Frank Luke

[Ras 0]

Being very new to WW 1 history, I just came across the information about the book and now subsequent movie about the story of Frank Luke, Jr. i did a search and saw that he was mentioned a number of times, but after a number of inquiries, didn't see anything about the book. It is spendy but maybe some are interested in it or the dvd that shows the research. I have neither but thought it worth mentioning.

 

http://www.indysquadron.com/thestandfrankluke/

[Jammer28 0]

I would love to read the book but $64.99 is a bit pricey for me.

[OvS 8]

I would love to read the book but $64.99 is a bit pricey for me.

 

 

No disrespect intended to the Luke family, or Frank Luke himself, but really, was he worth writing a book about and considering it a 'mystery' how he died? At an exorbent price of $64.99 for the book and then a DVD as well, it looks more like a marketing campaign than anything else.

 

He was short lived in the war, from July to September 1918, and scored 15 kills (which many debate were false as he often went out alone) in an area patrolled by lesser quality German pilots. He was not well liked in his squadron, and either went AWOL after an arguement with the CO, ran out of fuel, or was shot out of the sky by ground fire protecting a balloon, which he never took down. Seems like bad piloting decisions based on wreckless desire for attention.

 

He recieved a MOH for and shooting/killing a few German infantrymen while trying to avoid capture, which is where he lost his life.

 

Personally, it's not a story worth writing about, or publishing all of this, especially at this price. There were many men lost on the front, who died a hero's death and recieved nothing in return. They make it seem like this is 'the book' to own, regardless of the fact that he really was not a hero at all.

 

Now... Rauol Lufbery, Elliot White, Quentin Roosevelt... those are guys worth writing books about.

 

OvS

[Mr_Dirt 1]

OVS I disagree with you on the book and Frank Luke. I own the book and have finished it. The book is well written and it is pricey. The author explains in detail about the last flight of Frank Luke. There was three planes in the area that day which led to alot of confusion. Luke's last stand was witnessed by several French witnesses. They signed a confession of their storey right after the war ended. A german officer also gave his side which was very different in what the French said. The author spent several trips going to the scene of Luke's death and researched alot of material putting this book together. What he came up with seemed very reasonable to me. Luke was given the MOH for shooting down 3 balloons and engaging in a dogfight. It was also claimed he shot up and killed German Troops marching through the village he was shot down near. Luke then suposedly shot it out with troops who were trying to capture him. The author did a good job of putting the events of Luke's last day in order. He thinks Luke did shoot down 3 balloons, but only 2 flamed and one did not. The catch is only one was in sight of the French. Luke's friend from another Pursuit group shot down one of the ballonons and his wingman shot down the other. The friend was also shot down a short distance away. The author also shows that Luke never shot up the column of German Soldiers, but he was wounded and landed his plane. He crawled around a 100 yards from his plane towards a creek. It was getting dark and the Germans were approaching. Luke had swore he would not be taken alive he had enough strength left to rise up and fire 3 shots in the direction of the approaching enemy and fell dead from his wound. Now I do agree that he was not well liked by his mates, but Richkenbaker Spelling incorrect thought alot of him. If he would have lived he was to be transfered to Eddie's Command. I also think he deserved some recognition for shooting down 5 Balloons and Aircraft in less than an hour which was confirmed. I do know that many pilots turned and received credit for planes they did not shoot down, Luke should not be faulted for this. I agree with the other pilots you talk about they are heroes and worthy of books. I have read books on all of them, but in my humble opinion Frank Luke was worthy as well, he died for his country the same as the others. Now that is off my chest how is the Nova going I have not seen any comments about it Lately. Best wishes John

[SirMike1983 3]

I also think literature about Frank Luke is worth a look, though I do think the book's price is too steep. Luke was certainly not a "team player", but I do think he was a talented pilot and shooter. To me he actually is a bit of a mystery from the standpoint of just what was going through his mind during his flying career. He seemed to be a bit of loner, but capable still of high aggression attacks in the air. He seems like a good case for analysis of just what was causing this behavior.

Edited May 19, 2009 by SirMike1983

[OvS 8]

I also think literature about Frank Luke is worth a look, though I do think the book's price is too steep. Luke was certainly not a "team player", but I do think he was a talented pilot and shooter. To me he actually is a bit of a mystery from the standpoint of just what was going through his mind during his flying career. He seemed to be a bit of loner, but capable still of high aggression attacks in the air. He seems like a good case for analysis of just what was causing this behavior.

 

Good points from both of you about Luke, but still, to me, pilots like Mannock, Ball, Guynemere, Udet, and all the others are more interesting. A lot of Luke's story(ies) are contradicted by fact, and opinion. It seems even from the research the author did, he uncovered more contradiction. Luke's largest adversary was himself, as it showed in his very aggresive behavior and overall attitude.

 

Not that I am in love with the 'hero' type, and prefer the better names in aces, it's just that they make more of Luke and this situation than really warrants. What else is there to say, he was nuts (or really pissed off), he flew out one morning, tagged 1 maybe 2, who knows.. three balloons, got shot down, was jumped by German infantry, and got into an 'OK Coral' type gunfight, which he promtly lost.

 

Not much there to write home about to me. I'm sorry I'm being so negative, if I am, or even anti-Luke if you will, but after reading so many bios on WWI aces, I just thought Luke's was standard for an over-confident, cocky fighter pilot. Much like Fonck was, but he lasted the war. If Luke did, maybe it would have been different. Who knows.

 

The Nova... well, it's going, very, very slowly. ;) I'll try to post some pics soon.

 

OvS

[JohnGresham 0]

Good points from both of you about Luke, but still, to me, pilots like Mannock, Ball, Guynemere, Udet, and all the others are more interesting. A lot of Luke's story(ies) are contradicted by fact, and opinion. It seems even from the research the author did, he uncovered more contradiction. Luke's largest adversary was himself, as it showed in his very aggresive behavior and overall attitude.

 

Not that I am in love with the 'hero' type, and prefer the better names in aces, it's just that they make more of Luke and this situation than really warrants. What else is there to say, he was nuts (or really pissed off), he flew out one morning, tagged 1 maybe 2, who knows.. three balloons, got shot down, was jumped by German infantry, and got into an 'OK Coral' type gunfight, which he promtly lost.

 

Not much there to write home about to me. I'm sorry I'm being so negative, if I am, or even anti-Luke if you will, but after reading so many bios on WWI aces, I just thought Luke's was standard for an over-confident, cocky fighter pilot. Much like Fonck was, but he lasted the war. If Luke did, maybe it would have been different. Who knows.

 

The Nova... well, it's going, very, very slowly. ;) I'll try to post some pics soon.

 

OvS

 

I wouldn't compare him with Fonck. Fonck was, as far as I understand, extremely calculating and methodical about what he did. I doubt the same could be said of Luke. However, I do agree that there is at least a good deal of controversy and ambiguity about Luke's achievements. Personally, I've always ascribed the mythology around Frank Luke as partly driven by America's need to find heroes in a war they entered relatively late.

 

I'm certainly not going to call into question the bravery of anyone prepared to clamber into a cockpit at any point during WWI, but I have to agree with Ovs, this seems like the creation of a mystery where one simply didn't exist and at that price they do seem to be pricing themselves out of the market.

Edited May 19, 2009 by JohnGresham

[Ras 0]

I wouldn't compare him with Fonck. Fonck was, as far as I understand, extremely calculating and methodical about what he did. I doubt the same could be said of Luke. However, I do agree that there is at least a good deal of controversy and ambiguity about Luke's achievements. Personally, I've always ascribed the mythology around Frank Luke as partly driven by America's need to find heroes in a war they entered relatively late.

 

I'm certainly not going to call into question the bravery of anyone prepared to clamber into a cockpit at any point during WWI, but I have to agree with Ovs, this seems like the creation of a mystery where one simply didn't exist and at that price they do seem to be pricing themselves out of the market.

 

 

Maybe by this time next year it will be less than half the price or more and then I'll buy it. Until then, no way.

[SirMike1983 3]

I wouldn't compare him with Fonck. Fonck was, as far as I understand, extremely calculating and methodical about what he did. I doubt the same could be said of Luke. However, I do agree that there is at least a good deal of controversy and ambiguity about Luke's achievements. Personally, I've always ascribed the mythology around Frank Luke as partly driven by America's need to find heroes in a war they entered relatively late.

 

I'm certainly not going to call into question the bravery of anyone prepared to clamber into a cockpit at any point during WWI, but I have to agree with Ovs, this seems like the creation of a mystery where one simply didn't exist and at that price they do seem to be pricing themselves out of the market.

 

 

 

I think the comparison OvS was making was primarily an issue of egotism getting in the way of his being able to form a better bond with some of the other squad members. Fonck was a notorious braggart.

 

In terms of method, you're correct-- Fonck was incredibly cold and calculating in the air. He also was known to take few unnecessary risks. However both pilots were excellent shots, though Fonck had more a "sniper's" mentality, whereas Luke had more a "high speed and hit them hard" approach.

 

I still think Luke is a topic worthy of research (though the book is overpriced). Just what makes a man so reckless that the behavior actually verges on suicidal? Certainly many of these aces had a certain high amount of courage just to battle in these conditions, but Luke seems to go the extra step of actually putting himself, alone, into the most dangerous situations possible. I don't doubt his talent, but I wonder what makes someone go out of their way to get into the most danger possible. I think it goes beyond mere daredevilry. It almost seems suicidal at times.

Edited May 19, 2009 by SirMike1983

[tttiger 0]

No disrespect intended to the Luke family, or Frank Luke himself, but really, was he worth writing a book about and considering it a 'mystery' how he died? At an exorbent price of $64.99 for the book and then a DVD as well, it looks more like a marketing campaign than anything else.

 

He was short lived in the war, from July to September 1918, and scored 15 kills (which many debate were false as he often went out alone) in an area patrolled by lesser quality German pilots. He was not well liked in his squadron, and either went AWOL after an arguement with the CO, ran out of fuel, or was shot out of the sky by ground fire protecting a balloon, which he never took down. Seems like bad piloting decisions based on wreckless desire for attention.

 

He recieved a MOH for and shooting/killing a few German infantrymen while trying to avoid capture, which is where he lost his life.

 

Personally, it's not a story worth writing about, or publishing all of this, especially at this price. There were many men lost on the front, who died a hero's death and recieved nothing in return. They make it seem like this is 'the book' to own, regardless of the fact that he really was not a hero at all.

 

Now... Rauol Lufbery, Elliot White, Quentin Roosevelt... those are guys worth writing books about.

 

OvS

 

LOL, OvS.

 

"No disrespect intended..." and then you pee all over the guy.

 

This after peeing all over entertainers who don't give all their money to charities in another thread...

 

They must have been pretty hard up for moderators....being a mod isn't (or shouldn't be) a license to opinionate wildly on every subject that pops up on the boards.

 

No disrespect intended, of course.

 

That said....

 

If you lived most of your life in Arizona as I have (I worked at the state Senate press room for more than 20 years and walked by the "St. Luke" statue in front of the capitol several times a day and go out to Luke AFB regularly to use the commissary), you can't help but be aware of the story.

 

I can't imagine there was enough left unsaid that makes this book worth the price. I haven't read it so can't take issue with what it says but it strikes me as more hype than substance.

 

BUT if you go and look at the list of the top 15 US aces in WWI at The Aerodrome, Rickenbacker and Luke and Lufbery (and only at the very end of his career) were the only ones who flew for the US Air Service.

 

All the rest flew for the RFC/RNAS and RAF (or in the case of Springs a USAS unit that was actually part of the RAF).

 

That alone makes Luke worthy of some attention. He's in a very select group of USAS aces.

 

Luke was certainly a tarnished hero but his flaws were what makes him interesting. Like much of the RFC with its many public school alumni, the USAS was largely comprised of Ivy League types. Luke (perhaps like Bruno Stachel) was shunned and certainly had a chip on his shoulder. And he was a tough guy, an ex boxer (boxing is hardly a team sport).

 

Team player? No. But neither were Ball or Bishop (Bishop may have been an outright liar but he's still considered Canada's greatest ace). The ranks of WWI aces were filled with many loners and individualists.

 

ttt

Edited May 19, 2009 by tttiger

[Creaghorn 10]

maybe frank luke didn't notice it's real, but thought it's a sim, thinking, if i die, i'll make another career. few flight hours, many kills for this short period, quickly died after couple days. i think we have many frank lukes here among simmers.

[+MK2 12]

No disrespect intended to the Luke family, or Frank Luke himself, but really, was he worth writing a book about and considering it a 'mystery' how he died? At an exorbent price of $64.99 for the book and then a DVD as well, it looks more like a marketing campaign than anything else.

 

He was short lived in the war, from July to September 1918, and scored 15 kills (which many debate were false as he often went out alone) in an area patrolled by lesser quality German pilots. He was not well liked in his squadron, and either went AWOL after an arguement with the CO, ran out of fuel, or was shot out of the sky by ground fire protecting a balloon, which he never took down. Seems like bad piloting decisions based on wreckless desire for attention.

 

He recieved a MOH for and shooting/killing a few German infantrymen while trying to avoid capture, which is where he lost his life.

 

Personally, it's not a story worth writing about, or publishing all of this, especially at this price. There were many men lost on the front, who died a hero's death and recieved nothing in return. They make it seem like this is 'the book' to own, regardless of the fact that he really was not a hero at all.

 

Now... Rauol Lufbery, Elliot White, Quentin Roosevelt... those are guys worth writing books about.

 

OvS

 

OVs wow...I have to strongly disagree with your statements.

 

I respectfully have to say you really do not know what you are talking about as far as his confirmations. Most of his kills were confirmed by signed affidavits. He often flew with Whener his trusted wingman and when he did get a a kill alone, he landed near freindly troops and got signed affidavits. When he socred a kill alone the first time it was not confirmed.....and that was it.

Luke went through great trouble including landing at balloon batteries in order to get the confirmations and driving out to the wreck of the planes he brought down. I am not sure where you are getting your history on Luke but it is waaaaaaay off base.

 

Luke had 18 kills , most in just a 17 day stretch, is an American hero and very much worth talking about. A brave flyer whom Eddie Rickenbacker called the best fighter pilot America had (I think Rickenbacker knows more than you or I when it comes to this subject, since he flew out of the same aerodrome he did and knew him personally and had 26 kills himself!!!)

 

The book is amazing, worth every penny and a great read and Luke was a hero worth all the accolades. As far as the other comment which I take some exception to that Luke was not "a hero at all". I suggest you read up and find out how important Luke was to morale and how he set the pace for Balloon busting and the effects that had on the ground war being fought before you dismiss him as a hero.

 

I know members of the Luke family.

I know Stephen Skinner the author

I have hundreds of books on aces and rank this as one of the best I have ever read. Stephen spent 15 years of his life uncovering new facts , it's his life's work and a masterpiece.

[+Dave 2,322]

To get a good history of Lt Luke, come see me WPAFB and I will give you a tour of the USAF Museum WWI section. Its fantastic. I am very much interested in that book. I blame Mk2 for my interest.

[Rickitycrate 10]

MK2, my thanks to you sir as I was unfit to make a civil comment. F. Luke being one of my hero's. Enough said.

[OvS 8]

OVs wow...I have to strongly disagree with your statements.

 

I respectfully have to say you really do not know what you are talking about as far as his confirmations. Most of his kills were confirmed by signed affidavits. He often flew with Whener his trusted wingman and when he did get a a kill alone, he landed near freindly troops and got signed affidavits. When he socred a kill alone the first time it was not confirmed.....and that was it.

Luke went through great trouble including landing at balloon batteries in order to get the confirmations and driving out to the wreck of the planes he brought down. I am not sure where you are getting your history on Luke but it is waaaaaaay off base.

 

Luke had 18 kills , most in just a 17 day stretch, is an American hero and very much worth talking about. A brave flyer whom Eddie Rickenbacker called the best fighter pilot America had (I think Rickenbacker knows more than you or I when it comes to this subject, since he flew out of the same aerodrome he did and knew him personally and had 26 kills himself!!!)

 

The book is amazing, worth every penny and a great read and Luke was a hero worth all the accolades. As far as the other comment which I take some exception to that Luke was not "a hero at all". I suggest you read up and find out how important Luke was to morale and how he set the pace for Balloon busting and the effects that had on the ground war being fought before you dismiss him as a hero.

 

I know members of the Luke family.

I know Stephen Skinner the author

I have hundreds of books on aces and rank this as one of the best I have ever read. Stephen spent 15 years of his life uncovering new facts , it's his life's work and a masterpiece.

 

Good points, but it still doesn't change my opinion about Luke. I think Raul Lufbery should have the same focus and attention that Luke seems to get. That guy to me, is a hero.

 

Some other aces that were superb Balloon Busters...courtesy of The Aerodrome

 

http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/balloon_busters.php

 

As you can see, Luke ranked 9th. This is the same arguement that has been made about MvR being the best fighter pilot in the sky, verses Udet, Fonck, Guynemere...etc. It's the kill list that you have to look at. Are they shooting down 2-seaters, or 1-on-1 aerial combat verses another scout.

 

I have my opinion about Luke, even reading the book might not change it. To me, it's as was already stated before, a bit of American folklore that we NEED the hero, the outcast, the underdog for some reason, meanwhile, in the corner sits Lufbery, a guy that was part of the Lafayette Escadrille from day 1, and saw more action than any other American pilot, based purely on him volunteering when the USA was not even at war with anyone.

 

My facts and opinions were purely based on information written in books that I've read over the years and other stuff across the internet, mostly because nothing solid was ever written about him. Who's fault is that? Not mine, I don't write books for a living. I guess it's something that many other military writers such as Franks, and countless other authors did not feel the need to touch on.

 

Maybe that'll change if I read the book. But whether I'm right or wrong on Luke is really my opinion, and it's not based on my just wanting to be wrong. Just like Bishop, many have questioned his truthfulness about his victories. Why a guy would have to go through such great lengths to get confirmation on kills, especially Balloons that explode as bright as the sun when they do, is beyond understanding. Did Rickenbacker do that? Lends one to imagine that he did not have a believable personality from the start, or maybe he was narcissistical? I don't know. I'm not a doctor. MvR did it as well, but he had reason to, after 20 kills, 30, 40... I guess you get used to doing something. I don't know what posses anyone to do that, it's kind of grim. But MvR was a hunter by nature, so maybe it was like displaying a Boar's head?

 

When the price comes down, I'll read the book, or even rent the DVD from the library. I'd like to see it.

 

On a side note... considering I am American, I do love a hero... underdog whatever (I actually have a B/W picture taped to my locker door of Joe Namath tossing a bomb, while he is in mid-air, during a Miami game), it's just that until you have read the book "The First Day on the Somme" by Martin Middlebrook, or "Bloody April/Black September" by Norman Franks (and others), you'll see what I mean about heros and what it really means to be one. To me, it's not the guy that wastes important squardon time driving around asking people to sign personal witness accounts, or driving to wrecks to salvage parts from a recent victory to re-assure someone that you really did it. To me, it's about the little guy whole kisses his cross, jumps over the line and runs out to his death simply following orders from his CO.

 

So be it as it may that I am wrong about Luke, I have my reasons. The poor bastards flying the 2-seaters that go down in flames deserve the credit of a hero as well, but don't because they are considered fodder. I've been to the cemeteries, and read the names and nameless. A guy with 10 Balloons popped single handidly, 4 shared and 4 aerial victories doesn't give me the same feeling as a guy I crouched down in front of, who was a CMOH winner for bravery.

 

http://www.webmatters.net/france/ww1_bony_usa.htm

 

Scroll down to Turner, he's from New York (nice!). I have my own picture of his headstone at home from when I paid my respects to him. Why not write a book about his last 'flight'?

 

All the best,

 

OvS

[Hauksbee 103]

Now THAT was a dogfight!

[OvS 8]

Now THAT was a dogfight!

 

Udet vs Guynemere... absolutely! Honestly, I think Guynemere might have had the edge. Tough to say. Udet's superior flying skils, in a slower plane, verses Guynemere's paitence and accuracy in the Spad.

 

Wow... imagine if Udet's guns didn't jam?

 

How about Collishaw vs Allmenröder?

 

Jeeze... All this talk about Luke and other WWI aces is better than debating who was the best Yankee? Ruth or DiMaggio or Jeter or Jackson or Munson .. or . .and on... and on.

 

Love it!

 

OvS

[+MK2 12]

Good points, but it still doesn't change my opinion about Luke. I think Raul Lufbery should have the same focus and attention that Luke seems to get. That guy to me, is a hero.

 

Some other aces that were superb Balloon Busters...courtesy of The Aerodrome

 

http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/balloon_busters.php

 

As you can see, Luke ranked 9th. This is the same arguement that has been made about MvR being the best fighter pilot in the sky, verses Udet, Fonck, Guynemere...etc. It's the kill list that you have to look at. Are they shooting down 2-seaters, or 1-on-1 aerial combat verses another scout.

 

I have my opinion about Luke, even reading the book might not change it. To me, it's as was already stated before, a bit of American folklore that we NEED the hero, the outcast, the underdog for some reason, meanwhile, in the corner sits Lufbery, a guy that was part of the Lafayette Escadrille from day 1, and saw more action than any other American pilot, based purely on him volunteering when the USA was not even at war with anyone.

 

My facts and opinions were purely based on information written in books that I've read over the years and other stuff across the internet, mostly because nothing solid was ever written about him. Who's fault is that? Not mine, I don't write books for a living. I guess it's something that many other military writers such as Franks, and countless other authors did not feel the need to touch on.

 

Maybe that'll change if I read the book. But whether I'm right or wrong on Luke is really my opinion, and it's not based on my just wanting to be wrong. Just like Bishop, many have questioned his truthfulness about his victories. Why a guy would have to go through such great lengths to get confirmation on kills, especially Balloons that explode as bright as the sun when they do, is beyond understanding. Did Rickenbacker do that? Lends one to imagine that he did not have a believable personality from the start, or maybe he was narcissistical? I don't know. I'm not a doctor. MvR did it as well, but he had reason to, after 20 kills, 30, 40... I guess you get used to doing something. I don't know what posses anyone to do that, it's kind of grim. But MvR was a hunter by nature, so maybe it was like displaying a Boar's head?

 

When the price comes down, I'll read the book, or even rent the DVD from the library. I'd like to see it.

 

On a side note... considering I am American, I do love a hero... underdog whatever (I actually have a B/W picture taped to my locker door of Joe Namath tossing a bomb, while he is in mid-air, during a Miami game), it's just that until you have read the book "The First Day on the Somme" by Martin Middlebrook, or "Bloody April/Black September" by Norman Franks (and others), you'll see what I mean about heros and what it really means to be one. To me, it's not the guy that wastes important squardon time driving around asking people to sign personal witness accounts, or driving to wrecks to salvage parts from a recent victory to re-assure someone that you really did it. To me, it's about the little guy whole kisses his cross, jumps over the line and runs out to his death simply following orders from his CO.

 

So be it as it may that I am wrong about Luke, I have my reasons. The poor bastards flying the 2-seaters that go down in flames deserve the credit of a hero as well, but don't because they are considered fodder. I've been to the cemeteries, and read the names and nameless. A guy with 10 Balloons popped single handidly, 4 shared and 4 aerial victories doesn't give me the same feeling as a guy I crouched down in front of, who was a CMOH winner for bravery.

 

http://www.webmatters.net/france/ww1_bony_usa.htm

 

Scroll down to Turner, he's from New York (nice!). I have my own picture of his headstone at home from when I paid my respects to him. Why not write a book about his last 'flight'?

 

All the best,

 

OvS

 

To sum up your post:

 

You do not think Luke is a hero (your opinion, not shared by many, many Americans ...again including top aces like Eddie Rickenbacker, the Generals who were there and saw the inspiration he provided and I ahh...I dunno maybe the people who named an AIR FORCE BASE after him)

You read some books on Luke (No idea which ones because the ones I have read recently both the Stand and Terror of the Autumn skies are full of facts).

Your still wrong about his confirmations, no matter what you read on the internet.

You think Lufberry deserves credit (I am not even sure what you mean since he has an aerial move named after him! Is a legend and a hero and plenty has been written about him, countless books dealing with the Lafayette escadrille).

Maybe you should write a book about Turner! Stephen spent 15 years of his life writing whatever he wants to write!

 

Oh and last but not least...its' mind boggling he is ranked 9th , after all he only had 2 1/2 weeks to do it!!!

 

There is really no where else to go with this discussion.

 

I encourage you to read the stand as I am fairly certain if you do you might change your opions on the subject.

[Rickitycrate 10]

My 2 cents. I read Harold Hartney's book "Up and AT 'em" some years ago, can't place my hands on my copy right now, and I seem to recall how Hartney personally sent Luke and Joe Wehner out to get two balloons and since they were based near the front Hartney was able to visually see the gasbags when they lit up. How's that for confirmation? If my memory of this event is incorrect I beg all your pardons.

 

Me I fly a sim, that I love, I have fun. All the participants of WWI were really in it and paid dearly. For me to disparrage any of them is just not something I'll do. Opinions are fine. Facts may be disputed. We may have favorites and heroes. They all deserve respect IMHO.

[OvS 8]

I encourage you to read the stand as I am fairly certain if you do you might change your opions on the subject.

 

OK!! OK!! I'll read it!!! Maybe I've read too many books about German aces... who knows... OK... I'll read it.

 

Most of the stuff I've read in the past, as I stated before were columns, and books that touched on a bios of each pilot. Nothing I've ever read about him was strictly written on him and him only. So maybe the opinion of the author's I read at that time was not in favor of him, which did not help build mine... same for Fonck. You also have to imagine this was as far back as almost 20 years ago when I was in college and just out High School... then stuff on the internet while researching pilots for my Hell's Angels patch.

 

Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't make me have a love for an American hero than anyone else. BTW... it was standard practice put into place after WWI that many airfields all across the USA were renamed for WWI aces. In fact, Lufbery field in Long Island has since been recovered as a Nassau County park and renamed Cedar Creek Park. Roosevelt Field, named after Quentin is now a shopping mall.

 

But your right, maybe I am being a bit too harsh. Sorry if I offended you in any way, it was not my intent.

 

All the best,

 

OvS

[Rick Rawlings 137]

Good points, but it still doesn't change my opinion about Luke. I think Raul Lufbery should have the same focus and attention that Luke seems to get. That guy to me, is a hero.

 

Maybe that'll change if I read the book. But whether I'm right or wrong on Luke is really my opinion, and it's not based on my just wanting to be wrong. Why a guy would have to go through such great lengths to get confirmation on kills, especially Balloons that explode as bright as the sun when they do, is beyond understanding. Did Rickenbacker do that? Lends one to imagine that he did not have a believable personality from the start, or maybe he was narcissistical? I don't know. I'm not a doctor. MvR did it as well, but he had reason to, after 20 kills, 30, 40... I guess you get used to doing something. I don't know what posses anyone to do that, it's kind of grim. But MvR was a hunter by nature, so maybe it was like displaying a Boar's head?

 

 

So be it as it may that I am wrong about Luke, I have my reasons. The poor bastards flying the 2-seaters that go down in flames deserve the credit of a hero as well, but don't because they are considered fodder. I've been to the cemeteries, and read the names and nameless. A guy with 10 Balloons popped single handidly, 4 shared and 4 aerial victories doesn't give me the same feeling as a guy I crouched down in front of, who was a CMOH winner for bravery.

 

All the best,

 

OvS

 

 

Man, it never rains but it pours... while I certainly do agree that all aces need more recognition, you don't have to go far to find that at least to his contemporaries, Luke was the real deal, as far as that goes. I just happened to be re-reading Fighting the Fying Circus, which you can verify for yourself here:

 

http://www.richthofen.com/rickenbacker/

 

and, to answer your question above (emphasis mine), Rickenbacker goes into quite a bit of detail documenting the considerable effort that he went through to get his own kills confirmed. It seems that for the American squadrons, you had to get confirmation from a ground source to count kills and, as there was some rivalry between the various squadrons, Rick was, by his own account, driving all over the front and practicing his French just to get confirmations. Luke just seemed to be doing what everyone else was doing. Rickenbacker also mentions witnessing several of Luke's baloon kills personally, or by members of his squadron, as they were often done at dusk and could be seen on the ground from his home aerodrome.

 

If anything, Luke seemed to be a bit of an Albert Ball type figure, slightly out of his element socially, never had many close friends and was a loner in the air as well at a time when the life span of that type of behavior was measured in weeks for even the most skilled pilot.

 

Rickenbacker goes on to refer to Luke thusly:

 

"In my estimation there has never during the four years of war been an aviator at the front who possessed the confidence, ability and courage that Frank Luke had shown during that remarkable two weeks."

 

Now, you can take that as you like, written in 1919 by someone who knew Luke personally and may certainly have had motivations to play up a fellow american ace, but then again, Rickenbacker is very candid in his book about the numerous mistakes made by all the pilots and by the various fighter commands and so maybe he is candid about Luke as well. It is certainly food for thought.

 

Also, courage takes various forms. As for the two seaters, Rickenbacker also describes an interesting account of a duel he had with a very skilled two seater team that he tricked into running out of ammunition and then proceeds to have a debate with himself about whether to finish them off or let them go. War and courage are tricky and thorny issues to puzzle through, especially 90 years down the pipe, but this certainly is an engaging debate!

