Ace of the Month

Ron_F · 29 December 1999, 07:50 AM

Gents,
In Over the Front, he is listed with 13 victories. However, due to USAF Study # 133 in '69, as well as other such inquiries, his score is listed as 6.00. Just as Rickenbackers is not the 26 of OTF, but 24.33. I wonder why the GOGS go against this finding? Many scores have been done this way, WW1 and WW2. Some aces being counted down to 1 or 2 away from that title due to this inquiry...

My point? There is a difference in the American scores officialy listed as opposed to GOGS writings.

For what its worth. Does NOT detract from what these men did in any way! Heroes all the same.

Ron F.

Ron_F · 29 December 1999, 07:53 AM

I read the passage in OTF..... very intersting on the reasons. A shame tho...

Ron F.

29 December 1999, 08:24 AM

Has anyone seen profiles or photos of Putnam's aircraft in any publication? Particularly M.S. A-1 that he flew?

Amy · 29 December 1999, 08:27 AM

Ron F.:

There's a short article in a Cross and Cockade journal (Autumn 1977) about Putnam's scarlet SPAD titled "Putnam's Red Devil?" If you can't find this particular article, I can scan it for you.

Side note: Same article further states that Putnam died from two bullets through his heart.

Cheers,
Amy

Ron_F · 29 December 1999, 10:06 AM

Amy,
Thanks for the info, but wasnt my question! was another poster in this thread! im sure he ll appreciate it!

salute,
Ron F.

Amy · 29 December 1999, 10:20 AM

Oops! That post should've been for "Paul F".

Barrett · 29 December 1999, 01:55 PM

Lots to catch up with:
The USN/USMC ace total in WW II was c. 500 versus 180 USAAF in the Pacific Theater, so the quality of Japanese aircraft doesn't really enter into the equation. I think it's more to do with opportunity and the fact that more relatively senior naval aviators got fighter assignments than AAF types. Basically, the Hellcat destroyed Japanese airpower, accounting for as many credited shot down as all USAAF fighters combined in the Pacific and CBI.
I did a survey of 210 aces c. 15 years ago, and the results were almost uniform: navy-trained pilots went to combat highly confident in gunnery and tactics while army guys said their strength usually was flying the assigned airplane. Far more USN/USMC felt "strong" in all phases of training than did AAF types. Also, tailhook aviators seemed to have better situational awareness--possibly a result of the navy "loose deuce" cruise formation versus the world-standard "finger four."
None of which really explains why 3 times as many Annapolis grads made ace as did West Pointers, but it's fun to kick around.

Barrett · 29 December 1999, 02:02 PM

Ooops: forgot to include this subject in the above reply. The reason that Putnam appears with 6.00 in Study 133, etc., is because the survey is limited to pilots in the US Air Service. Putnam's first 6 victories were obtained as a French NCO; he (like many other Yanks) then put on Uncle Sugar's uniform and continued flying and scoring in allied squadrons before finally joining the USAS. The same thing happened in WW Deuce but far less often.

mike_baram · 29 December 1999, 04:28 PM

"None of which really explains why 3 times as many Annapolis grads made ace as did West Pointers"
Barrett, my man.....
The answer is so obvious it's ridiculous. Army guys finish a mission, come back to base and spend the evening with the local damoiselles. Navy guys finish a mission and come back to a ship where all they see is lots more navy guys. With all that testosterone flowing about it's no wonder the Navy scored more kills.
Regards,
Mike