Luke's tactics

[Barrett]

I want to start a separate thread apart from the previous one about The Luke Movie, etc.
What is really known about Luke's tactics? More specifically, how did his balloon-busting missions fit into the 27th Aero's operations and the 1st PG generally? (sorry, Billy; I don't have " September Rampage" here.)
A quick scan of Luke's balloon kills shows they occurred from 0600 to 1900 (6 am to 7 pm) or thereabouts, with 11 of the 15 occurring from 1600 onward. Presumably he preferred to attack out of the west with the setting sun at his back.
However, were these mostly volunteer sorties or were they assigned by the squadron or group? I assume that specific balloon busts originated with the infantry division receiving unwelcome attention from German arty, but the chronology of Luke's balloon kills seems to indicate that he kept to his own schedule.
Furthermore, the fact that Luke/Wehner/et al practically never had proper top cover (a 4-plane flight would seem appropriate), leaving one wingman to tackle X number of Albatrii/Fokkers shows a lack of co-ordination and planning at the unit level. What was Capt. Grant's approach, and how did it square with group cdr. Hartney's philosophy?
Lots of questions, not many answers--yet.

>assume that specific balloon busts originated
>with the infantry division receiving
>unwelcome attention from German arty

From how 4 AFC went after balloons, it appears they were spotted in the days previous patrols or missions, rather than requested by the artillery or infantry. After the balloon had been spotted and its location pinned, a pair of pilots would dive out of the mist and attack the balloon the next morning as a special mission. They would have devised the best way to attack the balloon since they knew its location.

Either that or the balloon was a target of oppurtunity during the days scouting or strafing. Appearing where they were trying to cause havoc and just happening to get in the way. Gordon can probably add more detail on how 4 AFC went about knocking down balloons.

Effective pilots being effective pilots, Lukes methods may have been similar to Cobby, King, Watson and the other balloon victory pilots of 4 AFC. If Lukes balloon victories were in the afternoon, he may have gone up in the afternoon or evening specifically to attack it after spotting the balloon in the mornings/midday's patrolling. That way he would know the exact location of the balloon and the would have worked out the most effective way to attack it. Just a thought.





cam
AFC - http://members.xoom.com/PointCook/index.htm

[Russell]

Good questions Barrett. A lot of the RAF's attacks seemed to be coincidental.. The keen guys by 1918 always took a top cover along and seemed to plan it, relative to sun, cloud and wind. 84 planned everything in detail, who was to shoot, the top cover, everything. Sholto Douglas would not let any one in 84 attack a balloon, unless they practiced attacking him in a Brit balloon so he could pass their technique. Proctor was unique - he deliberately just shot holes on the first pass and went back to burn it on the second. As to Frank, planned yes, covered properly, no way, it would be too much like letting a misconceived junior hoon ruin a war by using initiative. I mean the op orders specified patrols the night before at HQ, how dare he interfere?

[stephen]

Credit Billy Haiber's "Rampage" for most of this:

The 27th was specifically ordered - twice - by Hartney to keep pressure up against the enemy balloon lines in the first two weeks of September. Grant and Clapp (Luke's flight commander) both resented the orders to constantly attack balloons as a danger to their pilots and didn't hesitate to assign those duties to the guy they disliked most, Luke. Of course, Luke excelled in the role and was recommended for a DSC within two weeks by the same CO that set him up with the unwanted job in the first place.

Luke's combat reports constantly refer to two situations: either leaving the patrol formation deliberately when a balloon was sighted to attack in conformity to Hartney's orders, or leaving on a patrol with the primary intent of seeking balloon targets.

These were not instances where Luke, an undisciplined loose cannon, ran off on his own to be a star. He was following specific orders to attack targets of opportunity, and balloons were specified in squadron orders. That he did not have sufficient air cover to carry out his orders safely is more a discussion of unit leadership... Luke was doing his job regardless (revisit the "fearlessness" post?).

Craig Gilbert was a balloon corps veteran who wrote to Royal Frey in 1962 that "for us of the balloons we could have used a lot more protection and with a few more Lukes, the Americans could have controlled the skies long before they did."

Luke was not careless, stupid or crazy. He followed orders in spite of the personal danger it put him in, and he literally fought to the last second of his life.

Again, credit nearly all of this to Rampage, which covers a lot of 27ths daily functions and reprints scores of combat reports and daily orders.

[Barrett]

This is shaping up as an extremely useful thread: thanks to all who've contributed thus far.
Ref. 84 RAF's highly professional approach to balloon busting: I'm reminded that Jim Goodson, "King of the Strafers" in the 8th AF, says that he was shot down on the only strafing mission he ever planned. He was after an Me-163 that'd been spotted on a field the day before and he wanted to destroy it before it moved. However, the AA gunners finally got him.
Hey, that's why they call it war...

Hooray Skinner Hooray: You did an excellent job answering Barrett's interogatories about 'balloon busting a la Frank Luke.. Barrett: I accept your apology for not having "Rampage" available, but answers to your questions are all in that little ole book. Steve answered most of them, and I'm not going to answer the rest, for obvious reasons.Best rregards: BillY H 09 Aug 00.

Billy, this thread has perked an interest. Just wanted to let you know I am going to order your book from Amazon unless you can provide a signed copy (which I will of course pay for). If you are able, please respond to this thread as I have long ago destroyed my e-mail capacity on the home computer.

[stephen]

You'll enjoy it thoroughly. If Billy misses your post I can get you his email. He signed my copy for me and I'm sure will do the same for you.

Rampage has been blasted a time or two on this forum, never with any credibility, but its one of the best background works available on Luke and is an excellent resource. Be prepared though... there's lots of material that does not pertain directly to FL but is necessary to understand his situation, career and personal decision making processes. It is not just a biography, it has 10 or 12 appendices with all sorts of background info. Highly recommended.

[Barrett]

Billy & Forumites/Luke-ites: to paraphrase the novelist Jacquelin Susann, "One Is Not Enough." Frequently I do get 2 copies of books so I'll have 'em both summer & winter. As an author myownself, I heartily endorse the procedure. "Rampage" needs to be the next duplicate.

[Shooter]

*checking off the box on his "to do" list*

Buy Haiber's book. Make that two.

Roger your last, Barrett.


Shooter sends