Deleted member 1487
Have you heard about the principle of concentration of force? Or Soviet loss rates, both non-combat and combat relative to the Luftwaffe?Dude, you forgot a major thing. Frontage length. The reason Soviets and Americans were able to use their air superiority once they won it was due to having enough planes to cover the front.
It doesn't need to match them man for man given how much better they performed man for man.The Luftwaffe, even an expanded one, simply does not have that capability.
See the charts below.
I'd do a lot more research on 2nd Kharkov if I were you:In the Second Battle of Kharkov, the Luftwaffle greatly contributed to the German counter attack, revealing armored columns, supplying as many as 30 pockets, but when they tried to bomb, they quickly found out that the "target rich environment" was so huge they were hardly able to make a dent with complete air superiority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Kharkov#Luftwaffe
German close air support made its presence felt immediately on 15 May, forcing units such as the Soviet 38th Army onto the defensive. It ranged over the front, operating dangerously close to the changing frontline. Air interdiction and direct ground support damaged Soviet supply lines and rear areas, also inflicting large losses on their armored formations. General Franz Halder praised the air strikes as being primarily responsible for breaking the Soviet offensive.[30] The Soviet air force could do very little to stop Pflugbeil's 4th Air Corps.[38] It not only attacked the enemy but also carried out vital supply missions. Bombers dropped supplies to encircled German units, which could continue to hold out until a counter-offensive relieved them.[38] The 4th Air Corps anti-aircraft units also used their high-velocity 8.8 cm guns on the Soviet ground forces.[39] Over the course of the 16-day battle the 4th Air Corps played a major role in the German victory, conducting 15,648 sorties (978 per day), dropping 7,700 tonnes of bombs on the Soviet forces and lifting 1,545 tonnes of material to the front.[40]
On 14 May, the Germans continued to attack Soviet positions in the north in localized offensives and by then, the Luftwaffe had gained air superiority over the Kharkov sector, forcing Timoshenko to move his own air assets forward to counter the bolstered Luftflotte 4. The Luftwaffe won air superiority over their numerically superior, but technically inferior opponents.[41] The air battles depleted the Soviet fighter strength, allowing the German strike aircraft the chance to influence the land battle even more.[42] Nonetheless, the Soviet forces pushed on, disengaging from several minor battles and changing the direction of their thrusts. However, in the face of continued resistance and local counterattacks, the Soviet attack ebbed, especially when combined with the invariably heavy air raids. By the end of the day, the 28th Army could no longer conduct offensive operations against German positions.[34]
On 17 May, supported by Fliegerkorps VI, the German army took the initiative, as Kleist's 3rd Panzer Corps[48] and 44th Army Corps began a counterattack on the Barvenkovo bridgehead from the area of Aleksandrovka in the south. Aided greatly by air support, Kleist was able to crush Soviet positions and advanced up to ten kilometres in the first day of the attack. Soviet troop and supply convoys were easy targets for ferocious Luftwaffe attacks, possessing few anti-aircraft guns and having left their rail-heads 100 kilometers to the rear.[49] German reconnaissance aircraft monitored enemy movements, directed attack aircraft to Soviet positions and corrected German artillery fire.[49] 4th Air Corps response time to calls for air strikes was excellent, only 20 minutes.[49]
The consequences of losing the air battle were also apparent. On 18 May the Fliegerkorps VI destroyed 130 tanks and 500 motor vehicles, while adding another 29 tanks destroyed on 19 May.[52]
The Luftwaffe also intensified operations over the Donets River to prevent Soviet forces escaping. Ju 87s from StG 77 destroyed five of the main bridges and damaged four more while Ju 88 bombers from Kampfgeschwader 3 (KG 3) inflicted heavy losses on retreating motorised and armoured columns.[52]
In broad daylight, the Luftwaffe, now enjoying complete air supremacy and absence of Soviet anti-aircraft guns, rained down SD2 anti-personnel cluster bombs on the exposed Soviet infantry masses, killing them in droves.[54]
By 26 May, the surviving Red Army soldiers were forced into crowded positions in an area of roughly fifteen square kilometers. Soviet attempts to break through the German encirclement in the east were continuously blocked by tenacious defensive manoeuvres and German air power. Groups of Soviet tanks and infantry that attempted to escape and succeeded in breaking through German lines were caught and destroyed by Ju 87s from StG 77.[11]
More than 200,000 Soviet troops, hundreds of tanks and thousands of trucks and horse-drawn wagons filled the narrow dirt roadbetween Krutoiarka and Fedorovka and were under constant German artillery fire and relentless air strikes from Ju 87s, Ju 88s and He 111s. SD-2 cluster munitions killed the unprotected infantry and SC250 bombs smashed up the Soviet vehicles and T-34 tanks. Destroyed vehicles and thousands of dead and dying Red Army soldiers choked up the road and the nearby ravines. General Bobkin was killed by German machine gun fire and two more Soviet generals were killed in action on the 26th and 27th. Bock personally viewed the carnage from a hill near Lozovenka.[55]
Hayward gives 75,000 Soviets killed and 239,000 taken prisoner.[53] Beevor puts Soviet losses in terms of prisoners as 240,000[10] (with the bulk of their armour), while Glantz—citing Krivosheev—gives a total of 277,190 overall Soviet casualties.[4][9] Both tend to agree on a low German casualty count, with the most formative rounding being at 20,000 dead, wounded and missing.[8][9][10] Regardless of the casualties, Kharkov was a major Soviet setback; it put an end to the successes of the Red Army during the winter counteroffensive.
