An Enfield Rifle vs the Red Baron?

C

Calum

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
37   0   0
Location
PG, BC.
I just finished watching a really neat Documentary on the Discovery Civilizations Chanel. 'Unsolved History', it was a repeat from 2002, on "The Death of the Red Baron".

They recreated the Red Barons Final pass over the battle field, and using a whole lot of neat high tech stuff, and written accounts of the day determined that an Aussie Soldier with an Enfield rifle might very well have been the one who delivered the single fatal shot to the Red Baron.

This is nothing new, but it was interesting to see.

They also had some interesting slow motion video of Vickers machine gun, and an Enfield at work, and the effects of a .303 bullet on the human body via test devices etc.

Since it is a repeat this has probably been mentioned a ways back, but I thought I'd mention it again in case. BTW it is on a few more times again today. (Mon Feb 6th). :)

Also of interest:
http://www.anzacs.net/who-killed-the-Red-Baron.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-air-support/ww1/richthofen.htm
http://www.westernfront.co.uk/thegreatwar/articles/individuals/richthofen.htm
 
Gibbs505 said:
Interesting. have to be a good, or lucky, shot to hit a plane with a rifle!
Click to expand...
Not necessarily so!
Early in the war, troops from both sides learned and applied some effective grouped anti-aircraft techniques for low-flying planes.
In his last dogfight, Baron Von Richthoffen had strayed very close to the ground and it is very possible he got shot upon by Aussie troops that were watching the show.
Many american pilots lost an engine or a plane to vietnamese civil guard group wingshooting; they had refined this to an art, using sector mapping and timing and monitoring the straffing planes' paths.
PP.:)
 
It's never going to be proven, but I think the version of him being shot down by another plane- just as possible, is a better version, and I bet if he had a choice, that would be the way he'd want it.
 
A friend of my father was shot down twice in vietnam to ground forces with AK's. He was flying F 100's loaded with iron bomb's so they took quite while to reach altitude. The VC would sit in fishing boats off the carrier groups and strafe the bottom of the planes. His fuel tanks would look like swiss cheese and he wouldn't have enough fuel to return and have to ditch in the ocean. This is with a jet. It would not be unreasonable to hit a triplane who's speed would be at a maximum speed was just over 100mph and was most likely less than 60mph. You would still have to be a good shot.
 
Imagine finding that Enfield...be like winning the Lotto. :D

Also remeber that these WW1 planes where thin skinned. :cool:
 
Yes, I remember watching that documentary couple of years ago and the autopsy (IIRC) was showing that the bullet had entered in the red Baron's side and going up. Then again, for those who are shooting clays or else,
depending on the angle, sometimes your target sorts of stop in the air and you just puff it.

I do believe the story although the official story goes for the canadian pilot.
 
The Demise of the Red Baron

... Also, a lot of "The Diggers" in WW1, came straight from the Farm, and were used to shooting at moving targets, be they ducks, rabbits or kangaroos ! ... David K.
 
Actually, anti-aircraft fire with rifles was still a standard part of infantry training as late as WWII. Generally, such ground fire would be "massed fire" - i.e. multiple infantrymen firing at once - so don't think in terms of a lucky shot from one man potting at a plane.

The following picture is scanned from my 1940 Canadian Army Training Pamphlet No. 1 - "A General Instructional Background for the Young Soldier", in which there is an entire chapter on anti-aircraft fire with small arms (primarily the rifle, with a bit on using the BREN ....)

anti-a~1.jpg


A couple of relevant quotes:

"The maximum fire of all available small arms weapons will be immediately brought to bear on the attacking aircraft ..."

"The two rules of aiming at crossing aeroplanes are:-
(i) Sights set at 500 yards.
(ii) Direct the rifle the required lead in front of the aeroplane and in the direction of its flight. Maintain the lead by swinging with the aeroplane and fire without checking the swing."
 
anti-aircraft fire with rifles was still a standard part of infantry training
Click to expand...

sadly it still is today, although it applies more to helicopters and slow movers.
from the C7/C8 pam:"Owing to the high speed of aircraft , it is essential that fire is delivered quickly and with reasonable accuracy. Rifle fire collectively controlled is an effective deterrent against low flying aircraft."
 
Interesting stuff GrantR!

I wonder if our Rangers are drilled on the use of their Enfields vs low flying aircraft? :D
 
I heard that the Germans counted destroying planes on the ground as kills too, plus longer tours of duty accounts for the high numbers.
 
Last edited:
An Australian Lewis gunner did the bastard. For all the glorification of him, he was a cold blooded killer as evidenced by the number of aircraft he shot down. And it really helps if you have your Jasta flying above to watch your arse while you drop down on some poor sucker.

Unfortunately the Australian was an "other rank", not a pilot officer so you know how that tune is played. Besides the souvenier hunters disassembled (tore apart) his aircraft before any investigation could be made.

It's just a pity that someone didn't get Richthofen in their sights earlier in the war.
 
His brother,Lothar was an ace in WW1. Manfred saw to it that his brother got ground duties because he was afraid he would surpass him.

It was an Australian Lewis gunner that did the bastard. Of course the Australian was an "other rank" not a pilot officer, so you know how that tune is played. It's just unfortunate that noboby got richthofen in their gunsights earlier in the war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom