Does this count.... as it's only an opinion?

[Ginger.]

“His flying was wonderful, his courage magnificent and in my own opinion he is the bravest German airman whom it has been my privilege to see fight.”

[Chock]

I think it counts as an 'informed opinion'. But despite your intentions to have a bit of a pop the Hun (yup, spotted that - oh no! he said Hun!, burn him!) it is a fair point in some ways. Not specifically regarding Werner Voss, but it is something I've often thought about actually, and I'll tell you why...

I'm currently re-reading 'In the Teeth of the Wind', which you probably know is a diary/memoir of RNAS Squadron Leader CPO Bartlett (but I'm not specifically singling this out, it just happens to be the one I'm reading at the moment). Now, without wishing to sound mean, if you read through that, or in fact pretty much any other WW1 pilot memoir (of any side), barely a page goes by without something such as this appearing: 'Had tea and crumpets and then went for a flight around the aerodrome to test the engine on B1234, crashed on landing and broke a strut and the propeller, later that evening we had a jolly ruck in the mess to celebrate Binky's return from hospital, he having flown B6789 into a tree the previous week. What larks.''.

That kind of thing is so common in WW1 memoirs, that you often find yourself thinking, who the hell taught these guys to fly!!? Of course, one has to consider the fact that aerodynamic knowledge was somewhat in its infancy then, and training often was indeed not as good as it could have been, and sometimes even the wood they used in aeroplane construction was rubbish. So anyone who flies these days has the benefit of hindsight, better training, better aeroplanes and the combined knowledge of 100 years of powered flight too, as well as the knowledge of many air wars to draw on. Thus, I'm not denying that we are 'standing on the shoulders of giants' in some ways, but even so, there must have been some truly rotten pilots in WW1. Even Mannock, who is my personal favourite, broke aeroplanes with depressing regularity, and we know MVR was not great at landing either.

Voss may indeed have been a great pilot, he almost certainly was, and enough witnesses say so, but when some of those witnesses clearly couldn't land a plane for toffee, it does make me wonder a bit.

Al

[Ginger.]

The very best, and the one that always makes me smile is Taffy Jones's advice on surviving a crash...

'Brace one arm on the instrument panel and the other on the seat, then lift your feet up.'

This worked perfectly for Taffy during his whole flying career, sadly, it couldn't help him when he fell off his ladder!

[JFM]

That MvR was not good at landing is a fair bit of exaggeration, IMO. That's not aimed at you, Chock, that's an across-the-board observation.

Often this is bandied about based on MvR's pranged landing during his first solo as a student pilot--my first solo landing in a Cessna was no greaser, and I had formal instruction. I'm glad that nobody has discounted the thousands of good landings I've had since then and judged my piloting skills based on my student pilot "ability." Rife are the airman who have pranged airplanes as students and went on to become excellent pilots. Frankly, even though student pilot mishaps are common, I question Zeumer's ability as an instructor, and from what Richthofen wrote he instilled zero confidence in his student just prior to MvR's solo. In early April 1916, while MvR was still flying two-seaters (one of which was the tricky LFG Roland C.II, which had a notorious landing reputation, although there is zero indication MvR ever had any trouble with them) Zeumer wrote that Richthofen "already knew much more than his former teacher." This after MvR had been a pilot less than four months.

The other barometer of Richthofen's landing ability is his autobiography, in which he wrote that after his first victory as fighter pilot he was "so excited that I landed also, and my eagerness was so great that I nearly smashed up my machine." This from the translated Red Air Fighter. Yet the 1917 German Der Rote Kampfflieger says nothing about "nearly smashing" his Albatros, just that he almost went over on his nose ("auf den kopf"). Almost = close, but did not. This during an impromtu adrenaline-laden landing at a strange field after his first victory in a plane type more maneuverable and light on the controls than any he had flown during the previous nine months and likely had landed, at most, once or twice, ever.

MvR never landed on a tent hangar (Andrews), never taxiied into a tent hangar after landing ( LvR), never stalled/spun/crashed his airplane and was imprisoned as a result (Udet), etc. Are these incidents barometers of the abilities of these men, who were pilots and not students at the time? Not that I've ever seen.

And speaking of Udet, in 1929 he discussed that while flying with MvR he suddenly noted him turn back for the lines and descend. "All at once he [MvR] turned sharply into the wind, banked, dropped, straightened out and disappeared from view behind a low ridge. When I got over him, I found that he had made a perfect landing on a 20 meter long bit of level ground. It was the only landing possibility within an area of more than a square mile and so small at that, that only a miracle-man could have successfully negotiated it." Richthofen's skills had obviously increased since his first student pilot solo.

