The Other Billy

[Barrett]

In the mid-20s Mitchell made increasingly inflammatory statements about the status of US military aviation. Finally he pushed things too far (in the opinion of his superiors) when he accused the army staff of criminal incompetence and/or stupidity which had led to the deaths of many airmen. Just for spice, he included the navy after the airship Shenandoah was ordered into a summer storm over the Midwest, resulting in heavy loss of life.
Mitchell also advocated an independent air force, free of army influence--heresy in those days. He was found guilty of gross insubordination (the verdict was never in doubt) and booted out of the service.
He died during WW II but afterward Congress voted the medallion as a sort of apology.
Some of Mitchell's concepts were prescient; some were wiggy. Originally he was a supporter of aircraft carriers but later seemed to recognize their "threat" to land-based airpower and negated their utility.
Mitchell had many acolytes, including Hap Arnold. The Russian expatriate, Alexander Seversky, was the most vocal and accepted most of Mitchell's dogma at face value. Read "Victory Through Airpower" (1942) for illumination.

Thanks, reminds me of Lindburg in a totally opposite way.

With the outbreak of WWII there were many people going around saying "Mitchell told you so!" However, in his views about possible war with Japan and Germany, Mitchell was not original. There was a mercernary cum author named Homer Lea who after having served for Sun Yat Sen in China wrote a book titled "The Valor of Ignorance", in which he went into great detail about the upcoming war. This book was published in or about 1907. It's very possible that Mitchells' views may have been colored by this book. It still makes for interesting reading and shows how the concept of "race" was a major factor to the average citizen.

Tony:
If you want facts on the DVII, Dave Watts, a contributor at times to this Forum can give exacting information concerning the data on DVIIs in U.S. service. I am not attempting to parallel DW's great awareness of DVIIs as "war booty" but I would like to make a few generalizations re your comments: It's not my thing to contest others postings but you are making some statements that- for the sake of those interested in acquiring factual information about the personalities, equipment and issues of WWI aviation- should not be let go without some response: "Wings" was not Hughes work. It was written by John Monk Saunders and directed by William Wellman- a flyer in France in WWI. Frank Tomock was the chief pilot; crashes of a SPAD and a DVII were flown by Dick Grace. Only two DVIIs were available for the film; most other ships were supplied by the Air Corps and were mostly Thomas-Morse MB-3s and Curtis P-1s.
You are, obviously, confusing "Wings" with "Hell's Angels", which was a film, primarily written, and directed and produced by Howard Hughes. Paul Mantz was also not involved with "HA", although he always liked people to think he was. Frank Tomick flew in the role of "MvR": He is featured in a great "wingover and vertical pull through" by the way- One "Von Bruen" was played by Frank Clarke- a mortal enemy of Mantz- and against whom- he was able to have charges brought in WWII.
There were five DVIIs available for the film "Hell's Angels". One of them was the "Hisso" powered one that is featured in an old, old, photo on the recently published special edition of "Wings" Magazine, Two others were Hall-Scott powered conversions. Tomick again, was chief pilot assisted by Clarke, Leo Noomis and Roy Wilson. All the numerous "other DVIIs" were "Travelairs" built in Wichita Kansas, They were thereafter known as "Wichita Fokkers"- for their similarity to the actual DVIIs- especially after their modification by Otto and Wally Timm in Glendale.
No, there were no "squadrons of DVIIs" in the Air Service or Air Corps. The "Booty" D-VIIs came into Allied possession as a result of the Treaty of Versailles" which stipulated their surrender. Mitchell had nothing to do with this high level decision. I doubt if at some lower level he would even been involved in allocating examples of surrendered Fokkers to U.S. forces. I see nothing in his writing or in others writings concerning him, that suggest any involvement on his part along these lines. Many U.S. Squadrons in France, after the armistice, had a DVII, or two, as souvenirs. There certainly were operational uses of the DVIIs in U.S. service; the first military plane to operate off a field in Hawaii was apparently a U.S. Marine Corps DVII. I know a few others operated at Air Service staions in Texas in the early '20s. I'll venture to say no U.S. squadrons had any significant number of DVIIs- (ie. more than two or so)- in operation. The standard U.S. fighters after the Armistice in Germany during 1919 were the same SE5a, Camel and SPAD types as were in action when the conflict ended. The SE5s were on squadron strength for many years after WWI here in the U.S.- cf: "Lindy's" experiences as a young U.S. military flyer. BTW: Most of these SEs had been rebuilt with steel tube fuselages- the DVII influence possibly- although steel tube ships had been built as early as 1910 in France. Several of the major U.S. aviation firms were provided a DVII after the war for design analysis purposes. I have seen photos of one at the Boeing plant as the early Boeing pursuits were being developed. The major point of interest was the feature of the welded fuselage. The ship, rugged as it was saw use as a test platform for other types of engines at Wright-Patterson (ie. Packards) and in commercial applications: Ie. the two DVIIs as mentioned above were converted by the Hall Scott Motors Corporation, of Oakland, Calif. They'd bought two and re-engined them with their own powerplants as demonstration units.
I hope you'll accept this in the friendly sense that I convey it.. Sincerely yours.... Lee

Lee; Many thanks. I know that the data I had was "spotty" at best. The photo I saw in the book may have been the Texas aircraft. I remember reading the about Paul Mantz in an old aviation magazine, and they may have simply passed along his saying that he flew a D-VII in the film. Hells Angels was the other older film I was thinking of.(I couldn't rememember the name when I was writng.) Thanks again for your input.

