20 victory ace Wilhelm Frankl KIA

[rammjaeger]

Gunnar,

TJWC gave Frankl (a Christian in 1917) Nr.16-18 for 6th April but Nr.20 two times for 7th April (19.10) and 8. April (13.30) - obviously something wrong here with the claim counting in TJWC. 14.15 Frankl was starting to his last mission.

VBR
Hannes

[wings]

Frankl was killed during the afternoon, so he could not have been shot down by Bishop.

[Graeme]

Sorry about the delay - ISP connection problems.

The ice hockey analogy wasn't brilliant but it was all I could think of at the time (1 am). However, the point I was trying to make was that half a dozen pilots claiming to have shot down the same enemy aeroplane isn't an example of overclaiming, it is an example of a shared victory.

The RFC Communiques were not intended to be a British version of the Nachrichtenblatt but, as is stated in Communique No 1 "It is proposed to issue a communique of all items of interest in connection with the Royal Flying Corps twice weekly. If brief details of items of interest are included in the daily summaries of work rendered by Wing Commanders, it will considerably assist in making this communique of interest and value."

While they are a valuable source of information, the RFC Communiques are an imperfect vehicle for assessing claims since the terminology used is too imprecise, the comment regarding 48 Sqn's actions on 8 April 1917 being a case in point - and many claims are listed under the wrong date.

Unfortunately, much information has been lost over the years destroyed during the German bombing in 1918 (as was the case for 48 Sqn) and through periodic 'weeding out' at the PRO over the years since.

In this instance, what can be pieced together is that the Bristols encountered six Albatros scouts to the east of Arras, probably around 3 pm (British time). After a brief engagement one Bristol was shot down, two Albatros scouts had been claimed and the remainder seen to retire.

We can now establish that the Bristol was shot down by Bernert of Jasta Boelcke. If Frankl did fall victim to Bristol Fighters as is usually quoted, 48 Sqn were the only unit with them at this time and these were the only claims made - discounting the four driven down which are mentioned in the communique.

The Brisol was a new type and is unlikely to have been identified as such in German records of the time. The only other claims for Albatros scouts made at about the right time were by 3 Sqn RNAS and Naval Eight; 3 RNAS were flying Pups which were well known and not likely to have been mistaken as two-seaters and Naval Eight was then equipped with Triplanes.

As the 48 Sqn combat reports relating to this engagement were amongst the records destroyed in 1918, there is no way of establishing the precise details of each crew's combat and each person will have to make up their own mind as to which crew, or combination of crews, brought Frankl down.

Graeme

[Billy_Bishop]

For Jasta, I'll repeat a quote from Dan McCaffery's book, just for his edification.

With every piece of the puzzle except one pointing dramatically at Frankl, we can only assume that the Jasta records inadvertantly listed his loss as having taken place in the afternoon instead of during the morning patrol, as was actually the case.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Droops]

Al,

I read the quote that you posted, and the reasoning is pretty flimsy. I haven't gone back to re-read it, but from what I can remember I can summarize it thus:

1). Bishop had a combat some time before with a pilot who had a Star of David painted on his plane.

2). Bishop believed that the pilot he fought on the day in question was the same one he'd fought some months earlier.

3). From that, and based on the fact that Frankel was Jewish, the author concludes that Bishop shot down Frankel and the time recorded is erroneous..

Now, you're not stupid. You know as well as I do that there are TONS of problems with this line of thinking. I find that line of reasoning to be, well, disingenious at best on the part of the author. I wouldn't give it much credibility.

Regards,

John

[Droops]

This will teach me to post without re-reading something.

I've re-read the post. It indicates that Bishop's opponent had a Star of David on it. There was no previous combat months earlier with someone similar, as I erroneously posted.

Still, to conclude that this is Frankel on this basis is not very sound. It could be another pilot with similar markings, or it could be Frankel's plane flown by someone else. There are numerous possibilities. I also would like to know the sources of this author's statements, as they seem to be pulled out of a hat, so to speak.

IMO, the idea that Bishop shot Frankel down based on this statement is a bit of a stretch.

Regards,

John

[rammjaeger]

Al, did you not read?

Frankl was starting AND lost in the afternoon!
That is documented but I know you are more willing to accept every speculation claiming the opposite.

McCaffery wild construction is not "pointing dramatically at Frankl". A Star of David on the machine of a man who was giving up his Jewish religion already some years ago? IMHO unproven speculation of an author who was obviously nothing knowing about Frankl´s change of religion. Another example of bad research.

Additional such a remarkable feature should not be missing in B.s combat report. Other German
pilots, e.g. Auer, had such stars painted on there machines - and they were not of Jewish descent. Therefore this allegedly feature is also not pointing strictly on a Jewish pilot.

Strange that always imaginary statements and speculations but not documents should prove B.s claims and stories.

BTW which source has Mr McCaffery given for the this comrad´s "confirmation" of Bishops story about the Easter fight?

[Billy_Bishop]

Actually, he didn't list any sources in his book for this particular claim.

In general, his references are combat reports and all the OLD veterans he interviewed.

But then you know how newspapermen are. They hardly EVER reveal their sources.

Let ME point out here, I am not really convinced either. But I felt that since there are SOME who will accept almost anything, I might as well post McCaffery's claims here.

He is reported to have done quite a bit of research, and it's not MY fault he didn't cite his sources for each claim he made. IF anyone else wants to try and contact him, and see if you can get any info out of him, go right ahead.

VBR,

Al Lowe

.... and those same "sources" that credited Bishop
with Frankl also tie Bishop to the downing of Paul Henning von Osterroth. This despite the fact that von Osterroth shot down a Spad 3 hrs after "being shot down by Bishop" (see "Who shot down who" GOGS to see wreck of Spad)and in the air a full six hours after that when engaged with Pups of Naval 3 he fell to his death at 1830 by Cambrai road. Claimed by three pilots in that one. Pretty full day, heh.

OOps, my bad, RFC must have commited a clerical error with the time of the claim. That explains everything. Never mind Al! (wink)

Holck

Would anyone-- perhaps you, Hannes?-- be able to tell us just what Frankl's personal markings were? It seems McC. assumed that they (it) were a Mogen David. This "emblem" was fairly common with the Austro-Hungarian FLIKs; in fact, it was the squadron emblem of Flik 51J.
Did Bishop claim this was the marking he saw? As far as Franks is concerned, in WHO DOWNED THE ACES IN WW1, he is pretty sure that it was the Bristols of 48 Squadron that downed Frankl; no mention of Bishop at all in his account.
BTW, since we've mentioned the Mogen David, has anyone noticed (in recent publications) the cropping of the Voss photo, the one where he's in front of his Albatross adjusting the chin strap of his head gear? Well, when I saw the photo originally, back in the 1960s, you saw that the emblem on Voss' fuselage was a swatstika. Perhaps, in the name of political correctness, the photo is today cropped, because it's mistaken for a hackenkreuz. They ARE different: the Nazi emblem, the hackenkreuz (literally, "broken cross") is a swatstika REVERSED... then again, Lufbery's emblem (on his SPAD) WAS a hackenkreuz... oh, the hell with it!!!