Ltn Joeph Jacobs and the quest for the 2nd DEVIL image

[Cigogne]

The bald fellow behind and to the right (our right) of Laumann in the white formal collar is Gotthard Sachsenberg. Naval officers wore the high white collar with a bow tie in their official wartime dress uniforms. Not sure if he is wearing a naval uniform here in this postwar photo, but if not, he seems to like the high-collar shirt.

[Hal Oele]

Hi folks, dear Aaron,

sorry that i have to say this, but Sachsenberg is definitely not on this photograph!

For all who can´t remember, here´s the photograph again:



Cause: Richthofens third burial
Place: Berlin Invalidenfriedhof
Time: 1925
Persons from left to right:
Loerzer, Walz, Buckler, Bäumer, Köhl, Keller, Thuy, Osterkamp (in Marine-Uniform), Könnecke, Veltjens, Jacobs, von Grone, Laumann, Udet, Leonhardy, Bolle, Klein, von Boenigk, Degelow, Wüsthoff.

19 in Uniform, except "Waldo". Waldo is Ernst Udet dressed in civil.

Here´s the detail again:



Mikell van der Laan thought that Laumann is Boelcke.
Cigogne believes that "Waldo" is Sachsenberg.

Next photo shows Sachsenberg in a photo from 1919.
Ears, eyes, and the headshape didn´t fit to "Waldo"



But this fits...
Ernst Udet some years later...



Perhaps its possible that the administrator, cut out all the answers to this matter, and open a new thread?

Dear friends of history, i hope (toi toi toi) that now all questions to this picture are answered...
(all pictures are from my collection!)

Have a nice weekend
yours
Hal

[van der Laan]

Hal Olee

I agree with you on this one, but there is one tiny problem ...... You have been horribly upstaged by MT's previous post concerning JJ. It's a lot like talking about the bad food on the Titanic while running for the stern.

MT insinuates that JJ has a pattern of misleading or at least the author of the diary does. It's too cryptic, if there is evidence of such it would be news, but only if there is evidence and with out the rest of us seeing it, how are we to be convinced...faith alone?

[Patrick]

MT insinuates that JJ has a pattern of misleading or at least the author of the diary does. It's too cryptic, if there is evidence of such it would be news, but only if there is evidence and with out the rest of us seeing it, how are we to be convinced...faith alone?

I don't know if "misleading" is the right description, it implies a malicious attempt to deceive. But perhaps "occasional hyperbole" better describes MT's assertion about the accuracy of some of Jacob's recollections? Here's something from Sims' interview with Jacobs referenced earlier that caught my eye --

Originally Posted by van der Laan

JJ has done several interviews in the 60s and 70s, a really good one is inside the book by Edward H Sims "Fighter Tactics and Strategy 1914 - 1970" published in 1972 ISBN-0-8168-8795-0 [ i found mine used on amazon.com for nine dollars US ]

Chapter 8 "A Reserve Officer" is entirely about old JJ and most of it in the form of an interview . . .

From Chapter 8, page 54:

I left flying school at Hangelar, near Bonn, to join the Army in 1914. I flew as an observer, bomber pilot and artillery spotter -- the Aviatik, LVE (sic), Rumpler and other planes.

. . .

In the beginning I sometimes carried bombs -- we threw them over the side with our hands -- ten kilo bombs. We carried six in the cockpit.

That's a very plain statement of fact by Jacobs. He specifies "ten kilo bombs" which in context of the rest of his statement (taking place in the 1914-15 time period) means 10 kg Cabonit bombs. He's specific about the amount carried -- "six" -- and how they were carried -- "in the cockpit".

But on reflection it seems -- unlikely. Terry Phillips and I discussed this same point regarding the Ilges and Brandt flight and quickly (too quickly?) discarded the idea that six Carbonits could be carried loose.

LVG C.IV Question

It's an odd-shaped weapon that can not be stood on end or stacked on it's side -- the best way to carry them is to hang them from the wire loop at the fin end. It's big enough that six of them would crowd out a cockpit, (in fact, doubtful you could find room for six and an occupant in any cockpit), and present a real danger of shifting weight or plunging right through the fabric side if the pilot was forced to manuever. One or two loose in the cockpit might be believable, but it seems that six would require some kind of rack or magazine.

So how are we to take Jacob's statement to Sims? Positive confirmation that it was possible to carry six Carbonit bombs loose in a 1914-15 era aeroplane cockpit? Or perhaps an exaggeration to add emphasis and color to his description?

