Soviet aces in Korea sky

Other Wars Korean War
#21

Cut and paste from another site debating these issues:

Hundreds of B-29’s? Hundreds of B-29’s?
See, the problems I have with the new Soviet/Russian revelations of winning the Air War over Korea is the sheer numbers of claims. B-29’s were forced to fly night bombing raids after the loss of a half dozen or so, which was all it took to prove that F-84’s could NOT prevent the interception of B-29’s by jets. There were so few B-29’s even available to fly that the loss of this small number was considered disastrous.

Same with the F-86’s. So many are claimed, by the Soviet pilots (and claimed for Chinese and North Korean pilots by said Soviet pilots), that a full scale, national cover-up would have had to have taken place, in America, in front of the press. Every worker in the factories, every ferry pilot, every pilot in Korea, would have to be in on the big secret, to wit: UN planes were downed by Communist MiG-15’s by the thousands, and this was covered up. UN planes were falling in droves, every day, over the entire peninsula. Low level, medium level, and high level, day and night. And, compressed into the time frame of Soviet intervention (the MiG-15 didn’t start the war, it was introduced later).

And the cover-up continues to this day. The USAF was crushed over the skies of Korea, secretly, but we’re gonna keep up a good front, for morale purposes, and pretend we really won.

This scenario (the crushing of UN Air forces, causing cover-ups and speeded up productions of front line planes, and ALL the secret shenanigans that would entail) brings up several questions.

How, oh how, with air superiority, did those hordes of Chinese not drive the UN out of the peninsula? Call it propaganda all you want, but the Chinese seriously outnumbered the UN forces. According to Western propaganda, all that kept the North Koreans, then the Chinese, from slapping the insignificant UN ground forces aside was the application of crushing airpower, disallowing the Chinese any chance at consolidations on the battle field. Deep interdiction of supply routes also was a deciding factor. Are we to soon get a revised Chinese order of Battle, showing that the few troops they supplied achieved a stalemate only because of THEIR air superiority?

The US had major problems with their Air Power and its applications in Viet-Nam. These, with the huge losses to anti-aircraft, and the frustrations with “low” kill ratios, were well reported and documented. The arguments about who shot down how many are very minor. Why the big disparity in Korea?

These same Russians coming out with the “updated” results of casualties in WW2 and Korea, as dutifully reported by my good friend Alex, are being accused, by Russian citizens (mothers) as well as outsiders, of seriously underreporting the casualties of both Chechnyean conflicts, as well as the Afganistan war. In the USA a government agency investigating itself is ridiculed and reviled.

I have written on this subject so many times I really tire of it. The kicker, to me, is the article “What Did You Do In The War, Ivan”. It showed that a Russian claim of 6 or 7 Australian Meteors on a certain date in the Korean war actually resulted in NO shootdowns. Look at a few of the websites showing the Russian victory over the skies of Korea, and you will see the date. The only reported kills were these Meteors. None were shot down, but all were fired upon. My good friend Zed tells me that Russians were allowed to make a claim if they believed the plane was damaged beyond repair (as opposed to the USA’s requirements for an explosion, crash, flames, or corraboration). Add in a unit’s Zampolit, the well known Soviet propensity to over claim, the pressures to produce, and we have the makings of what we see here.

It just doesn’t add up. BUT, if you RB’s feel better believing that the North Koreans and Chinese shot down some 400 US planes, with the Russians adding 800 some, with the UN bagging about 400 total, (thats right, 1200 to 400 total), then by all means go ahead. I really, really weary of defending against this type of historical revision based upon wishful thinking.

#22

Well Bravo i have agree with you the Soviet unreal claming shoted down UN aircraft is not good.
There is some of statements which we could hear from the Russian members.
This material was took from the other popular forum:

The tupical list of soviet “archivements” in Korea is here
Lets consider what is the true and what is not

This is true. At least considering the 5 articles of russian and Ukrain war historians which i were based of archives researchs.

  1. They lost 335 a/c, 135 pilots and shot down about 1300 US a/c, including almost 200 B-29s. Every kill occurred over North Korean territory and was confirmed by coinciding gun camera footage, and wreck inspection or evidence from local administration that the plane was downed. American planes that were damaged or crashed behind front lines, on South Korean territory, were not counted as kills at all.

