Carl Bolle - ace killer

[spad]

In my quest to find all I can about this chap it has occurred to me that despite his impressive tally of victories, with the possible exception of his last two claims and a SPAD pilot he did not appear to master any experienced successful Camel, SE5a and SPAD scout pilots among the thirty-odd aircraft he claimed to have shot down.

Perhaps this reinforces my view that "aces" pick out their victims because these are easy prey. And that "aces" are like centre-forwards in a football match, only interested in their own scores. Or that "aces" stay out of situations where they can be picked off.

I am not singling out German aces, I expect this was unilateral but fighting on your own side of the lines helped. On the Western Front the commonwealth pilots rarely had the luxury of choosing their battleground.

K

[Pips]

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at Spad. After all, Bolle made claims for 9 Camels, 4 Se.5's, 7 SPAD's and 2 Snipe's. Quite a healthy claim list out of 36 overall.

Or do you mean because he doesn't have any Allied aces listed amongst his claims? If so, that doesn't seem to be unusual.

A quick scan of the Aces section top 30 overall, only 15 claimed aces amongst their victims.
MvR - 7
LvR - 7
Voss - 4
Baumer - 3
Nungessor - 2
Buchner - 2
Boelcke, Jacobs, Madon, Berthold, Rumey, McLaren, Mannock, Ball and McLaren all only claiming 1.

Notable exceptions being Fonck, Bishop, Guynemer, Udet, Little, Fullard, Hazell, McElroy, Loerzer, Collishaw, McCudden (not counting claim for Green Tail), Barker, Ball, Gass and Gilmour.

[HoHun]

Hi K,

Originally Posted by spad

Perhaps this reinforces my view that "aces" pick out their victims because these are easy prey. And that "aces" are like centre-forwards in a football match, only interested in their own scores. Or that "aces" stay out of situations where they can be picked off.

These are certainly interesting considerations in which a lot of factors play their roles.

For example, the victims also play a role in "picking out themselves": If an ace approaches an enemy aircraft, the chances of the defending pilot spotting the attack in time and reacting to it competently and thus avoiding to get shot are certainly higher if the defender is an ace-level pilot himself, and lower if it's a novice. So you'd see a bias towards aces shooting down more novices than aces than you'd expect from just looking at the raw numbers of novices and aces in the enemy air force.

The same applies for aces staying out of a situation where they can be picked off. Often, ace pilots as experienced and competent pilots ascend into leadership roles, and that puts them in positions where they fly ahead of the men they lead, which is a position in which they naturally are less likely to be picked off.

(The question of whether it's better to attack the leader or the wingman of a pair first is also discussed in Shaw's "Fighter Combat", by the way, which is the modern jet fighter pilots' bible. Shaw himselfs considers picking off the wingman the better option, even if the leader might be the higher-value target.)

Then there's the factor that not only does being an ace increase the likelihood of getting into a leadership position, the position in front might also increase the chances of scoring more kills, since usually the leaders get the best shooting opportunities. This was quite clear in WW2, when the pilots could coordinate via radio and the four-finger formation was developed, but I would think that the same also applied during WW1.

And with the aces both being in a better position to score kills, and better protected against being attacked themselves, on top of their greater tactical and technical competence, one would expect that the non-ace pilots were overrepresented on the scoring lists of anyone, including on that of other aces.

All these are general considerations, which in real life can be complicated by a lot of additional factors. I'm just outlining these factors to share my imporession that this might be a complicated topic in which it's easy to overlook what in statistics might be called systematic influences.

In addition to the systematic influences, I'd also argue that who gets to shoot at whom with which results also has a probabilistic nature, so there will be considerable statistical "noise" in the data. This "noise" means that some ace might be conducting combat in exactly the same way as his comrade aces, and still get different results - for example, in terms of the number of aces he shoots down in relation to the number of novices.

If a probabilistic situation is repeated often enough, the list of results will be likely to show some unlikely outcomes, too :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[spad]

Many thanks for your contributions chaps. I think my argument has it's genus is considering the claims of Moelders in 1941, because they are so accurate. And also because they show that he was a master at picking off a straggler among the RAF Spitfires and Hurricanes. I cannot apply the same argument to Sailor Malan, Paddy Finucane etc because their claims are obviously at best, hopeful.

As Pips points out "aces" very rarely fight "aces" to a conclusion.

HoHun's post is also valid and well argued. In the era of jet combat the experience of the pilot and the superiority of his aircraft negates any real skill comparison. Like most conflicts where one side has a massive techical superiority over a short period, accuracy in terms of statistics are easily tabled.

The psychology of the "ace" is surely pertinent. If he is a hero and patriot surely his aim (no pun intended) is to shoot down an enemy "ace" to protect his homeland and save his comrades. My thought is that "aces" may be patriots and heros but confronted by an easy victory over a weak opponent and a stiff fight over an experienced air fighter it seems the former is the path chosen.

The nature of combat would surely often make this a decision to be made in seconds but the "ace" can make that.

