We are proud of our students!
Vitaly Fokeev- Honored Master of Sports - clay pigeon shooting, participant of the XXVIII Olympic Games 2004 in Athens and XXIX Olympic Games 2008. in Beijing, world champion 2006, winner of the 2006 World Cup.
Vladimir Dyatchin- Honored Master of Sports - Swimming, participant of the XXIX Olympic Games-2008 in Beijing and XXX Olympic Games-2012 in London, three-time world champion, winner of the 2007 World Cup
Lyudmila Litvinova- Honored Master of Sports - Athletics, silver medalist of the XXIX Olympic Games-2008 in Beijing, bronze medalist of the 2009 World Championship.
Yuri Rybin
NONVIRTUAL FISHERMAN
The life of an athlete is constant traveling, training camps, competitions. But geographical displacement is only a purely external side of it. Much less we know about the inner world athlete. Meanwhile, each workout is the result of long reflections, the choice of a methodology, the search for a new and tedious, repeated repetition of the past. Each competition is a tough clash of strength, the characters of athletes who are fighting for the honor of the country and for personal benefits. And, no matter what they say, it is not yet known which component is more important.
The spear thrower needs to put the enormous power of a mighty body into a single effort lasting only a fraction of a second. And the strength is really incredible. There is such a term - "hitting the spear", meaning the correct investment of effort in the axis of the projectile. And in the photographs I have seen that when this does not happen, the spear literally bends into an arc. Rybin, accustomed to such energy in his own performance, somehow with surprise told about the incident on the plane. After many hours of flight, the Russian record holder Sergei Makarov, sitting in front, stretched out with pleasure, stretching his arms up. For the sake of a joke, Yuri held him by the wrists and suddenly felt that, with an effort, a neighbor could easily pull him out of the chair. And seat belts wouldn't help.
Yuri likes to compete. Even in training. I remember a few years ago as a sparring partner in strength exercises he had a well-known bodybuilder in Russia Oleg Kopylov. Oleg worked well with weights. I remember the photograph in which he was depicted with a barbell on his shoulders. Lavishly hung with "pancakes", the bar even bent, but the strongman kept the weight. There were more than three centners in that bar. And Rybin chose such a "monster" as his partner. Both are groovy, they drove each other to their maximum weights. An important element workout is the shot of the shot. But the seven-kilogram iron ball seemed rather light to them, and they found a replacement for it - a broken weight without handles. It was what we needed. And a pood piece of iron flew to their delight, like a child's ball ...
He thinks paradoxically. Everyone knows how many problems athletes have due to injuries. Fortunately, during his twenty-year career, Yuri did not have any serious injuries. I tell him - it's great, I haven't missed a single season. And I hear in response: “Maybe this is bad - sometimes it would be necessary to stop, think, change something. And so I had to chase victories without interruption ”.
Constant, for two decades, victories at national championships, regular successes at international tournaments made him a name on the world stage. It seems that a little more - and there will be an extra-class result. Reached: first he threw a javelin at 84, 52 meters, then at 86, 98 - Russian records. I made it to the finals of the World Championship, and this is the elite. But he has a higher dream - Olympic Games... Throughout my career I was in the national team - first the USSR, then Russia, I was always a candidate for participation in the main start, but ... a long sports career, so - will have time. However, the next games in Barcelona were held without Rybin, and the next, in Atlanta, did not see the Lipchan players either. And now he understands perfectly well that the current chance, in Sydney, is the last.
All life is subordinated to this. Yes, now it's a bit easy. He, an elite athlete, is invited to a serious training camp. In Chile, South Africa, Spain. But, as in everything, you have to pay for something good. And now the perfectly organized training camp in Turkey is accompanied by the constant presence of an armed soldier - at the stadium, in the hotel, on the bus. A trifle, but annoying. This is how Chechnya haunts ...
Successes, impressions, experience and - age. Rybin 37. Does this affect? Communicating with Yuri in training, outside sports arenas, you note his former purposefulness and energy. But this is outwardly. The athlete himself admitted that he realizes that time is working against. This is not the first time, starting the preparatory period for the next season, doubts plagued: is it worth it? What is it all for? However, there is a goal, and Rybin is again harnessed to the strap of preparation. But the question has not sunk into oblivion, it will still arise before each workout, before each approach to a heavy barbell, before each departure to seemingly so attractive training camps. Sometimes there is not enough emotion (this is always vigorous and benevolent Rybin!), And he tries to compensate for the deficit with music. She has become an indispensable attribute training process performed by our spear thrower. Active, that is, with a built-in amplifier, speakers, a laser disc player, headphones constantly find a place in the athlete's training bag. Surprisingly, it is not light pop music that supports in heavy tedious work, but completely different music. Knowing well the old Rybinsk predilections - rock, groovy dance rhythms, I was somewhat surprised to see in the music box not only discs of modern classics - Queen, Deep Purple, but also Luciano Pavarotti, Placido Domingo, Bach. And I heard the explanation: “I do not need to whip up my muscles, but my soul. And only complex music reaches her. "
The meaning of sport is victory. It is clear, first of all, over oneself, over one's own weaknesses, but also over specific rivals who have no less talent, and the goal of life is the same - victory. They need to be resisted, and Rybin succeeds. Little by little, bit by bit, he himself creates a good - victorious - attitude. And he goes to this seemingly the most irrational way, doing good deeds for others. I don’t think I’ll be mistaken in saying that there was no such case when Yuri drove past a friend in a car without offering him a ride. And he will definitely be on his way. And when it turns out that he is in the other direction, he will smile: "I'm not driving - a car." And so in everything.
We have read more than once about the wives of the military, astronauts, sailors. But the companions of the athletes are also worthy of the warmest words. Yuri, talking about his Irina, answered simply - we have an understanding at the level of genes, after all, more than twenty years together. Therefore, they sadly part before the next training camp, meet with joy, sincerely celebrate victories and experience defeats together.
However, at home there is often no time for emotions: so much accumulates before arrival that one can only dream of rest. And the venerable champion performs not only urgent matters, but also, if I may say so, super-programmatic ones. His own hand-laid parquet, self-made furniture are his pride.
And one more topic that cannot be ignored when communicating with world-class athletes is pharmacology. There are so many rumors, opinions, facts and scandals related to doping that I asked this question, as they say, head-on. Rybin answered immediately and without a shadow of embarrassment: "I take Nootropil." (From a medical reference book: nootropil - increases the energy metabolism of brain cells, developing their potential neurophysiological capabilities).
