When I was a youngster, we had the Daily Telegraph delivered. Each year, on the anniversary of his death, a small piece would appear commemorating the death of Major Mannock. He was always described therein as the "King of Air Fighters." My father, an ex-pilot, told me that Mannock probably downed as many German aircraft as Manfred von Richthofen although he was only credited with 73 kills (some say 79).

I haven't found much written about Major Mannock's final combat. Did any German pilot claim to have shot him down? Was he as well known to the Germans as von Richthofen was to the allies? Much publicity was given to the death of the Rittmeister but Mannock doesn't appear to have attracted any public accolades at all - at least not at the time of his death. It seems as though British and Commonwealth allied flying aces were not feted as were their French and German counterparts. Does anyone have any input on this?

Regards - Des

I am not sure it is true to say he did not attract any public accolades as he was awarded the VC plus his diary was published although not until sometime after the war - possibly late as 1960s.

I have been under the impression that Mannock's official score of 73 was "uplifted" to get him above Bishop (whose own score was very controversial with claims that it was as low as anything between about 2 and 12 from memory). However Mannock's unofficial score may have been well in excess of 73.

I have seen claims for McCudden of up to 104 but cant recall if this included "damaged" as well as shot down. McCudden's official score was 57 so you see the type of variation that can exist.

Regards,

Jonathan S

Should have added that as opposed to the French and German propaganda machines, the British policy was not to show a preference for the performance of airmen against those of the other services. McCudden and Warneford were named around Jan 1918 as leading aces, but prior to that the public knew little other than the names of pilots such as Lanoe Hawker, Albert Ball and Leefe-Robertson and possibly Rhodes-Moorhouse.

Regards,

Jonathan S

Thanks Jonathan. Do you have an account of Mannock's last flight or know where I can find one? I seem to recall there was some debate as to whether he committed suicide when his SE-5a went down in flames. I believed he carried a revolver with him in the air in case of this eventuality.

There was a struggle to get Mick Mannock the VC. Quite a lot on Wiki?

Colin

Fortunes of War Series

MANNOCK VC
Ace with One Eye
By Frederick Oughton and Commander Vernon Smythe

ISBN: 1-847145-029-4
£9.99

Cerberus Publishing Ltd
Penn House
Bannerliegh Road
Leigh Woods
BRISTOL
BS8 3PF

I have a copy if you have difficulty...

I know nothing more than the accepted accounted. Mannock had been attacking an LVG and had followed it down to 200ft when he was hit by ground fire near Laventie. I went looking for the location this August as it happens. The incident was witnessed by Inglis, Mannock's wingman on this occasion and Inglis confirmed these details in his Combat Report. Ira Jones went looking for the wreck of the plane as soon as he heard the news but found nothing amongst the shell pocked landscape.

The revolver was as you say, carried to shoot his brains out, rather than die by fire. I expect this whole incident happened far too quickly for Mannock to carry this out and possibly he was killed outright by ground fire prior to crashing.

Some more info on his memory. A plaque was placed, and annual services were conducted, in Canterbury Cathedral in Mannock's memory - I assume still there? And a wing of Canterbury Hospital was named after him as was a building in Canterbury. Wellingborough ATC were called the Mannock Squadron.

Regards,

Jonathan



Naval & Militray Press having been advertising this book at a ridiculous price like £2.95 or £3.95.

Re the Canterbury Cathedral Plaque, have a look here at the entry for Mannock -

http://www.kentfallen.com/Vc%20register.html

Surely some mistake. Warneford although a VC was never an ace having gained his VC bombing down an airship in 1915. he was killed not long afterwards. He would have been well known to the British public in 1915 not 1918! One assumes that all the other VC airmen would also be known to the public including Bishop who's VC was awarded in 1917.

Whilst there was an official policy of not highlighting one pilot above the rest of his unit the award and gazeting of various gongs must have alerted the British Press and unofficially there would have been some publicity

Mannock was very good at encouraging and bringing forward the new pilots and would carry out joint attacks with them but insist that they be credited with the victory rather than sharing it. (whereas in the German case Richthofen would have had all the credit). In his last action Mannock had just carried out such a joint attack with a novice pilot.

Lieut-Col.
Be careful in your remarks about the holy Richthofen. You'll be getting hate mail from the USA!.

I'll add it to the pile

Yes it proves that Mannock was not overly concerned with his own score. Of course he had been under the tutelage of a very good instructor ...

