[Milsurplus] "Lancaster" ( digression from )

[Hubert Miller]

I have long been interested in 'loss rates' and I don't know quite why. I am pretty sure in conditions of low temperatures
especially, I wouldn't have lasted long. I don't recall many specifics of 'loss rates' except for maybe the U-boat crews and
also BTW, allied merchant seaman had quite high losses. German losses at Stalingrad were >97% but that was so some 
extent self-administered; some Germans continued their war two weeks after the main groups surrender.  There were
'death marches' in North Korean captivity that are not now widely known but were severe as those under the Nazis. 
At one time I was interested in compiling a comparison list across many wars. Maybe I still will do this. 
Not a happy subject, but a subject. 
-H

>Thanks for that.

The loss rate in ALL bomber crews was horrendous. That includes US crews.

According to this site:

http://www.taphilo.com/history/8thaf/8aflosses.shtml

The 8th AF alone suffered 30,000 killed.

There were 15,500 fatalities and 7100 aircraft lost in training accidents.

I remember reading somewhere that the loss rate for U.S. bomber crews was well above the loss rate for any other service. Some figure over 50% comes to mind, but is probably wrong.

Ken W7EKB

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus