Flaming Onions

[rammjaeger]

Boom,

you can find Immelmanns words in the German book "Immelmann - der Adler von Lille", page 69, last sentence of the chapter "Artillerieflieger in der Champagne". I hope I got the translation correct. The German text is:
"Ohne Scheitel, die Haare sind 3 mm lang, sehe ich natürlich aus wie eine Klobürste."
He wrote the lines in a letter to his mother end of April 1915.
In fact he had not so super-short hair on the most photos.

It would be interesting to see the original text because the censors or ghost writers made the original texts more smoothly running for the books of 1916 and 1934. There are some differences visible between existing original letters and the book text. *

Immelmann had a good sense of humour - he would not worry about this sentence in the history books. *

Gordon is correct concerning the multi-barrelled AA gun!

Was this weapon originally designed for shipboard use, like the Hotchkiss 37mm rotary cannon?

It was the M-Flak gun that I was thinking of; that's the weapon I read described as the source of the flaming onions.

[rammjaeger]

The M-Flak was originally built for ship-use but Krupp re-built the gun as M-Flak (3.7 cm).
The Revolverkanone (3.7 cm) was an older model and this gun was used by the "Fußartillerie" (lit.: "foot artillery) before. It was an improvisation. But you could be right that different models of Revolverkanonen were used before in the Navy too - at least I remember "Meyers Lexikon" (1885 or later) mentioned the Revolverkanone in use by the Navy.

We had repeatedly discussions concerning the flamming onions and I am also thinking the very fast firing and frequently used M-Flak was responsible for the "flaming onions" in the British reports.

The ultimate question, I guess, is: when was the M-Flak 3.7 introduced into service? There are references to flaming onions from mid-1916, and those I've read are written in a context that implies they were well-known even at this date.

[rammjaeger]

Michael,

the M-Flak was introduced 1915 - I will look for the month of the first 100. Another 40 were re-built at the end of 1915.

[rammjaeger]

The answer: M-Flak was used since "Mitte 1915" (mid-1915).
Source: Entwicklung und Einsatz der deutschen Flakwaffe und des Luftschutzes im Weltkriege.

[leo]

The opinion of Forumites seems to be that the Flaming Onions were not particularly effective. I am wondering how effective any anti-aircraft was durng the Great War. Did they have any sort of fire direction or was everything "Kentucky windage"?

leo

Archie could be extremely effective against aircraft flown by inattentive pilots. Provided you were aware and avoided flying in a straight line for too long, you could easily avoid being hit. If you let them get your range, though, you could easily be brought down. I've read a number of first-hand accounts of RFC aircrew captured when their a/c were disabled by archie. In some cases a/c were victims of direct hits, and are described as disintegrating.

One reason that archie was considered ineffective is that the structure of 14-18 a/c was largely unaffected by shrapnel from archie bursts. The number of vital spots on such a/c was pretty small, so you could be hit by shrapnel and escape with nothing more than torn fabric or minor damage to spars or longerons. I've even read of a/c taking hits to fuel tanks and being brought home through the simple expedient of the pilot sticking a gloved finger into the hole, allowing tank pressure to be kept up until a safe crossing of the lines could be (more or less) guaranteed.

Another way of avoiding damage from archie was to avoid whenever possible flying below 6,000 feet. Below this altitude you were at the mercy of all sorts of archie, not just the high-altitude stuff. Below 1,000 feet everybody shot at you. I suspect they even threw leftovers from lunch. Nobody liked to fly low-altitude missions, and those squadrons that had to during big pushes later in the war did in fact suffer horrendous losses to archie.

Hi al

When i saw the thread Flaming oignons i was going to give an answer. But Rammjäger told it all. 3.7 Maschinekanonen.

Very effective. For those intrested i have pictures of the gun.

Now, read also Pail Bewsters book, lGreen Bazlls, the adventures of a night bomber.

in it he describes an attack on Bruges and the subsequent Flak.

arounf Brugge, sector naval corps at that moment there were about 14 3.7 M.kanonen groupes in 7 batterie. Ostend had also some 14 gungs, the Flakschule about 8 and then you had teh M-FDlakzuge. all over the sector.

The schot down (confirmed and done by Maschine Kanone)

26.07.17 Sopwith DD
17.09.17 ?
26.07.17 DH
02.05.18 Sopwith
26.05.18 DH 4
24.06.18 FE2
29.06.18 FE2
03.09.18 Spad


apparently some more planes were hit by the M-kanone, but then the reports speak of Flak an d do not attribute the victory to a special batterij.

alain.

[Boom]

<<Another way of avoiding damage from archie was to avoid whenever possible flying below 6,000 feet. Below this altitude you were at the mercy of all sorts of archie, not just the high-altitude stuff. Below 1,000 feet everybody shot at you. >>

Some things never change. The rule over Vietnam was never, EVER, below 3,000 feet. Based on the vertical; range of 50 caliber and equivalent.