And he did not rush to change the topic of the conversation, he spoke about doubts, numerous options for methods, approaches related to training volumes, intensity. On the one hand, it's simple: repeat the training pattern preparatory period leading up to a successful competitive season and no problem. But just as you cannot enter the same river twice, so two years cannot be the same. Therefore, the constant companions of the not festive, hard work of an athlete are not only training and competitions, but also constant doubts, the search for new ways to victory. We, the fans, are not assistants in these matters. The only thing we are needed - in the wish of good luck. The only one, but absolutely necessary. So good luck Yuri!
June 2000
More recently, Yuri Rybin delighted fans athletics victories in the All-Union, All-Russian and international arenas, and yesterday the eminent spear thrower celebrated a round date - 50 years. On the eve of the anniversary, an LSG correspondent paid a visit to Rybin, asked about the present day and recalled the past ...
I haven't seen Yuri Rybin for a long time, but in the years that have passed since our last meeting, he has hardly changed: he is friendly, smiling, polite. Yuri has not changed, and outwardly, at least fifty will not give him for anything!
Snowboard and master class
He now lives in the suburb of Lipetsk - in the village of Nikolskoye, which is along the Chaplygin highway. All around - nature, breadth and beauty. By the way, the place for the house was not chosen by chance - at one time he rode on a local slope on a snowboard, to which he became attached to his soul after parting with athletics. I liked the place, and as a result, the foundation of the future house was laid here.
It was about ten years ago, and it was then that Yuri Rybin decided that it was time to tie up with big sports:
It was February 2003, the traditional Russian winter championship in long throwing was held in Adler. I failed to achieve anything at these competitions and, on the eve of the 40th anniversary, I realized: this is the limit, my body does not obey me, I have exhausted my resource in javelin throwing. And he left the sport. Quiet, no wires.
But move, lead active image I did not stop life. Almost immediately I began to ride on the board - first on the water, then on the snow. Gradually he even became a kind of master in these types. At least I get great pleasure from the process! What else does a person need?
There was no desire to try yourself in the role of a coach or a sports organizer?
Why is that? For two years I still worked in sports. I tried to find myself, so to speak, by profession - a trainer, an instructor in the gym. By the way, over time, I developed a little skepticism about the halls. In a confined space, even an hour drags on for a long time, sometimes you think: when will it end? And on fresh air and two hours of classes fly by unnoticed ...
So, having worked as an instructor, I realized: no, this is not mine. And then friends who were already doing business with might and main offered to work with them. I agreed and ... now I can safely call myself a builder. The first object, which was built with my participation and under my leadership, is a shopping center on Gagarina Street, in the area of a former oil depot. We can say that we turned a garbage dump in the center of the city into a decent place ... Little by little, I began to get involved, to study. Now on my account there are already several built objects, each of which can be proud of.
I never thought that my line of work would change so diametrically opposite. But - I do not regret anything. Although you have to work, especially during the hot season for builders, 10-12 hours a day. But this is where sports training helps! Indeed, in sports it was the same: the main thing is the goal, and in order to achieve it, one should not pay attention to the efforts expended, to achieve this at any cost.
So sports start I have not gone anywhere. As he was stubborn, he remained so. The only thing, by the age of fifty, the shoulder, worn out by years of training, began to ache. Now I probably can't even hold a master class in javelin throwing - my shoulder won't allow ...
Advanced South Africa and backward Russia
When Yuri and I began to sort out a whole heap of his awards, which he took out of the box, the ex-record holder of Russia and two-time participant in the world championships lamented:
I have long wanted to set up something like a home museum, hang medals on the wall. But I didn't do it in time, and now I think: maybe it's already useless. Even such thoughts come: until I put the awards on display, it means that I am still young! If we had a good sports museum in our city, I would give part of the awards to it: let the youth look, equal to our generation ...
Hasn't lost interest in athletics? Do you keep in touch with your sports friends?
Necessarily. I follow the javelin throwing, and not only it, with the help of the Internet; With the same Andrey Moruev, with Misha Sadov. And Marina Zhirova came to visit not so long ago. She is now big man in the Moscow region - a deputy of the Balashikha Council and director of the local stadium "Meteor".
In the summer, by the way, I'm going to go to the World Championship, which will be held in Moscow. This is a great opportunity not only to watch the competition, but also to see old friends.
Do you follow Lipetsk sports? How would you rate his condition?
It is very pleasant that finally last year in Lipetsk they built track and field arena... True, I have not yet visited it - there is no time for everything. But for young people it is a great gift.
Yuri Valentinovich RYBIN. Born on March 5, 1963. Master of Sports of the USSR of international class, ex-record holder of Russia in javelin throw (86.98 m). Finalist of the 1995 World Championship in Gothenburg (7th place - 81.00 m), participant of the 1993 World Championship in Stuttgart. Winner team championship Europe as part of Luch (Moscow). Two-time champion USSR, seven-time champion of Russia. Married.
Latest news from Lipetsk region on the topic:
Yuri RYBIN: "The glass is half full for me"
Lipetsk
Heart-to-heart Photo - A. Evstropov Not long ago, Yuri Rybin delighted the fans of athletics with victories at the All-Union, All-Russian and international arenas, and yesterday the eminent javelin thrower celebrated a round date - 50 years.
13:07 06.03.2013 Lipetsk sports newspaper
Yuri RYBIN: "The glass is half full for me"- Lipetsk
More recently, Yuri Rybin delighted the fans of athletics with victories in the All-Union, All-Russian and international arenas, and yesterday the eminent javelin thrower celebrated a round date - 50 years.
11:33 06.03.2013
Lipetsk newspaper
Bridge TV
16.10.2019 Today, at the Zvyozdny Sports Palace, MHC Lipetsk played the third and final home match of the series in the NHL championship.
LipetskMedia.Ru
16.10.2019 Lebedyan swimming champions. October 3, 2019 at swimming pool CYSS in Dankov hosted the Open Championship of UIA DO CYSS in Dankov Dankovsky municipal district swimming,
Education department
16.10.2019
The Russian Open Championship in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu AJP Russia National Pro 2019 was held in Moscow last Saturday.
Department of Physical Education, Sports and Tourism
16.10.2019
Diana Ryabinkina, a volunteer school student, took part in the European Taekwondo Championship among cadets (born in 2005-2007).
October Banner
16.10.2019
Today at the base sports complex"Sokol" will host pioneerball competitions under the Spartakiad program among children and adolescents at the place of residence.
Department of Physical Education and Sports
16.10.2019
We were head and shoulders below
They had experience in Europe.
So they taught us,
And after learning ... we beat them.
