Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 68

Thread: WW2 aerial gun camera footage

  1. #1
    Senior Member wild_wild_wes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    just left the solar system
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,199

    Default WW2 aerial gun camera footage

    I just finished reading deveral memoirs of WW2 figter pilots; one of them, Blackburn or Yeager, candidly admits to shooting enemy pilots in their parachutes. The reason given was that the enemy pilot had survived and learned from the encounter, and would soon be in the air again, ready to kill some other Allied fighter pilot.

    The thought just occured to me: would there have been gun camera film of the enemy pilot being killed in his 'chute? The cameras were set to go off when the guns fired, right?

    Then there must have been (dozens?) of such footage, if this was not an abberation (and I don't think it was). What do you suppose happened to the footage? Did the people who reviewed it simply destroy it without comment?

  2. #2
    Last of the Mohicans boone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Van, man.
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wild_wild_wes View Post
    Did the people who reviewed it simply destroy it without comment?
    Yes....duh.

  3. #3
    Member Skukuza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    We gonna need a bigger boat.
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Not exactly cricket is it?

  4. #4
    Senior Member Connaught Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Garlic Fields of Transylvania, Romania.
    Age
    56
    Posts
    16,348

    Default

    Not an excuse but you will find the other side were fond of doing the same thing.

    It might not have been sporting but was there a regulation specifically saying you cant do it?

    If so, what regulation and posted where?

    Tank crew bailing out of a hit tank were fair game, sailors in the water etc..etc..

    Connaught Ranger.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Marmot1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    4,132

    Default

    I believe one of international conventions prohibited shooting pilots while under chute, however paratroopers were exception. On the other hand it was common practice to kill enemy pilots this way by all sides of WW2.

    As for the sailors, there was also international convention that obligated wining party to pick up survivors and prevented them from being machineguned while in water.

  6. #6
    Senior Member PeterG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Trondheim, Norway
    Age
    48
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmot1 View Post
    I believe one of international conventions prohibited shooting pilots while under chute, however paratroopers were exception. On the other hand it was common practice to kill enemy pilots this way by all sides of WW2.

    As for the sailors, there was also international convention that obligated wining party to pick up survivors and prevented them from being machineguned while in water.
    Actually, it wasn't 'common practice' at all to machine gun downed pilots in their parachutes. In the entire battle of britain, with thousands of aircrew parachuting, only 2 such episodes are known - both by polish RAF pilots.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Rural Abode , USA
    Posts
    982

    Default

    I believe Yaeger's compatriot ( Bud Anderson ) in the 357th FG shot up a german in chute. He saw the german pilot shooting bailed out bomber crew in their chutes and kept at him until the kraut bailed out... then he gave him his own medicine.
    I am not aware of any instance of a german pilot being killed by civilians on the ground in britain... but the nazi minded type people in germany hung,shot/murdered more than a handfull of allied airman.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmot1 View Post
    On the other hand it was common practice to kill enemy pilots this way by all sides of WW2.
    So...should I believe you or a man that was there and actually killed a pilot in a chute?

    This is the man 11 Bravo made reference to:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8LVlYJ5eJU

    I hardly believe it was common by all sides. Perhaps it was by some, but certainly not all.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmot1 View Post

    As for the sailors, there was also international convention that obligated wining party to pick up survivors and prevented them from being machineguned while in water.
    Except if you're mush Morton. Actually not meant to disparage him. He died a hero but war is not always black and white.

  10. #10
    Senior Member PeterG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Trondheim, Norway
    Age
    48
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmot1 View Post

    As for the sailors, there was also international convention that obligated wining party to pick up survivors and prevented them from being machineguned while in water.
    A while back, there was a documentary here on TV on the sinking of the german POW ship M/S Rigel in a norwegian fjord in november 1944. It is thought that some 2500 perished in the attack - almost all of them russian and serb prisoners. Other estimates say 2000 - and some as many as 4000 died.

    The attack was carried out by aircraft from the british carrier HMS Implacable. survivors - and civillian norwegian witnesses ashore, say that a second wawe of aircraft machinegunned the helpless survivors in their lifeboats. Only about 200 survived.

    The filmmakers interviewed historians at the british admiralty, but unsurprisingly, there was no record of machinegunning lifeboats in the after action report.

    * I stumbled across a small memorial to 27 russian POWs at an old german AA emplacement not far from here, this summer. The germans probably didn't record exactly what happened there either.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Mastermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nevada USA
    Posts
    6,330

    Default

    The famous British ace, Stanford Tuck, in his book written by Larry Forrester, "Fly for Your Life" (ISBN-10: 0553203916) admits to machine gunning downed German aircrew in the North Sea. He said he did it as an act of kindness since he would have wanted his adversaries to do the same for him in order to avoid a slow and agonizing death by exposure in frigid water. But, he ordered his flight home and away from the area before he did it...he did not want the stain on his reputation with the squadron at the time. There is no mention in the book of the gun camera footage or what might have happened to it.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Elbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Pollos Hermanos
    Posts
    5,835

    Default

    The Japanese were also known for shooting at bailed out airmen.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Mastermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nevada USA
    Posts
    6,330

    Default

    I have very mixed feelings on this conduct. Pilots are highly trained resources. In fact, most nations that are defeated in modern combat first began losing air superiority over their battle theater, which was lost due to pilot shortage, not shortage of AC. Both Germany and Japan had excellent AC available almost to the very end...but, once the skilled and experienced pilots were depleted, the air war was basically lost, then the ground war was lost, then the war was lost.

    So, since pilots are warriors, and since they are extraordinarily valuable enemy resources, I have to agree with killing them no matter the circumstances...chivalry be damned.

    I know that is not the moral answer. But, it is the agonizingly practical answer.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Elbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Pollos Hermanos
    Posts
    5,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastermind View Post
    I have very mixed feelings on this conduct. Pilots are highly trained resources. In fact, most nations that are defeated in modern combat first began losing air superiority over their battle theater, which was lost due to pilot shortage, not shortage of AC. Both Germany and Japan had excellent AC available almost to the very end...but, once the skilled and experienced pilots were depleted, the air war was basically lost, then the ground war was lost, then the war was lost.

    So, since pilots are warriors, and since they are extraordinarily valuable enemy resources, I have to agree with killing them no matter the circumstances...chivalry be damned.

    I know that is not the moral answer. But, it is the agonizingly practical answer.
    It hurts a bit to admit it, but I agree MM.

    One just has to look at the astonishing rate at the nosedive that the Japanese air forces took in combat efficiency once their veteran aircrews, some of which had been in combat in Manchuria years before Pearl Harbor, began to fall to Allied guns. Once they started putting rookies into cockpits on a mass scale, they were done for.

  15. #15
    Tel Aviv Stud tanks_alot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tel Aviv, Israel
    Posts
    7,085

    Default

    From a moral point of view, why were bailing tankers a fair game as opposed to pilots and sailors?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •