Werner Voss...some guy!

[Creaghorn 10]

hallo everybody, very interesting topic,

my two € cents,

two seaters were the primary prey a scout went after. it was their job to prevent those spies to make photos. i have red lot of times aces mentioning to shoot down two seaters is a lot harder than scouts because they could shoot back at you. the same in BHAH. mostly, if i have to make unplanned landings it's because i went after twoseaters who riddled me. if two seaters in BHAH would act more evasive instead of keep flying straight, then it would be even much more harder to get them. so i consider aces with downing lot of two seaters are the better and more worthy ones because they also help to win the war.

as for MvR. he was a very humble personality, so of course he was not going to tell the world, look at me, i am a great acrobatic and skillfull pilot. he had to teach pilots to become from average to good pilots. of course he would not tell, hey, if you want to be a good pilot you have to be a stunt pilot. that wouldn't have encouraged nobody. instead he said, look. only thing you need is to have heart when you attack. you have to be focused and don't need to do unnecessary things for the audience on the ground but make the kill. that's the only thing what matters. he was responsible for a whole jagdgeschwader. to look after everybody of them. so he also had to be a role model in beeing effective.

for me voss is maybe the best natural aviator in history. but he never had to take care about others. he had no leadership. i think MvR was a very very skillfull AND acrobatic pilot. but he talked himself down because simply beeing humble and a leader for others. no showoff. i have red about surviving pilots MvR had shot down, and they all praised his magnificent flying. i have red of prisoners who of the whole flying circus knew which of them were the two richthofen brothers just recognizing their amazing flying skills. there were lot of dogfights where MvR had to fight by himself against 4, 5 or more enemies at once while hes mates couldn't help because they were too inexperienced. if he would have been a mediocre flyer, he would be dead much earlier. the only person who said about him to be a mediocre flyer was HIMSELF. nobody else. a derek jeter would also say about himself beeing an average shortstop, compared to ozzie smith. but still that doesn't mean he is average. he is still one of the top ten shortstops in the world compared to the rest. for me it's the same about MvR. if he says he's no very skillfull and acrobatic flyier, he is still better and more stunt pilot than 99% of the pilots at the western front.

[godzilla1985 0]

Obsolete flying coffins, godzilla? It was an FE2 that almost killed von Richtofen in July of 1917. And they didn't get more obsolete than that, at that time. Personally, I'd rather take on three single-seaters in OFF than one two-seater (except of course the BE2c, which must stand for "Bloody Easy 2 chase", since I've yet to have one even take evasive maneuvers, let alone fire back). While a fighter is more maneuverable than a two-seater it can only shoot at you when you're directly in front of it. You're exposed to greater danger from most two-seaters in all but a few positions. And there were several 'ace' two-seater crews, including at least one that won the Pour le Merite (when I find my book on it, I'll edit in the names). As for type and 'quality' of the opponent, these weren't sportsmen playing a game. They were soldiers fighting a war. And observation planes were the most valuable asset in the sky in WWI (the bomber became more important in WWII), while scouts/fighters were the most expendable. From a war effort standpoint, one RE8 was worth a dozen or more scouts.

 

 

 

Isn't it possible that MvR almost got killed by that FE2 gunner because he got maybe......careless? I never ever said 2 seaters were totally harmless butterflies (see my "walk in the park" line) but historically most early to mid WWI observation aircraft with the exception of a few were slow, underpowered and could only fight effectively in the horizontal plane. Most (again not all) of these planes were not built with aerobatics in mind and too much maneuvering pretty much made the gunner/observer ineffective. Also the "Flying Coffin" wasn't my words but one from an anonymous RFC observer pilot, so if you didn't like that you will have to take that up with him. Now if you were a green scout pilot, or a pilot unfamiliar with how to attack a 2 seater or even a crack pilot who get's careless or complacent about attacking one because you shot down dozens of them.. then yes your in for a very bad day maybe a even a fatal one. Also my post were dealing with the real world not the OFF world, I really should have put that in my earlier post as I knew someone might bring up about the 2 seaters in OFF. The devs of OFF have spoke about the 2 seaters in the game in regards to the defensive capabilities and I'm going to leave it at that. Now heres the catch 22 I see with your last statement about one RE8 being worth a dozen or more scouts. Now if I'm flying for the other side and I manage to make your scouts ineffective because most have been shot down, and you can't provide adequate escort (or maybe none) for that RE8. Whats the real chances that RE8 would make it to the target area you want it too go? Probably would be highly unlikely as it has no protection from my scouts. A few might slip by sure, but probably not enough will get by my scouts to do you much good in a strategic sense. Air superiority, denying the enemy from flying in an airspace..... thats won by scouts not two seaters. All through military aviation it has been proven over and over again that if you can't control the airspace you want your planes to fly in your going to pay a high price. If I want to have my observation planes flying anywhere I want them to go negating your ability to stop them is paramount. Now I don't mind a sprited debate but something you said in your last post isn't sitting to well with me. Why would you feel that my personal feeling of the the quality of your enemy and his equipment in relationship to a pilots kill tally somehow makes you feel I'm degrading these pilots to just sportsmen? To me thats a cheap shot if anyone treated it like some kind of a sport it was these pilots were talking about. Did they not paint kill markings on thier aircraft in WW2? Didn't MvR have little silver cups made after every kill? If you have ever talk too a fighter pilots (and I have talked with a few) and ask them about any fighter engagement they were in. How many will tell you about the enemy pilot they dropped in on his six unseen and dispatched with a of burst of MG fire? Probably not very many, but most if not all will tell you about the enemy pilot that took them to the edge of thier skill, endurance and thier aircrafts capabilities. Once the engagement starts everything else becomes secondary and unimportant at that moment, it's you or him and thats all there is, and in the end one of you is going to win and the other lose. These are not my words but my friends Dad who was a Marine fighter pilot flying F4U's in the pacific during WW2. If it's some kind of sport it was that way long before I came along by the very guys who did these things, not by me.

[JFM 18]

Great stuff, gents! Loved it all.

 

I agree that destroying two-seats obs planes was strategically more valuable than destroying scouts, although of course any enemy plane is fair game. RFC sent two-seaters over the lines with or without escorts, so if the Germans had eventually shot down all the escorting scouts the two seaters would have still gone over. The photographs they took were too important and necessary for intelligence to assess current and/or plan pending ground operations.

 

Regarding MvR's 6 July 1917 wounding, I have studied this event for years and written about it extensively. Contrary to popular belief, he was shot by neither the FE2d he attacked nor by German friendly fire from behind. This determination is based on combat reports, eyewitness accounts (air and ground), photographic evidence and gunshot wound ballistics. So MvR wasn't careless; the bullet came from a blindspot, and charging the FE2d head-on was well within his normal operating methodology. He was perhaps a bit careless when he had his engine and fuel tanks damaged in March 1917, precipitating his forced landing. A bit of target fixation, no doubt.

 

Yes, von Baur, "overrated coward" referenced several claims of this that I've debated elsewhere. Normally this is claimed because MvR shot down two seaters. Interestingly, other men who also shot down many two seaters are not referred to as cowards or "unworthy," as is Richthofen. Men such as McCudden, Voss (as Godzilla mentioned), Boelcke, Immelmann, Ball, Hawker, Lufberry, McElroy, etc.--all have official tallies that contain at least 50% two-seaters. When's the last time you saw McCudden being referred to derogatorily (as is MvR) because most of his engagements (some 75%) were not straight out of the Great Waldo Pepper? I know when: never. On the contrary, McCudden is praised for it.

 

Even for guys who shot down mostly scouts, is that reason to grant them more worth? Who flew these scouts they shot down? The majority of pilots were not aces, after all. Look at Mannock. For some of his scout victories he shot down pilots far less experienced than he. Just a quick trawl through the official lists and:

 

(Mannock's) 20th: Ltn Vortmann, Jasta B, no victories, KiA

23rd: Ltn Derlin, Jasta 20, no victories, KiA

24th: Ltn Aeckerle, Jasta 47, no victories, KiA

35th: Vzfw Schorn, Jasta 16, one victory, KiA

45th: Ltn Dunkelburg, Jasta 58, no victories, KiA (possible ID)

 

Does butchering neophytes make Mannock a better pilot just because their planes were scouts and not two seaters? Does it reflect greater credit upon the man? Not by the yardsticks of many who measure MvR's similar stats; a dichotomy I debate. War isn't about "fair." Just because a guy shoots down mostly scouts or mostly two-seaters doesn't mean that based on that he's better than guys shooting down more of the opposite kind--especially when you consider that the preferred and sought after method of victory employed gaining an enemy unseen from behind and then shooting him at close (i.e., can't miss) range. What's it matter if the guy with the bullet through the back of the head was flying a scout or a two-seater? Anything that entered the arena with crosses or cockades painted on it was a worthy target.