i dont get it. I know that this movie has nothing to do with history. Like geography americans dont much about history either. But witch one was The Red Baron, cuz in reality there was only one red german plane ( The Baron) Who's was the best ace of WWI and never lost an air battle. He was shot by autralian soldiers from the ground. So my question is - Is The Red Baron in this movie or not, o got confused.
shareSPOILER ALERT!!!
Actually, most of the planes in Jasta 11, AKA "Von Richthofen's Flying Circus" were mostly red, like the German squadron in this movie. (There are plenty of other threads on this board lamenting the fact that the Fokker Dr1 wasn't yet operational at the time of the story, so I won't get into that!) Von Richthofen's was the only one that was completely red, though.
Von Richthofen himself was not really represented in this movie. Wolfert was probably the character most resembling him, as being a high scoring ace and chivalrous, but Wolfert's death at Rawlins' hands was barely noticed unlike that of the real Red Baron.
The Black Falcon was probably too dishonorable and ruthless to have been a good representation of Von Richthofen.
By the way: In reality, von Richthofen wasn´t chivalrous. He was very ruthless after he´d made bad experience with an enemy he wanted to force to land and whose gunner shoot on him, while the plane was already landing.
shareShoot the pilot! If a Two-seater - shoot the gunner first!
Seems reasonable to me?
War = nice/chivalrous.. since when? (a few)nice persons throughout history does not count, sry':-/
Richthofen wasn't the only flier in WWI. In fact others, such as Mick Mannock, Werner Voss, Boelcke were better. Survival was a matter of luck, not skill.
There's a fascinating body of non-fiction literature (read Sagittarius Rising) that's out there. The people who were lucky enough to survive tended to be highly educated and their memoirs are some of the best military literature in any conflict. And the better stories have yet been seen on the big screen. I'd love to see a movie version of Frank Luke's story - much more interesting and entertaining than this forgettable and predictable movie.
Some guys like Voss and even Manfred's brother Lothar were better pilots. No one was a better leader in the skies than Richthofen, though, as he was arguably THE pioneer of his day (yes, even more than Boelcke, who originated individual fighter tactical doctrines) for squadron combat tactics and teamwork. He was also supposedly as good a marksman in the air as anyone. He just wasn't an acrobatic or fancy pilot. Richthofen commanded the total respect of the men he led into the skies, and there was a reason for that.
shareYou can add to that list of great WW 1 fighter pilots Albert Ball, another British ace, with 44 victories. He died in May, 1917 at twenty years of age in a dogfight in northern France. He became disoriented in heavy cloud cover as he was chasing (and ultimately forcing down) an Albatros piloted by the Red Baron's younger brother, Lothar von Richthofen. von Richthofen survived the crash landing, but Ball, apparently flying low in an attempt to confirm his victory, popped out of the low cloud cover only to find himself inverted and, according to observers, only about 200 feet above the ground. The engine of the SE-5a fighter that he was flying would often cut out after sustained inverted flight, so with a dead stick, he was pretty much a passenger at that point. Without enough altitude for corrections and, of course, no parachute, he crashed. He was pulled from the wreckage by a French farm girl, and he died in her arms a few minutes later. The Germans gave him a funeral with full military honors in the nearby village of Annoeullin. By this time, the tide of the war was beginning to turn against the Germans, and they were looking for any advantage they could. With their huge propaganda machine, they basically spun the Ball/von Richthofen story as a victory for the German pilot. It wasn't until several years later after the war that the truth was revealed. von Richthofen, according to observers, was completely defensive during the fight. His plane riddled with bullets and his fuel tank smashed, he crash-landed, fortunate to survive. When the wreckage of Ball's plane was examined, no bullet holes were found. Ball himself was not hit by gunfire, either.
If anyone ever wanted to make a movie of Capt. Ball's life, what a story it would make. Action, intrigue, romance, tragedy; you name it!
I second that.
shareyup, it is absolutely played out to see how many people are quick to dog Americans on the web for their poor grammar, cultural awareness, knowledge of history, etc... but then go ahead & echo those deficiencies themselves in just the handful of words by which we have to evaluate them
maybe take a look in the mirror next time before throwing out ill-conceived stereotypes?
I suspect they used tri-planes in this movie so you could tell the Germans and French/Americans apart more easily in the aerial scenes.
sharefirst off the red baron was shot down by Captain Roy Brown.
share[deleted]
Yithian is correct.
More than 20 years ago I read a book that covered Richtoffen's death. It included the autopsy results and post-mortem photos.
Richtoffen was hit by a ground gun while executing a right banking turn. The round entered his right side just below the ribs and exited out his chest just below the left nipple. They also recovered the fatal slug from the soldier who snatched it as a souvenier.
The trajectory alone proves he was hit by ground fire. The book gives the credit to Cedric Popkin.
