Tell me about Raymond Collishaw

[Taz]

Vin- The Peter Principle.

Taz
Terry Phillips

[Nieuport28]

Hi Jon an all~
Perhaps , as I offer a defense of Raymond Collishaw in the matter of the 'alternate theory' as to the death of Werner Voss, I should have titled this response "Don't Kill the Messenger'? The classic experience here?~ That of someone villified for presenting a less than popular opinion? Let me further offer for your consideration:

If a Raymond Collishaw had never drawn a breath on this earth, there would still exist some question about the ultimate fate of Voss~ and an 'alternate theory' to explain it. So, why then, would RC's advocation of research in the matter be termed 'a blunder'?~ The report by Lt. Wendelmuth of Jasta 8 would still exist in German records (Ie, 'The Bodenschatz Diary'): "Lt. Wendelmuth reports that Lt. Voss had been shot down from behind during air combat with a Sopwith"~

The 'alternate theory' exists yet, because it was never disproved or proved 'for the record' when the principals involved were still with us back in the late '60s and '70's. It presupposes that, after surviving the '56' scrap, Voss entered momentarily later into another, and fatal confrontation with Brtish 'Sopwiths'~ (but confusion as to types of enemy a/c encountered is legendary). It was a simple scenario: Wendelmuth attacks two Brit a/c and is joined by Voss~ and Voss loses his life in the ensuing combat. Wendelmuth claimed to have revenged V. with the downing of the British.

A German POW, Lt. Waldhausen, brought McCudden's book "Flying Fury' back to Germany with him and at that point the more elaborate, 'Wagnerian' scenario of the 'Voss vs. 56' melee became preferred by most, if not all, Germans. Collishaw visiting in Germany in his later years, learned of the simpler version and became interested in learning who the British 'Sopwith' flyers might have been.

Published compilations of RAF losses (cf.'Henshaw') suggest that a Lt. Baynton of 32 Squadron was downed by W. that PM.

RC was a person truly interested in those momenteous experiences of his youth as a combatant in the skies of France. Dan San Abbot has told me of his afternoon with RC where the thoughts of the Canadian were pre-ocupied with the 'Death of Guynemer', etc. RC was an authentic 'voice from the past' and took far more interest in the history of WWI aviation that most of his peers of that time.

I'm sure you won't mind my taking a moment to consider and possibly even correct the impression you've given that, in 'Fighting Triplanes' by Evan Hadingham, there is evidence that RC provided the author with the name of a other than 56 Squadron flyer involved in the 'alternate theory;~ In your recall attempt, I realize you didn't have the original material at hand~ You suggest in the above, that it might possibly be a "RNAS' pilot~ who was considered by RC to have been the victor over Voss.
Important for this moment is that there is nothing in 'Fighting Triplanes' which suggests that a British pilot ('Naval'~ or otherwise)~ from a Squadron other than 56 was involved in Voss' death. At the time of the publication of 'FT', in '68, that thought wasn't current and EH only made reference to the two French pilots ('Sellier and Janet'~ 'unit unknown')~ who might have been candidates for involvement in the affair~ as victims of Wendelmuth~
It was subsequent to the publishing of 'FT' that there was activity by Collishaw, which identified another possibility: I have an e-mail from Alex Revell to myself in which he stated that it was he, at Collishaw's request, who found a possible involvement in a battle with Wendelmuth on 9-23-17. This pilot, Baynton, became a POW.

Mr. R. wrote me "The only casualty which was not eliminated by time or location was G.R. Baynton of 32 Squadron" Mr. Revell added that "There was no time given for B's loss in the casualty report."
In subsequent months Collishaw "failed", Mr. Revell, further writes "to provide the addresses of Baynton or his brother."
Mr. Revell did not pursue the issue: He further states to me "Why should I have 'pursued the lead myself? I was working on other things and merely checking out the many points raised by C, which took a considerable amount of time."...another comment from this note of Mr. R. to me continues along the same lines with: "The theory was C's. In light of the fact that he was giving me no hard facts, why should I have wasted time in trying to trace them. (?)

I hope I have satisfactorily established that EH was not at all misled by RC who, as is suggested by you in this 'thread' and did not, "In his biggest blunder" mislead 'a young writer' a vis this matter of another British pilot as the possible victor over WV? As the old expression would have it' 'His personal reputation in this matter demands a kinder fate'~?

It might be of interest here to note, as mentioned above, that G.F. Baynton had a brother also in 32 Squadron. There is a comment available that G.F. told this brother that the other plane with him in the affair was 'a Camel'~ If so one might reasonably inquire to what Squadron was this Sopwith attached? Or, did '32' ever operate mixed types of a/c? (GFB was in a 'DH-5').

It seems to me that it would have been most desirable for any of the other researchers active at the time to have contacted, recorded and revealed for posterity, the recollectionsl of the many, then surviving members of '32', including the brother, (GFB died I believe in 1924 or so)~ Douglas Whetton may have undertaken such research as he too, was working for Collishaw~ Such inquiry could have served to ascertain the facts~ and possibly, completely eliminate the possibility that Baynton was at the scene of, or involved in Voss' death. If a 'Camel' was indeed there~then that pilot may have been the victor over Voss? There is little in the brief report by Baynton in his file at the PRO (WO 339/861327) other than his description of the battle damage which resulted in being forced down~ No time is recorded for the 'line patrol' he was undertaking. No claim is entered over an e/a. This precludes not at all the possibility that he fired on, was fired on in return and knew subsequently knew nothing of the a/c he had initially under attack~ (this much as Rhys David had to be told by others that he'd 'downed Voss'~ RD not seeing any of the ensuing results of his engagement with WV). Nor does it preclude the pilot of the 'Camel' accompanying Baynton as the successful attacker of Voss?

Importantly, Baynton's residence at his time of enlistment, 48 Russell Road, Moseley, Birmingham, is yet there in his file~ there for any investigators who via the address~ could. nearly fifty years ago, have probably located members of his family~ It seems most probable that additiona;contacts could have ensued with the many, then yet alive, former '32 Squadron' members?

Although many accounts of aerial combats do not agree due to 'The haze of combat'~ the reports of '56' members re. the fray with Voss are most exceedingly confusing: Although he crashed well within British lines, McCudden reported Voss down in German lines. Capt. Hoidge says that McC. wasn't even there at the finale. Hoidge was the 'victor of record' according to the 56 Squadron's first documentation of the affair~ (a photostat of the combat report is in Hadingham's work)~ and the report is then annotated by hand to evidence that Rhys David was the victor. RD said he, personally, didn't see Voss go down~ he did however, confuse the issue of his own 'power of personal recall' by reporting to Maurice Baring, at RRC's HQ, re. Voss's rotary engine powered two-gunned 'Tripe': "The engine was not a Mercedes, but I thought it was a stationary~ and it had four guns"~ (!!)~

I am not mandating a conviction on my part that valorious '56' Squadron's claim in regard to the victory over Voss need be deflected over to the already glorious record of '32'~ 'The Royal Squadron'~ or any other unit of the RAF operating on that September PM of 1917~ but~ as Hadingham (most recently of PBS', 'Nova', in Boston) wrote: "If the conventional attitude is taken that Voss died as a result of Rhy David's attack, then some explanation is required of all the discrepancies in one of the most famous of First War air combats."

These thoughts, and EH's consideration of them, in my thinking are, and were. independenI of RC's interest in the case~ Again~ a reading of FT' will definitely establish that the 'Baynton premise' was never supplied to EH by RC~ I only wish it had! Had this knowledge been in EH's possession, he might have put it to better use in querying the principals still alive then~ nearly fifty years ago now~ when he wrote his intriguing book~ (ie. including, among 'the principals', possibly, the Lt. Kiegan, of the 174th Brigade, who, as AR learned, buried Voss~ and may have viewed the participants~ and their number in the battle above him?)~

Jon, I loved your WWI Video~ Everyone! Please do view it!! A good example of respect for veracity and an allegiance to historical reality amidst all the fantasy proferred us recently in the guise of WWI Aviation History!~ Congratulations in every regard!!

[Barrett]

I have Collishaw's memoir somewhere but don't recall how he addressed his early retirement in WW II. Whatever his real accomplishments (or not) I have a lot of respect for him because he took time to reply to a query from a young wannabe historian ("Age and the Fighter Ace" in Aerospace Historian) and he remains one VERY few "greats" who pursued a serious interest in history. In that regard he shared traits with the late Rod Smith, another Canadian ace of Malta vintage. Rod was amazing: knew more about Essex class aircraft carriers than some admirals!

[Lufbery]

N-28,

Thanks for a very interesting post. By the way, what video are you talking about?

From what I've read of Collishaw, he was a very good pilot, darned lucky (escaping from several close calls), and a good leader.

Here's a question for all: is Collishaw the one who nearly fell out of his plane after it got shot to pieces? I seem to recall something about him having to hang on to the Lewis gun until he could struggle back into the cockpit.

Regards,

[Graeme]

Drew

It was Louis Strange who was tipped out of his Martinsyde and hung onto the Lewis until he was able to get his legs back inside the cockpit and kick the stick over. His machine wasn't "shot to pieces"; he had trouble getting the empty drum off the Lewis so stood up with the stick between his knees and as he wrestled with the gun in the slipstream, he lost his grip on the stick and the Martinsyde rolled over.

The damage done was by Strange's boots as he kicked around in the cockpit, smashing most of his instruments, and as he flopped back into the wicker seat, which collapsed.

Graeme

[Nieuport28]

Drew~
Please see the second response in this 'thread' where you'll find a contribution by Jan Goldstein~ (I mistyped the name as 'Jon')~ He has supplied a link to his site where he narrates a timeline~ with photographs~ with emphasis on the aviation activity in the First War~ Lee

In another thread, I'm slowly listing date, time, location, of Capt. W.M. Alexanders combat reports, from the Naval 10, 210 R.A.F. Squadron Record book.

When mentioned in his reports, ( Not every report is a claim ! ), I'll insert others victories and or casuilties, as he reported them.

Jim

[rainbase]

N-28. thanks for the oh-so-kind plug of my film effort. Your earlier post about Collishaw, Haddington and the other was fascinating; an impressive piece of writing! Right on.