean Air War:

 

It is highly likely that Captain James Jabara did NOT become the first Korean War ace and the "First jet-vs-jet ace" on 20 May 1951. According to an article written by two Russian historians, Leonid Krylov and Yuri Tepsurkayev, Three out of One Thousand, only four of his victims to that date could be confirmed.

All three MiG kills claimed by USAF Sabres on 3 April 1951 were confirmed by Russian sources (So, Jabara’s first kill is fully confirmed).

 

But there were no Soviet losses on 10 April, the date of Jabara’s second official kill, and no Chinese MiGs were in the air. Regarding 12 April 1951, during the huge battle between B-29s and their escort fighters against the MiGs of Antung, only one MiG was lost, against the four claimed by Sabre pilots. So, only one is confirmed, and it is not sure that Jabara scored that kill. The same happened on 22 April, the date of Jabara’s fourth official kill, only one MiG out of four claimed was actually downed, and again it is not sure that Jabara scored that kill. Even if the single MiG losses on 12 and 22 April were scored by Jabara, his tally on 22 April wouldn’t have been four, but three enemy aircraft downed.

 

Regarding 20 May 1951 his first kill of the day is fully confirmed. His victim was Captain Nazarkin (196 IAP, 324 IAD). His second combatant escaped, seriously damaged, but he escaped. So his score by the end of 1951 was only four. Additionally, the MiG-15 pilot who attacked Jabara was Sr. Lt. V.N. Alfeyev (196 IAP, 324 IAD) who also reached ace status, with 7 kills - including Jabara. Evidently the US pilot left the aerial battlefield so damaged that Alfeyev sincerely thought that he shot him down.

 

There is no doubt that Jabara became a high-scoring ace in his second tour in 1953, nor that he was an outstanding fighter pilot, but unfortunately he wasn’t the first Korean War ace nor the "First jet-vs-jet ace." Check out the article Three out of One Thousand, in the http://www.korean-war.com site.

And we also know F86s did not dominate KTO when they fought against soviet piloted MiG-15s from VVS; they were equal.

Edit: recommended? Yes, read "Red devils over the Yalu" by Igor Seidov with the help of Argentine historian Diego Zampini.

And about Kramarenko a very nice article if you are able to read spanish=> http://www.rkka.es/Otros_articulos/18_COREA_Serguey_Kramarenko/018_COREA_Serguey_Kramarenko.htmarenko/018_COREA_Serguey_Kramarenko.htm[/url]

Well, people keep voting without writing their sources or anything. I think presenting this as poll is a bit weird, cause is not a matter of "what you think" but a matter of serious historic research which bring us closer to facts and not just mere opinions.

So, Jabara being named the first jet vs jet ace is pure Cold War propaganda, not reality.

The poll is about opinion, its not a competition to see who is right. As for one countries propaganda over another, I am not sure anyone can say 100% whose is right and whose is wrong, somewhere between both lies the truth.

I agree there will always be propaganda specially during a conflict, but that it is also taken under consideration by historians who do the research.

Anyway, the difference here is that soviet documentation was done for internal use, it was secret, and not for propaganda. On the other hand, we already know that "Sabre supremacy" or "10:1 k/d ratio" nonsense was pure propaganda made for tax payers ;)

It's not a competition, but also giving an opinion without good knowledge about something, leads nowhere but to forum flood.

So, Sith, what is your opinion, who was the first one and based on what sources? I'm interested to know.

Weird. You said above that this is not a competition, but you present the subject as a poll, where we can add points to one or the other. If you want opinions, the voting part of it is not very helpful as facts show it: you see? no one commenting opinions in this thread, just mere votes :music_whistling:

Really I am just getting interested in this era, I never new much about it before, I have been reading up on the controversy, its been very interesting.

So, you are new to KTO history...but already voted Jabara as the first ace. Based on what Sith? I ask you again cause i'm really interested to know where you get your data from but so far you have always avoided the question. Please tell me is not just from Weakipedia!