I wonder if thery're addressing hate male to Mannock's ghost. I know we're led to believe that allied pilots saluted von Richthofen after his death but Mannock didn't. He is reported as saying words to the effect of: " I hope he burned all the way down."

It wasn't only Manfred that took credit for kills that weren't his. His brother Lothar took the credit for shooting down Albert Ball but apparently Ball's SE-5a was seen by a German officer on the ground to appear inverted out of a cloud out of control. The theory is Captain Ball becamed disoriented in the clouds and crashed without being hit by a German fighter.

Wasn't there a German pilot who claimed the French ace Guynemer? I remember reading as a youth that the French myth was that Guynemer flew so high that he couldn't come down.

Regards - Des

Above the Trenches, which lists and where possible identifies all the victories of the British Empire aces, puts Mannock's score at 61, and says that this figure has a "higher than average degree of verifiability". The figure of 73 is thought to have been arrived at by Ira Jones in an attempt to boost his hero's score to above that of Bishop's supposed score.

Jones wrote the book "King of Air Fighters", Mannock's biography, in the 1930's. I too remember the "in memoriam" notices for Mannock in the Daily Telegraph. I wonder who placed them there? It wouldn't have been Ira Jones; he died in 1960 which was before my time.



Any formation leader is going to have the advantage in raising his score, simply by being the one to decide when to open fire. Mannock may well have credited some score to novice pilots, but even if MvR didn't do this, is there any proof that he actively took credit from others? After all, he was held in high regard by his men.



Unlike McCudden, Mannock's VC was posthumous, and had to be actively campaigned for by Jones et al

Some of you chaps should post on the Aerodrome site. Those of us who do are always under attack by the Americans to whom Richthofen and the jasta pilots could do no wrong.

Alex

Funny, I noticed that tendency too. Perhaps that's why I don't bother with the site any more.

Cheers

Gareth

Gareth,
Yes, but get back in there, we need the support. We're way behind the Lines, surounded by Huns on all sides!

I am not disputing they are a knowledgeable bunch on The Aerodrome - I have bursts of reading through threads on there but rarely post. It is the lack of decorum that puts me off.

If all I was interested in was the Jastas, I probably would go in there. But (though I haven't been there for some months) I hadn't noticed much about, say, airships, or the Aerial aspect of the Dardanelles campaign, or the development of Naval Aviation, all of which also interest me.

I find Aerodrome
a too narrow
b too dogmatic
c far too partisan and clique ridden

Jonathan, Adrian and Centurian,
Yes I agree with all your reservations about the Aerodrome site, but if others don't post then all the statements and arguments they put forth become facts and accepted as such by those not as knowledgeable. The best way to counter the German bias, I agree very heavy, as is OTF, is to put forward the other view. Why is it that the Americans, almost without exception, are so overwelmingly interested in the German side of things. I've been wondering about this since I started researching in the 1960s. Very strange.

Why does the image of Snoopy in Red Baron guise come to mind?!

Well, I daresay I'll call back into theaerodrome from time to time, but the problem for me, (still having a family and job), is that I stay up far too late on this forum and ww2chat, without trying to keep up with yet another forum.

Adrian

I have been preparing a talk for the WFA an fighter pilots and have attempted a contrast and compare theme on the leading six RFC/RAF and German Air Service 'aces'. The research proved fascinating and it rapidly became clear that clear that apart from their leading positions in the scores tallies (and accepting that Mannock's was at least influenced by Jones post war actions) it became very clear that the two pilots were alike in three other ways.

Both gained justified reputations within their services as aerial tacticians and teachers of their "chicks" - the new inexperienced pilots. Wether or not both were shot down from the ground - as seems likely - or not, both were definitely ignoring a lesson that they taught and retaught others - do not follow an enemy down. It also seems certain from written evidence from contemporary sources that both were suffering from - and I will use an old term - combat fatigue when they were killed. Thirdly, in terms of influence on the use, deployment and operation of fighting pilots and machines no one else seem to have had such an influence on their respective air forces at squadron/wing level.

It is generally accepted that the British did not seek to publicise the achievements of leading air fighters - just as it is recognised that the Germans firmly did use them for propaganda at home and abroad. However in 1918 new books by both Ball and Bishop were advertsied in the Sphere magazine. The brief ad copy certainly implied that these two were well known to the public. (Richthofen's own account was also translated into English, with an editoril justifying its publication by the editor of Aeroplane, C G Grey) in 1918. I believe that serious research in contemporary newspapers and magazines may show that British aces were rather better publicised than is generally thought.