 

RR

[Rickitycrate 10]

There is an aspect of this thread that is coming around to the question of motivations. In particular the need to get confirmations. It may have stemmed for a need for recognition or validation. Let's not forget that for many of the U.S. pilots they had german speaking parents back home. A man was judged by the spelling of his name at the time. Many of them were not so far removed from the enemy and came under suspicion. Rickenbacker was a man of great determination and provided for his family from an early age, worked late into life as well. He also had the stigma of being an "old man" that had fanaggled his way into the Signal Corps. He was by nature a competitor ie. racecar driver. When you fight hard and have something to prove you want/need the credit for it. There is thread now discussing the Bruno Stachel character from the The Blue Max. He was of the wrong class, beneath his jasta mates and he felt it to his core. It drove most of his actions. Always something to prove so he needed his proof. Joe Wehner and Frank Luke naturally teamed up for the reasons of their heritage and being outsiders for that fact. Who wants to be thought of as a lesser man when they are putting their life on the line like all the rest? Something to prove I'ld say. Raoul Lufbery, bless him, had his French heritage to his advantage. He was not to be suspected in his motives. He fit in with French and the Yanks. It was easy to understand why he was there putting his life on the line. I do not say he had no inner demons. He unfortunately met his end in the way he feared most. Well anyway thanks for considering these thoughts.

[OvS 8]

I would like to point out that I appreciate the passion you guys have on the Frank Luke issue. No doubt, I am not a man of a big ego and certainly accept when I am either wrong or beat at a debate.

 

Perhaps my past perceptions of Luke are vastly off target, not having read anything solid, meaning anything dedicated to him and his life only, jaded my opinion of him. Probably NOT the best platform to stand on, but I did none-the-less.

 

No doubt, after reading as many posts that you all have read, I am wrong. So I'll head to the Library and pick up some of the books that have been mentioned and read them. It is sad that he only had a 2.5 week run at glory, but when you are reckless as Rickenbacker mentioned about him, that's the price you pay.

 

Thanks again fellas, this is more proof of to the calibur of people we have around us and in this community.

 

All the best,

 

OvS

 

PS... tttiger... being a moderator does not mean I can't enjoy the company of the people I so do respect and appreciate. Being wrong is part of life, and it make the conversations so much more deeper and detailed. I don't mind it, so neither should you.

[+MK2 12]

I would like to point out that I appreciate the passion you guys have on the Frank Luke issue. No doubt, I am not a man of a big ego and certainly accept when I am either wrong or beat at a debate.

 

Perhaps my past perceptions of Luke are vastly off target, not having read anything solid, meaning anything dedicated to him and his life only, jaded my opinion of him. Probably NOT the best platform to stand on, but I did none-the-less.

 

No doubt, after reading as many posts that you all have read, I am wrong. So I'll head to the Library and pick up some of the books that have been mentioned and read them. It is sad that he only had a 2.5 week run at glory, but when you are reckless as Rickenbacker mentioned about him, that's the price you pay.

 

Thanks again fellas, this is more proof of to the calibur of people we have around us and in this community.

 

All the best,

 

OvS

 

PS... tttiger... being a moderator does not mean I can't enjoy the company of the people I so do respect and appreciate. Being wrong is part of life, and it make the conversations so much more deeper and detailed. I don't mind it, so neither should you.

 

Nice post, tell you what PM your address, I am sending off a present to you...enjoy the read...

[tttiger 0]

PS... tttiger... being a moderator does not mean I can't enjoy the company of the people I so do respect and appreciate. Being wrong is part of life, and it make the conversations so much more deeper and detailed. I don't mind it, so neither should you.

 

Hey, as long as you don't point to the sheriff's badge you're wearing while you're offering your opinions, I have no problems with you airing your views at all (well, that whole thread about celebrities and charities should have been locked -- it has no place here on a WWI flight sim forum. Using OT in the title does not make it OK, IMHO).

 

But I do question whether the referee should ever offer views agreeing with one side over the other. There's an ethical conflict (or at least the perception of one).

 

So far, you've managed to play both roles rather well.

 

Interesting and passionate thread. We need more like them.

 

 

Tony

Edited May 28, 2009 by tttiger