Etc. Gusinsky
combat pilot 767 air defense IAP
The astute reader will immediately guess that behind the word "unknown" is hiding air combat airplane. And he will be right. Probably, many still remember a small note, almost ten years ago, in the newspaper "Argumenty i Fakty" No. 16, 1990, in which, perhaps for the first time in Russia, a list of aerial victories of the most productive German aces in World War II was officially published. But it was she who caused a long and passionate controversy on the pages of numerous periodicals about the reliability of the three-digit combat accounts of our opponents.
Particular doubts were caused by the very method of confirming the shooting down of an aircraft in an air battle. Many believe that the five main points of the confirmation system in the Luftwaffe cannot objectively and reliably reflect the likelihood of an aircraft being destroyed. The author fully shares this point of view.
Let me remind you what these items are - 1) the report of the pilot; 2) report of a direct witness (participants in the battle); 3) the recommendation of the squadron commander; 4) report of a witness from the ground; 5) film-film machine gun. In particular, it was said that the first three reports cost nothing: they came from people who were very interested. Regarding the 4th point, examples were given of how often in combat conditions it was impossible to confirm the destruction of an enemy aircraft if the air battle took place over enemy territory, or over a water surface, etc. And, the last, 5th point: due to the imperfection of the photographic installation, which works only at the moment of firing, it also could not reflect the real picture of the damage and what followed - the plane fell or returned safely to its airfield.
One cannot but agree with convincing arguments, as well as real examples given in the articles, and following their quite reasonable logic, it turned out that for all the skill of the leading aces of the Luftwaffe, their mind-blowing accounts of aerial victories are nothing more than fiction. And in contrast to these "soapy" three-digit accounts, the authors presented the reader with more modest double-digit accounts of our Soviet aces, which, according to some, are even somewhat underestimated, since many of our aces, for a number of reasons, gave aerial victories to other pilots: their wingmen - out of a sense of duty , young pilots - to raise their morale, etc.
Summing up the insolvency of the combat accounts of the German aces and along the way analyzing whose aces were more effective, many authors cited the fact that, in the end, the dispute over who fought the Germans or ours better was resolved on May 9, 1945 - in favor of Air Force of the Red Army. And the final figure of 57,000 destroyed German-fascist aircraft on the Soviet-German front out of 77,000 lost by the Germans, indicated the undeniableness of any final conclusion. This is the current public opinion in our country regarding the fascist and Soviet aces of World War II.
Over the course of many years of research work related to a separate theater of operations in the High North, having in his hands well-verified lists of losses of both sides: units of the 5th Luftwaffe Air Fleet, based in Northern Finland and Norway, as well as the Air Force Northern Fleet, units of the 7th Air Army and 122nd Air Defense IAD - the author came to conclusions of a somewhat different nature.
First of all, in these logical reflections, it is alarming that their authors unconditionally question the accounts of the German aces, but not the Soviet ones. Although it is well known that the Germans have one very characteristic and significant national feature - the very notorious German punctuality. The author experienced this very well for himself, having lived in Germany for more than six years.
And if there is every reason to doubt this German pedantry, then what can we say about our “broad Russian nature”. But these are, of course, only the subjective emotions of the author, which, in particular, helped him to correctly understand the origins of this or that case.
But what about the regulations in the Red Army Air Force, according to which the downed enemy planes were determined and credited to the combat accounts of Soviet pilots? The author was able to find only two such documents, which guided the command of the Murmansk Air Defense Divisional District. Both date back to the 1942 period. Here is one of them, I will give it in full:
Extract from the letter of the Commander of the MDR Air Defense Colonel Ivanov to the Commander of the 122nd IAD dated 07/10/42:
In order to correctly account for the downed aircraft of the pr-ka and correct information, the Main Command of the Red Army ordered the aircraft to be considered downed after confirmation:
1. Posts of VNOS * or NP of anti-aircraft artillery;
2. Groups of pilots who saw the plane crash or the established place of the plane crash by reconnaissance after the battle.
For the final approval of the downing of the aircraft, the pr-ka submit material on the downed aircraft to the headquarters of the MDR Air Defense.
Commander of the MDR Air Defense Colonel Ivanov.
As you can see from this document, instead of five points, as the Germans had, our Air Force in 1942 had only two. True, the second point includes two definitions. But what is interesting to note is that the testimonies of the pilots of the participants in the battle are in the same "weight" category with the item - "the place where the enemy's plane crashed." That is, no matter how it is necessary to look for the downed plane, it is enough only to confirm the participants in the battle.
Of course, there was more than enough room for abuse in these definitions. This was quickly realized "at the top" and soon new additions appeared:
Extract from the order of the MDR Air Defense, ref. No. 01932 dated 11/18/42:
In development of the instructions of the Commander of the Air Defense Forces of the territory of the country, the Commander of the MDR Air Defense ordered:
a) the place of the plane crash;
b) a photograph of the crashed plane;
c) data defining the type and belonging to the relevant part, number and other identification marks;
d) an act for the shooting down of an aircraft, signed by disinterested persons (not of the part, the units that submit the act);
e) confirmation of VNOS posts.
2. For fighter aircraft:
a) a photograph of the downed aircraft;
b) confirmation of VNOS or refinery posts.
4. In the submitted documents for the downing of the aircraft, indicate which signs and who confirms.
5. Simultaneously with the act, submit all supporting documents. It is obligatory to attach the completed scheme to the submitted act.
The planes will not be considered shot down without the submission and execution of the relevant documents.
Chief of Staff MDR Air Defense
In this document, point 5 is very interesting: which aircraft can be considered damaged. No false modesty can be considered any plane that went down sharply ... But these were only separate regulatory documents, and in the subsequent war years, the record of downed enemy aircraft in the Red Army Air Force was tightened. For example, in 1944, without providing photographs or details of the downed aircraft, an air victory was not counted.
But in life, as you know, everything happens according to its own unwritten laws, and before moving on to bare facts and examples, let's try for a moment to imagine and understand the essence of air combat itself. To do this, let us turn to the memories of our respected veterans, who more than once saw an enemy plane in the crosshair of an optical sight, managed to survive in this bloody war and survive to this day.
