Who killed MvR

[Martin]

As A "Johnny come lately" to this august body of knowledge on WWI aviation history. I would love to hear the opinions of the members of this forum as to who they thought did kill MvR.

[Rex_Feral]

I say ground fire killed MvR. The single wound that killed him did so almost instantly, so the timeline doesn't support Brown's claim. MvR would have gone down almost immediately had Brown inflicted the fatal wound, not flown on normally for the additional minutes he did.

[Graeme]

Basically, you'll have to read everything ever written on the subject, make up your own mind, then defend your decision against all those who have a contrary opinion.

Despite what has been written over the years, the precise timing of events has never been established and the bullet that inflicted the fatal wound has never been found. So, based on the evidence available, it would appear unlikely that Roy Brown fired the fatal shot, despite what he claimed in his combat report.

However, just to liven things up, I'll say that the RAF was correct in giving Brown the credit. ;)

Graeme

[leo]

IF Brown probably did not shoot MvR down, why would the RAF be correct in awarding him credit?

leo

[Martin]

So we suppose it was ground fire then .....possibly from Popkin?

[Rex_Feral]

IF Brown probably did not shoot MvR down, why would the RAF be correct in awarding him credit?

leo


Because that is the only proper ending to the legend.

The greatest air ace of WW I can't fall to lowly ground fire, he had to be bested by another knight of the air. :)

[The_Observer]

Martin, it can be stated with NEAR certainty that ground fire was responsible for MvR's death. When you consider the testimony of the 4/21/18 event, provided by literally hundreds of men from both sides who were there, it is nearly impossible to believe that the fatal shot came from the air.

It is a fact that von Richthofen died from a right-to-left shot through the side/back of the trunk, with the bullet exiting below the left nipple. Such a wound, regardless of whether or not the bullet struck the heart, would have been immediately traumatic to the individual hit. As reported by hundreds of observing ground troops, MvR continued to pursue May's Camel turn for turn, at tree-top level , for 90 to 120 seconds after Brown had fired into him. If Brown had delivered the fatal shot, how could/why would vR continue to pursue his intended victim turn for turn? Would such an action even be possible for a mortally wounded man? Seems highly doubtful, at least to me.

More likely an unwounded vR continued after his man until he noticed the ground fire being directed at him. Upon turning for home, the slug with his name on it finally caught up with him.

Carisella's research makes an excellent case concluding that the team of Popkin and Weston most likely killed MvR. Based on the evidence presented, I come to the same conclusion. While it is certainly possible that someone else on the ground fired the fatal shot, it is impossible for me to conclude that the killing shot came from the air.

[leon_hale]

history will almost certainly show that brown was the one who killed richthofen.
i personally believe he did, and he (brown) believes he did. he seemed genuine when he said "i couldn't have felt greater sorrow if he had been a friend", or something like that. i don't think he was just saying that 'for the record'. i believe he really thinks he killed him. he was, after all, in the cockpit of an aeroplane that was behind richthofen. he knows at what angles they were flying in their efforts to shoot down their perspective targets. he must have been at an angle, favorable to him, to get off 'the shot'. he would know whether or not it had been possible to have made the wounds that took richthofen's life.



leon

[Rex_Feral]

history will almost certainly show that brown was the one who killed richthofen.
i personally believe he did, and he (brown) believes he did. he seemed genuine when he said "i couldn't have felt greater sorrow if he had been a friend", or something like that. i don't think he was just saying that 'for the record'. i believe he really thinks he killed him. he was, after all, in the cockpit of an aeroplane that was behind richthofen. he knows at what angles they were flying in their efforts to shoot down their perspective targets. he must have been at an angle, favorable to him, to get off 'the shot'. he would know whether or not it had been possible to have made the wounds that took richthofen's life.



leon


I don't buy that. Would most combat pilots rather have their name go down in history as the man who beat the ace of aces, or become a footnote in history, as just another pilot who tried and failed to shoot down MvR.