If I'm not mistaken, Mitchell certainly did not die during WW2, but years earlier; in 1938, I believe? His last words were supposedly more than a little bitter, as that the American military had ignored him and would someday pay for it...
BTW, one of the officers on his courts-martial was none other than Douglas MacArthur. MacArthur claimed years later that he had voted for acquittal, but I don't think that we will or can ever be sure on this one, as the "jury" deliberations of this courts-martial were secret... I suspect that MacArthur was just being political here; even so, I admire and respect him in other ways (his Inchon landing was a masterpiece)...

[Barrett]

Cap'n Lewis is right: Mitchell died in 1936 (I was thinking 39-40). Don't know about his last words but should find out, as his wife was a distant relative of my father's.
MacArthur was the army's youngest two-star in 1925 and presided over Mitchell's courtmartial. He became chief of staff 5-6 years later which may be one reason he escaped the ax for the Philippines debacle in 41-42, contrary to Kimmel & Short in Hawaii. IMO Mac didn't do anything exceptional in WW II but he was the only one willing to defy conventional wisdom ref. Inchon. In fact, the only reason Bradley got a 5th star in 1950 was so that he could talk to MacArthur! (Brad had already declared 'phib ops "impossible" in the nuke age.)
the gov't. offered Mitchell a posthumous olive branch in naming the B-25 for him. Am hard pressed to think of another US airplane bearing the official name of an individual though apparently the Brits liked Americans well enough to name the Avro Lincoln <g>!

Re. McArthur
Recent biographies of McA. have offered that he was no friend of Billy M. and indeed voted accordingly for conviction. McA proponents always wished to suggest otherwise as his actual vote was an embarrassent in years subsequent to the new (1940s-Post-"Blitzkrieg") acceptance of the "Doctrine of Airpower". McA's reputation has suffered badly, in many eyes, over his failure to give Brereton- C.O. of the B-17s in his Phillipine-base air units- the opportunity to sortie against bases on Formosa Those ships were destroyed on the ground 24 hours after the Pearl Harbor strike! Brereton was always disgusted by his inability to get permission to interdict with a first strike at the enemy bases. McA., ducked the issue for years and then offered that it would have been "a suicide mission and accordingly he didn't authorize it." His motives were possibly far more convoluted and certainly not flattering: He deposited a tremendous sum into a New York bank as a bonus for his services to the Phillipine government, courtesy of Pres. Quezon and other political friends in Manila. You can read that Eisenhower, proffered a similar but much less "bonus", declined as it would be "improper for a serving U.S. officer to accept such a gratuity from a foreign government". There is a interpretation about McArthur's "services" in those early days after Dec. 7th, 1941, that they may also have included endorsement of a posssible settlement with Japan which would have established the Phillipine Nation as a neutral in the newly raging war between the U.S. and Japan. A strike against Japanese territory by the B-17s would have negated any proposed strategy of neutralization for the Phillipines. This is serious revisionist thinking and possibly of no merit. What is certain is that the B-17s were absolutely wasted after all the preparation, training and deployment efforts, that there were elements of the Phillipine government who wanted a neutralization for their country and that it is most curious that Brereton reports being oddly "stonewalled" in his attempt to get permission to issue offensive mission orders from McA's H.Q.
The affection McA had for the time spent in the Phillipines and his "I shall return!" promise have led some critics to suggest that the invasion of the Phillipines was almost a privated vendetta for the General, which was not sustained by any tactical need. The argument is that the by-passing of the Phillipines would have enabled "heartland strikes" at Japan to have been effective in bringing the war to a conclusion without the loss of life involved in the campaign for the recapture of the Phillipines. I would think the U.S. fleet elements would have been endangered by Japanese air units based in the Phillipines had the islands not been recaptured. I doubt if there would have been any "Japanese-Breretons" who were unable to get permission to attack!
BTW: The ladies figured prominently in McA's professional life: He had a interest in a lovely lady in Wash. D.C. who also had attracted the great Lothario, Jack Pershing: Pershing told McA to "back off"; Doug responded with "Jack, you have absolutely no authority over my personal life- you can't tell me that." Guess who got orders to report immediately to an assignment in the Phillipines? McA. brought back a souvenir from that early tour in the Phillipines: he set her up in a salon in Washington where he assumed no one knew of her relationship with him. Westbrook Pegler insulted the Gen. in the immediate Post WWII years and McA sued. His attorney was astounded when asked to drop the case against WP. McA had seen the list of witnesses Pegler was going to call. On said list was "Little Miss Manila"- "Drop the case!" the attorney was again told. Lotsa fun! Do you know about Jack Pershings Parisian "model" mistress that he married on his deathbed? She'd been with him since '18 and was given a General's widows pension for life. We common folk have to be married to survivor for three years, I recall, for widows benefits to be established. Again-Lotsa fun! Regards...Lee

