Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: agent 009 on July 21, 2005, 09:26:10 PM
-
Some historians have downplayed Richthofens shootdown of Hawker. Citing the wind as the major factor in his favor.
Hawker did have the better turning & more maneuverable plane, Manfred the faster. The fight lasted 30-35 minutes most reports state. Shots fired at beginning, 30 minutes of circles, then shots again fired at end.
One account states Hawker did some aerobatics that Richthofens 'less creative flying' could not match. Richthofen's report states; my opponent then did a series of silly loops.
The author of this account also metion shots whizzing past Richthofens head during this acrobatic display, ( which is sci-fi, Manfred states shots were only fired at beginning & at end ). Besides, the author wasn't there!
Last thoughts. Hawker officially had 9 victories credited to him. Some speculate he may have had as many as 30, but these were downed before British began counting shootdowns, ( it was in the earliest part of aerial fighting ).
The point being Hawker was the more experienced of the 2. Richthofen was beginning his single seat career at the time of this encounter, fall 1916, his 11th victory.
So, was the Baron the patient hunter? hung with a more maneuverable plane for 35 min. Should this battle-victory be downplayed or not?
-
Red Baron was killed by a French Machine Gunner on the ground..
fact.
-
Australian.
-
Rifleman.
-
Same thing..
-
5-600 yrds. very lucky shot. Or the best marksman in Australian army. Lucky is more likely.
-
Originally posted by agent 009
5-600 yrds. very lucky shot. Or the best marksman in Australian army. Lucky is more likely.
Or accidental..
-
I like broccoli.
-
Originally posted by Scherf
I like broccoli.
With cheese..
But your breaking a rule..
-
Australian machine-gunner(s), but thats not the topic of the thread.
Hawkers score of "destroyed" was 9. WW1 scores are often badly misunderstood or misquoted. Btw the RFC always kept records of a pilots "successes", I have never heard of anything that claimed Hawkers score was 30 because the RFC "didnt start counting".
Hawker may have been involved in 30 combats where he either shared or personally vanquished/drove off/damaged opponents.
In regards to the fight, it was a classic matchup of a faster fighter vs a slower but more manueverable one. Hawker was over enemy territory and he had to break off at some point. Either that or be forced to land and be captured.
I dont think it needs to be "downplayed?" or "uplayed". It was by all accounts a very tough fight for both of them. In Richtofen's autobiography he wrote before his death he talks about the fight and had great respect for Maj. Hawker. As for experience, Richtofen was not a novice pilot in the Fall of 1916, he flew combat types in the East before coming to fly in the West. Hawker probably had more single seat time by the time of the fight.
Richtofen pressed the attack because that was his job, he would have broken off had there been a sound reason to, but he was over friendly territory, and he was in combat with an enemy machine. I see no reason why he should break off.
*An interesting comparison, which happened 56 years later, over N. Vietnam pitted Lt. Cunnignham's missile armed supersonic USN F-4J Phantom II vs Colonel Toons gun armed subsonic but very manueverable MiG-17 Fresco.
-
Give up Agent
We are much too silly to discuss this.
EDIT: Except for Squire, that is...
More importantly, was the Battle of Trafalgar indeed fought on dry land near Cudsworth as Prof. D.P. Gumby's research indicates? Was Drake too clever for the German fleet?
My brain hurts,
SEAGOON
-
It was all going good for Richthofen til the beagle cherry-picked him. Not some crocodile hunting mudmonkey with a popgun.
-
Originally posted by Pooh21
It was all going good for Richthofen til the beagle cherry-picked him. Not some crocodile hunting mudmonkey with a popgun.
That'd get an 'A' in LaserSailors highschool history class. ;)
-
:mad:
You only insult me because you can't top me in an argument. :D
-
Who cares, they were both good pilots who fought well:P
-
Originally posted by Pooh21
It was all going good for Richthofen til the beagle cherry-picked him.