I think most fighter pilots would rather be the hero, and their retelling of the tale would be skewed to reflect this.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Martin:
I used to think that it was ground fire that got MvR until I heard the paper presented by Philip Markham and read the article that appeared in Over the Front, Vol.8 No.2 Summer 1993. Now I am absolutely convinced it was Captain Roy Brown that shot down MvR.
Blue skies ahead,
Dan-San

[Baron_von_Tecumseh]

The angle of the wound,that it was right to left,plus
the timeline,makes me feel it had to come from the ground,most probably Sgt. Popkin.
Also I payed $100000 for the bullit on E-Bay,and its a
lewis!!

[Rex_Feral]

The angle of the wound,that it was right to left,plus
the timeline,makes me feel it had to come from the ground,most probably Sgt. Popkin.
Also I payed $100000 for the bullit on E-Bay,and its a
lewis!!


LMAO ;)

[WFS]

According to what I've read Brown's attack came from above and to the left of MvR. The fatal bullet hit the Baron right to left with a slightly upward trajectory. Also, the bullet was found under MvR's flight suit which would indicate that it was fired from far enough away that it spent all of its energy.

I've read Carisella, Titler and Franks&Bennett, as well as other less comprehensive reports. Until I see something with new evedence I have to go with Popkin. However, I'd like to see the article that Dan-San mentioned.

Best Regards,
Wayne

[Cigogne]

To throw some more thoughts on this:

1. Stephen Lawson remarked that if Brown had hit him in the area mentioned in Markham's treatise there would have been a corresponding bullet hole in the seat to match. (If I recall correctly, Markham thought von R had twisted in his seat). The surviving seat in Ottawa shows no such hole.

2. Also, the article, often credited to Brown, where he says ""I couldn't have felt greater sorrow if he had been a friend," is believed to have been written by a hack writer and not Brown. I read somewhere a few years ago that Brown dissavowed having written that account.

3. von R's firing pin in one of his guns broke and the other also might have been disabled at the end, according to Carisella.

4. Weren't both the Lewis and Vickers machine guns both .303 calibre? That would make it hard to determine what gun fired it unless one had the exact guns where the rifling marks could be studied and tested by ballistic experts.

[Michael]

<quote>1. Stephen Lawson remarked that if Brown had hit him in the area mentioned in Markham's treatise there would have been a corresponding bullet hole in the seat to match. (If I recall correctly, Markham thought von R had twisted in his seat). The surviving seat in Ottawa shows no such hole.</quote>

I'm not surprised - the seat is in Torornto, at the Royal Canadian Military Institute. :)

[Graeme]

There were probably thousands of .303" calibre bullets flying around at the time from every Lee Enfield, Lewis and Vickers in the vicinity. Without forensic examination of every weapon, it's impossible to say which gun fired the bullet and whose finger pulled that gun's trigger.

Based on the content of Brown's combat report, the RAF justifiably (at the time) credited him with the victory and gave him a Bar to his DSC. It is only with the benefit of historical (if not hysterical) hindsight we can suggest that the decision was over-optimistic.

Anyway, I did say I'd side with Brown only to fuel the debate. Seems to have done the trick!

Graeme

[Bushrod]

Could someone check MvR's final flight path and see if he flew over any grassy knolls?

[Craig]

. . . and why not? We've already got a Magic Bullet!

I'd like to know more about this article that Dan-San mentioned. From what empirical evidence - as well as educated guessing - I am aware of, it seems likely that MvR was plucked from the sky by a lowly grunt. I can see some bloke taking a hip shot as the triplane whizzes by. And he never knew he'd hit the Baron.

[Barrett]

Homework assignment: everybody inclined toward ANY opinion in this matter is required to read Franks' "The Red Baron's Last Mission" (reviewed here) so we'll all begin from a common point of departure.

[Karl Otto]

MvR is dead? Has Lothar been told?

[Kory_Clark]

Basically the argument in "Brown's camp", is that the baron looked over his shoulder to the right after Brown made his pass(from the left)...that Brown made at least one more pass from the right and shot MvR with his trunk slightly turned(as stated by Brown in his account). Though it is missing in all accounts i've read, I would think Brown would keep harrasing MvR until he went down(at least make a reverse pass/check on his quarry). To assume the only attack Brown ever made in the encounter was above and from the left...it just doesn't make sense, leave his friend hanging and run off? Something more than a bullet is missing. No WWI flyer with the exception of Fonck and Bishop would assume 1 pass would do.


