9 July 1918 Karl Plauth and a dead Frenchman?

[spad]

While setting up my latest argument (you know it's coming ) I came across this from a thread four years ago, relating to the claim of Ltn Karl Plauth of Jasta 20. "09-07-1918: My first downing, a Spad single- seater. The story is not entirely clear. The Staffel shot down four that morning (c1030), Leutnant Joachim von Busse, Leutnant Waldemar Baron von Dazur, Leutnant Hans-Rudolf von Decker and I one each. Decker and I had one each on this side, but neither of us was able to watch the crash, as we immediately had air combat with other single-seaters. We both thought we had dealt with Englishmen. But there is an Englishman and a Frenchman lying below. But that's the same after all. As a beginner, I may have been wrong in the type, and maybe it was the Spad that is actually below and which no one else claims."

He was probably wrong about the type (and French and RAF records do not support four German claims). But who is the Frenchman? The sentence seems to indicate two dead pilots, one British, one French, were recovered and attributed to Decker and Plauth. There isn't even a French casualty record from the day previous or the day after that fits. And one assumes the aircraft they occupied (in life), would be in German hands because his staffel found them and put them in cold storage.

This feels to me like a post-war diary "revision", like "Taffy" Jones'.

best regards

Keith

[R Gannon]

Hi Keith

I guess once again that it’s going to be left up to the Antipodean Revisionist to shed light on this one. Quite a burst of claiming by Js 20 on this date: von Busse garnering credit for an ‘SE5’ SW Dickebusch at 1025 and accorded jenseits, von Decker getting credit for an ‘engl SE5’ south of Dickebusch at the exact same time but given as ‘diesseits’, von Dazur accruing credit for a one size fits all ‘Sopwith’ over Millerkruisse (2km SW Dickebuscch) at 10.30 and given as ‘jenseits’ with new man Plauth laying claim to and being credited with a ‘Spad’ east of Kemmel also at 10.30 which was given as diesseits. The Vzfw Soltau flight log gives the frontflug as 09.45-11.00.

Js 20’s opponents were an OP from 74 Sqn led by Capt WE Young which when flying at 15,000 dived on a ‘flock of Fokkers’ at about 10,000ft over Neuve-Eglise (3km south of Kemmel) at about 09.25BT. Several were driven down but only one was claimed as decisive: New Zealander Lt RH Grey recording, ‘…I got onto the tail of one EA Scout and fired a long burst with both guns. EA went down out of control, but I was unable to watch him right to the ground owing to the presence of other EA. This machine was also seen to go down by Lt. Giles. Height of termination of fight 3,000’.’ Time is given as ‘9.35am’ and location as ‘South of Kemmel’. Appended to the report is ‘Confirmed as crashed, by AA.’ American Lt LA Richards wrote in his diary, ‘…Have a royal dogfight and drive down several but don’t know how many we secured. Battell is missing…’ The last is referring to Lt AJ Battell (Can), a new man on SE5a C1950 who was last seen in combat with EA over Neuve Eglise at 09.30 BT. Listed as missing he was unfortunately killed.

Lt Battel was the only loss and the close proximity and times of all four German credits can lead a Jasta skeptic to just one simple deduction; that all four pilots look to have laid claim to the SE5a of Lt Battel, which likely crashed just south of Dickebusch. Indeed, I would not be surprised if Battel was yet another ‘pfennig from heaver’: his SE5a breaking up whilst diving on the EA. No one saw him shot down and as usual visibility from the German side is both vague & ambiguous. I’d also wager that Ltn Plauth was the pilot of the EA chased down to 3,000ft by Lt Grey. Baring in mind that the new man only ‘thought’ that he had dealt with an ‘Englishman’ but did not see it crash because he had a combat with another single-seater (ie chased down by Grey).

The only lifeline I could throw to the claim of the ambitious Ltn Plauth is that post-combat he may have garnered word (telephone ring-around) of wreck of DH9 D1023 from 103 Sqn (crew pow) – last seen heading north on an early morning reconnaissance and which was likely victim of KFlakbtter 193 which was credited with a ‘DH4’ (sic). Possibly reported as a ‘Spad’ by whoever Js 20 contacted on the phone.

Don’t all applaud at once.

[spad]

I think the weirdest thing about this is that Jasta 20 have the body of a dead Frenchman in their basement.

Where did they get the body?

best regards

Keith

[R Gannon]

Originally Posted by spad

I think the weirdest thing about this is that Jasta 20 have the body of a dead Frenchman in their basement.

Where did they get the body?

best regards

Keith

Hi Keith

Mate, I think you are reading too much into Plauth’s accounting. My take is that he was simply stating that there were two wrecks on the German side after the combat: one an ‘Englishman’ (not to be taken literally as an ‘English’ person but the wreck of Battel’s SE5a) and the other this ‘Frenchman’ he was laying claim to, which he thought was a ‘Spad one-seater’ Yet he concedes, ‘The story is not entirely clear – or an alternative translation, ‘The story hasn’t quite been cleared up yet...’ Later in his 17 July entry he states, ‘…Shreds of the shot down Spad has been recovered. Perhaps I can take the rudder back home with me…’

As to whom Plauth was claiming is certainly a mystery. Not only no French loss, but my understanding is that there were no French units operating on this sector at this juncture. A couple of SPAD’s from 103 Aero were lost in the general area on 22 May 18, but I think we are stretching things to link them. Forty-four years of logging combat data has left me hugely skeptical about the German claiming and crediting system, which despite being far better placed to conduct a battlefield clearance, looks to have been open to manipulation and exploitation.

If I was to offer the considered resolution of an 'Antipodean Revisionist'; I rather suspect that during the combat Plauth merely fired end on at a machine with a radiator and Spad exhausts – thinking it was a Spad but in reality, an SE5a. Then in spinning down below 3,000ft to escape Lt Grey near Kemmel he observed a wreck on the ground which might have been the missing 103 Sqn DH9 and subsequently laid claim to it. He lets it slip in his 17 July entry, ‘…I am a bit saddened about many breaks [bad luck injuries]. I wanted to achieve so much and fighter combat flying began so beautifully…’ Sounds like a man in a hurry to me.

Russ

[spad]

I wonder if it's the translation that's a little off, and that the original meaning was not "lying below" but brought down or shot down?

[frontflieger]

Originally Posted by spad

I wonder if it's the translation that's a little off, and that the original meaning was not "lying below" but brought down or shot down?

For me the question is: Where can I find the original German text?

[Gregvan]

Hi Thorsten,
It is found in Werner von Langsdorff’s Anthology, “Flieger am Feind,“ published by Verlag Bertelsmann, Gütersloh, 1934. Plauth, Karl: „Als Jagdflieger bis Kriegsende,“ pages 280-290.

[Gregvan]

Here are the pages in question, from "Flieger am Feind."

[Gregvan]

You can find Jos' excellent translation here.

https://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=72517

[frontflieger]

Thanks Greg.

Like always Jos' translation is really good. Due to my not-so-good English and to clear our discussion here, I would translate the sentence a bit differently:

"We both thought we had dealt with Englishmen. But there is an Englishman and a Frenchman lying below. But that's the same after all. As a beginner, I may have been wrong in the type..."

I would prefer: "... But there is an English [type of plane] and a French [type of plane] lying below. But that's the same after all. As a beginner, I may have been wrong in the type."

He did not refer to two men lying there but two planes.

Best regards
Thorsten