No, they took units already assigned to AG-South and operating in the region:Sure an expanded one could make a larger tactical bombing, but they basically grabbed almost every tactical bomber (and plenty of other aircraft) from the East front just for this one battle.
Luftwaffe
Hitler immediately turned to the Luftwaffe to help blunt the offensive. At this point, its close support corps was deployed in the Crimea, taking part in the siege of Sevastopol. 8th Air Corps under the command of Wolfram von Richthofen was initially ordered to deploy to Kharkov from the Crimea, but the command was rescinded. In an unusual move, Hitler kept it in the Crimea, but did not put the corps under the command of Luftflotte 4 (Air Fleet 4), which already contained 4th Air Corps, under the command of General Kurt Pflugbeil, and Fliegerführer Süd (Flying Command South), a small anti-shipping command based in the Crimea. Instead, he allowed Richthofen to take charge of all operations over Sevastopol. The siege in the Crimea was not over, and the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula had not yet been won. Still, Hitler was pleased with the progress there and content to keep Richthofen where he was and withdraw air support from Fliegerkorps VIII in order to prevent a Soviet breakthrough at Kharkov.
By 15 May, Pflugbeil was reinforced and received Kampfgeschwader 27 (Bomber Wing 27, or KG 27), Kampfgeschwader 51 (KG 51), Kampfgeschwader 55 (KG 55) and Kampfgeschwader 76 (KG 76) equipped with Junkers Ju 88 and Heinkel He 111 bombers. Sturzkampfgeschwader 77 (Dive Bomber Wing 77, or StG 77) also arrived to add direct ground support.[37] Pflugbeil now had 10 bomber, six fighter and four Junkers Ju 87 Stuka Gruppen (Groups)
https://media.defense.gov/2017/Mar/...LD_BROWER_CANBY_AIRPOWER_MANEUVER_WARFARE.PDFSoviet internal equipment production would still be larger than the German counterparts. If you look at OTL and just assume anything within range of a Junker 88 is leveled, that still leaves them being able to outproduce Germany in terms of equipment tonnage, ammunition, turreted armoured fighting vehicles (AKA tanks, not TDs which find themselves in an awkward situation when the enemy isn't in front)… Don't get me wrong, the Soviets loved lend lease equipment. The Sherman was considered roomy, comfortable (something American tank crews disagree with) reliable, and accurate. While they were often one-shoted by German tanks, they found other issues more important than armor. But even their internal production far outpaces the German counterpart.
You're WAAAY overestimating the power of having quadruple the number of fighters and 900% more twin engine fighters, as well as the impact of a specialized air force for the Eastern Front could do.
None of these air war factors will be deceive post Uranus.
Per this Soviet CAS/battlefield interdiction/air cover by their air force was vital because without air support mobile units would be on their own against both the Luftwaffe AND nearly 90% of counterattacks. Which is why the chapter on the Soviet use of air power in WW2 emphasizes how vital air support was to Soviet advances of any distance. Having the Luftwaffe be able to strip the Soviets of fighter cover and shut down their ground support air arm would mean advances that petered out rapidly and shattered armor penetrations.An interesting statistic is that 11 percent of German counterattacks were in the battle for the first position, 58 percent for the second, and 30 percent for the third position. Thus, about 89 percent of the counterattacks had to be repelled beyond the limits of the first position, that is, where the enemy reserves were not dependably neutralized by fire during the period of artillery preparation . Ibid.
As we can see below a major increase in Luftwaffe strength in the East spells disaster for the Soviet air force and the Red Army's ability to conduct ground operations.
http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com/2012/04/eastern-front-aircraft-strength-and.html
Luftwaffe strength in 1941-42 stays close to 3,000 but in 1943-44 it goes down to ~2,200. This decrease in size is due to the withdrawal of units to serve In the West against the Anglo-American bomber offensive. At the same time the Soviet air force manages to increase its strength by a huge factor.
The composition of the LW fleet also changes during the war. Early on the bombers make up a large part of the Eastern fleet but in 1943-45 their numbers are constantly decreasing while the ground attack aircraft make up the largest part of the overall force. Fighter strength also decreases each year.
For the Soviet force the huge numerical increase is concentrated on ground attack aircraft and fighters.
Regarding losses there is always a striking difference between the LW and the SU. The Soviet force always suffers more losses despite having a large numerical advantage in the period 1943-45. For both forces 1943 is the year of worst losses.
What is missing on the losses part is the losses per sortie statistic. Unfortunately I don’t have data for sorties in the East, with one exception. Historian Gröhler in "Stärke, Verteilung und Verluste der deutschen Luftwaffe im zweiten Weltkrieg" gives for the Eastern front in 1944 0,00703 losses per sortie with the equivalent number in the West being 0.0537.
Usually a loss rate over 5% means an airforce cannot continue to operate efficiently. On the other hand a rate of ~1% in 1944 when the Soviet airforce had such a quantitative advantage is very low. It definitely doesn’t paint a very good picture of the Soviet pilots.
Finally a word should be said about aircraft types. In 1941 the Soviet force is operating obsolete types like the I-16 fighter. However by 1943 the new fighter models Yakovlev 1,7,9 and Lavochkin 5 are able to fight well against the German Bf-109 and Fw-190 at least at low altitude.
For anyone who wants to learn more about the air war in the East I can recommend the books of Christer Bergström.