The particular true.
They really had losed 335 Mig-15 but claming the 200 shoted B-29 is the certainly nonsence ( like and claiming the 650 hited Sabres).

  1. American kills were asserted by gun camera footage only, and unlike MiGs 23mm and 30mm guns, that was 12.7mm guns. Thus, a lot of kills were recorded for B-29 gunners.

  2. Surprisingly, NO MiGs were downed by B-29 defensive fire at all.

Well i read the fragments of reports of Ivan Kojedub ( the famouse soviet WW2 aces who prepeared the soviet pilots in Korea) ther were a lot of cases when the Mig’s were hited by the B-29 mushin-guns fire but there were no any records to confirm they were shoted down. Althiough i saw the photos of holes on Mig-15 from the muchin-gun bullets , but this was n’t enought to damage fighter mortally, and practically in all cases pilots ( if he was not killed) could landed the fighters.
Indeed it was extremally hard to damage critically the speed jet fighter by the 12.7-mm mushin-gun of B-29.
If you look for instance to the Germans attacks at the B-17 formations 90% of shoted Germans fighters were hited by the escort fighters Tanderbolt or Mustang ( not the B-17 gunners).
But shoot to the Messershmitt is the one hand but the other hand is to shoot in Mig-15 dived on 900-1000 km/h to the B-29 formation from the rear half-sphera ( the tactic which soviet pilots used). In this way even automatic fire sistem of B-29 could be absolutly unuseful.
So considering this obvious facts i could admit this statements is true, exept perhaps few or single cases.

  1. The primary result of Soviet involvement was limiting B-29s to night raids over clouds only. Fighter-bombers employment to the north of 38th parallel was also severely limited

Perhaps but the motives of the limitation of action B-29 could be anothers also.

Well concidering the statements above i wish to notice the all what we could consider as true is the total number of shoted B-29 in Korea is about 100 (different sources gives some little varians figures), B-26 about 150, and about 500-600(!!) of JET fighters.
It hard to believe but the soviet 64-iak lost about only 335 Mig-15 -the figure which i have no doubts to be the true.

Cheers.

#23

Chevan, as we have remarked in previous discussions, history is not an exact science and this topic is, in my opinion, a prime example of just how in-exact it can be. Many historians have their bias and dislikes (Herodotus and Xenophon come to mind – but don’t quote me:cool: ) which can affect their reporting. Add to that the reliability/unreliability of data, statistics and conflicting evidence, things can become rather confused. Once flaws are discovered, there is a natural tendency to treat all data from that particular source as flawed. What we ought to look for is corroboration and historical effect, as you have done in your comments above.

As we have also remarked, on this particular topic, unless we can gain access to original sources of data from both sides and corroborate the evidence we will probably never know the exact truth. However, reasoning seems to be putting us into the ‘ballpark’.

I do believe that I have become much better informed on this matter than I was before you opened the thread – well done!

#24

I think it was on UK terestrial TV? However, these docu’s are quite frequently repeated on the various statelite/cable channels. ‘Discovery Wings’ is probably a good place to start.

#25

There was a History Channel program on it a while ago. I believe the USAF and US Navy pilots could tell the difference between a MIG-15 flown by the Chinese or North Koreans and one flown by a Soviet pilot. They were rare, serving in small numbers, but it was no secret that the Soviet pilots were quite effective…

#26

I think the best guess is that they were roughly even…

The official kill ratio for the US Air Force was 11 (communist fighters shot down)-1 during the air-to-air combat engagements of the Korean War (it shrank to 2-1 during Vietnam). I do not doubt this since they were fighting ill trained Chinese and Korean pilots most of the time. But I’ve heard that any one’s best guess is that the kill ratio between the Soviets and Americans was roughly equal, when you put aside all of the posturing, propaganda, and exaggerations…

#27

Why is not 20-1 ? :smiley:
As it was mentionet above the UN pilots claimed only 792 shoted down Mig-15 ( the basic SU/PDRK/China aircraft) but as it wrote Panzerkmacker the one hand was to claim but the other hand was to shot down the firghter ( Actually Russian sources confirmed the lost only 335(piloted by soviets)+ 231(piloted by China and Koreans) = 566 (!!!) Mig-15)
And as we had calculated the UN forces lost ONLY jet fighters about 600 .
I/e/ the rough kill ratio was 1-1 ONLY IN COMBATS OF JET FIGHTERS.
But UN forces lost about 500 Mustangs , 100 B-29 and 150 B-26 - the whole air armade.
At least 70-80% of those loses were the resault of Mig-15 attacs.
So i really don’t know what are talking about 11-1?

