One day in the history of the 16th Guards Fighter Regiment
Every year the Great Patriotic War recedes into the past from us, the memory of the immense feat of our grandfathers who saved Russia from destruction and won the Victory is gradually erased. Today is a good opportunity to remember some of those who fought for the Motherland: Alexander Pokryshkin and his student and fellow soldier Viktor Zherdev. Let us turn to one combat day from the history of the 16th Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment, in which the pilots fought - September 21, 1943.
For Pokryshkin, that day was the most productive in the entire war: according to the results of two combat missions, four aerial victories were recorded on his account: 2 Ju-88 and 2 Ju-87. All downed planes are noted both in regimental documents ("Log of downed enemy planes", "Certificate of confirmation of shot down enemy planes twice by Hero of the Soviet Union, Lieutenant Colonel A. I. headquarters of the 9th Guards Air Division. It would seem that everything is clear. So in the collection "Soviet Aces", compiled by M. Bykov, in accordance with the sources, all four victories won by Pokryshkin that day are indicated (there is a slight inaccuracy only in relation to the place where one of the downed Ju-87s fell) (Soviet Aces. Victories of Stalin's falcons. 1941-1945. M., 2008. S. 408).
But as it turned out, not all modern authors are ready to credit Pokryshkin with these victories officially recorded at his expense. We are talking about A. Tabachenko, the author of a recently published book about the 16th GIAP. It was already necessary to point out Tabachenko's inexplicable bias towards Pokryshkin and point out a number of distortions and factual errors. Unfortunately, the "author's approach" - distortion of facts, uncertain knowledge of sources and bias - manifested itself in his description of the battles of September 21, 1943.
If Bykov in this case strictly follows the documents, then Tabachenko did not find anything better than to question their objectivity, at the same time throwing a number of accusations to Pokryshkin (who can no longer answer him).
He doubted that Pokryshkin had shot down Ju-87 that day (at least one, or even both). Calling them "phantoms" and "ill-fated", Tabachenko leads the reader to the idea that the records of their destruction appeared in regimental documents either not without the participation of Alexander Ivanovich himself, or in order to "tighten" his combat score. That is, it hints that these "phantom" Ju-87s were the result of postscripts.
The second charge (filed either as a version or as a "revelation-inference") is very close to the previous one. Tabachenko claims that Pokryshkin appropriated other people's victories. Referring to a phrase taken out of context and incorrectly interpreted from the memoirs of Konstantin Sukhov, he writes that following the results of the battle on September 21, its participants Zherdev and Sukhov "gave one aerial victory to Pokryshkin." And he profoundly exclaims: “So, it means that not only Pokryshkin handed out the downed planes to his wingmen, but the wingmen also“handed over”the shot down planes to Pokryshkin's fund! The deputy commander of the air regiment did not reach up to 50 destroyed German aircraft … "(Tabachenko A. I. 219). In general, you to me, I to you. What is the logic of such mutual juggling of victories - the author does not explain.
The basis for Tabachenko's "reasoning" was the fact that only two Ju-88s were actually recorded in ZhUSS 16 GIAP for 09/21/43 to Pokryshkin, and marks about downed Ju-87s appear later, as well as the fact that in the order for regiment No. 088 “About the payment of monetary reward to the flight crew of the regiment for the downed enemy aircraft "there is no mention of the" bastards "shot down by the pilot (Ibid. Pp. 218–224).
So, maybe Tabachenko is right? Well, let's look at the events of that day based on all the sources available to us.
So, according to the "Journal of Downed Enemy Aircraft", that day four victories were recorded on the regiment's account: 2 Ju-88s were shot down by Pokryshkin (pictured) (confirmed by the pilots who participated in the battle, the first - Zherdev and Golubev, the second - Sukhov and Golubev), another Ju-88 was knocked down by junior lieutenant Popov. The fourth valid aircraft was the FV-189, which was destroyed by Lieutenant Trud. A record of the victory over one of the U-87s shot down by Pokryshkin appeared in the Journal a few days later, on September 29 (Golubev confirmed). Finally, in November (between the 20th and 24th), a record appeared about another U-87, credited to Pokryshkin following the results of the battle on September 21 (confirmed by Golubev and the chief of staff of the 133rd command post, Major Solnyshkin; "Bast shoe"). (TsAMO RF. F. 16 gia. Op. 206868. D. 3. L. 3–5, 11).