Everybody wants to be number one. :)

Really? I thought it was not a competition! :megalol:

Jokes apart, it's up to us to decide what sources we trust. For me is easier, i'm neutral -Argentina- so i don´t have nationality biased issues on this matter, i love USAF planes and history as well as VVS ones. My country flew mainly NATO planes, Sabres, Meteors, Skyhawks, etc. But when it comes to History i like to be as objective as possible, specially after being misinformed by Hollywood movies and documentaries from History Channel for so long, and we in the west were misinformed over decades.

The most reliable sources i've found say the following:

1) K/D ratio between VVS MiG15s and USAF F86s was almost equal 1,3:1 . And let's not forget something history channel or some western historians don´t tell you: Migs main task was not to shoot down Sabres, but bombers and attack planes. Sabres main task, was to kill MiGs. So, even then an almost equal k/d ratio between them, what is your opinion about real success then? And another thing: VVS lost 335 planes against NATO, NATO lost 1,100 planes against VVS MiG15s.

2) Top two fighter aces in KTO were soviet MiG-15 pilots: Sutyagin and Pepelyayev.

3) Number of aces during KTO: VVS= 53 aces; USAF=40 aces

4) First jet vs jet ace in History: Kramarenko (or even Alfeyev reached ace status before Jabara)

And finally and going a bit OT, during WW2 the top alllied aces were soviets (Kozhedub, Rechkalov, Pokryshkin, etc) also during KTO the top aces were soviet, and even nowadays in the international online campaigns (competition) and dogfights i have participated for the last 10 years, usually are russian pilots the ones who win. Let's give the guys some credit !

Wow, taking this a little too serious I think...

Actually i take it with interest. Didn´t you say you were really interested in KTO too...? :music_whistling:

Yes, of course I am interesting in learning more, but on one hand you tell me not to trust internet sources, but to me that is all you are, words written on the internet ;)

Where did i say that you should not trust internet? I just mentioned not to trust Weakipedia as a deep source, not the whole internet. Please stop writing things i didn´t say.

So I am open-minded about it, the things I have seen and read about so far point to Jabara

I'm really interested in that! I'd like to check your information, but for the third time in a row i ask you about your sources and you keep avoiding to mention them I find your comments very vague

and you are looking for a fight were there is none.

Fight? No fight here mate, i'm really keen on KTO air to air history and as i'm really open minded i have researched a lot for the last 2 years, so i try to avoid misinforming people, and always open to learn more. We are into a discussion not a fight, aren´t we? No fight here, maybe is the language barrier that makes it look that way.

I acknowledge there is varying opinions on the matter, but I haven't seen anything compelling to make me change my mind much, if you want to recommend some reading then by all means do so. But I am not interested in much else.

What opinions? Western opinions and stats mainly? What soviet perspective material have you read so far? Have you read Seidov's material? (the most important research found to day) If you are open minded as you say, then ask questions! That is what real open minded people do when they don´t know much about something.

You ask me to recommend some reading? I've already done it twice on this thread -check firsts posts- but it seems that you have been doing selective reading; i wonder why :smilewink::music_whistling:

While both sides over-claimed quite a bit, the USSR claimed more kills than the number of aircraft that had been deployed in the theater.

But you also have to understand how the USSR scored kills. Each member of a flight was given a full kill credit for each plane downed since they flew as a co-operative team. Whereas, the USA divides up the kill based on who actually did the shooting, i.e. if you are the only aircraft that fired on the target, you get a full kill credit and no one else gets anything, but if two planes fired on the target, the kill may get split, 1/2 to each pilot.

I've seen your recommendations, and thanks.

Good to hear that, you are welcome Sith.

While both sides over-claimed quite a bit, the USSR claimed more kills than the number of aircraft that had been deployed in the theater.

I agree with you overclaim always exists, true, from both sides; but is inaccurate USSR claimed more kills than the amount of planes deployed by USAF. Where did you get that data? And how many planes does it say USSR claimed?

