I don't think any real student of history lends much credence to the notion of national personality traits, if there really is such a thing, affecting any tactics, 'Hunnish' or otherwise.
Given the chance, I think I'd have cheerfully engaged in being a sneaky b*****d if I'd have found myself having to fly a plane in WW1. After all, why risk a collision or a stray bullet knocking your block off in a swirling dogfight, if you could instead hack down some hapless loner nursing a sick engine on the edge of such a furball? It's certainly cruel, but it's also exactly what I'd try to take advantage of if I could. Derisory accusations leveled at famous aces having indulged in that kind of thing there may be, but they were getting the job done all the same and the score sheet shows it was the way to go. In a war of attrition, it's numbers that count and not glorious tales of keenly contested aerial duels, because we know how that turns out, as Voss and Ball would doubtless confirm if they were alive to speak of such things.
As Douglas Bader famously said: 'War is not a game of cricket'. Thus, we should not be fooled into imagining that every ace was either likable or especially sporting, because neither trait is part of the job description for anyone other than the press. But back on the subject of the original thread, here's an interesting one to consider with regard to aces, tactics, and glorious tales...
Apparently a few 85 Squadron pilots actively objected to the proposed choice of
James McCudden to replace the outgoing
William Bishop as 85 Squadron commander, instead requesting Mannock, who of course ended up with the job. Bishop was never really content to lead the Squadron as many at 85 had evidently wished, preferring instead his lone forays, these being the ones that led to many of the, if not actually proven to be dubious, then certainly unwitnessed claims he put in. Regardless of whether one subscribes to the school of Billy Liar, or the church of much maligned Saint Billy, what is not in doubt is that Bishop had about half of 85 squadron's victory claims on his personal score sheet by the time he was being bumped back to Canada and out of 85, so he was certainly not spreading the love among his charges at 85 in the way at least some of them apparently would have preferred.
But in fairness, you do hear conflicting views about Bishop's popularity at 85 and in the RFC at large; if there was anywhere I'd ever like to have been a fly on the wall, it would be for some conversations around their mess in summer 1918. More interesting than accusations and opinions on Bishop however, is the notion that some pilots at 85 evidently considered McCudden would not get them the successes they craved when they heard he was potentially coming as Bishop's replacement. I don't think anyone doubts McCudden's sincerity, or the credulity of his claims and successes, but it seems that some at 85 thought he would offer more of the same in terms of few opportunities to score victories among the various flights.
It's well known that Mannock was one of the 'scientific fighters' when it comes to the tactical positioning of leading flights and setting up attacks, and was keen to see pilots in his charge grow. This was no secret at the time either, so one can understand the pilots yet to open their score sheet at 85 preferring him as a choice. Conversely, it seems McCudden had preferred taking the science of stalking things solo to its zenith, a preference which was also well known among the RFC flyers at the time too. But what do you think McCudden would have done in the role at 85 had he got it? Was it a misconception for some pilots at 85 to think he'd not have got them the kills they wanted, and not been a 'team player'? Moreover, the apparent desire for a commander who adopted such 'scientific' methods is more than enough evidence that British pilots at large couldn't give a toss about being 'sporting' and were on the whole just as keen to fight 'unfairly'. And if that's the case, then it makes Bishop, with his lone forays, one of the more sporting types!
Mannock and McCudden were apparently on quite friendly terms, Mannock even stating McCudden's tutelage had saved his life once, but there's a big difference in their attitudes to combat. Their reactions to the news of the death of MVR is no better illustration of that, with McCudden relating in
Flying Fury how his squadron toasted the Baron's fall that evening, which is in contrast to Mannock expressing the hope that 'toasted' was exactly how he hoped the Baron had met his end, refusing to raise a glass to him at all.
We do know McCudden liked to stalk two seaters on his own, and that was a game for loners when played the way McCudden preferred it, so in that they'd be back on the kind of territory Bishop preferred at 85, but is that all McCudden would have done, if given the freedom of such a command? Mannock too liked going for two seaters, but his methods involved the flight he was leading, invariably gaining each man a victory credit.
Speculate away gentlemen....
Al