And what does the 16 GIAP Combat Journal say? Regarding the first battle, it says the following. Pokryshkin and Golubev provided cover for ground troops. “At the end of the patrol, we saw up to 15 Ju-87s, which bombarded the Vostochny beam. Tiefenbrunn with H-2500 mt. The battle formation is a wedge of links. Major Pokryshkin attacked one group, did not observe the results of the attack. Slave Jr. l - t. Golubev observed a flame and an explosion on the ground. Presumably this is a downed plane. After the first attack, some kind of guidance radio station transmitted, above you, the planes, to gain an altitude of 3000 m. The order of the radio station was carried out, but no planes were found. " On September 29, when the record of the shot down appeared in the ZhUSS, an addition was made: “1 U-87 was shot down by Major Pokryshkin. There is a confirmation of nsh 133 kn. The plane Ju-87 fell in the north-east. B. Tokmak "(Ibid. D. 1. L. 242v. – 243).
Two hours later, Pokryshkin made the second flight - this time as part of the four. The second pair was made up of junior lieutenants Zherdev and Sukhov. And then there was a battle, which is reflected in the memoirs of its participants - Pokryshkin and Sukhov, and captured in the picture of the pilot of the "brotherly" 104 GIAP Alexei Zakalyuk (on the top photo).
Pokryshkin describes how he shot down two Ju-88s. The first exploded from its fire, and our plane slipped through the fireball of the explosion.
Jumping out of the fiery cloud, the pilot looked around: “left and right were bombers. One of them burned, apparently it was struck by an exploded neighbor. He took aim at the far right and gave a burst. A jet of smoke erupted from the Junkers' wing. He turned abruptly, fell into a dive and began to leave. I rushed after him and finished it off with the second round on the left engine (in the book "Knowing Yourself in Battle" Pokryshkin mentioned the place of its fall - the bank of the Molochnaya River - AM). Then he jerked his car up. To the right of me was falling "Junkers", set on fire by a pair of Zherdev "(Pokryshkin A. I. The sky of war. Novosibirsk, 1968. S. 318). We emphasize that Alexander Ivanovich in both of his books talks about the plane shot down by our second pair. Tabachenko is silent about these words: this allows him to build a version that the plane shot down by Zherdev - Sukhov (which he, of course, did not find on their accounts "at Bykov") and went to Pokryshkin's account.
Pokryshkin believed that another Junkers was set on fire by an exploded bomber, but was not counted. By the way, Sukhov, describing the battle in detail, also mentions the fourth burning "bomber". The very first, shot down by Pokryshkin, was swallowed up by an explosion cloud. “Two more bombers are burning on the right and left. And the third ahead can share their fate, if …”. One of the first two was attacked by Pokryshkin, but this "third" was captured by our pair. “Zherdev and I drove for a long time - all the way to the ground - that Junkers, alternately attacking him - either apart or in pairs. The shooter fought back fiercely. Zherdev's fighter received several holes. Leaving, the "Junkers" whirled, slid, dived to the very ground, trying to level over it and leave at low level. But, apparently, the pilot did not calculate - and pulled out the car late. That gave a subsidence - and, hitting the ground, burst into flames and fell apart”(Sukhov K. V. The squadron is fighting. M., 1983. S. 179). We'll come back to this plane a bit later. Therefore, Sukhov (like Pokryshkin) believed that four aircraft were shot down in the battle.
And how is this fight described in the ZhBD? The patrol was coming to an end when the presenter noticed that from the west “5 Yu-88 approached B. Tokmak / u /. They were attacked from behind. As a result of the attack of Major Pokryshkin, the leader of the five Ju-88 exploded in the air. 2 people / eka / jumped out with parachutes. Ml. l-t Golubev knocked out 1 Yu-88 and he dived into his territory. Major Pokryshkin and Jr. chased after him. Lieutenant Golubev lit his right console and left engine. S / amole / t fell burning southwest. Molochansk (TsAMO RF. F. 16 gia. Op. 206868. D. 1. L. 243v. – 245). The text of the summary is given with the preservation of punctuation, which in this case seriously affects its meaning.