Having said that, the majority of exhisting evidence does point to groundfire. I'm not convinced either way.

[leo]

I am a certified Geezer. I distinctly remember a radiio show called "We The People" Perhaps Dan-San who is older than I, can also remember this production. On that show Capt. Roy Brown appeared and stated, "He had gotten a shot an all red Fokker. At no time did the good captain claim that he had brought down that plane.

lleo

[Martin]

I too would like to know more about the article mentioned by
Dan San. Is it available on the web and if so where?
Dan San can you help?

[WFS]

* Homework assignment: everybody inclined toward ANY opinion in this matter is required to read Franks' "The Red Baron's Last Mission" (reviewed here) so we'll all begin from a common point of departure.
*


I assume you mean "The Red Baron's Last Flight" by Franks & Bennett. (Not to be confused with Franks & Beans) :o Hey professor. Do we get extra credit for Titler and Carisella? 8)

Ragards,
Wayne

[Graeme]

Combat Report submitted by Capt A R Brown 21 April 1918:

(1) At 10:35 a.m. I observed two Albatross (sic) burst into flames and crash.

(2) Dived on formation of 15 - 20 Albatross (sic) Scouts D5's and Fokker triplanes, two of which got on my tail and I came out.
Went back and dived on pure red triplane which was firing on Lieut. May. I got a long burst ino him and he went down vertical and was observed to crash by Lieut. Mellersh and Lieut May.
I fired on two more but did not get them.

The report is endorsed "one decisive" and counter-signed by C H Butler, Major, Commanding 209 Squadron R.A.F.

Combat report submitted by 2nd Lt W R May:

Attacked large formation of about 15 - 20 machines.
Engaged on E.A. firing bursts head on into engine, he went over and dived down. I was unable to observe result as a second machine attacked me from behind.
I fired at a second machine but without result. I then went down and was attacked by a Red triplane which chased me over the lines low to the ground. While he was on my tail, Captain Brown attacked and shot it down. I observed it crash into the ground.

This report is endorsed Indecisive (I think, the handwriting is difficult to read) and counter-signed by Major Butler.

Sounds convincing, dunnit?

Graeme

[ace-o-aces]

I am somewhat familiar with the evidence of MvR being shot by groundfire. However, I hadn't heard of this Popkin before. Who was he and why do they think his machine gun (of all those present) fired the fatal shot?

[Graeme]

The plot thickens -

Combat report submitted by Lts S G Garrett and A V Barrow, No 3 Squadron, Australian Flying Corps:

At 10:45 a.m. while engaged on photography we were attacked by two triplanes as above[dark with red noses]. One triplane dived on us and the observer fired 120 rounds in bursts. One E.A. appeared to separate from the others and might have gone down but the pilot and observer wewre to busily engaged with the other E.A. to watch him down. The other E.A. finally withdrew.

Appended to this is a comment by Major David Blake, Commanding 3rd Squadron Aust. Flying Corps:

3rd Australian Divisional Artillery report:

At about 10.40 a.m. several red nosed triplanes were seen to attack two R.E. 8s in the neighbourhood of Hamel. One of these triplanes came down and crashed at J19b.4.4. Pilot killed. Papers on Pilot's body show him to be von Richthofen. Decisive.

So, MvR was actually brought down by the crew of an RE8. Note there is no mention of other aircraft involved, nor of ground fire.

Graeme

[Rick]

Graeme, as you know doubt know, but for the enlightenment of our members, and to hopefully stiffle questions before they arise, the 'indecisive' undoubtedly refers to the claim of Lt. May getting shots into an e/a engine and seeing him go down.

[Graeme]

Rick

Butler's handwriting is a bit difficult to decipher (and my copy of the report is not brilliant) but the annotation appears to read "Indecisive" and relates to May's attack upon a Triplane (said to have been flown by Wolfram von Richthofen).