(it shrank to 2-1 during Vietnam). I do not doubt this since they were fighting ill trained Chinese and Korean pilots most of the time.

This is right. As i read in the memours of Kogedub he wrote that the Chinas and Koreans pilots were too weak at first period of war till 1953. But he wrote after the “US intensive therapy” the professional skill of pilots was constantly rised and to the end of war there were a 1-2 kill rate.
Particulary he wrote the Chinas/Koreans lost 231 Mig and claimed 272 shoted of UN aircraft.But as we alredy know the claiming is not to be shoting. I think they shoted no more 40-50% of claiming i/e/ 100-120 aircrafts.

But I’ve heard that any one’s best guess is that the kill ratio between the Soviets and Americans was roughly equal, when you put aside all of the posturing, propaganda, and exaggerations…

Well that’s true if we look ONLY at the fighter/fighters combats. But don’t forget the main aim of soviet fighers were the bombers . Mig-15 shooted down a lot of bombers ( see above) thus the total kill rate was at least 3( UN fighters,bombers and ets)-1(SU/CHINA/PDRK fighters).

Cheers.

#28

http://www.belowtopsecret.com/thread169190/pg1#pid1708488

Read this post from ATS…

#29

Mate could you be more accurate in the text of source next time :wink: Do you mean the post of Jezza?

The Sabre’s combat record in Korea was, by any standards, impressive. Of the 900 aerial victories claimed by USAF pilots during the war, 792 were MiG-15s shot down by Sabres. The MiGs in their turn managed to knock down only 78 Sabres. American fighter pilots thus established a ten-to-one kill/loss ration in their favor.

Well as we saw 792 victories was in reality 566 Migs ( 335 soviet and 231 PDRK/China).
But what’s funny …only 78 Sabres:)
It’s amazing but Wiki gives …“only 224 Sabres”
http://www.korean-war.com/AirWar/AircraftType-LossList.html gives “only 275 Sabres”
and Panzerknacer source give us …“just 184 F-86 lost by every cause”
It’s seems mate EVERYBODY has its own personal “source of true”. Don’t you seem it strange?

Documented postwar research indicates there were actually only about 379 US victories.

It was 566 indeed ( all of Mig-15 all of modification shoted in Korea) + 10 Mig were lost in soviet airfields caused non-combat reasons. i/e/ about 600 .
And as you know Mig-15 fought NOT ONLY against Sabres but against Shoting Stars,Meteors and even Mustangs. Look to the loses rate of all of UN aircrafts and possibly you learn the true.:slight_smile:

Cheers.

#30

I’ll check the number discrepancies. But the F-80 Shooting Star saw only limited service in Korea as it was more of a WWII vintage jet and nearly saw service by the end of 1945. So it wouldn’t have really been a fair fight, correct?

And I imagine some F-51 Mustangs were lost to MIGs, but in reality, the F-51 had been used solely for ground attack in Korea, as it was found to be an excellent “tank-buster” when armed with 66mm rockets. I would think the vast majority were lost to ground fire.

#31

BTW, the (American) History Channel had an episode of “Dogfights” on a USAF Sabre versus a Russian “Honcho” piloted MIG. “Honcho” is Japanese for “boss” or “big shot,” which is how the US pilots referred to the (suspected) Soviet pilots in Korea.

#32

OK if you please

But the F-80 Shooting Star saw only limited service in Korea as it was more of a WWII vintage jet and nearly saw service by the end of 1945. So it wouldn’t have really been a fair fight, correct?

Sorry mate but number of lost F-80 - about 300 does not look like “limited service”.
I have to agree about Meteors ( 42 lost) this look like true exactly becouse reason that you wrote - it was WW2 raritet.

And I imagine some F-51 Mustangs were lost to MIGs, but in reality, the F-51 had been used solely for ground attack in Korea, as it was found to be an excellent “tank-buster” when armed with 66mm rockets. I would think the vast majority were lost to ground fire.