Capaciously, objectively and quite accurately, Alexander Shevtsov managed to show the specifics of air combat between fighters in just a few sentences in his book "This is a difficult summer":
“And then everything started spinning. It would be difficult for an uninitiated person to understand this mess. Because of the roar and howl of their own engines, the pilots did not hear the roar and howl of a stranger, just as they did not hear the crackle of machine guns and even the bass tatakan of cannons. And frankly speaking, in this deadly carousel it was not always easy to determine which Messer you were fighting with. Crosses and stars flashed in the air. Oh, how much it was necessary to see, understand, evaluate, weigh the fighter at the same time, and everything was given not seconds, but fractions of a second. " 1
This excerpt shows very well that in a fierce fleeting group battle it was not easy to follow the actions of an individual enemy aircraft, and no one did it. After all, the main thing was, at least, not to allow the enemy to act with impunity and at the same time to try not to be shot down. Everything else (follow the readings of the instruments, memorize landmarks on the ground, watch where the plane attacked by you falls, etc.) was of secondary importance.
This is the reality of any air combat and therefore at meetings with veterans, asking the same question: "Have you seen how the enemy aircraft attacked by you fell and where it crashed (exploded) on the ground?" the author invariably received the same answer that most of the pilots in battle did not see the crash site. Perhaps the most categorical answer was the former pilot of the 768th IAP of the 122nd Air Defense Division Boris Pavlovich Nikolaev, who defended the sky over Murmansk during the war years:
“No one will ever tell you where (the enemy's) plane fell. Any pilot sees that he shot down, but he does not watch how he falls, where he falls, he looks first of all behind the situation in the air ... "
And here is another very interesting revelation that I received in a letter from the former pilot of the 767th IAP of the same air defense division, Timofei Demidovich Gusinsky:
“In battle, you see your turn where it lies. When you get there, you immediately see changes in the flight of your victim. It will either roll without overload, or a lump of smoke will come off from it, and subsequently a fire may break out. Well, let's say there was no fire - he banked and went down, in a dive. And at this moment you have a "hundred and ninth" on your tail, but the distance is (still) respectable and he does not open fire on you. Why are you going to pursue your victim? It is clear that you are engaging in battle with the pursuer. And at home they ask you: "Show the place of the fall of the one you knocked down." Moreover, in the tundra, where the landscape is the same everywhere. You know one thing: east or west of the Tuloma River - that's all the landmarks. Yes, even depending on how high the battle took place. You will not pursue the victim, if on the mountain we are superior (on the side) of the enemy, and the loss of height is like death.
So it was with me after the battle on May 9, 1944. Squadron commander Captain Nikulin put me in front of a choice: “If you don’t show the place where 109 fell, the headquarters will send a presentation to the Order of the Red Star. Show me - to the Order of the Red Banner. I refused to breach and did not indicate the place of the fall of the Me-109, I did not see it ... "
There is nothing surprising in these answers. If it were the other way around, then this is what would be surprising. Of course, there are exceptions to the rules. And the author is sure that there will be veterans who will tell you in detail how they shot down the "Messer" or "Junkers", how it, leaving behind a black train, fell to the ground and a huge smoky "mushroom" rose above it. But such memories will be relatively few.
Let's make the first conclusion: the pilot who announced the destruction of the enemy aircraft in battle, in most cases did not see its fall. We will not consider the testimonies of other participants in the battle, since many authors have rightly noticed (albeit only in relation to the Germans) that they are interested persons, and therefore cannot be objective.
It would be appropriate to note here that while working with the daily operational reports of the 258th SAD, whose fighter regiments operated in the Murmansk direction, the author drew attention to one interesting thing. Sometimes, after an air battle, the squadron commander, and sometimes even someone from the command of the regiment, flew to the indicated areas in search of pilots who had not returned from a combat mission and at the same time to check the downed enemy aircraft. As a rule, on the first sortie, and sometimes on subsequent ones, they did not find their downed planes and pilots, but invariably immediately, on the first sortie, they found all the places where enemy aircraft crashed and thereby confirmed the reports of the pilots who had returned from the battle. This is suggestive.
Although there is nothing surprising here either. For a moment, imagine that a very principled person is at the head of the regiment, who, as required, without the necessary and reliable evidence from the VNOS posts, ground command, and also without material evidence (i.e., certain parts, tags etc.) does not credit downed enemy aircraft to the accounts of his subordinates, and therefore to the general combat account of the regiment. And the following picture turns out: neighboring regiments are fighting, their number of victories invariably grows from battle to battle, and in this regiment, the number of combat losses invariably grows. I think that such a principled commander will not lead the regiment for long, let alone his future career.
Many will ask, but what about the reports of the observers of the Airborne Forces or ground forces (if the battle took place over our territory), after all, they were the main witnesses in confirming the fall of the aircraft? We will talk about their role in this matter, since in practice everything turned out differently.
Who read the book by A.I. Pokryshkin "Sky of War", remember how he attacked and shot down his Su-2 bomber in one of the first sorties. In reality, such cases in the sky of war were not isolated. As for enemy aircraft, until the very end of the war, pilots in air battles often made mistakes in determining the type of enemy aircraft. This also applied to experienced pilots. Here are some examples:
On April 19, 1943, Guard Junior Lieutenant Nikolai Bokiy, who had by this time 9 aerial victories, shot down the German ace Oberfeldwebel Müller, who was flying a Bf109G-2 / R-6. Returning to his airfield, the pilot reported on the destruction of the Focke-Wulf-190, which, as everyone knows, is strikingly different from the Messer in all angles.
On March 7, 1944, two "Airacobras" of the 19th Guards IAP, the leading pair - the Guard Junior Lieutenant Kuznetsov, flew out to intercept the enemy scout. Our fighters over the Kirov railway intercepted an enemy plane and, after several attacks, shot it down. Upon their return, they reported on the destruction of the Finnish Pe-2 and indicated the place of its fall. The next day, the search group found the plane, but it turned out to be a German Junkers-88 from the 1st squadrons of the 124th long-range reconnaissance group (1. (AF) / 124). It turns out that even in a relatively calm air battle, a two-keel aircraft can be confused with a single-keel aircraft.
What are these two examples? And here's what. If the combat pilots were mistaken in determining the type of aircraft, then what could be required from the observers of the VNOS posts. As you know, these "farms" were usually sent to the Red Army, only fit for non-combatant service (during the war years there was such a humorous decoding of the abbreviation VNOS - "drank, ate, sleeps again," Ed.).
Now let's look at how the VNOS post confirmation system worked in practice. Rarely did aerial combat take place directly over the heads of the observers and, as a rule, the aircraft conducting the battle moved, by earthly standards, over considerable distances. Therefore, few people could follow the battle from the beginning to the very end from the ground and indicate the exact place of the plane's fall. However, VNOS observation posts on the outskirts of Murmansk were quite enough. Most of them recorded the results of almost every air battle and the estimated squares of the crash sites, which were immediately reported by telephone to the headquarters of the Murmansk Air Defense Brigade Region (MPVO) 3.