Leo asked why, if Brown did not shoot down MvR, the RAF was justified in giving him credit?

I've quoted verbatim from the Combat Reports (I've copies in front of me & I've got Mellersh's somewhere) just to show how easy it was/is to reach the conclusion that MvR was brought down in aerial combat, apparently witnessed by other pilots of the squadron (Brown) or by Infantry (Garrett and Banks).

Even those carrying out the medical examination of MvR's body could not agree about the trajectory of the bullet through his chest. Quoting from the article by Frank McGuire in Over The Front Volume 2 Number 2:

THE RICHTHOFEN MEDICAL INQUIRY

Report submitted 22 April 1918 by Colonel Thomas Sinclair, consulting surgeon of the British Fourth Army, and Colonel S. A. Nixon, the Fourth Army’s consulting physician:

We have made a surface examination of the body of Captain Baron von Richthofen and find that there are only the entrance and exit wounds of one rifle bullet on the trunk. The entrance wound is on the right side about the level of the ninth rib, which is fractured, just in front of the posterior axillary line. The bullet appears to have passed obliquely backwards through the chest striking the spinal column, from which it glanced in a forward direction and issued on the left side of the chest, at a level about two inches higher than its entrance on the right and about in the anterior axillary line.

There was also a compound fracture of the lower jaw on the left side, apparently not caused by a missile - also some minor bruises of the head and face.

The body was not opened - these facts were ascertained by probing the surface wounds.

Report, also dated 22 April, by Captain N. C. Graham and Lieut. G. E. Downs, both RAMC attached RAF:

We examined the body of Captain Baron von Richtoven [sic] on the evening of the 21st instant. We found that he had one entrance and one exit wound caused by the same bullet.

The entrance wound was situated on the right side of the chest in the posterior fold of the armpit the exit wound was situated at a slightly higher level nearer the front of the chest, the point of exit being about half an inch below the left nipple and about three quarters of an inch external to it. From the nature of the exit wound, we think that the bullet passed straight through the chest from right to left, and also slightly forward. Had the bullet been deflected from the spine, the exit wound would have been much larger.

The gun firing this bullet must have been situated in roughly the same plane as the long axis of the German machine, and fired from the right and slightly behind the right of Captain Richtoven [sic].

We are agreed that the situation of the entrance and exit wounds are such that they could not have been caused by fire from the ground.

On 22 April two medical officers of Australian Corps headquarters, at Bertangles, also examined the injuries. One was the deputy director of medical services, Colonel G. W. Barber, the other Major C. L. Chapman. Colonel Barber’s official report has been quoted, very briefly, only in a letter from the former commander of the 53rd Battery AFA to a British military journal. He considered the fatal wound “just as would be sustained as a result of a bullet from the ground whilst the machine was banking.” Similarly, according to a war diary entry quoted in later editions of the Australia Official history, Major Chapman thought the bullet "might well have been shot from the ground."

There's another article in an OTF journal which I'll look up. this discusses the actual wound and whether it would necessarily been instantly fatal.

Graeme

[Barrett]

Wayne: Oh-oh! I/you/we have opened a can of (beans-worms-who knows?) Am reluctant to order franks & beans in Jolly Olde England because on my first UK trip I naively ordered a hamburger and got a meat patty w/some stuff on the side. Then I went for a tour in an automobile with my luggage in the boot and the engine under the bonnet.
We Yanks are at a distinct linguistic disadvantage Over There...
Popkin Did It.

[Graeme]

Barrett

Sgt Cedric Popkin had his claim "confirmed" by Lt D L Fraser, Intelligence Officer 11th Infantry Brigade, but the claims made by Gunners W J Evans and R Buie, both of the 53rd Battery, 14th Australian Field Artillery Brigade, 5th Australian Divisional Artillery were "confirmed" by Major L E Beavis, CO 53rd Battery.

As Churchill said - two peoples divided by a common language (or something like that; and it might have been someone else who said it, but hey, you know what I mean).

Graeme

BTW, you should've asked for a beefburger - same thing, just more expensive (plus more stuff on the side). ;)

PS, "can of worms" over here.

