The First Ace
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Chapter One The First Ace It is generally agreed that the title ‘ace’ applies to any fighter pilot who has destroyed five or more enemy aircraft in air to air combat. It is also generally agreed that the term originated with the French in the early part of 1915. It is not generally known, however, that the first pilot to earn this accolade was a Frenchman named Roland Garros, who was a lieutenant in the French air force. At the time he was trying out a new device which was fitted to his Morane monoplane. This was very much his own idea, and allowed him to fire a fixed machine gun through the arc of his propeller. It consisted simply of fitting deflector plates to the airscrew blades. The story is told in more detail in later paragraphs, but for the present it is only necessary to note that his success was immediate and decisive. Garros shot down five German aircraft in just over two weeks between l and 16 April 1915. This was a feat absolutely unheard of at the time, and seldom equalled since. He received the Legion of Honour, and his victories were given prominence in most of the Allied newspapers. He became a hero overnight. How the term ‘ace’ came to be applied to him and to future airmen is best told by Arch A Morane-Saulinier Type N aircraft. (AWM H04376) 1 AUSTRALIAN FIGHTER ACES Whitehouse in his book Decisive Air Battles of the First World War: Five victories in sixteen days! That was the initial harvest of Roland Garros’ front-firing guns. He was cited for the Legion of Honour, and nearly every newspaper in France and Great Britain carried the astounding news of his aerial accomplishment. The gay boulevardiers screamed their cheers and toasted the newest hero in champagne. ‘Oh, that Garros’, they cried. ‘Roland Garros our aerial saviour! Five enemy flying machines he has destroyed. Garros is an ace! 1 The French word ace was a popular catchword of the day in Paris, particularly in relation to athletes, and was applied to anyone who had performed anything unusual. The latest Grand Prix winner was an ace; the newest cycling hero was an ace; popular jockeys were included in this newest category of headliners. It was natural that the word should be applied to Roland Garros. This continued reference was caught by an American newspaperman in Paris who interpreted it to mean any pilot who had downed five enemy planes and, in his next dispatch to New York, applied the reference to Roland Garros without bothering to explain how the Frenchman had run up his score or with what new weapon. It thus became the journalistic standard by which a French fighter pilot was rated. The French word ‘l’as’ for ace, or ‘top of the pack’, was soon adopted by the French Army. The title was awarded officially to every pilot who destroyed five (or more) enemy aircraft. Their destruction had to be confirmed by at least one witness or ‘other good evidence’. Most other countries also adopted the term and it soon became universallly recognised. Occasionally, and in some countries, the score for recognition was raised from five to ten, but five is the figure now accepted by all who use the term. However, it was never adopted officially by the original British air forces, and it is still not recognised by either the RAF or the RAAF. The British ignored all references to individual fighting scores and still did not accept the ace designation. Not until late in 1915 did they compile authentic records of enemy aircraft shot down, and they did not publish the names or the day-by-day scores of their outstanding airmen. It was only on the publication of decorations and awards that the victory scores of their heroes were mentioned. Nevertheless, it is a well established and internationally recognised term and the above definition is the one which has been used throughout this book. Even to this day, neither the RAF or the RAAF have ever recognised the term in the official sense, and as a consequence, no official records of enemy planes shot down by individuals have ever been produced. More importantly, neither air force have ever published the names of their aces or outstanding pilots. On the other hand, the subject has been deeply researched and written about for so long that there is now little argument about ‘who did what’. 1 Arch Whitehouse, Decisive Air Battles of the First World War, Duell, Sloane & Pearce, New York, 1963, p. 86. 2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIGHTER - WWI Garros thus not only gave us the first fixed gun fighter. He also demonstrated its effectiveness beyond doubt. It was this weapon and this weapon alone which led to the highly specialised role of the fighter pilot, and the long line of aces which followed. Without such an aircraft there would be no story to tell. We should now go back and trace the events leading up to this unique combination of man, machine and weapons. (For a brief biography of the life of Roland Garros see Appendix Three.) Reporters interview Roland Garros (centre) after one of his prewar flights. 3 AUSTRALIAN FIGHTER ACES 4 CHAPTER TWO Development of the Fighter World War One In August 1914, at the start of the World War One, each of the major powers had some form of an air force. However, none of the aircraft were armed, nor was any form of air to air combat foreseen. There was little difference between military or civilian aircraft, or in the way they were flown. Military aircraft were intended purely for reconnaissance and the duty of the military aviator was ‘to see, and not to fight’. In fact the real task that any aviator had at that time was to keep his machine in the air. Any other duties were quite secondary. The aviators’ real enemies in the early days were the weather, their own lack of skill, and the general weakness and unreliability of their machines. If, in the early days of the war, aircraft from opposite sides did meet, they would either ignore each other completely, or the pilots might wave to each other before going on their separate ways. As aerial reconnaissance developed and became more important, it was soon necessary to try and stop the enemy planes from crossing the lines, or if they did so, to try and chase them away. Airmen began carrying personal weapons such as pistols, rifles and shotguns. These were readily available, were light, and the most popular. Pilots, and later observers, would take potshots at each other with these hand- held weapons, but not with any recorded success. Some even tried hanging grenades below their machines, which hopefully would detonate on contact when dropped on an enemy aircraft. It was not long, however, before machine guns were fitted on improvised mountings, but the added weight was a real problem. The gun also needed a lot of ammunition, and this further added to the problem of weight and space. Also, in most aircraft, there was no way that the gun could be fired forward or downward, as the propeller, wings, struts and rigging wires got in the way. Soon new aircraft came into service designed to carry machine guns as standard equipment. Many of the problems remained, however, particularly in aircraft with the engine in front. The observer could only fire to the rear, and in an arc over the tail. This gave some protection in a defensive role but was no good in the offensive or attack role, which was the original purpose in arming the aircraft. 5 AUSTRALIAN FIGHTER ACES With rear-engined, or pusher type machines the position was quite different. The gun could be mounted in the nose and fired forward free of all obstructions. The observer consequently had a wider and much safer field of fire. This type of installation was ideally suited for the attack role, and was quickly adopted. As a matter of interest, the French are credited with the first confirmed victory in this new style of warfare. As early as 5 October 1914 the observer of a Voisin (a pusher type) shot down a German Aviatik two-seater with a Hotchkiss machine gun mounted in the nose. Nevertheless it remained a difficult and hazardous operation until a new breed of aircraft was designed and built. Whether the engine was mounted at the rear or in front, there were problems common to both. The gunner normally had to direct the pilot into a position where the guns could be brought to bear on the target. This usually called for sudden and unexpected changes of direction. In turn this put a considerable strain on both pilot and machine. Performance was still very marginal, and it was difficult enough in most cases to control the aircraft without the extra weight of gun and ammunition, or the drag induced by the gun and other fittings. The net result was that it was usually extremely difficult to get close enough to the enemy to be effective. In many cases the intended victim was able to pull away unscathed. However, as the object was in fact to chase the enemy away, the results were to some extent successful, whether or not he was destroyed. Nevertheless, the new technique continued to achieve a comparatively high rate of success, and a high degree of skill and team work soon developed between pilots and observers. Where an enemy aircraft was destroyed, the pilot and observer were each credited with one enemy destroyed.