On the same day, reports on downed aircraft were received by telephone from the headquarters of the Air Defense Forces to the headquarters of the aviation divisions, and from there to the regiments. On the basis of these telephone reports, the division's daily headquarters operational reports appeared: "Confirmed by VNOS posts."
But let's return again to the VNOS post. After it was reported by telephone about the fall of the plane (s), a group (2-5 Red Army men) was allocated from the calculation of the post to search for the plane and pilots. This search could last more than one day and did not ultimately guarantee any results. But if the plane (or what was left of it) was discovered, then the finder made a detailed memorandum (due to the diligence and literacy of the writer) 4.
And now attention, the most interesting detail in the mechanism for confirming VNOS posts - it was at the time of finding that the type of the crashed plane was determined. And earlier, by phone, if it was impossible to reliably determine the type of aircraft and its affiliation, by unwritten rule any unidentified aircraft was considered enemy! Also, the human factor cannot be discounted, when sometimes the desired was passed off as reality. After all, every Soviet person wanted not ours, but a hated plane with crosses to fall to the ground.
Then the written report came on command - to the platoon commander, battalion commander of the VNOS, and from there to the headquarters of the Air Defense Forces, where it was filed into multivolume files. The real information of these memorandums about the found aircraft, with the exception of individual cases, due to the fact that the air defense and the air force were different "farms", were not received by the aviation units, and therefore were not taken into account.
Now it will become quite clear why, after the battle that took place on April 19, 1943, the observers of the VNOS posts reported the fall of four enemy aircraft, but in reality ... one Messerschmitt, one Airacobra and two Hurricanes were shot down. Note in passing that all the participants in the battle announced that Captain Sorokin of the Guard shot down the fifth Messerschmitt, and although it was not confirmed by VNOS posts, he was also credited to the battle account of the future Hero Soviet Union 5 .
Of course, one example is not enough to draw any conclusion. Perhaps this case will seem to someone uncharacteristic for Soviet pilots. Therefore, I will give one more "uncharacteristic" example, only now with "confirmation" from ground troops and other disinterested persons.
One day in January 1944, when the "polar hunters" from the 5th fighter squadron "Eismeer" rarely appeared over Murmansk, the "Pegmatit" radar stations recorded a large number of targets heading towards the city. On alarm, three groups of Yak-7b and Yak-9 from the 122nd Air Defense Fighter Division were raised, a total of 26 aircraft.
Soon, the VNOS posts reported on the approach of six Ju-87 bombers, accompanied by two six Me-109s. But when meeting with our fighters, "Junkers" suddenly removed the landing gear and "turned" into "Messers". A battle ensued, after which the Soviet pilots announced the destruction of nine Me-109s. On our side, only one Yak-9 was shot down, the pilot, junior lieutenant Chelyshev from the 767th IAP, safely landed with the landing gear retracted at his airfield.
Judging by the available archival documents, all reported downed enemy aircraft were confirmed:
Downed planes are checked by going to the crash sites, but due to the difficulties of finding them in the hills, only 6 burned and wrecked enemy planes have been found so far. The other four are confirmed: 1 prisoner, three reports of pilots who shot down planes and other pilots, participants in the battle, who saw both the moments of attacks and falls.
Me-109 - Jr. l-you Zubkov and Chernetsky 767th IAP. (Confirmed: by the workers of Loparskaya station, the head of the communications post; reports of the pilots Koryakin, Zubkov and Chernetsky);
Me-109 - Jr. l-nt Round 767th IAP. (Confirmed by: Kruglov's report, parachute passport, tag number 109593; reports of pilots Fedorov and Ilyin);
Me-109 - Jr. l-nty Levanovich and Ilyin of the 767th IAP. (Confirmed by: Levanovich's report, tag, wing console, compass and other burned parts of the aircraft);
Me-109 - Jr. l-nt Krivobokov of the 768th IAP. (Confirmed: reports of pilots Krivobokov, Kutuzov and Shpyrko);
Me-109 - Jr. l-NT Skachkov 768th IAP. (Confirmed: reports of pilots Skachkov, Chelyshev and Babushkin);
Me-109 - Jr. l-nt Krivobokov of the 768th IAP. (Confirmed: report of the pilot Jr. L-NT Krivobokov);
Me-109 - Jr. l-nty Kuznetsov and Agafonov of the 769th IAP. (Confirmed: reports from Kuznetsov and Agafonov; certificate from the commander 2/1082 ZAP and an act drawn up by the commander of military unit 35562);
Me-109 - Art. l-nt Gavrilov of the 769th IAP (Confirmed: tag number 109552 6 and 50557, acts drawn up by the commander of military unit 39264; reports of pilots Chernenko and Kvaschuk);
Me-109 - Art. l-nt Nikulin and junior l-t Malyshev of the 769th IAP. (Confirmed: reports of Nikulin, Malyshev, tag No. 109553 6, act drawn up by the commander of military unit 35563);
Me-109 - Jr. l-NT Fedorov of the 767th IAP. (Confirmed: reports of pilots Kruglov, Ilyin, Levanovich and Fedorov).
As can be seen from the documents presented above, of the nine downed aircraft, only four Me-109s can raise doubts, which are confirmed only by the reports of the participants in the battle. The other five have physical evidence or confirmation from outside observers and thus do not raise doubts about the reliability. However, judging by the available lists of losses of the 5th Air Fleet, in reality on that day the German side lost only two Bf 109Gs. Pilot non-commissioned officer Wilhelm Strobel was wounded, but returned to his own, and the commander of the 9th detachment, Lieutenant Walter Klaus, was captured.
A few words about the lists of losses of the German side, as many readers with righteous indignation will express doubts about any lists of the enemy side. Can you trust them?
First of all, it must be said that these lists were not compiled during the war years, when, for various reasons, the German staffs, when reporting to the higher authorities, often underestimated the combat losses of their subordinate units. By the way, the Germans themselves admit this fact.
But in our time there are other lists of losses, which were compiled by historians-researchers on the basis of numerous archival documents - registers of losses, combat reports, combat logs, etc. Over the course of tens of post-war years, they were constantly supplemented and refined. Currently, they reflect the real picture of combat losses in air battles, and also take into account the ZA shot down by fire, missing and killed in disasters.
To be honest, once and for the author there were some doubts. This case is directly related to our topic. Studying the military activities of the 20th Guards IAP, in which such famous fighter pilots as Hero of the Soviet Union V.I. Krupsky, P.S. Kutakhov and A.S. Khlobystov, the author was faced with a striking fact.