PPS, you put gas in your automobiles - so did we during WWII (well, I didn't, I'm a post-war production) but nowadays we put petrol in our cars. :)

Oh well, witching hour + 30. Must be time to climb the little wooden hill.

[Barrett]

Graeme et al: It's no better in the nautical world, at least where naval aviation is concerned. In the USN we launch off the catapult and (before mirrors devised by the RN) landed according to signals from the landing signal officer. In the Royal Nivey they launched off the "booster" and followed signals of the "batsman." During a cross-deck evolution in the Med during the late 40s Wally Schirra said the only words that were universally translatable all began with "F."

[Michael]

My favourite/favorite communications story involves a Royal Canadian Navy destroyer sailing with an RN ditto and a USN ditto. The latter two were signalling each other by radio, and were making heavy weather since the USS had a Georgian radioman, while the HMS had a Yorkshireman on the radio. The Canadian signaller broke in with "Can I interpret? I speak both your languages!"

[WFS]

Barrett:

There are two small islands in the Chesapeake Bay (Smith and Tangier) that have remained just isolated enough to retain a touch of the original settlers English pronunciation in their dialects. *I once saw a PBS documentary, on the English language, where they interviewed Smith Islanders. *They used subtitles! *My own version of American English is hopelessly tainted by an Eastern Shore of Maryland accent and too much time reading Victorian and Edwardian Era literature in my youth. *Definitions aside, no one can convolute a sentence like the Brits. *I don't even want to think about Cockney rhyming slang!


Best Regards,
Wayne *

* *

[Barrett]

Wayne: Interesting that you mention the Eastern Shore. My family's American roots are thereabouts, complete with Tilghman Island (a British base during the War for Independence, BTW). Saw the same PBS special; a real revelation.
As far as Great War content, I wonder how the French ever tolerated doughboys' mutilation of their language. I'm old enough to recall the annual 11 November parades with replica 40 & 8 rail cars and old-timers in khaki and puttees discoursing upon the joys of "chavose and homes" for hosses & men, to say nothing of "ving blank" wine.
Actually, I don't suppose the French tolerated it well at all!

[WFS]

All:

I'll try to sum up the basics of why I credit Sgt. Cedric Popkin, 24th Machine Gun Company, 4th Australian Division, with downng MvR.

*The medical evidence shows that the fatal bullet hit MvR in the RIGHT side. *There were also reports from the first to arrive at the crash that there was a single hole in fabric to the right rear of the cockpit. *The bullet exited through the left chest about 3" higher than the entrance. *

The medical examiners' use of the term posterior axillary was misunderstood by some to mean that the bullet entered MvR's back. *Posterior axillary means to the rear of the side of the body.

*Because the Bullet did not have a steep upward path original findngs eliminated ground fire. *However MvR was flying very low and may have been turning when he was hit. *The bullet was found (and unfortunately removed by an orderly) inside the Baron's flght suit.

*Eyewitnesses reported that MvR's plane crashed after Brown's attack from the LEFT, after Buie and Evans Lewis gun fired and just before the same witness heard a Vickers gun fire. *

Brown attacked in a steep dive from above and to the left then veered off to avoid collision. *When he looked back he saw the triplane fall and assumed that he hit it. *Honest mistake, nothing more. He was in the wrong position.

The witness heard the Lewis gun BEFORE the triplane showed any effect. *The fact that he heard the Vickers AFTER the plane made a steep climb (immediately before it crashed) was because the sound was slower than the bullet. *

Sgt. Popkin was firing a Vickers from a hillside at the time MvR went down. *This placed him at the correct position to have inflicted the fatal wound. *He reported that he saw his shots take effect. *He was also firing from several hundred yards away which explains why the bullet didn't have enough energy left to pierce MvR's flight suit. *

It is possible that some lucky digger got MvR with his Enfield. *However, it's much more likely that a trained anti-aircraft machine gunner made the fatal shot. *Popkin got him boys and girls.