For me, his statement proves nothing because the real-world physics keep getting in the way. Until someone can show the exact method of carrying six Carbonit bombs, either loose or mounted in some way, inside the cockpit, I find it an unbelievable description. I don't think Jacobs is misleading or lying or deliberately attempting to distort historical truth. But he makes a plain statement here that is difficult to connect to reality. I think "occasional hyperbole" is probably about right, and I'm sure Manfred has studied this far more thoroughly than I, so perhaps there's something to what he says.

[van der Laan]

I think he meant the 6 round bomb rack mounted on the side. Anyone got a picture of one?

[StephenLawson]

Aside from the MT fodder we are relatively doing well.

[Hal Oele]

Hi Folks,

i´ve stopped counting how often the sons and daughters of WW1 pilots told me stories about their life that are pure fiction!
Those stories are nice, but i prefer original documents!
Personalunterlagen, Patientenakten, Sterbeanzeigen and so on... are top sources for researchers.
Gunnar and the late Rick Duiven knows exactly what i´m talking about.
A subjective coloured diary (perhaps re-written years after WW1) could only be a first impression...

Yours
Hal


some more "fodder" from MT

It seems so as if the archivist of the LaFayette foundation isn't willing (see the thread "Ltn. Jacobs and "his" Boreas" in the Camouflage and Markings section) or not able to enlighten the readers.

So I may remind him of B.S., in my opinion the person with the best knowledge of the Jacobs story - and the only living one who had actually known Jacobs and discussed with him, but who was displaced by "big money" from the USA, when the widow of JJ couldn't withstand after the sudden death of Jacobs.

From the files of Friedrich Karl Knust:
Personal-Bestandsnachweisung Jasta 22, 30. Juni 1917: Ltn.d.R. Knust, geboren 6.7.91, Patent 22.3.15, bei Pi.Batl.9, Abzeichen 12.5.16, zu Jasta 22 am 25.5.17, von Park 7.

Together with Ltn.d.R. Jacobs and Ltn.d.R. Meyer he went to Jasta 7 on 3. August 1917. On 2. March 1918 Ltn.d.R. Knust was transferred to Junkers Bauaufsicht.

Manfred Thiemeyer (banned)

PS:
Do aviation history of WWI a favour and forget what's written by and about Ltn.d.R. Josef Jacobs in the book "Fighter Tactics And Strategy 1914-1970" by Edward H. Sims.

[van der Laan]

MT: I would love to dismiss all the known writings of folks like O’Connor, Sims and even Lawson himself. Relegating them all to fantasy, but there is a problem with doing that: simply put it’s this: they… each of them, are probably only writing half/truths about the real JJ as JJ himself (like every other fighter pilot) took artistic licenses to the extreme: the truth of this is this is why we all put GUN CAMERAS on fighters to this day: as memory from high adrenaline situations is less than accurate ( no matter who you are JJ or Chuck Yeager: it does not really matter) and these authors all used the aged man JJ as their source. So I agree, it could be missing important facts.

I understand (in your queer way) you are telling me: “van der Laan: if your understanding of JJ is from these half truth accounts via wives and fans, your understanding is not very valid”, but Manfred I got nothing else to run off of dude: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? People like O’Connor and Lawson, Sims and others probably have lots of inaccuracies on their accounts (thats the nature of archeology), but it’s the best anyone was willing to put out there for public review and thats all I have access to. The rest is all unheard, unseen, undiscovered and inaccessible to me and people like me.

Life is imperfect and we have to make do with what we have. If my sources are Sims, O'Connor, Lawson et all, and they are dead wrong, and therefore my understanding is dead wrong, then logically if you have sources or even are "the source" that can correct my understanding and do not use it to correct my understanding then Lawson et all are not at fault.... you are.

I am not calling you out here, simply stating that if my impression is wrong and you hold the keys, then its your fault not the mentioned authors.


I get the impression you are willing to set the record straight for me, and I am more than willing to listen/read whatever is posted. That is the nature of all your posts right: setting the record stright? There are no inapropriate postings in this thread as far as I am concerned so post away, tell me the tale... I’ll be waiting… all information is welcomed

[Dan_San_Abbott]

van der Laan:
As he stated, if you want the truth, you must get it from him. When this occurs, is about the same time as a the second coming. I would suggest you don't hold your breath.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[van der Laan]

I'm still waiting for Manfred to pour on the coal and get this JJ train really moving but right now the steam engine is chugging uphill and if he does not come up with something soon I may run out of fuel.... until then here's a little more from my ever smaller pile of JJ photos and tales.

As mentioned before, old JJ flew quite a number of different birds, here he is next to a Fokker DII, not sure if its his dog or just some poor stray that wondered in from Brugge.

[CENTER]

Here is the same photo as it appeared in CC long ago