The fifth victory of Ltn. Karl Meyer

[Dario_Silva]

It is officially accepted that the Ltn. Karl Meyer, Jastas 4 and 11, will be fully recognized, 4 victories, including:
1. 31.07.1917 RE 8 (Jasta 11)
?. 14.08.1917 Sopwith 18:40 Near Wytschaete (Jasta 11) (Bodenchatz p.33 Edition 1998)
2. 28.06.1918 SPAD (Jasta 4)
3. 15.07.1918 SPAD (Jasta 4)
4. 18.07.1918 Camel (Jasta 4)
It is true that on several occasions has tried to include in the list of Aces commonly recognized by the French method of the five victories, but in this case for this thread, I just move the following questions:
a.- This victory (14.08.1917) does not officially accepted, is not "official" or recognized, for which reason?
b.- And who or who is responsible for providing this list of confirmed and unconfirmed victories?
My only intention is perhaps to give me my big light on this question.
Greetings!
Dario

[R Gannon]

Dario

Correct - JIHF lists the 'second' victory of Karl Meyer (then Js 11) as a 'Sopwith' 18.40 near Whytschaete. My photocopy of original 1930's edition listing it as 'Jenseits' - ie over the Allied side. However it is not listed in KOFL 4 or in the Grub St canon's JWC or Jasta Pilots. I suspect it was disallowed at KOFL 4; there certainly is no British loss which would remotely match it. But then again, the same can be said for others this day which were allowed. It probably boiled down to a lack of witnesses. Not to say it was a flight of immagination, but rather an over optimistic damage assessment.

Indeed there are a number of 'victories' accorded to JG 1 pilots in JIHF which are not corroberated in relevant KOFL listings.

Cheers Russ.

[Dario_Silva]

Russ
Thank you for your important comment.
According to your words, as I understand it is perfectly feasible to take this victory, as valid for Meyer.
It is not my crazy suggestion that his name be included as part of aces, recognized in the present through the French method.
Perhaps here at The Aerodrome are the persons indicated that they can make a decision on this aspect, which to me is a cause of honor.
Please, if anyone else has any documentation or opinion that is deemed important to dismiss or affirm this theory, would be very grateful.
Thanks again Russ.
Greetings!
Dario

[R Gannon]

Dario

The term 'Ace' in my mind is very arbitary. Anyone who got into a plane in those days had guts. If they engaged in combats they were a hero in my books and if they began to shoot down an enemy planes well that is courage plus. We must not forget the reccon & bomber people either - their courage is not as easy to quantify as 'kills'. And my heart really goes out to those counteless thousands who willingly climbed out of a trench with a rifle & bayonet to attempt to cross a no mans land swept by machine guns & shrapnel. In truth it was safer in the air!

Cheers Russ

[Dario_Silva]

Russ
I fully share your view that people who perhaps without any valid reason, or profit, some with a cause and those without it, risked his life in the great war and other conflicts, which often even without being reminded.
I would summarize that all these men, although the war will always be a nonsense, they were heroes, to overcome his own instincts to conserve their own lives, even though the cost of losing their lives, or the of others.
The death nor war can never be held, as well as the heroism can never be quantified.
Excuse me if I strayed from the main subject of this thread.
Greetings!
Dario

[Dario_Silva]

In this case, I move that, perhaps given recognition to an event that is based on valid documentation, as is claimed victory, although the fact and include it in this new century on the list of aces, is a symbolic act , It is an act of honor to the success of a man who risked his life in the air during the great war.
Please, if anyone can offer a light, to clarify whether this victory is historically valid, or is simply a fact that can not be supported scientifically by documentary.
Greetings!
Dario