Regards,
Wayne * * * *

[Baron_von_Tecumseh]

I think it was Popkin also and at this late date
I doubt if anything will change my mind.
But I do want to add,that May is not a good
witness for Brown.May was being chased
by Manfred right on his tail.I don't *see
how May could have seen anything that
Brown was doing.But lots of witnesses
on the ground saw Brown *turn away after
shooting and Manfred was still chasing
May who could see little or nothing to his rear
The only thing like this I ever ran into in history
is the old "Rumpsey Dumpsey who killed
Tecumseh?" theres like 40 different storys
of who killed Tecumseh. It wasn't a Brit
they were already running down the road
when Tecumseh died.

[leo]

We will never know for sure, but it as cetainly more fitting that he was brought down by Brown.

leo

[Kory_Clark]

I always say this everytime the topic comes up.

MvR was a dead man no matter how you look at it. Flying into such a hornets nest was a grave error and almost certainly an accident.

Brown sealed MvR's fate, when he told May, prior to the flight. "When in trouble fly back, over our lines". May, the tempting rookie target that fixated MvR was the biggest factor in his demise. Though perhaps an argument could be made his slow triplane was...

[Cigogne]

At near ground level the Triplane would've been at its fastest, between 103-115 mph. But, for once the wind was blowing the wrong way.

Also, if von R. broke off and was checking his guns to fix the problem, not knowing that the firing pin was broken might account for why there was no arm wound and that the bullet had a clear path to the posterior fold in the armpit.

The bullet had gotten lodged in the wallet that was in von Richthofen's pajama or jacket pocket according to Ted McCartie (?), the orderly who had to tug to get it out.

The whole von Richthofen twisting in the cockpit comment is based on the statement made in that bogus article attributed to Brown, but denied by him. Can't base the turning in the cockpit on that.

[leon_hale]

there are a few things i'm not all that clear on. maybe someone can help shed some light on the subject.
1. brown made a firing pass from the left and banked away.
* *what good did that do? knowing wop may was a rookie, what would be the point of flying in, squeezing off a few rounds and leaving? as far as that goes, he could have just as well stayed out of it, for all the good he was doing may. wouldn't he keep following, trying his best to get richthofen off mays tail? did he see bullets hit the cockpit and, thinking he had hit richthofen, turned to re-enter the fight above?

2. richthofen looked around and saw brown.
* *if, being hit, he turned to see who fired on him, wouldn't he bank away and head for the lines? *if he wasn't hit, but still looked around to see who fired on him, wouldn't he turn and get on the tail of brown? wouldn't he at least have kept an eye on brown, who was banking away? why would he look around, see brown, and ignore him?

3. why would he be so intent on getting may, knowing he was over enemy territory and flying that low? did he think he was invincible? could the headaches he was still suffering from impair his judgement? had he been hit by brown and, knowing it was fatal, became dead set on getting may before he himself died?



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * thanks,



leon

[Graeme]

Barrett and Wayne:

I thought you called destroyers "cans"?

What with aeroplanes being called airplanes, planes, kites, grids and Lord knows what else, small wonder we have trouble understanding one another on the Forum at times.

Best to not get started on Cockney rhyming slang - we'd spend the rest of this year trying to explain it all.

Leon:

The whole MvR episode is full of contradiction; Brown, being charged with the safe keeping of his patrol as an entity, might have made only a single pass at MvR IF he believed that he had got his man and could then leave May to get home alone. Otherwise, knowing that the others were more experienced than May, he could have left them a little longer and concentrated on assisting the tyro.

As for the evidence that MvR banked his machine or twisted around in the cockpit being based upon a discredited article, I would say that any fighter pilot who didn't do either of these things periodically, especially in the combat zone, was dead meat. MvR had been around long enough to know to keep a sharp look out.

All we have today is circumstantial evidence, there is nothing to directly link any of the claimants with the bullet that killed MvR. However, I would echo Wayne's comment that Popkin was probably the best located of those on the ground.

I still like to think that MvR was brought down by another fighter pilot, but deep down I know it is extremely unlikely that he did.

Graeme

[Kory_Clark]

It has been theorized that MvR was surely directionally challanged at the time and thought, he was in fact over his own lines.