On this path one might argue that MvR and his staffel and geschwader comrades destroying valuable if obselescent two seaters is much more valuable that his pursuit of scouts (especially if we can agree that the RFC/RAF scouts do not register anywhere near the number of actual victories over German aircraft...).

Overall one might argue that an "ace race" is not productive. It does not focus on quality but rather on quantity AND probably leads to the death of a number of excellent pilots. Like Coriolanus the "ace" considers himself an Osprey - supreme hunter of fish.

As is the osprey to the fish, who takes it
By sovereignty of nature. (Coriolanus)

In the end an "ace" is a self-made man of whatever nation. Ruthless, single-minded, devoted to himself and his reputation, willing to bend rules and massage the truth. And, perhaps at the start of his career - lucky!

K

[Old MacDonald]

Another consideration, IMO, is that shooting down any enemy fighter or bomber is at least somewhat likely to have a psychological effect on both other members of that unit and lower level commanders. Less--perhaps--than losing an ace, but an effect nonetheless.

Loss of fellow newbies must almost certainly frighten other newbies and have a sobering effect on immediate commanders. Higher level commanders, who are commanding/managing (not the same thing) by numbers tend to ignore or be unaware of whether losses were experienced men or newbies. Do I have enough planes? Do I have enough pilots? Does my logistics tail keep up with operational requirements?

At higher levels the numbers are more important than the individuals (except to those individuals, their friends, and their families, of course...). The primary exception at these levels is when a truly major ace (viz. MvR), aka National Hero, is lost and the widespread emotional and propaganda effect it has on the troops, political leadership, and citizenry.

Whether this is true or provable, it's analogous to Bomber Harris' firm belief that "dehousing" the German populace was as effective as directly destroying their war tools and forces. Harris was (mostly, but not entirely) wrong, but it seems iffy to criticize aces for going after easy meat. Sure, such "easy" kills drive up the ace's numbers, but it does not directly follow that these kills are irrelevant to the enemy.

[VtwinVince]

I think this is why the Voss vs. 56 Squ. action is such an interesting event.

[R Gannon]

I read the various preceding posts with interest, so I thought for the sake of some historical clarity, I would invest a few hours in the running up an analysis of Karl Bolle’s 36 game-book credits drawing upon my combat logs – 45 years in development.

Karl Bolle – game-book credit #1

Intro: Ltn Bolle, who had previously served with KG4/Ks23 was posted into Jasta 28 during April 1917 - the staffel being attached to 4 ARMEE. Although Bolle flew first under the leadership of Emil Schaefer and then Otto Hartmann in the hotly contested skies of the Ypres sector, he did not register a game-book credit until the second half of August.

18 Aug 17 – ‘DH’, Kachem, 08.03, ds, #1 – Bolle engaged the ‘DH’ together with Ltn E Hess with the 2-seater evidently braking up. However, the Albatros of Ltn Hess was shot about in the process and afterwards the pair tossed a dice to decide who would get the credit which resulted in Bolle garnering his #1.

Bolle was seemingly credited with wreck of DH4 A7454 from 57 Sqn crewed by Sgt CJ Comerford & 2Lt N Bell – post-war the graves of the crewmen were found in the cemetery at Iseghem.

The missing crew had been part of a six strong formation which had bombed Courtrai from 16,000ft and had attracted between 10 & 15 EA scouts climbed up to engage DH4s resulting in running fight back to lines between 07.20-07.30BT, with the EA below and behind. The crew of A7561 saw DH4 A7454 leave formation and dive down to be immediately be attacked by 4 of the EA flying 1,000ft below. A7561 went to assistance and the observer engaged one of the EA with his Lewis, the EA falling away seemingly OOC and was thought to reflect a machine which was observed to crash NW of Courtrai. The crew of A7555 also sent one of the EA down in spin but this was seen to flatten out. Another of the EA was driven down by the crew of DH4 A7535 but this one was under control. This same crew also believed they had been hit by AA which tore off R/H side of undercarriage, with DH4 subsequently being wrecked on landing back at Drogdlandt. DH4 A7454 failed to return and was reported as being last seen in a dive with 3 EA on its tail. Of some interest, the crew of A7555 described the EA as, ‘Albatros scouts, camouflaged various colours. One painted entirely red.’

Allowing for the fogs-of-war it is plausible that the reason as to why DH4 A7454 left formation in a dive and subsequently broke up may have been on account that undercarriage of A7535 struck the top wing when the DH4s were wheeling over the target, the crew of A7535 wanting to believe that part of their undercarriage had been carried away by an AA burst, whereafter the stricken A7454 was chased down by the Hess ketten from Js 28, with Albatros of Hess being shot about by observer of A7561 and then going into the usual evasive spin. DH4 A7454 evidently broke up before crashing and may well reflected the machine which was seen to crash to the NW of Courtrai by the crew of A7561.

More to follow.

R Gannon.