In the history of this regiment, one of the air battles was inscribed, as they say, in “golden letters”. Soviet pilots demonstrated in it their skill, mutual assistance, self-sacrifice and in a heavy, bloody battle inflicted great damage on the enemy, after which enemy aircraft did not appear in the area of our airfields for a long time. All participants in this significant battle were awarded orders and medals. Guards Major Gromov, at that time the commander of the 1st squadron, who led this battle and shot down two Messerschmitts, was presented to the Order of Lenin.
In total, it was announced that eight Me-109s were destroyed with their losses: five pilots were killed, three were injured, seven Kittyhawks were shot down, three were knocked out, two of them were overhauled.
When the author turned to the above lists, it turned out that on that day the 5th Eismeer squadron had no losses at all! It was just hard to believe. Fortunately for the author, in Murmash, exactly where this battle took place, one of its participants lived - Nikitin Ivan Mikhailovich. Then he was wounded in the leg, but managed to reach his airfield and safely land.
Ivan Mikhailovich's story was exciting, with a mass of interesting and shocking details that were not included in either the operational summary or the official description of the battle in the Journal of Combat Experience of the 20th Guards IAP. At the end of the story, as always, a tactless question was asked: "Have you seen with your own eyes at least one falling or burning fascist plane in this battle?" To which Ivan Mikhailovich, with a sly smile, replied: “When I left the hospital, I was awarded the medal“ For Courage ”in a solemn atmosphere in front of the formation. Handing over the award, the chief of staff of the regiment whispered in my ear: “Oh, we never found a single“ messer ”...
Probably, in this case, the command of the guards regiment was advantageous against the background of such heavy losses to present a fictional picture of the battle, and to compensate for the pain of the loss of their comrades in arms from the surviving pilots with an abundance of awards.
What conclusion can be drawn from this? I don't know how things were in other theaters of military operations, but apparently in the Far North, the pilot's report was (more often than it seems at first glance) the main evidence and the only point in the confirmation system of enemy aircraft destroyed in air combat. Another vivid example of this is the last battle BF Safonov, when he reported on the radio about the destruction of three Ju-88s over the PQ-16 convoy at once, and to this day (judging by the press) no one doubts this fact.
Speaking about the imperfection of the confirmation system in our Air Force, it will probably not be superfluous to show the case when a really shot down plane was confirmed by VNOS posts or other ground observers according to all the rules. For the attention of the readers, I present the report of the pilot who shot down an enemy plane, and he is one of the most productive aces of the Arctic - Pavel Stepanovich Kutakhov, whose name does not require any additional presentation (spelling of the original):
"To the commander of the 19th Guards IAP, Guards Major Novozhilov
I report to you that today on 27.3.43 in an air battle, which began on a low level in the area of the lake. Home and (in) the ratio of enemy forces 4 Me-109G (against) our 3 "Airacobra". From the first attack, I hit one Me-109G on a turn, which immediately left the battle and went to the north-west. In the unfolding aerial combat on verticals, I took advantage of the peculiarity of my vehicle, compared with the vehicles of Silaev and Lobkovich, to break away from them and began to fight 600-1000 m higher than mine with two Me-109Gs. They make a coup after 15 minutes of battle and attacked Lobkovich and Silaev. I followed them from behind, fought off Lobkovich from under the tail and began to pursue the Me-109G, which tried to get away from me for 4-5 minutes on horizontal and vertical maneuvers. I carried out attacks from small distances from behind from above and from behind from below, in the upper vertical position the Me-109 was hit, but having made a coup, I lost it on camouflage. The posts announced his landing, the pilot was taken prisoner.
Commander of the 1st IE Guards. Major Kutakhov "
And here is the confirmation memorandum of the head of the ground team, who became an unwitting witness of this air battle:
"To the commander of the 19th Guards IAP
from the Chief of the technical team No. 42 of the RAB, senior technician-lieutenant Tishchenko
I would like to inform you that my reconnaissance found an enemy aircraft of the Me-109G # 657 type, shot down by your pilots on 28.03.43. Your aircraft "Airacobra" tail number 10 pursued this Me-109G aircraft and fired at near Lake Tyukhmen, then your pilot stopped the pursuit, thinking that the enemy had left, (but) in fact, the Me-109G fell into the forest and exploded in district 3 km east of Lake Domashnee. The second Me-109G aircraft was discovered by a reconnaissance group 5 km north-east of the lake. Homemade. It was not possible to establish the aircraft number. The plane burned down. Shot down in battle by your pilots on 03/12/43. The moments of the fall of these planes were observed by my scouts, who were in search of other emergency planes.
The signature of senior technician-lieutenant Tishchenko assures
Head of the combat department and personnel of the 6th BAO Lieutenant Gusev "
And although in these documents not everything coincides and there are some inaccuracies (in particular, the serial number of "Messerschmitt" is not quite accurately rewritten), nevertheless, Major Kutakhov of the Guard really shot down a Bf 109G-2 piloted by NCO Edmund Krishovsky. The next day, a German pilot near Urd Lake was captured. In the indicated battle, the pilots of the 19th Guards IAP dealt with the aces of the famous 6th detachment of the 5th fighter squadron "Eismeer" (6./JG 5).
From all of the above, I would not like to build any global generalizations. But, nevertheless, the author made one main conclusion for himself; due to the inevitable specifics of air combat, the list of declared aerial victories of any ace, on whose side he fought, does not correspond to the number of aircraft he actually shot down. But how much it does not correspond, you need to find out individually for each pilot. However, in total mass, some kind of regularity can still be traced. According to rough estimates, the ratio of actually shot down planes to the declared ones ranges from 1: 3 to 1: 4.
The lists of victories of some of our aces below confirm these relationships. But here it should be noted that some aircraft shot down and confirmed by the opposing side can be claimed not only by other participants in the air battle, but also by anti-aircraft gunners, and in some cases by ordinary soldiers who fired rifles and machine guns at enemy aircraft. Therefore, only in rare cases can we say with complete confidence that such and such a pilot shot down this particular plane.
So in the list of the guard of Lieutenant Colonel Boris Feoktistovich Safonov, out of eight air victories confirmed by the German side, only four with full confidence can claim that it was he who won them.
I would also like to add a few words about the planes shot down in the group. Judging by the way they are invariably indicated with a plus, in almost all the lists of air victories of our pilots published to date, you involuntarily begin to believe that these numbers mean something. Although in reality, there is absolutely nothing behind these numbers.
During the war years, the practice of accounting for group victories somehow justified itself. Well, first of all, it was one of the incentives for our pilots to strive to fight in a group, since we suffered huge losses in individual battles. And in some regiments flightless political instructors, in their instructions on how to fight correctly, went so far as to put an enemy plane shot down in a group higher in importance than one shot down by someone alone.
