Did fighter pilots carry side arms?

[Fritz Kempf]

Did fighter pilots carry side arms? In all the books I have read on the Red Baron I don’t recall mention of a side arm.

Thanks
Ed

[Jim Bruton]

never know you are going to run into these days either!

[Lufbery]

Originally Posted by Fritz Kempf

Did fighter pilots carry side arms? In all the books I have read on the Red Baron I don?t recall mention of a side arm.

Thanks
Ed

Well, famously, Frank Luke was said to have shot it out with German soldier who were coming to pick him up after his crash.

There's another stufy of a high ranking officer being upset that his pilots weren't wearing their officer's swords (and spurs) in the cockpit.

Generally, though, I've read a lot more about pilots using the flare guns that were included in the cockpits to signal one another, and to torch their planes after crashing behind enemy lines.

Regards,

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Fritz Kempf

Did fighter pilots carry side arms? In all the books I have read on the Red Baron I don’t recall mention of a side arm.

Thanks
Ed

In a 2003 thread Barrett thought that von Richthofen carried a luger on his last flight which was souvenired. Some clot speculated that the lugar had been confiscated in one of Australia's "gun purges" !!

I read somewhere that Mannock is reputed to have carried some sort of a firearm to use in lieu of being burnt to death. Apart from that, not much point, I'd have thought.

[Fritz Kempf]

So it seems that it was up to the pilot except in the case of the officer that wanted swords and spurs worn in the cockpit; must have been a Texan. Thanks Guys.

Ed

[Barrett]

IIRC, Norman Franks' book about TRB's last flight mentioned that MvR had binoculars and a Luger.

[Skippy]

Liebe Kempf und Drewbery,
There is a newspaper account, credited to Hartney and post-war, of mechanics bringing to Hartney's attention their finding a holster and sidearm in Luke's cockpit...
One gets the impression from this that pilots' carrying of sidearms was not regulation...
Captain Lewis, when he spoke to Luke's nephew, John Park Luke, in March of last year, mentioned that Luke was adamant that he "wouldn't be taken alive"; he also disputed the Captain's contention that Luke, most likely, having abandoned his SPAD, waited "in ambush" in the Bradon (that's the actual name of the stream that flows through Murvaux)-- to paraphrase John Park, "that wasn't in his nature"...
The esteemed Captain still wonders why Luke, who he believes was not wounded, didn't set fire to his aircraft-- perhaps he was only able to holster the .45 automatic and not the flare pistol? Could it have been the damp and windy weather?
Moving along...
I've come across numerous accounts of USAS flyers having been downed behind German lines; in no account, outside of Luke's-- and there's even an account of a wounded pilot being murdered (and that's exactly what it was) in the last week of the war-- no account of a pilot or observer carrying or defending themselves with sidearms...
There's your educatin, Fritzl; now it's your conjecture...
The good Captain sends his warmest regards to Drewbery and the Missus...

[De Petrowski Alexander]

It was and still is customary for Officers to carry sidearms, depending on type of duty or the Military in which one serves, the more so in wartime, this was also the case in WW I, including Officer pilots, those services which also had NCO pilots no doubt emulated this practice. This practice was continued inside the cockpit, by some but not all.

Shooting it out with the enemy after being shot down sounds heroïc perhaps, but unless one is close to one's own troops or there is an escape option, it is usually a very bad idea, a pistol (Revolver) has only a very limited amount of rounds and your enemy carries not only much heavier weapons, he is also likely to be more numerous than one has rounds available.

Since it was virtually impossible to cross the frontlines in WW I for a shot down pilot, the German pilots had no choice but to surrender unless when close to Switzerland, therefore shooting it out was useless, for the Allied pilots the situation was a little better, since there were escape organisations in both France and Belgium leading them to neutral Holland. But like in WW II most never got a chance to contact one.

Sidearms could be off use however to keep angry civilians at bay, a danger to shot down pilots in all wars, as mentioned in many Airman war stories.
In some war areas it also keeps hungry animals at bay, sometimes very useful.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by De Petrowski Alexander

It was and still is customary for Officers to carry sidearms, depending on type of duty or the Military in which one serves, the more so in wartime, this was also the case in WW I, including Officer pilots, those services which also had NCO pilots no doubt emulated this practice. This practice was continued inside the cockpit, by some but not all.

That's a pretty sweeping statement, DPA. Are you able to be a bit more specific when you say "some but not all" ? In 1914 - 1915, before machine guns were fitted to aircraft, there are accounts of airmen using sidearms and carbines to shoot at enemy aircraft but later in the war, pilots flying over the Western Front shot down were unlikely to encounter hostile civilians or dangerous animals, unlike their counterparts in the Middle East. Apart from the reason attributed to Mannock, I can't see much point in the practice.

[De Petrowski Alexander]

Vin, I agree that taking sidearms in the cockpit on the Western Front, was off limited use, I used the phrase "some but not all" because there have been thousands of pilots on the Western Front, Although it might sound logic to leave sidearms behind, one cannot be certain that all of them saw it that way.

To avoid a burning death could be considered a good reason, or falling to their death because of no parachute available.