Actually it's USAF that often tried to hide real kills by saying "damaged by AAA". Nameless or unknown AAA is more vague and acceptable than saying to the world "Comunists pilots shot our boys down". Do you know the amount of planes USAF say were lost due to accidents? I can give you those numbers if you are interested, you'd be amazed, they are even more ridiculous than the "10:1 Sabre supremacy" affirmation.

But you also have to understand how the USSR scored kills. Each member of a flight was given a full kill credit for each plane downed since they flew as a co-operative team. Whereas, the USA divides up the kill based on who actually did the shooting, i.e. if you are the only aircraft that fired on the target, you get a full kill credit and no one else gets anything, but if two planes fired on the target, the kill may get split, 1/2 to each pilot.

I'm aware about the difference between individual and shared kills. Actually since WW2 the soviet planes would separate those kills; they would paint a red star on their planes for every individual kill, and a white one for a group kill. The two high scoring aces from KTO, Sutyagin and Pepelyayev, scored individual and not shared kills.

And regarding planes lost, if 3 guys shot on a plane even if they get 1 kill each, they would report it as one enemy plane lost, not 3.

 

1) K/D ratio between VVS MiG15s and USAF F86s was almost equal 1,3:1 . And let's not forget something history channel or some western historians don´t tell you: Migs main task was not to shoot down Sabres, but bombers and attack planes. Sabres main task, was to kill MiGs. So, even then an almost equal k/d ratio between them, what is your opinion about real success then? And another thing: VVS lost 335 planes against NATO, NATO lost 1,100 planes against VVS MiG15s.

I don't quite understand this part. If it's 1,3:1, then it can't be 1100/335, can it?

 

And regarding planes lost, if 3 guys shot on a plane even if they get 1 kill each, they would report it as one enemy plane lost, not 3.

 

I cannot agree with this one. Numerous examples of WWII fights show pilots reporting different number of enemy planes being engaged vs. the actual number involved. For example, when admiral Yamamoto was shot down, the first report comprised 3 bombers destroyed (vs. actual two) and it was indeed a "report for internal use", not the "propaganda" one. It wasn't until the end of the war when after cross-checking of documents, things could be cleared up somewhat, but even today it's uncertain whether Lanphier or Barber were more responsible for downing of admiral's plane. I'm sure similar situations happened over Korea, on both sides of the conflict.

As a Pacific War enthusiast, I don't read all that much about Korea, so I never investigated claims/losses that closely. The only numbers I can give right now are from:

a) Gordon's and Davison's book about MiG-15. It says at first Soviet sources stated 1106 enemy aircraft destroyed (including 651 Sabres) by pilots if 64th IAK regiment, plus 271 (181) shot down by other JAA pilots. At the same time US sources claimed 954 planes including 792 MiGs). With the same Soviet sources claiming 510 UN planes of all types destroyed during first year of MiG-15 involvement vs. about 40 acknowledged by UN during that period, I'd say 10:1 claim ratio was not only American specialty back then :D;

b) An article in my local "Aero" magazine, mostly about techincal details of both -86 and -15, but with a short paragraph about Korean campaign controversies. It gives more "updated" Sabre vs MiG figures of 379 Sabre victories vs. 103 planes lost according to western sources, and 574 kills vs 307 MiGs lost according to Russian sources. Apparently incomplete Chinese sources say their and NK pilots claimed 211 Sabres shot vs 224 planes lost, but it's impossible to verify these. The article was based on numerous books, inlcuding Krylov's and Tepsurkaev's one about MiG-15 aces (Osprey Publication), but since I haven't read them, I can't comment how good they are.

Hi Art-J! Regarding your post:

I don't quite understand this part. If it's 1,3:1, then it can't be 1100/335, can it?

I will clarify it for you: the 1.3:1 k/d ratio refers to Sabres vs MiG-15s piloted by VVS. The most accurate numbers we have to date show 293 VVS MiGs shot down by F86s; 270 Sabres shot down by MiG15s. (That is actually 1.085:1)

And let's not forget something; this is an impressive number by VVS, because their main task above Korea was not to kill Sabres, but to stop and shoot down heavy B29 bombers and attack planes. The escorting Sabres only task was to kill MiGs! So, even then, soviet MiGs managed to score almost equal k/d ratio than F86s.