I have been preparing a talk for the WFA an fighter pilots and have attempted a contrast and compare theme on the leading six RFC/RAF and German Air Service 'aces'. The research proved fascinating and it rapidly became clear that clear that apart from their leading positions in the scores tallies (and accepting that Mannock's was at least influenced by Jones post war actions) it became very clear that the two pilots were alike in three other ways.

Both gained justified reputations within their services as aerial tacticians and teachers of their "chicks" - the new inexperienced pilots. Wether or not both were shot down from the ground - as seems likely - or not, both were definitely ignoring a lesson that they taught and retaught others - do not follow an enemy down. It also seems certain from written evidence from contemporary sources that both were suffering from - and I will use an old term - combat fatigue when they were killed. Thirdly, in terms of influence on the use, deployment and operation of fighting pilots and machines no one else seem to have had such an influence on their respective air forces at squadron/wing level.

It is generally accepted that the British did not seek to publicise the achievements of leading air fighters - just as it is recognised that the Germans firmly did use them for propaganda at home and abroad. However in 1918 new books by both Ball and Bishop were advertsied in the Sphere magazine. The brief ad copy certainly implied that these two were well known to the public. (Richthofen's own account was also translated into English, with an editoril justifying its publication by the editor of Aeroplane, C G Grey) in 1918. I believe that serious research in contemporary newspapers and magazines may show that British aces were rather better publicised than is generally thought.

Sorry about the repetition - it probably also goes on for longer than a minute and suffers from deviation - finger trouble!

David

Certainly the airship victors Warneford and Leefe Robinson became household names; of course it suited Government propaganda-makers to make them so. McCudden also received great publicity after his VC award, which he tried to avoid, and the VC actions of Bell-Davies and Hawker were heavily publicised.

But I get the impression that these men were publicised (and Ball's and Bishop's books published as you point out) because they were VC recipients rather than (in some cases) aces. VCs of land and sea actions were also publicised, which is at least consistent. I don't get the impression that aces who were not awarded VCs received any publicity. In the German Air Service, it was the Pour Le Merite recipients who received publicity - but of course this award was virtually automatic for any pilot who achieved a particular score (which was originally eight but increased as a score of eight or more became more common)

Adrian

McCudden's name was actually released to the press around 7 Jan 1918 - this was after the press had been clamouring for the identity of the pilot who had been shooting down Huns by the handful and whose exploits had been annonymously reported on by the press in teh previous months. The name of another pilot, I think Warneford, was released to the press at the same time.

McCudden's VC was not gazetted until around March 1918, possibly in part in consequence of the Press wanting an up-to-date air-hero to rival von Richtoften, although if ever a VC was deserved for air-fighting, McCudden was the man.

Regards,

Jonathan S

Interesting stuff. One of the problems of course is actually researching contemporary newspapers; they are not particularly accessable, it takes days to search them and then you have the age old problem of journo's accuracy. But it would be interesting if anyone has accessed old newspapers to see when people were first mention and just what was written about the aces/VC winners at the time. I just have this feeling that we are somewhat mislead by the accepted notion that the Brits thought it "not the thing" to exploit the experts pilots. Nevertheless the Brits employed a great deal of effort on propaganda - during and after the war the Germans, despite the effectiveness of their own prop. efforts internationally (which got Ricthofen's book published in both the UK and the US) thought that our efforts had been considerably better. It would be interesting to hear of dates upon which the air aces were first "written-up" by the British press. There was considerable "leakage" of information to the press, particularly to provincial daily papers and local weeklies, from letters sent home from the front and it seems inconcievable that some airmen somewhere did not write home about "our man Mannock", or any other of the leading pilots.

Are you sure it was Warnford? His VC would have been gazetted over two years previously and he appeared in the press at the time. As he was killed shortly afterwards it would be of little propaganda value to issue his name (again) over two years later. There were plenty of other didrtinguished fighter acres around who would have made better press.

No and obviously I now realise it wasnt Warneford - I just had a blank and that was the only name that I could conjure up from RNAS aces. Possibly Collishaw?

The point is that the WO and Admiralty jointly agreed to release the name of their top pilot in the first week of January 1918 as a result of a sustained Press campaign to have a fighter-pilot hero lauded in the same way as von Richtoften and Guynemer had been in Germany and France.

I can say with 100% accuracy that in the case of the WO that pilot was James McCudden. His VC was gazetted 2 April 1918 and was the first RAF VC (RAF formed 1 April 1918) - although strictly speaking McCudden's commission in the Army Lists was in the RE and he was on secondment to the RFC/RAF, therefore his VC is numbered in official lists as part of the Army (RE) total.