[Barrett]

Lee: thanks for the hot news--truly better late than never!
In the course of researching the aviation MoH book I became acquainted with a coupla folks from the 19th BG, who have zero-zip-nada regard for MacArthur. He was his own worst enemy and an extremely poor judge of character in some critical positions, most notably his obnoxious, studiously abrasive, sycophantic (I run out of adjectives) chief of staff, Gen. RK Sutherland. the only comparison I can make is Martin Bormann who guarded access to the Fuhrer with similar jealousy. When Brereton arrived in the PI in November he recognized a potential disaster but couldn't get past Sutherland, with results demonstrated on 8 December--most of MacA's airpower wiped out 8 hours AFTER Pearl Harbor!
Adm. Nimitz reputedly said he couldn't stand being in the same room with Sutherland--and Chet Nimitz was Santa Claus!
Hap Arnold evidently kept George Kenney in command of 5th AF largely because of his ability to work with Mac--few could. However, Kenney's vainglory approached Mac's in taking excellent combat leaders away from command positions and largely wasting them as scalp hunters: Lynch, Kearby, and McGuire--all KIA as freelancers. Bong never had a command and never wanted one.
Another mark against Mac occurred during the WW I vets' (Mandatory Great War content) bonus march in DC. Despite orders to the contrary, Mac used force against the ex-doughboys, resulting in a PR disaster including some deaths. (Ike and Patton were also involved.) Hoover had every reason to sack Mac but chose not to rather than demonstrate an army out of control to a depression-ridden public.
If not for Inchon, MacArthur's place in history might be far less secure. Subsequently, of course, he finally ran afoul of Truman and Gen. Ridgway had to rebuild from practically zero.
Break-break.
Pershing: my best bud grew up in a high-tone DC neighborhood that included The Widow Pershing who asked my pal's dad to dispose of some memorabilia, including his M1911! It had unfortunately been stored in its GI holster for about 40 years with predictable results. However, rather than leave it intact, George's dad had the pistol refinished--and converted to a .22!
AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!

Barret: I was interested to learn that one of the veterans who was targeted as a leader of the "Bonus Marchers" was the very NCO who assisted Patton when a piece of shrapnel took a slice out of George's butt in France in '18. Patton's most memorable comment in D.C. was that if they turned the machine guns on the vets to "shoot a lot of 'em; if you kill only a few it will be too easy for them to become martyrs in the eyes of the Press, etc."
Geo. was always proud of the wound and eager to display it; he was once arrested on an East Coast beach for wearing trunks which revealed most of his posterior. But how else could everyone see his wound? I have something in the works I've titled "Patton's Women": Cf: his sister was camping out on the Border, in '16, with Pershing- a fact which led many to agree that George knew what it took to get rather quick promotions. The sister followed JP to Paris where she was rebuffed; she came back to Pasadena, lived out her life in spinsterhood after making one request of the family: "Just don't ever mention Jack Pershing's name in my presence."
Patton seduced his niece while stationed at Schofield barracks in the late '30s and had her in Paris toward the end of the war in '45. Mrs. Patton, Beatrice, was infuriated but kept silent due to her concern over the reputation of all involved. Beatrice was a serious student of ancient Polynesian culture and had written one novel (pretty bad!) and, in French, one fairly well received study of the culture. She studied the old Religion and knew some ancient priests thereof. She exacted a weird retribution on the young lady. In her New York appartment, she set up an altar scene, incense, ancient melodies playing- ominous drum rythyms, etc. She ordered the niece to appear in this setting and came out in weird make-up and gowned as a Priestess. She ranted in Hawiian and invoked ancient curses- all of which completely terrified the young lady. Beatrice was most obviously gratified when the niece committed suicide within a few weeks!
In order that I not be completely off the subject of a/c have you encountered the fact that Patton wanted to fly his Stinson into the Desert Center, Calif. manuevering area when he was ordered there as C.O. in '42? He advised his predecessor that he'd be flying in; the predecessor, evidently no fan of George, advised in return that civilian aircraft were not permitted to fly in that area. Moreover, any and all aircraft including George's would be subject of anti-antiaircraft fire and aerial interception by fighters instructed to shoot down any encroaching aircraft. George arrived by train. Didn't they have fun though? We'll never see their like again!! They sure "got away' with a great deal of odd behaviour. In contrast to them did you see where a current Navy Skipper just lost his squadron because it was found he was co-owner of a private a/c with a subordinate? Personally I think I'll miss the "old ways"! I mean the ways of the "Old Army" and "The Old Navy"; not to imply- on my part- any interest in bemoning the absence of some Polynesian religious practice! (No offense intended to you, Beatrice, if you happen to be looking down!"- and especially, Dr. Lecter- not to you-)!
Regards, Lee