This happened during the Battle of Britain where both sides over estimated, for whatever reason, the true number of kills. I find it hard to imagine that it was easy, if at all possible, to keep accurate scores in the heat of a battle.

firstly, where is the table?

and i agree with Hagar, in the heat of battle you squirt bullets at whatever came in your sights and if you hit well who know what could have happened and then you had multiple people shooting and singular aircraft.  What ever happens though, we must remember that in the end they did defend our home countries and stop the onslaught of the enemy.

hm,but if you have a wingman,who can watch the battle from a safe distance,your number of kills can be very accurate.

if my flying skills were those of h.j. marseille,i wouldn't need a wingman. 

Quote:


Which is essential to keep the morale of the people high!  That actually sounds pretty much how it was done.

Quote:


http://www.pacificspitfires.com/history_air_raids.html

I think during the BoB a "confirmed" kill had to be witnessed by another pilot or someone on the ground. The aircraft had to be seen to crash for a kill to be confirmed.

Tactics are all very well in theory but often work out differently in practice. What happens if your wingman gets bounced & has his own fight on his hands? The less experienced pilots were often taken on as wingmen by the most experienced (someone had to try & show them the ropes) & often got quickly separated when the action started. From what I've read on air to air combat involving any sort of numbers it usually ended up with every man for himself. Unless you were prepared to follow a victim down & actually watch it hit the ground or sea (not a good idea) it would be impossible to know for certain if it had crashed or got away.