I cannot agree with this one. Numerous examples of WWII fights show pilots reporting different number of enemy planes being engaged vs. the actual number involved. For example, when admiral Yamamoto was shot down, the first report comprised 3 bombers destroyed (vs. actual two) and it was indeed a "report for internal use", not the "propaganda" one. It wasn't until the end of the war when after cross-checking of documents, things could be cleared up somewhat, but even today it's uncertain whether Lanphier or Barber were more responsible for downing of admiral's plane. I'm sure similar situations happened over Korea, on both sides of the conflict.

We both agree on this one. What i mean is about current studies, not claims during conflicts. Let's just forget about what pilots claim during conflicts because it is confusing and they will always overclaim. The most important numbers in order to see stats and events closer to reality (what i call facts), are the ones done after years go by and after deep research.

As a Pacific War enthusiast, I don't read all that much about Korea, so I never investigated claims/losses that closely. The only numbers I can give right now are from:

 

a) Gordon's and Davison's book about MiG-15. It says at first Soviet sources stated 1106 enemy aircraft destroyed (including 651 Sabres) by pilots if 64th IAK regiment, plus 271 (181) shot down by other JAA pilots. At the same time US sources claimed 954 planes including 792 MiGs). With the same Soviet sources claiming 510 UN planes of all types destroyed during first year of MiG-15 involvement vs. about 40 acknowledged by UN during that period, I'd say 10:1 claim ratio was not only American specialty back then :D;

 

b) An article in my local "Aero" magazine, mostly about techincal details of both -86 and -15, but with a short paragraph about Korean campaign controversies. It gives more "updated" Sabre vs MiG figures of 379 Sabre victories vs. 103 planes lost according to western sources, and 574 kills vs 307 MiGs lost according to Russian sources. Apparently incomplete Chinese sources say their and NK pilots claimed 211 Sabres shot vs 224 planes lost, but it's impossible to verify these. The article was based on numerous books, inlcuding Krylov's and Tepsurkaev's one about MiG-15 aces (Osprey Publication), but since I haven't read them, I can't comment how good they are.

I also know about these numbers Art-J, but they are outdated data, i would ignore them. Specially western sources are mostly american sources that didn´t care too much about soviet documents, one of the few (or the only one?) american researcher who really studies soviet documents is Jon Guttman. On the other hand, Igor Seidov and Diego Zampini have data from many american sources, even from Stephen "Cookie" Sewell an ex employee of the US Department of Defense

Hi

No discussion possible, Sergei M. Kramarenko was the first As in korean war

Long before this thread - I had already assumed that the only data you can rely on regarding combat records is the secret record of LOSSES that a country records during a conflict so that their own war machine can respond.

Some of the kills claimed by Soviet fighters were Australian so I will add this data point. I have previously read about Australia's contribution to the Korean Air War and I went again to refresh memory.

The short story is that the first Australian squad in Korea were flying Meteors against Migs and they did not do well. They lost a couple and would have lost more aircraft and pilots if the outmatched Meteor was more fragile. They picked fights, got beat up, but made it back. The accounts of these flights are not very authoritative but claim one Mig and four Meteor losses.

So the Australians in Meteors were retasked to ground attack and overall they lost 37 pilots and had 7 captured. They lost 54 out of 90 Meteors. Pilot accounts say that most losses were from AA and accidents.

Interview and Re-collection of a Australian pilot recruit in Korea

http://australiarussia.com/geoffrey_lushey.htm

Lot of interesting outbound links from this page

http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/MEGGS_BIO.html

One short story from the POV of US infantry about the effectiveness of Australian Mustang CAS sorties until Chinese Migs required their retirement in favour of jets.

Aust Govt record of Australian involvement in the Korean Air War

http://korean-war.commemoration.gov.au/stalemate-in-korean-war-1952-1953/migs-versus-meteors.php