So, one bomber was shot down by Pokryshkin. Another was hit by Golubev. It is possible that Pokryshkin considered him to be on fire from the explosion (although, as we remember, Sukhov mentioned two burning cars). And then … Either Pokryshkin chased after him, and Golubev finished off. Either Pokryshkin and Golubev chased, and the plane was shot down by Pokryshkin. Or you can read part of the phrase like that (by the way, from a grammatical point of view, this particular option will be the most accurate, although, of course, also incorrect): Pokryshkin chased, “and … Golubev lit his right console” (here is an example of how the thought itself the fact depends on their competent presentation).
On the third bomber, Zherdev made an effective attack. He attacked the remaining link Ju-88, as a result of the attacks knocked out 1 Ju-88, which, with a burning left plane, continued and / d / ti in formation. At this time, the Ju-88s were attacked by 4 Yak-1s. Ml. l-t Zherdev mistook them for Me-109, rolled aside and broke away from the enemy. At that time, I received an order from the host to go home due to lack of fuel”(Ibid.).
The regimental commander N. Isaev and the chief of staff Y. Datsky had no doubts about the authorship of the victories: the Zherdevsky bomber was classified as knocked out, and both counted "Junkers" were credited without hesitation to Pokryshkin's account. And what is this third plane, "not recorded" by Pokryshkin (in his words and in the words of Sukhov)? Perhaps the pilots believed that they were another Ju-88, which "caught fire" from the explosion. Or perhaps it was about one of the morning Ju-87s, which were not credited by the regiment headquarters that day.
Pokryshkin's offense becomes understandable if we consider that one of the "bastards" was indeed credited to him on the same day - only by a higher authority. This follows from the "Operational reports of the headquarters of the 9th Guards Fighter Aviation Division".
There is also a confirmation of the words of Sukhov and Pokryshkin about the third "Junkers" shot down by Zherdev.
In the operational report No. 265 of 09/21/43 it appears that on that day the 16th GIAP pilots performed 34 sorties, conducted 4 air battles, as a result of which they shot down “6 aircraft without losses, of which 4 Yu-88, 1 Yu-87, 1 FV-189. Shot down: Major Pokryshkin 2 bombers /: / 1 Ju-87, 1 Ju-88, both fell in the Tiefenbrunn area; ml. l-you Popov, Golubev on 1 Yu-88, bombers fell burning in the area of Molochansk, Bol. Tokmak; ml. l-t Zherdev 1 Ju-88, the plane fell and exploded 2 km. app. Molochansk; l-t. Labor shot down 1 FV-189, the plane caught fire in the air and fell sowing. app. Bol. Tokmak . “All downed enemy planes fell in the area of cover and are confirmed by Kirichenko's cavalry units” (Ibid. F. 20046. Op. 1. D. 14. L. 51).
What follows from the documents of the division headquarters? Firstly, on September 21, Pokryshkin was credited with one of the two Ju-87s shot down by him. Why the regiment received confirmation later than the division is now unknown. If Tabachenko had bothered to refer to the operational reports of the division and would not have been so viciously biased towards Pokryshkin, he would not have had to exclaim pathetically: "Okay, so be it, one" bastard "was found in half with grief" when he found a record in ZhUSS about him, made a week later (Tabachenko, p. 220). Not "found", but was credited on the same day!
Secondly, according to the results of the second battle, the division headquarters counted our pilots not two, but three downed Ju-88s. The bomber attacked by Zherdev by Divisional Commander I. Dzusov and Chief of Staff of the 9th Giad B. Abramovich was recorded as destroyed by the division. This aircraft also entered the report on the combat work of the compound for September. If the headquarters of 16 GIAP this month declared 9 destroyed Ju-88, then the headquarters of 9 GIAD - 10 (TsAMO RF. F. 20046. Op. 1. D. 18. L. 112).
This is one of many examples of how a day or episode can be reflected in different ways in regimental and divisional level documents.
