Birth of the Richthofen Circus?

[Southside Bucky]

Hi Russ.

As usual, you make your point very well.

I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that your research of WWI air combat claims and losses are of immense importance to the subject.

Is there any prospect that your work will ever get published?

Regards.

Bucky

[ManfredT]

High all,

when talking with Hal this afternoon it was consensus not to run into the minefield of "who shot who".

Back to the Birth of the Richthofen Circus.

It seems to be a British term and any hint is highly appreciated, where and when this term was in use for the first time. Both authors, Jones (War in the Air) and Henshaw (Casualities) are to vague without quoting any document.

There was no forerunner of the Richthofen Circus. An agglomeration of Jasta's during the Battle of Arras asked for an organisation. But a "mass start" at Douai of 4 Jasta's on 30th of April 1917 is not documented.

ManfredT

[GMU]

Originally Posted by ManfredT

High all,

when talking with Hal this afternoon it was consensus not to run into the minefield of "who shot who".

Back to the Birth of the Richthofen Circus.

It seems to be a British term and any hint is highly appreciated, where and when this term was in use for the first time. Both authors, Jones (War in the Air) and Henshaw (Casualities) are to vague without quoting any document.

There was no forerunner of the Richthofen Circus. An agglomeration of Jasta's during the Battle of Arras asked for an organisation. But a "mass start" at Douai of 4 Jasta's on 30th of April 1917 is not documented.

ManfredT

Hi Hal and Manfred,

Yes, and if such an organized effort occurred, it would have been illogical to keep MvR on the ground, as it happened on April 30th. He would have certainly been required to command such an important event.

If the 4 Jastas operated as a single Geschwader, then who was in command? There are no records of this, which suggests that it probably did not happen at all.

George

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Hi Gentlemen:
I agree with you George, without MvR in the lead, he was not following his orders. With this experiment, MvR would have most likely been buzy observing and expending his efforts in leading, rather than combat with the enemy. This was the first effort of this 6.Armee Jagdgruppe.
On 30 April 1917, in the German 6.Armee was established Jagdstaffelgruppe, consisting of Jasta 3,4,11 and 33 were commanded by MvR. The purpose of this organization was to determine if it were possible for a single commander, to maintain command and control of a large number of aircraft in the air, in battle. The 6. Armee Jagdgruppe was disbanbed on 1 June 1917. The experiment was judged a success, and led to the establishment of Jagdgeschwader Nr.1 on 26 June 1918.
The whole purpose of the establishment of the 6.Armee Jagdgruppe, was to determine if one man, could lead a large formation in the air and maintain command and control. If MvR was not in command while in the air, the purpose of this experiment was lost.
Blue skies Gentlemen,
Dan-San

[R Gannon]

Manfred

That may be, but Rick & co pulled it all together and put it in a book for the whole of the WW1 air war fraternity to use, not just a slect few.

As to HA Jones, he was as you would know in touch with the Reicharchive which supplied various German material used in his books.

'Who got who' is no minefield as long as the loss and claim data is accurate and giveing both times and locs. Sadly the time data is not recorded in many of the documents you quote - which for the most part only list fatalities. Surviving KOFL returns do provide some detail as well as missing & wounded but there are many many many gaps. A fellow countryman of yours Fliegertruppe provided some very good loss data re Schlasta 24 with time & locs and then it was pretty easy to identify the British airmen who caused the losses.

I would like to see a book listing of German losses along Henshaws lines. One which illiminates the non-operational losses, plus marrying up fatal & none fatal 2-seater losses and where available provide times & locs and a loss blurb as with British casualty returns. That would be a real boon for researchers.

Cheers Russ

[Hal Oele]

Hello folks,

first we start with our topic, and recapitulate the beginnining of this thread:

"The 30th of April was notable for a change in German air fighting tactics. The fighter flights attached to the Arras Corps at Douai (3rd, 4th, 11th, and 33rd) were combined to form one group which could, as occasion demanded, operate as a massed fighting formation. This group, which made its first sweep on the morning of the 30th, was promptly named by us 'Richthofen's Circus'..."
WAR IN THE AIR Vol.III, page 368

The statement of H.A. Jones is wrong!
Beside the Kofl-Berichte we have two evidence: the war diary of Lt. Baur of Jasta 3, and the eyewitness and interview partner Lt. Geiseler of Jasta 33, who shot down a FE2 at this very morning, after airborne at Villers-au-Tertre.

No Jagdgruppe was established during the Battle of Arras in April/June 1917 - a wrong conclusion deduced from the above statement!

Attached is a photograph of Lt. Geiseler at Villers-au-Tertre, after an incidence. No, not with a British, but with a molehill...



A last word to COTGAS:

Quoting Russ Gannon: "That may be, but Rick & co pulled it all together and put it in a book for the whole of the WW1 air war fraternity to use, not just a select few."