Regards,

Jonathan S

I've no idea whose name the Admiralty released, but Collishaw was the RNAS top scorer, both overall & as of January 1918, at which time he'd scored 40 of his eventual 60 victories. Another candidate would be Robert Little, who'd then scored slightly fewer victories than Collishaw - 38 out of a final 47 - but at the time had more decorations; DSO & Bar, DSC & Bar whereas Collishaw then had 'only' the DSO & DSC, although he later won a Bar to his DSO & a DFC.

I've also seen 62 as Collishaw's final total but have followed Above the Trenches by Christopher Shores, Norman Franks & Russell Guest.

Johnathan,
Interesting, I do not doubt your statement, but do you have a copy of the 'press release' or a newspaper cutting or reference?. It would be fascinating to see what spin the Admiralty put on it. I say that as an ex P.R.O. (spinner) - although fortunately I left the business before it became so tainted by deliberatelt deceiving the press - honest! I am not even aware if any wartime press releases still exist, or if they are in any Kew files, at least I have never heard tell of them. It would be fascinating if any records remained.

Collishaw was one of the six Brits I compared with the Germans. In 1988 one Timothy Greaves - who I understand is considered a somewhat tainted witness - re-scored the top Brits from existing records and gave Colishaw 62 victories, Mannock 60, McCudden 59, Beachamp Proctor 53 and Bishop 13. His criterion was "witnessed" kills. Jones for whom I have a soft spot (and who died by falling of a ladder) simply ignored Bishop's - an enigma at the very least - claimed total and credited Barket as "the leader of that magnificent band of Canadian airmen who towards the end of the war represented 35 per cent of active pilots Barker claimed 50 victories".

Jones makes the point that it was known that, apart from some inevitable overscoring, there was a belief that some flyers were making deliberately false claims. Our fascination for such aerial experts, and chewing over their accuracy of their claims, is both fascinating and strange. At a guess there must have been German machine gunners on the first day of the Somme whose kill rates where many times greater than any of the ace pilots.

I dont think I have - if I find the time I will look through my records. But what I can say is that I have seen references to it. I believe it is in Cole's biography of McCudden and I also believe I have seen it commented on in local newspapers of January 1918 - McCudden being a local lad. When I say "believe" I mean I am 99.9% certain but dont have the time to check at present.

Regards,

Jon S

David
It is interesting that the fighter aces (even before the term was coined) were considered the most heroic of all airman. The roles of the two-seater crews were just as important and dangerous but less publicised. I think we can say that the Germans started this with the lionisation of Boelcke and Immelmann - both brave and skilful men, to be sure.

Possibly the award of a VC to Hawker for shooting down three aircraft in one mission could be said to be an early British equivalent (and in fact predated the award of the Pour Le Merite [Blue Max] to Boelcke and Immelmann). More importantly there was the speech in the House of Commons by Lloyd George where he talked rousingly of "Knights of the Air" and "Chivalry in Single Combat", which put the idea of the hero fighter pilot into the public consciousness.

But if we look at medal award policy the difference becomes clear. To enlarge on my previous post: the Germans awarded a PLM automatically to their single-seater pilots if they brought down eight (or later in the war, sixteen, then thirty) enemy aircraft. But I am more than ever convinced that the British used VC recipients as their primary propaganda resource, not "aces". To do some number-crunching: 19 airmen were awarded VCs in WW1, of which ten were fighter pilots. But of these, only four were awarded VCs for shooting down a considerable number of HA over a period of time (Albert Ball, James McCudden, Edward Mannock, Anthony Beauchamp-Proctor). Two of these awards were posthumous (AB and EM); those of EM and ABP had to be lobbied for by their supporters, and ABP's VC was partly for his ground-strafing operations. All the other fighter pilots were awarded VCs for single actions, or the actions of one day, (Barker, Bishop, Insall, Hawker, Rees, Jerrard) which is closer to the normal criteria of the award. And most of these men got a degree of publicity.

Of the other VCs, two were for bringing down airships, but surely a grave omission is that only one was awarded specifically for a battlefield reconnaissance action (West) and one for a bombing mission (Rhodes-Moorhouse). The others were for saving the lives of observers while seriously wounded or for picking up downed comrades. I haven't done similar analysis with PLM recipients but I get the impression that there were not many multi-seater crewmen among them.

In WW2 of course it was completely different; almost all VCs went to bomber crew.