The doghouse is a dweeb ride that would surely cause perk whines in AH. :)
-
"(As for experience, Richtofen was not a novice pilot in the Fall of 1916, he flew combat types in the East before coming to fly in the West.)"
Much of the flight time in the east was as an observer, not as pilot.
He also flew some missions on west front as 2 seat pilot, and a handfull of missions in the Fokker eindekker single seat.
So, yes he was not a novice pilot, but less experienced in single seat action that Hawker. Hawker was flying a pusher, which would have afforded some protection from the rear, but not on this occasion. He almost made his lines, but still Manfred would have pursued. Lucky shot for Manfred maybe.
-
Originally posted by Hawklore
Same thing..
I'm confused...
French Machine Gunner = Australian Rifleman?
-
"not" same thing.
-
the real shame (aviation wise) from the first world war was McCudden crashing due to engine failure and being killed. He could have been an outstanding leader in wwii.
-
Originally posted by Furball
the real shame (aviation wise) from the first world war was McCudden crashing due to engine failure and being killed. He could have been an outstanding leader in wwii.
Ah but Providence cuts both ways Furball. Someone like Boelcke or Richthoffen could have survived and gone on to lead the Luftwaffe in WW2 instead of "the fat one" to use the expression of German WW2 fighter pilots.
Personally, I'm glad we were up against Goering as my German is terrible.
;)
- SEAGOON
-
but as an actual leader i dont think McCudden was surpassed in the first world war.
http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/england/mccudden1.html
-
isn't french machinegunner an oxymoron? yes perk the doghouse, vivid proof of allied bias in modelling. it was in fact the basis for the P47N modelling from the HTC imagination station.
-
Not all the WW1 successes were good WW2 leaders, seemed to depend on the man and the job. A lot changed from 1918 to 1940. Nothing is for certain. Same with the Army and Navy brass. Some made the transition, and some were mediocre to outright dangerous...
-
Mccudden was one of a very few who flew in every year of the war. As did Berthold on the German side.
Mcudden said this of Richthofen; The leader maneuvered very well. He also counted 24 bullets in his tail courtesy of the Baron.
As for Hawker having likely more than 9 kills, part of the problem was that he flew loads of lone patrols early on, hence no witnesses. Keeping track might also not have been a high priority for him, ( speculation ). Also it was the French who started the whole ace thing, then Germans & British began to follow suit. Awards & such for accomplishements,( Yes I know, Germans never accepted 5 kills as ace status).
Anyway, back to original point. It was Richard Townsend Bickers , hope I spelled that right, who wrote Red Baron The Legend Reevaluated that stated, Richthofen won because of the wind blowing in his favor. He's a well known author, flew in coastal command during the war, but full of beans regarding the Baron. Sure the wind was a factor, but heck Hawker had 35 minutes to line up a kill shot on Richthofen or his plane, & was able to do neither. Jeez, I wonder if Richthofens flying ability had "anything" to do with it??? Nah, couldn't be. had to be the wind.
-
Originally posted by storch
isn't french machinegunner an oxymoron? yes perk the doghouse, vivid proof of allied bias in modelling. it was in fact the basis for the P47N modelling from the HTC imagination station.
When wrapper, it clocks on the magazine blender!
-
Originally posted by agent 009
Anyway, back to original point. It was Richard Townsend Bickers , hope I spelled that right, who wrote Red Baron The Legend Reevaluated that stated, Richthofen won because of the wind blowing in his favor. He's a well known author, flew in coastal command during the war, but full of beans regarding the Baron. Sure the wind was a factor, but heck Hawker had 35 minutes to line up a kill shot on Richthofen or his plane, & was able to do neither. Jeez, I wonder if Richthofens flying ability had "anything" to do with it??? Nah, couldn't be. had to be the wind.
It was the conclusion of the fight was directly affected by the wind. During that 35 or so minutes Hawker had been blown over the German lines. the DH2 he was flying was a deathtrap, he should have long been taken off of the front or put in a better aircraft. he had to make a run for the British lines as he was out of fuel, which is when Von Richtofen shot him down.
As for Lanoe Hawker's skill, he was among the first to arm an aircraft. he was supposed to be a superlative shot, he had a deer hunting rifle mounted on the side of the aircraft, which with single shots had managed to down some german aircraft by shooting the pilot (before the fitting of machine guns) there was an almost legend among the german pilots of this moustached British pilot, who, without doing anything, could make their aircraft drop out of the sky (you couldnt hear the single rifle crack over the engines)
-
ahem.... I believe "official" credit goes to Lt. Roy Brown :)
So there.....
(although, in fact, I do believe the credit goes to the aussies"
As for leaders, My vote goes for the oft forgotten Raymond Collishaw. My favourite among WW1 flyers.
-
I think the DH2 was the main RFC scout at the time, but had he been in a Nieuport 11 , he still would have had the problem of being in the slower a/c to Richtofens Albatross DII.
It was an interesting battle because there is no doubt that both were very good shots and pilots, and tacticians. They knew what it was all about.
Hawker would have likely killed a lesser opponent, who made a mistake or lost his nerve.
As for Hawkers successes, its always open for conjecture, as in WW1 there were few witnesses and no gun cameras. The fact he had 9 confirmed in 1916 is actually a very solid score for those days. He could obviously fly and shoot.
-
Yep, most of Hawkers kills were over German side, making verification near impossible. & Yes, it was end of fight that the wind affected most. Dh2 was best machine they had at the time, a jump up from what they were flying before. Hawker deliberatley threw his into a spin to see if it could be brought out , ( recovered ), from it. Rather ballsy considering he had no parachute. He also added the 2 drums together design so pilots didn't have to reload so often.
-
Originally posted by Arty
ahem.... I believe "official" credit goes to Lt. Roy Brown :)
So there.....
(although, in fact, I do believe the credit goes to the aussies"
and his friend and leader on that flight was WOP May who went on to be a famous Canadian bush pilot.
-
Originally posted by agent 009
Yep, most of Hawkers kills were over German side, making verification near impossible. & Yes, it was end of fight that the wind affected most. Dh2 was best machine they had at the time, a jump up from what they were flying before.
the best they had were the Sopwith Pup and Sopwith Triplane that the RNAS were using up in the north, but inter service BS prevented the RFC from using.
If Hawker had been in either of these aircraft it would have probably been a very different story.
-
The first prototype Sopwith Triplane, N.500, went to France in mid-June, 1916 to undergo Service trials with Naval "A" Fighting Squadron at Furnes. The Triplane was an instant success, and no time was lost in testing it in action, for it was sent up on an interception within a quarter of an hour of its arrival at Furnes. It was destined to be flown operationally by naval units only. The R.F.C., who had already received a present of the first sixty R.N.A.S. Spad S.7s, decided in February 1917 to accept the remaining sixty in exchange for the Sopwith Triplanes on order for the Corps.
Clayton and Shuttleworth-built Triplane flown by No. I Squadron, R.N.A.S.
It would appear the Sopwith tripe entered service Feb 1917.
The type was ordered by the Admiralty for the R.N.A.S., and the War office followed suit by ordering 266 machines for the R.F.C. Sopwith built the R.N.A.S. Triplanes. Other contractors undertook production of the Triplane for the R.F.C.
No. 1 (Naval) Squadron, 'Naval one', went into action with the type in April 1917, in support of the hard-pressed R.F.C. The hitherto very successful Albatros D-III was completely outclassed, and IdFlieg , the German Inspectorate of Flying Troops, received a severe shock. The Tripehound could out-climb and out-turn the Albatros, and was 15 m.p.h faster. Naval Eight and Naval Ten, equipped in April and May, also made their presence felt. Proof of the Triplane's worth was soon to be shown. In April 1917 Flight Commander R. S. Dallas and Flight Sub-Lieutenant T. G. Culling attacked a formation of fourteen German aircraft. After forty-five minutes they had shot down three of the enemy and driven the remainder into retreat.