There is a program on History International Channel involving a team of experts that went into a great deal of depth in studying Richtoffen's death and who actually shot him.
They concluded that he could only have been killed in the manner he was by ground fire and the only person in the right position to have gotten the fatal shot off was an Australian named Snowy Williams.
I wish I could remember the name of the show, but if you keep an eye out for it, I am sure it will be shown again, as HI shows everything ad infinitum. It is an excellent show and I highly recommend it.
I love things like you just talked about! I watched one day the theory on the assasination of JFK and that was very interesting as well. So thanks for the heads up on that! I will have to look out for that so I can see it and learn about it.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
It sounds like an episode of "Secrets of the Dead."
shareI have a book titled "I shot down the red baron" There are three sections, all claiming to have shot down the baron, one is by Australian infantry, one is an anti-aircraft battery and one is an English pilot. The book is listed as non-fiction.
Cleanse with fire
I thought Snoopy shot the Red Baron... ;)
home-theater-systems-advice.com
Has many photos from Carisella's collection (sad how that's all been split up now) and goes with the ground gunner's theory as well. Still debates over who was the best candidate for that based on ground position but it's like the Kennedy thing--no definite answer.
I read that book back in 1969 (dating myself!) and have loved all the other followups in TV--History Channel, Discovery Channel, NOVA etc. Did Brown have anything to do with it? Sure, aiding in the target fixation, breaking off the dogfight etc but did his gun bring down Richthofen? Unlikely.
Richthofen broke many of his own rules that day and unfortunately didn't make it home.
"Richthofen broke many of his own rules that day and unfortunately didn't make it home."
Unfortunately? You would have preferred he stuck around a little longer and killed more Allied pilots?
"Shawn made $20 an hour, that equals about 87k a year" MommyToTwoAngels
Richthofen was an honorable man and warrior. The standards of chivalry that he adhered to are, sadly, extinct today.
If you ever have the opportunity to watch the History Channel special mentioned earlier, watch it. It describes the reaction of Richthofen's "enemies" when he was captured after being shot.
It also talks about his journal entries about his opponents. The Baron wrote that he had nothing but respect for them and that he was honored by their dignity and skill.
Yes, it was sad that a man of the caliber of Von Richthofen had to meet such an end and with him died the last remnants of honorable warfare. With all the atrocities that occurred in the trenches during WWI, The Red Baron maintained a level of nobility and honor that is unheard of today.
to the original poster;
And by the way, I'm one of those "Ignorant Americans" that know nothing of geography or history. :)
You should be careful grouping 300,000,000 people into a single stereotype.
My post had nothing to do with chivalry, nobility, or anything else. It was a question, that went unanswered, as to why a person would choose to think it unfortunate that an enemy, who would most likely garner more Allied kills, was stopped. Quite simple.
"Shawn made $20 an hour, that equals about 87k a year" MommyToTwoAngels
It's sad that someone like The Baron, who upheld these values should die such an ignoble death as to be shot down from the ground. It would have been better if he were shot down in a dog fight or a joust. I agree with you, he was a highly skilled enemy and had to go down, but he deserved a more fitting demise.
There is no shame in honoring a worthy adversary.
I agree. Given that it is World War I we are talking about, there was no evidence that the German Empire under Kaiser Wilhelm II was any more "evil" than the British and French Empires, or Czarist Russia.
Since Richthofen was the top-ranking ace, he would probably have "preferred" being killed by ground fire than shot down in a duel (incorrectly depicted in Von Richthofen and Brown), or ambushed from behind by a nobody. (Roy Arthur Brown was virtually unknown before he "killed" Richthofen. Even the Canadian ace Billy Bishop, who firmly believed that Brown shot down Richthofen, called him "a bad shot").
Couldn't disagree more. The British Empire, though ruthless at points, was more interested in securing trade routes. That meant incorporating subjects into governance, strengthening liberal institutions and the rule of law as well as implementing free trade. Ex-British colonies today are far better off than French, German, Belgian and Russian colonies. The Royal Navy also singlehandedly wiped out the slave trade. Belgian, French and German acts in their colonies was tantamount to genocide. The British Empire was much better.
Furthermore, I guess it doesn't really matter who really shot down the Red Baron. The seat in which he was killed is in Canada at the war museum, due to the fact that Roy Brown got credit for the kill. You can stick your finger through the bullet hole that killed him.
1. I don't want to start a long debate here since it is largely irrelevant to the topic. It was true that the British abolished the slave trade half a century before the American Civil War. But Britain was in a large part also responsible for starting the Atlantic Slave Trade in the first place, which led to the depopulation and underdevelopment of Africa. Also, where did you get the impression that ex-British colonies were better off than the others? That might be true for small eocnomies like Hong Kong and Singapore. But in South Asia (British India and Ceylon), internal strife began as soon as the British left, eventually leading (in the case of India) to the breaking up of the country. For Africa, don't you remember "The Last King of Scotland" (Uganda)? Also, how about the effects of British role in Egypt and the Middle East? Germany was not unified until 1870 and so was a latecomer in the scramble for colonies in Africa. The resulting rivalry, and also the formation of two hostile alliances in Europe, were largely responsible for the outbreak of the First World War.