As to Collishaw: in his book "Air Command" he doesn't mention being used for publicity in early 1918 with McCudden, but he may have omitted this: he does say that he did little flying between January and July 1918 "due to administrative and other tasks".

Adrian

From p145 of Cole McCudden VC:

On 7 Jan, above the caption "Our Wondeful Airmen - Names at Last", the paper (The Daily Mail) printed large photogrpahs of McCudden and Captain Philip Fullard of No 1 Sqn, adding, "in consequence of the Daily Mail's special efforts, two of our crack pilots can now be named."

Regards,

Jonathan

Many thanks for the additions. I agree, it seems that receipt of a VC was the trigger for media coverage and the Sketch date is most useful. Now to find a copy. Certainly the scout pilots were the air heros, as were the fighter pilots in WW2, their just was a glamour about their role. The knights of the air theme was clearly effectively aired in both Germany and the UK during the war, and I suspect France - although I have done little reasearch on their experts. I have just read the biograph of Degelow and he certainly seems to have tried to act chivalrously throughout his carer - later using his friendship with Goeringr to help at least two Jewish pilots out of Germany. I suppose it was hust the "oiks" like Mannock who thought knight of the air was just a load of bull. I rather admire the fact that he refused to raise a glass to Manfred von R.

In post #7 Joantahn Saunders mentioned that "Mannock had been attacking an LVG and had followed it down to 2000 ft when he was hit by ground fire near Laventie."

I am an ingnorant fellow, but could anyone explain to me-1 what 'an LVG' is?
Does anyone know exactly where he hit the ground?

All the best,
Fred

Fred - the story of Mannock, and what happened to him, will feature in a BBC Timewatch which will be shown in January 2009 on BBC2.

Paul,

Thank you for your prompt answer, but not only am I an ignorant fellow, I am also an impatient one as the Dutch 'Gang of Four' will be visiting Laventie and La Gorgue early October.

Of course we will watch your Timewatch Special. Please keep us informed of the date.

All the best,
Fred

Ok Fred, no worries. If you go to Laventie British Cemetery, and go to the back row to the right, you will find the Unknown Airman that it is believed to be Mannock. I can give you a GPS location for the crash site if that helps?

Meanwhile I would recommend this book, just published:

Mannock: The Life and Death of Major Edward Mannock VC, DSO, MC, RAF
by Norman L.R. Franks (Author), Andy Saunders (Author) (Grubb Street 2008)

Andy is a contributor to the Timewatch mentioned above.

Paul,

Once again thanks for the prompt answer.
As I am an old and ignorant fellow I 've asked Sir Cliff, the illustrious photographer and a much younger man, if we can use a GPS location. No doubt, this young chappie will know if it is any use.
If it is a photograph/ Google earth thing with a cross for the crash site, even I can use it.

Please send us the GPS.

Merci d'avance,
Fred

http://www.aviastar.org/air/germany/a_lvg.html

An LVG is a type of German reconnaissance aircraft

Regards

Fitzee

If you go to this GoogleEarth location: 50°36'11.90"N 2°37'23.59"E

Then you are very close to where he crashed. There is some parking here outside a renovated house, and you can walk down the lane ('Butter Lane' to the British) and see the ground where the front lines were at this time.

Thank you, Paul.

I'll get young Sir Cliff to interpret this for me.

Thank you, Fitzee,

Now I know what an LVG is.

All the best,
Fred

Hi 'Sir Cliff' - you need to cut and paste that reference I gave you, as the location shown on your screen capture above is not Mannock's crash site.

If you just enter 50°36'11.90"N 2°37'23.59"E you will get the site.

Thanks , Sir Cliff and Sir Paul !

Ah, to be young again and understand these things !

Fred

Hello Paul,

I am surprised that the location I indicate is not correct.
I searched manually on Google earth to your coordinates.
As you can see at the left bottom of the picture they very nearly
match the coordinates you mention.

Can you post a map which give the precise spot?

Best regards,
Sir Cliff

Drop me an email, and I will mail you a map section.

As I said above if you cut and paste that GPS location into the search box of GE it will take you right there; don't do it manually.

Paul,

We had some correspondence off forum about the exact location.
As I have noticed now manually searching coordinates gives
several different locations each time you try, so is not reliable.
I have found the button to fill out the coordinates.
You sent me your map and I can assure you we have a match.

To avoid confusion I will delete my first map and attach the map
with the right spot.

Very many thanks Paul for your efforts.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Cliff

Glad it was of interest.