A few days later, on September 26, a similar thing happened in relation to Captain Lukyanov, to whom the division headquarters counted the He-111 shot down in the area of Bolshoi Tokmak (reflected in operational report No. 270 and in the monthly report), while the headquarters of 16 GIAP no victories to him did not count (Ibid. D. 14. L. 56, D. 18. L. 112). In total, that day, the regiment announced four downed Heinkels (on the account of senior lieutenants Samsonov and Klubov, and junior lieutenants Zherdev and Sukhov) and one Me-109 (shot down by Captain Rechkalov), while the division headquarters counted the “messer” and five “Heinkel”(taking into account Lukyanovsky). Thus, the number of personal victories of Sergei Lukyanov will be 17 (and not 16, as it appears in Bykov's collection). But back to September 21st.
The third point, according to which the operational summary of 9 GIAD differs from the data of the 16 GIAP headquarters, is that the victory over one of the Ju-88s (which fell near Molochansk) was awarded not to Pokryshkin, but to Golubev. (This is the only mention of his authorship: there is no document at all about this Yu-88, or about the victories of Georgy Gordeevich over aircraft of this type).
What caused this decision is unknown. Perhaps the division headquarters thought that it was Golubev who shot down the plane. Perhaps Pokryshkin himself gave the plane to the wingman. Due to lack of fuel, our couple landed at the airfield of our neighbors. There the pilots refueled (having lunch at the same time). It is possible that from there the leader reported to the higher headquarters on the results of the air battle. By the way, Sukhov mentions that Pokryshkin reported to Dzusov about the battle even before his conversation with the chief of staff of the regiment (Sukhov. P. 182) In parentheses, we note that there were probably still cases of recording a downed plane on a slave. The fact that at least one of them could have taken place can be understood from the memoirs of Georgy Golubev himself (Golubev GG Paired with the "hundredth". M., 1978, pp. 128–130). But this is by the way.
Or perhaps, when determining the authorship of the victory at the division headquarters, there was simply a mistake, as it sometimes happened. For example, in the operational summary of the division for 09/02/43 it appears that Klubov shot down two Me-109s, while according to ZhDB and ZhUSS 16 GIAP they shot down one Messer, and the second was recorded on Golubev. A similar situation is with the report for October 22: two "Messers" by the division were attributed to Labor, while the regimental documents indicate that the second "thin" one was dumped by Zherdev. In the famous battle conducted by Rechkalov's group on November 1, there is also a discrepancy: one shot down Ju-87 was attributed to Zherdev (division), while Golubev (regiment) shot it down (TsAMO RF. F. 20046. Op. 1. D. 14 Sheet 32, 83, 93; F. 16 gia. Op. 206868. D.189v.-191, 292v.-294, 325v.-326; D. 3. L. 3, 8, ten). Probably the fight on September 21 is in the same row.
In any case, the command of the regiment counted the second Ju-88 to Pokryshkin immediately and without hesitation, which means that it had a reason, considering it to be his real author of the victory.
In favor of the impartiality of such a decision, the fact that the relations of the regiment commander Nikolai Isaev with Pokryshkin were, to put it mildly, not the warmest, also speaks.
So, comparing the data of the regiment and division, we come to the conclusion that already on September 21, that is, on the day of the battles, three victories were counted for Pokryshkin (U-87 and 2 U-88), and in total 6 victories were recorded at the expense of the regiment … Thus, Tabachenko's allusions to the postscripts of at least one of the "eighty-sevenths" are far-fetched and unsubstantiated, as well as his own statement that Zherdev and Sukhov "presented" the downed plane to Pokryshkin. By the way, a week later, on September 29, in a battle against a group of Ju-88, Pokryshkin gives Zherdev a Junkers, which was broken off from the formation and shot down by him, and he ignites a German plane and drives it into the ground, rightly taking into account the sixth victory (There the same. F. 16 giap. Op. 206868. D.1, Sheet 260 ob. – 262).
But what about the second Ju-87, the record of which appeared only in November (and then was included in the "List of victories" and award materials for the third Star)? Cases that the shot down plane was credited to the pilot after days, weeks, or even months were not so rare. In the history of 16 GIAP, a similar thing happened not only with Pokryshkin, but also with Rechkalov, Klubov, Karpov, Olefirenko, Trofimov, Tsvetkov, Berezkin - both in 1943, and in 1944, and even in 1945 - that is, under different commanders. It happened in the "fraternal" 100 and 104 giaps.