[Barrett]

There's room for argument as to whether MvR (or any other experienced fighter pilot) would've taken valuable time to look in the direction of gunfire close enough for him to hear it. To do so allows the shooter--who must be assumed hostile--to continue tracking when seconds are EXTREMELY important. It would make more sense to turn into the threat, especially since May (or whomever was in front of the "shootee") must remain a neutral factor for the next umpteen seconds.

BUT: MvR was tired, maybe disoriented, and obviously not on top of his game.

Again: everybody read Franks' book, then we can all sing from the same sheet.

[Cigogne]

I'm sure he did look around usually, but not at the instant of gunfire. That statement about Brown "seeing the glint of the big goggles" is pure journalistic hocum. If Brown's shot was the fatal shot there would've been a jerk and down he went. It has already been stated numerous times in print that the Triplane had to be flown every minute. A seriously wounded Richthofen couldn't have flown it for as long as he did after Brown's pass. He wouldn't have kept on pursuing May. May was flying so low above the Somme in some reports (May himself said he was tempted to crash his plane into the river) that he wouldn't have been able to look around. I don't buy May's report.

[WFS]

I have read medical opinions relating to the physiological reactions caused by a wound like the one that killed MvR.
There would be a sharp uncontrollable muscle contraction. *This was evidenced by the reports that the triplane made a steep climb before it crashed. (Brown missed that and reported that the tripane "went down vertical") *

Blood from the lungs would gush from the mouth and nose causing the victim to begin drowning in his own blood. *There was a large quantity of blood down the front of MvR's flight suit and even some on his boot tops.

Death would follow very quickly. *There wasn't any way that von Richthofen could have continued to chase May if Brown had caused the wound. *

Wayne *

[Baron_von_Tecumseh]

If I remember right,there was another
red triplane that went down near MvR's
Maybe Brown saw that one going down.
Maybe thats the one Brown shot at.
One things for sure,May couldn't
have seen what was going on behind
him good enough for him to be a
creditable witness

[Graeme]

Wayne:

There was an article written by Walter V Powell JD PhD that appeared in Over The Front Volume 1 Number 4. The final paragraphs read:

"Some writers have argued that it was medically impossible or at least highly unlikely that the Baron could have continued flying for 45 to 60 seconds if Brown had indeed hit him when he said he did. Bruce M Cameron, MD, in his article, “Who Really Shot the Red Baron?” (Houston Chronicle, 30 April 1978) cites the opionion of the world-renown heart specialist, Denton A Cooley, that a penetrating heart wound such as the Baron received is not necessarily a cause of instant death. In spite of such wounds, many people have continued to function for a time and indeed, recover. Therefore, Dr Cameron believes that Richthofen could have continued to chase May in a dying effort to shoot him down. Then as he began to lose his physical strength and as his consiousness ebbed away, he throttled back and instinctively glided to an almost perfect landing. The first persons on the scene agree that the aircraft had appeared to land with the pilot in control. When they approached the cockpit they found the Baron dead with his hand still on the control column.

Although the cause of the Red Baron’s death is still a subject of great dispute amongst World War I aviation buffs, officially, the Australian Army gave credit to their ground gunners; the RAF gave credit to Roy Brown. However, I am inclined to believe the reports of the Red Baron’s intended 81st victim, Lt W R May and his rescuer, Capt A Roy Brown."

Barrett:

While MvR would not necessarily have looked and then turned, he would instinctively turned his machine (with or without banking) to put off his attacker's aim. While performing this manoeuvre, he would take the time to find out where his attacker was - either just turning his head or twisting the whole of his upper body.

Like I say, it's all down to the relative timing of events and nobody has been able to establish exactly who did what and when.

Cigogne:

May never said he saw Brown attack and shoot down MvR. He stated that the Triplane did a spin and a half and went down to crash. Looking up, May saw another Camel directly behind, joined up with it and returned to the "airport". The 209 Sqn record book shows Brown and May as returning at 11:05, both having been in the air for 90 minutes.

