Flyboys: 2 scenes; one angered me, one saddened me!

[Freebooter]

Hello all,
I am new here, and have been lurking and posting a bit on the "Models" forum. But I just saw Flyboys a couple of nights back, which I loved! So I just wanted to comment on a couple of scenes that bothered and touched me:

One, the scene where the heavy fellow had to shoot himself to keep from burning; a terrible scene and predicament for anyone to be in and a terrible choice to have to make. But it was sad for me because I liked the guy and really related to him. At first I thought he was just another rich stuck up jerk. But then I got to thinking how I related to him as far as his relationship with his dad went. I knew how he felt. While my dad and I were close and loved each other, still all my young life he would cut me down, get mad at a lot of the things I would do and yell at me calling me an idiot, referring to me as "the idiot", even introduced me to his buddy one time as "the idiot". He was always telling me I was mentally lazy and couldn't do anything right, was a failure, etc, etc.. By the time I was in high school I had not one doubt in my mind that I was an idiot and a big, ugly, clumsy oaf! So I really felt for the big guy in the movie.

But like I said, I also thought he was a jerk at first and did not like the way he treated the black guy at first, but that is the way society was back then. He was just a product of his times and his class. But he proved himself to me as a decent fellow when he went to the black pilot's room and made up, and offered to share that 100 yr old bottle of Brandy that he cherished and had kept hidden, and shared with absolutely no one up to then. And I liked the way he more or less finally apologized to the black guy when he admitted he had been a "pompass ass" as he put it. A class act that! Showed the real metal of the fellow, class and manhood in him. So I hated that he got killed, the horrible way his life ended. I so wanted him to go back home to his hometown, and his dad, as a man, a pilot, a hero and hopefully an ace. A man of his own where he could make his arrogant, overbearing, judgmental father realize he had been wrong and a jerk to have treated his son that way! But like "Scar" said ini the "Lion King", "Life's not fair, is it?"

The other scene that bothered me is that scene where the Bosche pilot gunned down the slim fellow who had crashed landed his plane. For one, naturally as an American and a former soldier and marine it made me angry at the thought of anyone gunned down like that after he had crash landed successfully. That would be to me as bad as shooting a man coming down in his parachute. But something else irked me in that scene, I have always heard of the WWI pilots' honor towards one another, both allied and central. Did that really happen much, where a pilot would gun down a downed pilot like that? Are there any known documented times when that occured? What made me mad, as a admiror of von Richtofen, was that the guy who did it flew a red triplane, making us in the audience at first think it was the Baron himself who did it! For I know the Red Baron would never have done so dishonorable an act nor condone another doing it. And if he had known of a pilot who had done something like that I think ol' Manfred would have done something about!

What do y'all think of those two scenes? Just curious! By the way, I am going to see it again this weekend if I can. Maybe even tonight!
Take care,
Dave

[StrutterGunner]

I was a bit bothered by that scene with the Black Falcon gunning down buddy on the ground as well, though im going to reserve judgement on it as I'm not sure how much it actually happened back then. It did remind me though of the scene from U-571 where the german sub commander guns down the lifeboat full of brit ship survivors, even though I believe there was only 1 documented case of that happening during the entire second world war. Back to Flyboys though, at least they acknowledged that it wasnt a regualar occurrence with german flyers by showing the pilot of the crossed swords tripe showing his disgust/disapointment to the Falcon

If i remember right, that U-Boot commander was executed after the war.

[Lufbery]

Dave,

It's pretty cool how a movie can tap into emotions, isn't it? I thought those two scenes you metioned were pretty powerful too.

As for the WWII U-Boat commanders and the scene from U-571: the actual account may be referring to Admiral Karl Donitz's trial after WWII. From Wikipedia:

Following the war, Dönitz was captured by the British and held as a prisoner of war by the victors, who accused him of war crimes. He was indicted as a major war criminal at the Nuremberg trials on three counts: (1) "conspiracy to commit crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity," (2) "Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression," and (3) "crimes against the laws of war". Among the war crimes charges, he was accused of waging unrestricted submarine warfare for issuing War Order No. 154 in 1939, and another similar order after the Laconia incident in 1942, not to rescue survivors from ships attacked by submarine. By issuing these two orders he was found guilty of causing Germany to be in breach of the Second London Naval Treaty of 1936.