There are many such examples in the history of other regiments. We will cite only one - from the combat activities of 494 IAP, which was part of a division that fought in another sector of the front (also flying on "aircobras"). At the very end of December 1944, three FV-190s (one for each) were added to the accounts of Captain Videnkin and junior lieutenants Kulakov and Obotin, which they shot down in September - October, that is, two to three months before the appearance of these records in the ZhUSS regiment (Ibid. F. 494 Iap. Op. 614529. D. 2. Sheet 10 v. –11). There was just an operational pause (as at the beginning of the 20th of November in the 9 giad action band) and confirmation was received.
According to Tabachenko's logic, all such cases should be regarded as malicious postscripts. It seems that such straightforward judgments, at least, suffer from oversimplification. But whatever the reason for the appearance in the ZhUSS of the record about the second Junkers shot down by Pokryshkin, this fact alone is enough to stop speculation and leave this victory where it officially resides - on the pilot's combat account.
Well, as for the last "argument" of Tabachenko - that the U-87s were not reflected in the order "On payment for the downed", then everything is simple here. The fact is that this order does not include all the aircraft officially credited to Pokryshkin and another 13 pilots of the unit from mid-April to early October. So, Pokryshkin received a reward for 9 aircraft (5 Yu-88 and 4 Me-109, only 14 thousand rubles), shot down starting on April 20, although during this time he won 31 victories. Rechkalov was paid for only four aircraft (2 Me-109, Yu-88 and He-111) out of 23 personal and 3 group (if you count from the same date). Lukyanov - for three (out of 12), Tabachenko - for two (out of 5 + 1), Tsvetkov - for 2 (out of 7). Fadeev, Teterin, Iskrin, Trofimov, Fedorov, Olefirenko, Chistov - for one (the number of victories he counted for that period can be seen in Bykov's collection). Only Alexander Samsonov had a 100% result: he was paid for both of his victories won in the 16 GIAP (He-111 and Me-109) (Ibid. F. 16 GIAP. Op. 296915. D. 1. L. 168-171).
Tabachenko could not fail to see this. And the fact that he refers to this far from complete (in terms of personalities and even more victories) order-statement as "proof" that the "phantom-ill-fated" Ju-87 was attributed to Pokryshkin, speaks either of his inability to work with sources, or about the desire to fit them into their own theories and mislead the reader. Or both at the same time.
So, let's summarize. According to the regimental and divisional operational documents, the result of the combat day on September 21, 1943 for the pilots of the 16th GIAP was seven air victories won without losses. Four of them are on the account of Alexander Pokryshkin.
10.00–10.55 S-87 Pokryshkin Tiefenbrunn
- // - Yu-87 Pokryshkin north-east. Big Tokmak
11.05–12.05 U-88 Popov Veseloe
13.15–14.10 S-88 Pokryshkin sowing Big Tokmak
- // - Yu-88 Pokryshkin south-west. Molochansk
- // - Yu-88 Zherdev zap. Molochansk
16.45-17.40 FV-189 Labor zap. Big Tokmak
Well, the battle score of Viktor Zherdev (pictured), taking into account the victory he won that day, will be as follows (information that is not in the collection of M. Bykov, or specified in bold):
Zherdev Victor Ivanovich
List of aerial victories
04/16/43 1 S-87 south-west. Crimean
08/30/43 1 Me-109 Annunciation
09/02/43 1 Me-109 Konkovo
09.21.43 1 S-88 zap. Molochansk
09/26/43 1 Xe-111 s. Mikhailovka
09/29/43 1 S-88 Dniprovka - Ukrainka
01.10.31 1 S-87 Joyful
01.10.31 1 Me-109 north-west. Pervomaisky
10/22/43 1 Me-109 north-west. Burchak
11/28/43 1 S-87 Chuchak
07.16.44 1 S-87 Sushno
07.21.44 1 FV-190 south-west. Kulikow
07.21.44 1 S-87 zap. Verhrata
Total aircraft shot down - 13 + 0
Killed January 13, 1945, shot down by enemy anti-aircraft artillery, killed on the ground
This was that September day 69 years ago. We remember…