You may have a look at the books below.



They are the sources!
Not shown here is the input of Erich Tornuss and Gustav Bock. And the input of some younger German enthusiasts, who worked together with Dr. Bock. All information were given in trust. I think the German community were not even mentioned in the published books. For sure they were not asked, and as far as I know the relatives of Dr. Gustav Bock (+1988) were not pleased about that, what had happened...

And the future?
Much more information has seen the light, COTGAS is outdated...
A small group of german friends (and researchers) start to build up a complex information-pool...

ManfredT & Hal

[fliegertruppe]

Hello Forum,

referring to the matter of „zur Landung gezwungen“, here is one example from the bavarian Max von Müller documents.

09.08.1917 – Jasta 28
Bei einem Geschwaderflug an die Front mit Vizewachtmeister Wagner und Vizefeldwebel Bärenfänger griffen wir ein Sopwith-Geschwader von 3 Flugzeugen an. Während zwei davon zur Front zurückflogen, flog der Dritte, anscheinend ein Artillerie-Flugzeug in 3000 m Höhe in Richtung Menin - Langemark zur Front zurück. Ich griff sofort den Engländer an und nach 200 Schuß ging er sofort steil Richtung Front zurück. Ich hatte dabei Ladehemmung. Während der Behebung der Ladehemmung flog ich nun über dem Engländer her, jedoch der Beobachter schoß nicht mehr, anscheinend tot oder verwundet. In ca. 800 m Höhe über der Front griff ich ihn mit Vizefeldwebel Bärenfänger nochmals an. Hierauf ging der Engländer ganz steil hinter den feindlichen Linien nieder.
Müller Max Offizier Stellvertreter

Zeugenaussagen Wagner und Bärenfänger
Am 9.8.17 vormittag 9.30 sichteten wir, im Geschwader zu Dreien fliegend, einen Sopwith etwa in Höhe Menin Richtung Roulers fliegend. Wir griffen denselben an. Offz. Stellv. Müller ihm am nächsten, drückte ihn bis zur Front auf 800 m herunter. Der Sopwith ging darauf in steilen Gleitflug hinter seinen Linien herunter.
Wagner, Vizewachtmeister Jasta 28

Etwa um 9.30 vormittag griff in der Gegend Langemark Offz. Stellv. Müller als Geschwaderführer einen Sopwith-Doppelsitzer an, der sich sofort durch Kurven und starkes Drücken der Front zu dem Angriff zu entziehen versuchte, und anscheinend getroffen stark herabdrückt wurde. Ich unterstütze Offz. Stellv. Müller, der Ladehemmung hatte, wurde aber im Schiessen durch B.A.K. Feuer stark gestört. Über der Front war das feindliche Flugzeug nur noch mehrere Hundert Meter hoch und ging in steilen Gleitflug nieder.
Bärenfänger Vizefeldwebel

Kogenluft Anerkennung
Kogenluft No. 109291 Fl.IIIc.
Kofl. 4
Dem Offz. Stellv. M ü l l e r Jasta 28, wird der Abschuss eines Sopwith am 9.8.17 als „ jenseits der Linien zur Landung gezwungen“ anerkannt.

Greetings from Bavaria
Reinhard

[ManfredT]

Lieber Reinhard,

that's the point: Müller Maxl could present some witnesses, Laubfrosch Geiseler not. Lucky British - they don't need any witness.

Grüße aus der Eifel,
Manfred

[GMU]

Thank you Manfred and Hal for that interesting information.

So, what led to the development of the Jagdgeschwader? When was the birth of it?

Was there an experiment to see if it worked?

What criteria did the authorities use to choose the individual Jastas that formed the larger group?

George

[R Gannon]

Fliegertruppe

Any chance of translating your post re Muller's ZLG on 9 aug 17. I love this stuff but like many Forumites & WW1 air war enthusiasts I don't read German - can just work my way through basics.

Mannfred T & Hal

I'm well aware of Gustav Bock and his work - great get this vital stuff into print for the wider community. Rick's work like all the Grub St offerings should only be seen as foundations - none the less they represent the best that is on offer todate. Befor Grub Street, we all worked in the shaddows and relied on generosity of other enthusiasts to provide original data.

As to that tiresome 'witness' quip. Yes it is easy to get witnesses when you fight your air war on the very doorsteps of your airfeilds - much harder to get witnesses when you fight 90% of your war over the enemy's side. And again regardless of the much vaunted claims about the veracity of German claiming, the hard truth is that quite 40 % of these 'witnessed' German claims did not result in a 'hard kill'. Me also thinks: much of the multiple witness issue had more to do with Jasta pilots squabbling over credit for victories, than verifying whether the enemy actually went down let alone crashed. Very few Allied planes went down with less than two German planes on their tails. Again an advantage of fighting over your own side.

Cheers Russ