[R Gannon]

21 Aug 17 – ‘Martinsyde’ N.Seclin, 08.10, ds, #2.

This game-book credit entailed a bombing raid on Lezennes aerodrome (SE of Lille & 15km over the lines) by Martinsyde Elephants of the redoubtable 27 Sqn. On the return leg they were pursued by German scouts and when east of Seclin G102 A6259 collided with G102 A3992 with both pilots being killed whilst G100 7276 what shot up and chased down to make a forced landing near Billy-Berclau, just short of British lines, where the pilot was taken prisoner. Ltn H Muller, the Js 28 kanonen, took credit for ‘7276’ as his #25 whilst Bolle and Oblt Bethge (the SF of Js 30) garnered credit for the wrecks of the two Elephants which collided.

Despite plenty of British, French & Belgian aircraft operating over 4 ARMEE territory and resulting in numerous combats, Bolle did not register another game-book credit until December.

18 Dec 18 – secondary listings give ‘Camel’, NW Staden, 15.30, given as diesseits & burnt, #3.

The game-book credit relates to a sprawling air-battle in the environs of Roulers & Dixmude involving 17 Camels from 65 Sqn (flying in three formations) and 6 Camels from 9 Naval against a large formation of EA – evidently machines from Js 7, Js 28, Js 36 & MFJ 1 (which lost one pilot). Three Camels from 65 Sqn failed to return: B2419 (kia), B6241 (pow) & B2388 (pow) whilst B2487 returned damaged. The N’Blatt Abschusse for December only records two game-book credits for ‘Sopwith Camel’ (diesseits) which were awarded to two Js 36 pilots (Ltn Bongartz & Ltn v Habler) whilst Ltn Jacobs, the SF of Js 7, got the nod for a ‘Sopwith-eins’ between Houlthoulst & Dixmude as his #12 (claiming in his diary, ‘with a few rounds it fell into the water’), whilst Jacobs himself survived a crash landing. These fights were never one- sided affairs and pilots from 65 Sqn sent four of the Albatros scouts down. However, the Bolle game-book credit is not listed in the N’Blatt Abschusse for December and as such must reflect a later accreditation, indicative that it was not a straight forward claim. It would also appear that there was a later accreditation for a Sopwith by Ltn Lotz from Js 7.

29 Jan 18 – secondary listings give ‘Camel’ E Poelcapelle 16.10, vL #4.

Credit evidently relates to Camel B3890 from 70 Sqn, the Camel being last seen in combat with 10 EA between Roulers & Moorslede at 15.30BT/16.30GT. The pilot Lt KM Rogers survived as a prisoner to report in his RPS that he had been wounded and chased down by 4 EA resulting in a crash when he attempted to land near Houthoulst Forest. The thing is; there is a second Js 28 credit awarded to the staffelfuhrer Ltn Thuy – secondary listings citing a ‘Camel’ at Poelcapelle and timed 16.15 but accorded jenseits. Neither credit appear in the N’Blatt January listing, again suggestive that there were issues with these two credits. A game-book sceptic might hazard that both pilots had laid claim to B3890, which of course was chased down by 4 EA, and belatedly both were awarded credit.

30 Jan 18 – secondary listings give ‘DH’, E Wilskerke, 14.20, diesseits, #5.

Game-book credit evidently relates to DH4 N5982 from 5 Naval: one of a seven strong bombing formation which bombed Oostkamp airfield and which was harried on the return leg by 15-20 EA – evidently more than just one staffel. Two of the pursuing Albatros scouts were sent down seemingly OOC c13.30BT/14.30GT by two of the other crews but N5982 failed to return, and it subsequently transpired that both missing crewmen – FSL FTP Williams & AGL CA Lietch - were killed. Once again, the game-book credit does not appear in the N’Blatt abschusse for January suggestive of another delayed accreditation. However, I cannot help noticing that the printed medium has LtnzS Tinschert from MFJ1 credited with a DH4 on the preceding day (29 Jan) at Leffigne, which is only 2km ESE of Wilskerke and which relates to no loss on that date.

Thirty-one more to follow.

[spad]

I don't believe Bolle went into combat until several weeks after he joined Jasta 28. He joined the Jasta as a non-flying adjutant because he was still recovering from wounds he received in late 1916. I have read that he attended Jastaschule Valenciennes but this must have been after he joined Jasta 28.

K

[Barrett]

Originally Posted by Pips

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at Spad. After all, Bolle made claims for 9 Camels, 4 Se.5's, 7 SPAD's and 2 Snipe's. Quite a healthy claim list out of 36 overall.

Or do you mean because he doesn't have any Allied aces listed amongst his claims? If so, that doesn't seem to be unusual.

A quick scan of the Aces section top 30 overall, only 15 claimed aces amongst their victims.
MvR - 7
LvR - 7
Voss - 4
Baumer - 3
Nungessor - 2
Buchner - 2
Boelcke, Jacobs, Madon, Berthold, Rumey, McLaren, Mannock, Ball and McLaren all only claiming 1.

Notable exceptions being Fonck, Bishop, Guynemer, Udet, Little, Fullard, Hazell, McElroy, Loerzer, Collishaw, McCudden (not counting claim for Green Tail), Barker, Ball, Gass and Gilmour.

Add Hantelmann with 3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_von_Hantelmann