Even if you right i.e. Koreans developed the “revolution method of hight skill shoting down” the US tank-busters they could not capable to hit 500 aircrafts for 3 years.
Moreover as i read in memours of Ivan Kogedub he recal the Mig-15 attack to the Mustang formations and destruction some of them.
Don’t forget that the first and main the task of Mig was not the air fight with UN fighters - but the ground troops supportion and objects defence missions. They primiraly aim was the bombers B-29/26 and fighers-bombers F-80 and in same cases “anty-tank killers” P-51.
This coused the hight rate of loses of the piston aircrafts ( this is good supported by the datasof UN loses).
So even if the N/Koreans AAA gunners was a “damn lucky” shoting down the US Mustang by the bundles ( whats is the very controversial considering the experience of WW2) i could support that at least half of Mustang were damaged by Mig pilots (soviet and koreans).

Cheers.

#33

Here’s an article I found:

http://korea50.army.mil/history/factsheets/air_f_fs.shtml

#34

Well Nick thank you for the work…
let’s read this more closely.

The first USAF plane destroyed in the war was a disabled C-54 transport caught by enemy fighters at Seoul’s Kimpo Airfield. Some 1,465 additional USAF planes would be lost to various causes before the conflict ended. Only 10 percent of these losses would be in air-to-air combat.

Stop here. The figure of total lost 1465 a well agreeable with other sourses.
But “only 10 percent” i/e/ 145 is a full shit.:slight_smile:
Lets admit the tipical rate of non-combat loses ( on different reasons) the 10-15% ( this is highest rate for the airforce in the war) . For instance the Soviet non-combat loses were 10 Mig-15 from 335 lost i.e. about 3%(!!!)
So if we admit that the UN pilot were “worst level” and lost 10% of non-combat reasons.OK
Thus what we will have:
145 were lost in air-air combats + 145 were lost on different non-combats reasons = 290 aircraft.
So mate WHO SHOTED DOWN OTHER 1175 UN aircrafts.
MAy be it was the “super-accurate” N/Koreans AAA-gunners, or may be it was the China’s Rembo’s with bows :wink:
MAte if it coulb be the true - tell me please why it was nessesary to send the expensive Migs in the Korea, it will much better to send there a several soviet corps of AAA-gun artillery. They will shot down all the US aircrafts and and work well done;)

On November 8, 1950, 1st Lt. Russell Brown, flying an F-80, shot down a MiG-15 in the first all-jet dogfight in history

Really mate?
Now lets read the russian sources

http://chiv04.narod.ru/avia003.html
On 8 November of losses among the Soviet parts it is not noted. During that day combat conducted 28, 72 and 139- guard airs regiment. 139- regiments aircraft of the type F -80 in air it did not meet. 28 regiments, covering city and airfield of Andun, at height 4000 it is meter conducted futile air battle with six F -51. in this case, at height 4800 it was meter it patrolled group F -80, but not there was battle with it.

Indeed the first jet victory belongs to the pilot of F9F William Т. Amen who shoted down the Mig-15 of captain M.F. Grachev . He didn’t come back to the airfild in 9 nov of 1950

Soon the Sabres and MiGs were mixing it up over northwest Korea, an area that became known as “MiG Alley.” On December 17, 1950, Lt. Col. Bruce Hinton WAS THE FIRST Sabre pilot to score the first of an estimated 818 MiG-15 kills

As we know the total lost of Migs were 566 in Korea.

For a time the B-29s continued bombing targets in northwest Korea by day, but when MiG-15s shot down five Superfortresses in a week in October 1951, the big bombers began attacking only at night

It was a famouse "black week " for the B-29 when were lost 5 in N.Korea territory and 8 fall down to the sea.

These seven planes were the first of more than 975 enemy aircraft to be downed by FEAF planes in aerial combat.

Oh it is already 975 …818 from it was the Mig-15.

Nick thanks a lot , but i have to conclude this “source” which you linked look like the US propoganda site for inner aims. Thi is not the realible couse it had a great discrepancies with other (BTW US) .

Cheers.

#35

Here is some of interesting photos

The E.Pepeliaev gun-camera image. In the sight the F-86.

The damagings on the Pepeliaev’s Mig from the Sabre mashin-gun aftre the combat in 6 october 1951

The Sabre hited by the Pepeliaev 6 oct 1951. Later this Sabre was removed to the Soviet arfield and being cuted to 3 parts was sended to the Moscow for study.