The forced landing Udet mentioned had been caused by a damaged prop. After repairs, MvR "ordered a group [of] men to hold on to each wing until given the signal to let go. Then he started his motor and gave it every drop of gas it would take. With a nod from Richthofen, the soldiers released their hold. The triplane let out a roar and literally leaped perpendicularly into the air after a run of not more than five meters. I doubt if any aviator from that day to this had ever made a more brilliant landing or a more extraordinary take-off." That last sentence is opinion, but from a man who knew a thing or two about flying. (Udet doesn't say but I'll opine there was a fair bit of wind to assist both landing and takeoff.)

As far as what Ginger wrote, sure it counts that that's how McCudden felt. Interesting McCudden fought MvR and Voss--although when he fought MvR McCudden was too busy spinning away to notice much about MvR's fighting, other than he couldn't shake him. 1/2

[Ginger.]

Jim, when The Von and McCudden tangled with each other what types of aircraft were they flying, did either kite have a marked advantage over the other?

[JFM]

I knew that would be too tasty to resist!

You know what planes they flew and which type had the advantage--it was all those SE5a's against the lone F.I. Oh, wait a minute, that's when Voss was shot down. That's okay, though, since Lord-lovers love Voss because Voss lost.

During the MvR/McCudden engagement in which McCudden was forced to flee MvR's aggressive attacks by spinning down for thousands of meters and could not shake him until MvR broke off and gave him up for crashed, they were in a DH2 and Alb DII. It started head-on, with both men firing. I know McCudden had a jammed weapon after 20 shots and since he was surrounded by five SE5as--I mean Albs (D.Is, according to McC), he spun out. Prudent and sensible action, to be sure. At that point he and MvR were playing follow-the-leader, and McCudden could not elude what some people believe was a "mediocre" pilot. I don't believe MvR was mediocre; he was certainly good enough to keep up with McCudden.

[Ginger.]

Lord-Lovers, damned racist dog, retract Sir, I demand you retract!!!

You got a tad confused with all that spinning, seems Mac gave The Von a masterclass in how to aviod a somewhat clumsy attack. That's only my 'umble opinion though.

[JFM]

"You got a tad confused with all that spinning, seems Mac gave The Von a masterclass in how to aviod a somewhat clumsy attack. That's only my 'umble opinion though."

[Chock]

When I was learning to fly, I took to it fairly naturally (probably as I say, owing to the fact that, being obsessed with aeroplanes since I was a little lad, I knew a great deal about how they worked by the time I got to drive one of the things for myself. So I admit, I owe a large debt to all those before me, such as those WW1 pioneers).

But despite me being pretty good at flying from the off, that initial success in the first few hours led to me being a bit overconfident and of course, the inevitable student pilot heavy landing followed because of that (I got too fixated on the ground and flared too late). No damage to the aircraft ensued, but some dents in my ego certainly occurred, and a chastened Al then took the experience to heart and has never had a landing incident since, and that includes many landings in rough unprepared fields that are small, and even landing on a golf course once (long story).

Thus, I think the numerous 'Chalky Braithwaite broke a strut on landing' type tales you get in WW1 biogs, perhaps point to some less than brilliant flyers, as one would hope that like me, just one chastening poor landing is something from which you can learn and become a better pilot. But it often doesn't seem to be the case with WW1 flyers. Many of them appear to qualify as aces for the other side too, given how many of their own aircraft they seem to destroy through poor flying.

We know, for example, that McCudden was in fact killed making a real beginner's mistake, in turning back for the airfield with a stalled engine. So I do sometimes have doubts about whether him seeing 'wonderful flying' might be a bit relative, given that his own end is at least one occasion which demonstrates anything but the ability to judge what wonderful flying encompasses. That might seem cruel, but it is nonetheless a fact. Having said that, he was one of the guys who would spin the DH2 at Joyce Green, so sometimes I really don't know what to think regarding whether he was a good pilot or not. Maybe he was and just had a bad day, because one mistake is of course all it takes.

On the subject of the Baron's flying abilities, thinking about it, I suspect I am slightly guilty of perpetuating a perhaps undeserved 'MVR was not good at landings' notion, as I seem to recall that being something I read many years ago, rather than an opinion of my own formed from what I know of his flying, which, given the amount of books I have on him, is greatly expanded knowledge compared to when I read that 'not good at landings' opinion. So yup, that's a fair cop on that one!

Al