2. That the British gave Brown official credit for shooting down Richthofen did not make it a fact. In fact the controversies started immediately after the event. Today, people generally agree that it was more than likely that he was killed by ground fire. It has to be admiitted that the "proof" was based on the testimony of one or two people who claimed to have examined the nature of the wounds on Richtofen's body, and so there is at least some room for doubt.
Chivalry (and spin) aside, I think there's little doubt that the Germans were the bad guys in both world wars.
"Chivalry (and spin) aside, I think there's little doubt that the Germans were the bad guys in both world wars. "
Thats rubish, there are no "bad guys" in wars, there are sides only, good and bad guys is a propaganda concept for the dimwitted.
*beep* Hitler and Stalin (allies at the start of the war) were bad guys. By comparison, Churchill and Roosevelt were good guys. To falsely equate genocidal warmongers with those who defend against them is a shallow pose.
share*beep* Hitler and Stalin (allies at the start of the war) were bad guys. By comparison, Churchill and Roosevelt were good guys. To falsely equate genocidal warmongers with those who defend against them is a shallow pose.
So firebombing civilians in cities with no military gain is an acceptable version of mass slaughter for you?
There are no good or bad sides of war.
"It would have been better if he were shot down in a dog fight or a joust."
I agree with that.
"There is no shame in honoring a worthy adversary"
And that too.
"Shawn made $20 an hour, that equals about 87k a year" MommyToTwoAngels
It seems that a characteristic that a lot of combat pilots shared in both World Wars was a tendancy to self-destruct and make stupid mistakes late in their careers.
If they were lucky they got pulled from flying combat missions before they got themselves killed but Richthofen, like Voss, McCudden, Mannock, Ball and many others wasn`t.
"Any plan that involves losing your hat is a BAD plan.""
No, I am only pointing out that Richthofen didn't follow his own guidelines (Dicta Boelke) and paid for his carelessness. Richthofen should have been retired due to battle fatigue after his head wound but medicine and psychology were not informed about PTSD and other related issues then. I remember hearing the phrase shell shock about some ROTC instructors I knew who suffered from that post WWII. I do think the Luftwaffe would have been different if Richthofen instead of Goering had been around for WWII.
shareManfred von Richthofen was shot down twice. One he survived with a head wound, one he died.
On 6 July, during combat with a formation of F.E.2d two seat fighters of No. 20 Squadron RFC, near Wervicq, Richthofen sustained a serious head wound. He regained consciousness in time to execute a forced landing but was hospitalised and grounded for several weeks. The air victory was credited to Captain Donald Cunnell of No. 20, who was killed a few days later.
As to his death, it is almost assured he was shot down my Cedric Popkin, an Australian gunner. The trajectory and range was almost a sure thing.
I wouldn't put too much stock in ANYTHING on the history channel or the Military channel when it comes to facts. They take a lot of poetic license to make their programs sensational.
Stick to well researched books.
My god reading this thread makes your brain hurt, WOW so may desk WARRIORS RHAAAAH come on guys lets battle. Only a Desk warrior would say
Survival was pure luck not skill or The there were other better than The Baron
Only a desk warrior, I also like those dumb A$$es that comment on WW2 documentaries as if they would do better Pleazzzzz your fat A$$ would get an asthma attack and you would die even before the battle, now go grab yourself a cupcake sweet hart make yourself feel better.
First of all let me put your A$$ behind the controls and see how well you do without any skill. Or perhaps have your A$$ go hand to hand combat in the trenches without any skill.
As for Red Baron not being the best I'm sorry but he KILLED EVERYONE!!!!! The man painted his fighter RED, might as well but a bullseye on his A$$ and still he KILLED EVERYONE!!!!!
mooney_man:
Get with the times he was shut down by artillery when he was flying just above the tree line. His body had wounds generated by a bullet from a ground attack.
It is common knowledge my misinformed friend that the Baron was shot down by Roy Brown. No take-sies backsies on an autopsy that was performed and analyzed almost a 100 years ago.
shareNo my friend, it's not.
It's not common knowledge, nor is it even confirmed fact. Brown as officially credited by the RAF, but there are other strong - maybe stronger - possibilities and it will never be confirmed at this point.
It should be pointed out that Brown himself didn`t think that he had shot down Richthofen.
In his combat report he stated that the engagement was "inconclusive" but this was changed to "conclusive" by his C/O afterwards.
"Any plan that involves losing your hat is a BAD plan.""