Very eloquent entries in the logbook of downed enemy aircraft of the 20th Guards IAP for 1941-1942. Here are some of them:
Pilots: Art. l-nty Kontsevoy, Khlobystov, But, Gorelyshev, st. s-nt Bychkov, s-nty Chibisov, Petelin, Zurov in an air battle in the area of the lake. Päiveyavr was shot down - 1 Me-110, 2 Me-109 and 3 Yu-87. Confirmed by VNOS posts.
Pilots: Mr. Gromov, Art. l-nts Gorelyshev, Khlobystov, Kotov, Krymsky, Yurilin in an air battle in the area of Bolshaya Zapadnaya Litsa shot down 2 Me-109. Confirmed by ground forces.
Pilots: Art. l-nts Khlobystov, Gorelyshev, Krymsky, Yurilin, l-nt Lomakin, s-on Krutikov shot down 1 Me-109 in an air battle in the area of Bolshaya Zapadnaya Litsa. Confirmed by ground forces.
Pilots: Mr. Solomonov, Art. political instructor Seleznev, Art. l-nty Kontsevoy, Yurilin, Crimean, political instructor Zharikov, l-nt Pshenev, from-on the Circle in the area of Lake Odezh-Yavr, 1 Yu-88 was shot down. Confirmed by VNOS posts. "
And here is another curious entry in the same journal, which causes even more confusion:
Pilots: st. L-nty Khlobystov and Gorelyshev together with the pilots of the 145th IAP in an air battle in the area of Bolshaya Zapadnaya Litsa shot down 4 Me-109s "(there are no records of confirmation of VNOS posts or ground troops - Author's note).
If in the previous records it is not clear only what pilot and how many planes shot down in the group are recorded, then in this record it is not even clear what the regiment actually recorded these four “shot down” Me-109s in the group? And who can say how many stars to draw on board the aircraft that participated in this battle - one or four at once? I think we will not be mistaken if we assume that all these four "shot down" Me-109s were recorded in the accounts of the 145th and 147th air regiments. On the scale of the division, which included these regiments, this figure was already automatically doubled, and in divisional reports will appear not four, but eight shot down Messerschmitts. But the most interesting thing is that in reality on that day the Germans had no losses at all.
At the same time, one should not forget that the regiment's command, as well as especially distinguished pilots, quite often had to attend various meetings of residents of cities whose population suffered severely from enemy bombing. And the commissar proudly said that such and such a pilot personally shot down three enemy planes and ten in the group in a battle with the hated fascist invaders, and such and such personally shot down five and fifteen in the group ... Such numbers, of course, were impressive.
Many photographs have survived where our pilots pose at their planes, on which one or two filled stars are clearly visible for individually shot down enemy planes, and about two dozen "blank" stars for planes shot down in a group.
Very interesting memories were left by Alexander Shevtsov, already mentioned in this article, in which he showed well the attitude of the pilots of the 19th Guards IAP to this issue:
“And so Kutakhov's five landed. Excited pilots reported to the regiment commander: a group of enemy aircraft had been dispersed, the bombing of Murmansk had been disrupted. Four enemy planes were shot down in an air battle. Ours are all safe.
Who are the downed planes recorded on?
For everyone! Downed by a group.
Why at all? I knocked down one Messer. I shot at him, Comrade Commander. And he fell.
And I shot, - said Kutakhov.
However, I am not asking you to write it down for me. Yes, and Bochkov shot.
Gloomy and angry returned from the command post. In the evening, guys from other squadrons came to the first squadron: Volodya Gabrinets, Kolya Gubin, lively and always laughing Vanyushka Gaidaenko. And somehow imperceptibly the conversation spun around the Krivosheevsky plane. At first in the form of individual remarks or caustic remarks, then louder and sharper. And finally, it turned into a "man's conversation", in which it was decided: to consider personally shot down only the plane that the pilot destroyed on his own, without the help of others. All the rest should be recorded as being shot down by a group. "
Having slightly wrinkled each other, the pilots once figured out which shot down enemy aircraft to count in the group, and which not. But what about us? If 2/3 of the declared planes shot down personally are not confirmed at all, then what can we say about those shot down in the group? Anyway, where did they come from - shot down in a group? How can one logically explain this Soviet collective accounting, if in other belligerent powers this did not exist at all (Here you can argue with the respected author, see the article "Air Combat Accounting". Ed.).
Here are the cases that lend themselves to a logical explanation: the first - when the number of the fallen aircraft of the "enemy", according to reports from the airborne mission posts, was higher than the number declared by the pilots in the air combat. This difference was recorded for all the pilots who participated in the battle. The second is that absolutely all the shot down aircraft declared by the pilots, confirmed and not confirmed by VNOS posts, were signed between the participants in the battle.
But, as with every rule, there are exceptions. So, the author managed to find several cases when one enemy plane was actually shot down in the group. Basically, these are those episodes when everything is very clear: there is one enemy aircraft (usually a reconnaissance aircraft), and several of our fighters attack it in turn.
So, on June 27, 1941, three of our I-16s, the leading echelon commander of the 72nd SAP Major Gubanov and his wingmen - Senior Lieutenant Safonov and Lieutenant Antipin, having found a German reconnaissance aircraft "Henschel-126" in the ranks of their SB bombers, attacked him. After repeated attacks, the North Sea pilots managed to shoot down the enemy by joint efforts 8. Of course, this destroyed aircraft was recorded in the flight books of the aforementioned pilots as shot down in a group battle.
If such a case had occurred among the Germans, then the air victory would have been recorded only for one pilot, that is, the one after whose attack the enemy plane crashed to the ground. Of course, a mistake is possible here, since the attack of the previous pilot could have been more effective, but in the Luftwaffe there were no deliberately inflated numbers of air victories.
At the end of the article, as the genre of historical investigation requires, the author must draw an appropriate conclusion; to compare some generalized figures, on the basis of which it would become obvious - whose aces were more effective and whose list of victories should ultimately be longer.
The author suggests looking at this issue from the other side - whose losses were higher, which means that the list of actually shot down planes will be longer on the opposite side. From here, each reader will draw a conclusion for himself. To do this, I propose to compare the losses of Soviet and Nazi aviation during a successful offensive operation in the Far North in the period from October 7 to November 1, 1944, when our aviation already completely dominated the skies of the Arctic.