#36

One more interesting link is here
http://www.wio.ru/korea/korea-a.htm
The comparision of “official” US and Soviet datas of loses in Korea.
And list of the best aces in Korea is also very interesting.
As we could see the official US sources “confirmed” lost of lost in air-air combats:
103 Sabres + 17 B-29 + 18 F-84 + 15 F-80 + 12 Mustangs + 5 Meteors = 170 aircraft(!!!)
This is quite amazing but US confirmed the overall loses in Korea is more that 1000++ aircrafts (Just there were rescued over alive 1000++ pilots).
And claming the 818 hited Migs is a very big overstatement.

#37

The Soviets seemed to have lagged behind the west technologically in aviation.

#38

No, it’s not. The 1000+ pilots may have been bomber air crews, helicopter pilots, and members of allied UN air forces --not just US personnel. Also, “losses” are not just from “air-to-air” dogfights, but from anti-aircraft artillery (which was really the greatest threat to UN pilots), and crashes due to accidents and mechanical failures. There were never more than 180 Sabres in the Korean theater at any one time, whilst there was something like just-under 900 MIG-15s operated by the Chinese, N. Koreans, and a few Soviet pilots, at all times, by 1952 I believe. So obviously, the potential for such a high kill ratio is there. Does that mean that the F-86 was better than the MIG-15? Hardly, both had their advantages and deficiencies, and the MIG-15 would have been superior with a few improvements, hands down.

The problem was that the MIG were flown by comparatively few professional, experienced Soviet “Honcho” (top dog) pilots, while numerous US pilots were WWII aces (also known as Honchos) and had significant experience fighting the Luftwaffe and Japanese air arms.

And the “kill ratio” of 11-1 was only counted as air-to-air combat victories between the F-86 and the MIG-15. It wasn’t really fair, nor even relevant, for the USAF to count how many Mustangs were shot down by MIG-15s, but I can assure you, it had virtually no affect. The telling reason why is this: the US/UN had virtual air superiority when conducting tactical support operations, and were forbidden to even fly past the North Korean border to strike China for most of the War. The communist air forces were simply a non-factor for the most part, with the exception of inflicting some losses on the second-rate B-29 WWII leftovers, which the Soviets knew very well since they were flying it as the Tu-4! The USAF refused to risk and diffuse its air assets such as the B-36 in the Asian War.

Some of this info was gleaned from memory after reading “The Korean War,” by Max Hastings. Great read!

#39

If you actually read about the conflict, something other than agenda websites cherrypicking the worst of the US/UN actions in Korea, you’ll learn that the vast majority of the air war was close tactical air support to ground forces, desperately needed in 1950 especially.

The Communist air forces were simply a nonfactor. The UN had complete air superiority and conducted air strikes at will, and destroyed the N. Korean air force within’ a few days. So, actually, anything other than losses of piston engined aircraft due to AAA and ground fire would be ridiculous…

Really mate?
Now lets read the russian sources

Indeed the first jet victory belongs to the pilot of F9F William Т. Amen who shoted down the Mig-15 of captain M.F. Grachev . He didn’t come back to the airfild in 9 nov of 1950

Actually, the “Russian sources” may be the “bullshit” ones, since there were very few Russians in the War, as Moscow was largely pissed off over the uncoordinated (with them) Chinese intervention to the extent they refused aid to China, only selling them weapons for cash. The Soviet pilots were there to gauge and probe US tactics and to get experience against the US air forces. Nothing more.

I think they’re an interesting historical note, but one that has been exaggerated.

As we know the total lost of Migs were 566 in Korea.

I’ll check.

It was a famouse "black week " for the B-29 when were lost 5 in N.Korea territory and 8 fall down to the sea.

The “black week” was a pin-prick inflicted on obsolete aircraft used as cannon fodder in Korea. And such losses would have been regarded as light in WWII…

Oh it is already 975 …818 from it was the Mig-15.

Nick thanks a lot , but i have to conclude this “source” which you linked look like the US propoganda site for inner aims. Thi is not the realible couse it had a great discrepancies with other (BTW US) .

Cheers.

Yeah, um, the source you provided has a blinking “lol” on it. And they interestingly use the most favorable “statistics” from both US and USSR “sources.”

We’ll have to call pot-tea kettle on that one!