Three Triplanes were claimed, one each by Brown, Mackenzie and Mellersh at roughly the same time, 10:45. Brown's combat report quotes only a map designation (62D Q 2), Mackenzie quotes Cerisy but says because of the pain of his own wound he didn't hang around to see the Fokker crash - this machine was said to have had a brown fuselage and blue spots on the wings and was last seen on its back; Mellersh confirms the location as Cerisy and says the machine he shot down was red with a blue tail.

Only Brown and May make reference to an all-red machine (or, if you like, fail to mention any other colour).

May might not have been a credible witness, but the same could not be said about Capt O C LeBoutillier whose combat report reads, in part, "Also fired on a red triplane which was shot down by Captain Brown and crashed our side of the lines."

So, Brown claims to have shot at an all-red Triplane that went down to crash; May says he saw an all-red machine crash and Brown's machine was the only one close enough to have done the deed; Mellersh also saw the Fokker crash and stated Brown's was the only machine nearby and LeBoutillier confirmed "seeing" Brown attack and bring down an all-red Triplane inside the Allied lines.

Sounds like an open and shut case to me. But, then there's the conspiracy theory....... ;)

Graeme

[cam]

Graeme,

>Sounds like an open and shut case to me.

You could look at it another way, one aircraft fired on MvR during one pass, how many hundreds of ground troops had a crack with their rifles, and how many ground gunners fired? Brown would have fired with one pattern in a small burst. With the infantry that was in that area there would have been a consistent barrage of bullets from all angles, all directions and from infantry that had probably been in combat for many years and had good time to practise deflection shooting against anything that flew too low across the lines.

Of the 2 Sqn AFC DH5 aircraft brought down by enemy fire, 8 were to ground fire and 1 shot down by Enemy aircraft, though 4 returned damaged. The groundifre statistic doesnt include the DH5's that crashed on landing from sustained damage or were sent to the ASD as they were wrecks. The DH5's did a lot of work in the same altitude that MvR was flying around in. For the squadron's service with SE5a's it is different as the SE5a's were used predominantly for altitude patrol until the latter part of the war. Hard for infantry to shoot accurately with rifles when you are patrolling at 12,000 ft.

If 2 Sqn AFC's statistics for low altitude work are indicitive of the most likely source for the fatal bullet, then it was ground fire. Major W Rees wrote that you should never cross the lines at under 3,000 ft, sounds like good advice.

So who got MvR?, one plane firing one burst, or several hundred infantry with rifles and machine guns blasting away over an extended period?


cam

[Cigogne]

Graeme,

The statement you posted,"Also fired on a red triplane which was shot down by Captain Brown and crashed our side of the lines." does not say anything about "Boots" LeBoutillier WITNESSING it. This could have been written after conferring with both Brown and May and agreeing.

Too bad Perry Mason couldn't have had a crack at them. ;)

In a similar case Carl August von Schoenebeck states that Lothar von Richthofen shot down Ball.

He wrote "...we stare at this match over life and death. Their banking fight goes ever higher. It still seems that neither wants to be successful in sitting on the other's tail. but now things were going too far for Lothar. Suddenly he tore his machine around in order to come at the opponent from the front. He flies at Captain Ball in a split second. Only a brief moment. Both fire. Almost simultaneously Ball's machine rears up, goes into a spin, crashes into the earth-dead!"

Now, we all know that events didn't happen like he von Schoenebeck said. The evidence points otherwise. Brown's angle of attack from the left and the bullet wound don't jibe. As much as it would be cool to say that an airman got him, I am puzzling over that wound.

Another factor to be considered, if Richthofen was being shot at from the ground, there would've been some sort of audible report from the guns, right? Could he have heard Brown's guns over the din from below and known the difference? The engine noise of his aircraft would've drowned out much of the noise. Brown's gunfire might have blended into the rest of the din from below. Audible, yes, but maybe blended in with the rest of the gunfire. That to me is another factor of why PERHAPS he didn't turn around in the cockpit. Just throwing some thoughts around. I am not a passionate proponent of either view, but from what I've read tend to favor the ground fire approach.

Graeme, thanks for bringing this discussion topic up!