For direct participation in the operation, 747 combat aircraft were involved from the 7th Air Army, of which 308 fighters (54 La-5, 30 LaGG-3, 67 Yak-9, 32 Yak-76, 19 Yak-1, 81 P- 39Q, 25 P-40E and N), in addition, the Northern Fleet Air Force participated - 275 aircraft, of which 160 fighters (18 Yak-7b, 4 Yak-9, 105 P-39Q, 33 P-40N). A total of 1,022 combat aircraft, including 468 fighters.
The German air group of the 5th air fleet, opposing the Soviet air force in the Far North, then had 66 fighters of the 3rd and 4th groups of the 5th fighter squadron "Eismeer" (III. And IV./JG 5). All in all, 169 combat aircraft were based at sea and land airfields beyond the Arctic Circle.
Thus, the ratio of fighters was about 1: 7, of course, not in favor of the Luftwaffe. Nevertheless, only in air battles from enemy fighters, our side lost 66 aircraft, of which 39 were fighters. The enemy, on the other hand, lost 25 aircraft from the action of our fighters, of which only 12 were fighters. The total combat losses were: 142 aircraft from our side and 63 from the Germans; killed pilots, respectively 61 and 19. There is no need to invent any complex and confusing systems for calculating the effectiveness of this or that pilot, as some authors do. The above figures speak for themselves, who fought better and who should have a longer list of aerial victories.
As you can see, these figures also indicate that the enemy was not defeated, contrary to what was written in many books on the air war in the North.
Of course, now we can say that the enemy was cunning, did not enter "honest" open fights, that bad weather was in the hands of the German pilots, that the enemy's airfield network was more developed, but the fact remains that the "polar hunters" the skies of the Arctic once again demonstrated their advantage and, after defeat on the land front, almost in full complement relocated to airfields on the western coast of Norway. There, the new Bf 109G-14 and FW 190 F-8 fighters were already waiting for them, on which they continued fighting against the British Royal Air Force.
In conclusion, I would like to urge my fellow historians to go one step higher in their works and stop copying from each other well-known facts that supposedly should promote the heroism and high skill of Soviet pilots. Almost every such publication mentions cases when our illustrious ace No. 1 Ivan Kozhedub shot down a fascist Me-262 jet plane in the skies of Germany, or pilot Alexander Gorovets over the Kursk Bulge in one battle knocks down nine Ju-87 bombers at once, etc.
I will not reveal a big secret, saying that in each downed enemy plane there was a pilot who had a military rank, name and surname, and the plane belonged to one or another squadron, group, squadron. Of course, establishing all these parameters will require additional time and painstaking research work. But after all, one day it is necessary to name everyone by name, especially since the value of the feat of our pilots will not diminish from more accurate and specific information, but on the contrary will only increase. Although disappointment awaits someone, since many feats praised by Soviet propaganda will remain only beautiful legends.
Here is one of them, invented, I emphasize, not by the pilot himself, but by those who were supposed to do this by the nature of their occupations and positions. Three rams in one battle, and two rams were made by one pilot (A.S. Khlobystov) - sounds great and inspires new reckless actions. But if you think sensibly, is it possible to shoot down a heavy twin-engine Me-110, and then Me-109 with the same console of the right plane of a single-engine fighter R-40S? Theoretically, you can probably shoot down even more, practically - hardly.
Indeed, the German side confirms only one ram in this battle, but not senior lieutenant A.S. Khlobystov, and its commander, navigator of the regiment, captain A.P. Pozdnikov, who died in a head-on collision with the "Messerschmitt-110", whose pilot, Lieutenant Karl-Friedrich Koch, made an emergency landing and returned safely with the gunner-radio operator to his airfield. (It is not clear only about whom then Khlobystov "broke off" the wing of his "Kittyhawk", which is clearly seen in the photo in the article. Approx. ed., the photo is not shown on the website).
And here is the "bike" in the style of hunting stories, which were previously published in large numbers on the pages of the magazines "Wings of the Motherland" and "Aviation and Cosmonautics".
In an article under the popular title "Duel", it was told how the famous German ace Major Mebus was shot down by a North Sea pilot in the skies of the Arctic over the Barents Sea on June 8, 1944, who had 74 air victories on his combat account. The article also said that this ace always flew alone, and a dragon was drawn on his Messerschmitt-109. In support of the fact that this ace died in battle, a reference was made (a rare case!) To the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, which published an obituary.
Indeed, in Northern Finland in June 1944, Major Martin Möbus (Martin Modus), the commander of the 1st group of the 5th stormtroopers squadron (I./SG 5), was killed, and was a holder of the Knight's Cross and Oak Leaves. True, not in battle, but in a car accident and not on the eighth of June, but on the second. Yes, and he never flew the Messerschmitts, since all his combat activities took place on Ju-87 dive bombers. And his grave is not in the cold waters of the Barents Sea, but at the Rovaniemi military cemetery in Finland.
Perhaps, it was not out of nowhere that it was noticed in ancient times that they never lie so much as after a hunt and during a war, which many authors have simply forgotten about.
* VNOS - aerial surveillance, warning and communication. NP - observation post.
1 Alexander Shevtsov was a correspondent for a divisional aviation newspaper during the war. He flew 48 combat missions, of which 24 - on an Il-2 attack aircraft as an air gunner, which gave him the opportunity to competently describe an air battle.
2 B.P. Nikolaev in his combat account has 5 shot down enemy aircraft. 03/27/43 in the battle over Murmansk rammed Bf 109F-4 (WNr. 7544), he himself escaped by parachute, and the German pilot was killed.
3 From January 1942 - Murmansk Air Defense Divisional Area; from 10/27/1943 - Murmansk Corps Air Defense District.
4 Border guards, whose outposts operated throughout the war, were also engaged in the search for downed aircraft and pilots, but their reports went through other channels and, naturally, did not arrive at the air defense and air force headquarters.
5 For complete objectivity, it should be noted that at the same time in the area of the lake. Nyalavr, two Yak-9s of the 20th IAP of the Northern Fleet Air Force fought an air battle with two Me-109s. As a result, junior lieutenant Shevchenko announced the shooting down of one Me-109, and lieutenant Turganov - one FW-190. (Here is also an interesting detail, he fought with the Me-109, and reported that he shot down the FW-190).
6 These are tags from one plane.
7 Killed 9.09.42 in an air battle ramming a Bf 109F-4 in the forehead, the German pilot, Chief Corporal Gunter Hoffmann from 6./JG 5 was also killed. E.A. Krivosheev was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
9 Ns 126B WNr.3395 of 1. (N) / 32, pilot Feldwebel Fw Herbert Kern missing, observer Lt Paul-Heinz Becker killed.