You can throw any statistics out there that you want. But the facts support the USAF official history, because: as stated twice now, the Communist air forces were virtually of no hindrance to UN air power. Something that has been verified. If the US lost so many Sabres, then why were the vaunted (few) Soviet and supposedly “expert” Chinese pilots (by your assertions) not able to conduct any significant ground attack operations nor provide any sort of adequate air cover to the PLA and DPRK Armies?

In fact, if the US had not had absolute control of the air from the outset, the UN Armies would have probably been driven into the sea because of the initially poor performance of the US Army. It wasn’t until the Spring of 1951 that the US Army, under the fantastic leadership of Gen. Matthew Ridgeway, was able to stabilize and inflict heavy casualties on the Chinese…

#40

Nick what’s happend ?
You pomised to check the discrepancies of the US “officials figures”. Istead of you simply are going around.
How could we move forward in our study/checking the history;)?

That’s true Nick but don’t forget not all of the pilots who were shoted down were saved.
Many of then had perished or were captured. I think the total loses of UN/US pilots was over 2000.

Also, “losses” are not just from “air-to-air” dogfights, but from anti-aircraft artillery (which was really the greatest threat to UN pilots), and crashes due to accidents and mechanical failures.

this is very controversial point.
The ww2 experience just proved the AAA-artillery was not an such effective as you wrote about N/Korea.
BTW Have you a separate statistic of the kills of the N/Koreans AA-gunners?

There were never more than 180 Sabres in the Korean theater at any one time, whilst there was something like just-under 900 MIG-15s operated by the Chinese, N. Koreans, and a few Soviet pilots, at all times, by 1952 I believe.

Perhaps there were 180 Sabres at the any one time but the total quanty of F-86 was

According to a recent U.S. publication, the number of USAF F-86s ever present in the Korean peninsula during the war totalled only 674 and the total F-86 losses due to all causes were about 230
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_war

But as we know another sources called the 224/275 lost Sabres.
And the “few soviet” pilots (1100 indeed pilots that went through the Korean warfor the 3 years according the http://www.airwar.ru/history/aces/acepostwar/pilot/koreaussr.html)
operated about 190 (!!!) of Mig-15 at any one time according to the statistic of the soviet 64 UAK.

So obviously, the potential for such a high kill ratio is there. Does that mean that the F-86 was better than the MIG-15? Hardly, both had their advantages and deficiencies, and the MIG-15 would have been superior with a few improvements, hands down.

That’s true the both aircraft were the best in its time.
The Mig-15 was the perfect “bomber-killer” due to its guns firepower.
The Sabre was the perfect hunter due its better electrical equipment.

The problem was that the MIG were flown by comparatively few professional, experienced Soviet “Honcho” (top dog) pilots, while numerous US pilots were WWII aces (also known as Honchos) and had significant experience fighting the Luftwaffe and Japanese air arms.

Nevertheless the “few soviet professionals” who shoted down at least 3 times more UN aircrafts then they losed of the own;)
Not bad for the “few” ( more exactly 52 soviet pilot had bacome the aces - they shot down more then 5 enemy aircraft)

And the “kill ratio” of 11-1 was only counted as air-to-air combat victories between the F-86 and the MIG-15. It wasn’t really fair, nor even relevant, for the USAF to count how many Mustangs were shot down by MIG-15s, but I can assure you, it had virtually no affect. The telling reason why is this: the US/UN had virtual air superiority when conducting tactical support operations, and were forbidden to even fly past the North Korean border to strike China for most of the War.

The 1:11 kill ratio is Sabres Vs Mig is the just the propogandic “fairy tells” that was developed to prove the USA has “absolute won” the air combats . nothing more.

The communist air forces were simply a non-factor for the most part, with the exception of inflicting some losses on the second-rate B-29 WWII leftovers, which the Soviets knew very well since they were flying it as the Tu-4! The USAF refused to risk and diffuse its air assets such as the B-36 in the Asian War.

Even if we admit your point about “super N.Korean AA-gunners” - but this is just suggestion) the at least half of the UN aircrafts were shoted by the AA-gunners the other half is about - 1000 aircrafts by the 'communists" aviation.
Not bed i think for the non-factor. How do you think?

BTW you still do not provide any statistic figures about persantage of hited

Some of this info was gleaned from memory after reading “The Korean War,” by Max Hastings. Great read!

Good ,just do not frget to visit our forum to clear the mind comparing the different points;)