Dönitz was found not guilty on count (1) of the Indictment, but guilty on counts (2) and (3) and was sentenced to ten years in prison. However, in view of all the facts proven, and in particular of an order of the British Admiralty announced on 8 May 1940, according to which all vessels should be sunk on sight in the Skagerrak, and the answers to interrogatories by Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz, wartime commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, and Vice Admiral Charles Lockwood, wartime commander of Submarines, Pacific Fleet, stating that unrestricted submarine warfare had been carried on in the Pacific Ocean by the United States from the first day that nation entered the war, Dönitz's order to conduct unrestricted submarine warfare was not included in his sentence.[1] He was imprisoned for ten years in Spandau Prison, West Berlin.

Back to WWI: I'm not sure how frequently a pilot would strafe an enemy he had shot down. I'll have to research that a bit more.

By the way, here's a PDF file from MGM called "Real vs. Reel" on Flyboys. It's good reading: http://www.mgm.com/flyboys/pdf/real_vs_reel.pdf

Regards,

[Epee]

While not gallant the strafing of a downed enemy was certainly within the rules of war. The man had not surrendered and assuming he was on his own side of the lines he was simply returning for another airplane to come back and try to kill Germans with. Had he been on the German side of the lines the act was both murderous and stupid as prisoners are valuble.

The Red Baron did, to his own admission, strafe one downed victim. The situation seems justifiable within the confusion of combat. Richthofen was making a pass over a crash-landed two-seater and thought the observer had opened fire on him. Richthofen therefore strafed the two-seater as the gunner, even though shot down behind enemy lines had not surrendered. The pilot of the British plane survived and stated that he did not think his observer was capable of shooting. Werner Voss who was with Richthofen at the time backed up his buddy. Who really knows? That the pilot survived seems to indicate that Richthofen was not just giving vent to murderous intent.

[JFM]

Voss also strafed just-downed airplanes, more than once, and at least one of which was behind German lines.

[Freebooter]

Hello,
I had not thought of that. Yep, he would have just gone and got another plane and no telling who he might have killed. So I reckon if he was within enemy lines then why not to keep him from returning and killing you or a buddy. I had just always thought that back in those days they just did not do that.
Dave

[Barrett]

There's been more dribble published about The Chivalry Of The Air than any other GW topic. You want to know the reality? Here's Ken Porter, 147th Aero, c. 1985:

"If you find yourself in a fair fight, it just means you (bleeped) up."

The object is to kill more of Them than They kill of you. That's why it's called War.

If there's an opportunity to capture the other guy rather than hose him, that's fine, but it's not mandatory. Militarily, there's good reason to spare the guy on your turf because he might tell you something interesting.

The ultimate objectivity was expressed by Air Marshal Hugh Dowding in 1940 who noted with Olympian detachment that the Luftwaffe was entitled to gun RAF parachutes over England but the RAFish boys could not ethically kill parachuting Jerries, who would certainly be captured.

[Taz]

Freebooter- Welcome to the Forum. Like you, I enjoyed the movie immensely. Werner Voss is probably my favorite ace of WW-I and, he was known to strafe aircrews he had shot down on the wrong side of the trenches. Like Barrett said, all they were going to do was get into another aircraft and be dropping bombs or directing artillery shells onto his own countrymen.

There is a well known incident concerning a duel between Ernst Udet and George Guynemer related by Udet in Mein Fliegerleben where Udet's guns jammed and Guynemer let him go with a wave. At the time Udet had probably 10-15 victories (someone here will catch me if that is wrong), but he went on to claim 62 victories. A moral dilemma, just like Crossed Swords let the Yank go only to be killed by him in a later engagement. Tough questions and only answerable in the heat of the moment.

Hope you continue to enjoy the Forum and be assured you can always find an opinion here and lots of technical and historical help. Welcome to the fold.

Taz
Terry Phillips

[Balloon_Buster]

I know I'll get jumped on here... but I heard it from the horse's mouth. I worked with a submariner from WW 2 many many years ago. He told me that if there were any survivors after a sinking... they would eliminate all trace of them. A submarine depended on stealth. Survivors could tell the enemy about the sub acting in the area.

It's all about survival.