PDA

View Full Version : Calling Bearcat for Parachute shooting question



jayhall0315
06-04-2009, 05:27 AM
Bearcat, saw your post on Hans Stigler and the badly damaged bomber that he guided home. My question for you is, Were pilots normally shot in their parachutes or not ? What was official LW, USAAF, USN, Jap<span class="ev_code_RED">anese</span> and Russian policy ? I assume the Germans thought of the Russians as subhumans so I assume they always killed them in their chutes, no ? I believe Hartmann was also run out of fuel by four P51s and had to bail, and they let him live. What happened to US pilots if they killed someone in their chute and another squad mate saw it ?

Just curious.

jayhall0315
06-04-2009, 05:27 AM
Bearcat, saw your post on Hans Stigler and the badly damaged bomber that he guided home. My question for you is, Were pilots normally shot in their parachutes or not ? What was official LW, USAAF, USN, Jap<span class="ev_code_RED">anese</span> and Russian policy ? I assume the Germans thought of the Russians as subhumans so I assume they always killed them in their chutes, no ? I believe Hartmann was also run out of fuel by four P51s and had to bail, and they let him live. What happened to US pilots if they killed someone in their chute and another squad mate saw it ?

Just curious.

Vanderstok
06-04-2009, 05:40 AM
This is en excerpt from Hugh Dodwing's account of the Battle of Britain (from: http://www.spitfiresite.com/hi...-hugh-dowding-05.htm (http://www.spitfiresite.com/history/articles/2008/01/battle-of-britain-by-hugh-dowding-05.htm) )

"This is perhaps a convenient opportunity to say a word about the ethics of shooting at aircraft crews who have baled out in parachutes.

Germans descending over England are prospective prisoners of war, and, as such, should be immune. On the other hand, British pilots descending over England are still potential combatants.

Much indignation was caused by the fact that German pilots sometimes fired on our descending airmen (although, in my opinion, they were perfectly entitled to do so), but I am glad to say that in many cases they refrained and sometimes greeted a helpless adversary with a cheerful wave of the hand."

He had no problems with it as long as there was a chance the pilot could return to the fight!

stalkervision
06-04-2009, 05:58 AM
Hitler once discussed with erich hartman this very subject and Hartman said it was murder. Hitler agreed with hartman believe it or not! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Bearcat99
06-04-2009, 06:10 AM
I have no idea what the "official" policy was.. but I imagine that individually it was up to the soldier. From what I understand infantry on the ground was more likely to shoot someone in a chute than another airman, however every nation had incidents of chute shoots.. both as perpetrator & victim.

Flight_boy1990
06-04-2009, 06:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jayhall0315:
Jap </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You better correct this one quickly to "Japanese",Johny. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I thought that administration here was looking over such comments,even if they were posted without any negative feelings.

Zeus-cat
06-04-2009, 07:30 AM
When I was in the USAF in the 1980's we were told that aircrew bailing out were not to be shot at per the Geneva Convention. They were escaping a doomed aircraft and were no longer in the fight regardless of what territroy they were over. The Geneva Convention said that paratroopers could be shot at in their parachutes as they were enemy combatants on their way to the fight.

I don't know if the rules were the same back in World War II, but this is what they were when I was in the military.

LEBillfish
06-04-2009, 07:47 AM
As much as politicians like to "play" at war, soldiers must live it.

What that means is, though though not directly involved can discuss, debate, set up rules and guidelines, and demand "X" morality.........

It in reality has little to do with a young man who still has a very long way to go in developing character/experience/knowledge/regret, has his hormomes raging simply due to age, has his adrenaline peaked to the point that would give a horse a heart attack, is scared, angry, has just been shot at to be killed, just had his best friend die horribly, and has covertly been told by his superiors to show no mercy, be aggressive, etc., etc.........Who has his finger on the trigger and a choice to make.

In the end........The politicians expect them to act like saints after being cast into He11.....and they have a split second to decide what others had a lifetime to discuss.

So what do you think happened often?........Don't shame the soldier that reacts naturally.....Instead praise the one who overcame reflex (the very thing the military drills into him for good reason).

K2

TS_Sancho
06-04-2009, 12:10 PM
The U.S. naval pilots in the pacific made a standard practice of strafing shipwreck survivors in the water, the Japanese did the same.

The rules regarding Uboat's not aiding enemy shipwreck survivors were created after an allied aircraft attacked a surfaced Uboat towing a couple of lifeboats of allied civilians.

The eastern front in europe took human barbarism too the extreme for both sides. I believe as a rule there was no quarter expected or given by either party.

I've heard multiple accounts of allied aircraft strafing downed german aircrew in the west.

I dont believe shooting pilots in their parachutes was ever made an official policy by any of the western allies or the germans but I'm not well informed enough to speak on the Japanese or Soviets.

In the least it seems to me that it would be diffucult to tell friend from foe. From a tactical perspective it makes little sence to allow an enemy to live so they can go on to kill you another day.

crucislancer
06-04-2009, 01:01 PM
I watched an interview recently with a Mustang pilot, his name escapes me at the moment, who said they weren't supposed to do it, and considered it horrific. However, on one occasion he happened upon a German in a 109 that was shooting a bomber crew while in their chutes. He got really upset, shot the German out of his plane, and then shot him in his chute. No one said anything about it to him.

I could see such activities being brushed under the rug unless it became commonplace.

I've read many instances of Japanese pilots shooting airmen in their chutes. There is one story of a Corsair pilot that had part of his foot cut off by a Zero pilot that was buzzing him with his prop. Greg Boyington was straffed while in the water after being shot down in 1944. I'm not sure what was official with the Japanese, but the Geneva Convention was little more then toilet paper to them.

Gibbage1
06-04-2009, 02:46 PM
I think it very much depends on the PILOT and the SITUATION. I dont think it was a big trend in WWII to shoot down chutes. AVG said the Japanese had a habbit of doing it, so pull your cord low. There was a few other instances, but nothing wide spread. I think that if you did it, nobody would bat an eye, nor was it encouraged. Its just something that happens in war.

M_Gunz
06-04-2009, 07:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stalkervision:
Hitler once discussed with erich hartman this very subject and Hartman said it was murder. Hitler agreed with hartman believe it or not! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hitler had no trouble with murder anyway so what difference would it make to him?
In the 1974 World at War series they show Nazi home movies of forcing men to run
into a trench, stop and be shot, and then the next bunch and the next and the next.
They weren't killing prisoners fast enough that way so they made the gas chambers.
What kind of person can make those things happen and check on them, what does murder
mean to such a person? He murdered his own country.

WTE_Galway
06-04-2009, 07:49 PM
Actually the biggest danger to downed airmen was the local civilian population, regardless of nationality.

People get upset when bombs are dropped on their homes and they tend to want to take revenge.

Bartman.
06-06-2009, 03:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jayhall0315:
Jap </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You better correct this one quickly to "Japanese",Johny. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I thought that administration here was looking over such comments,even if they were posted without any negative feelings. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why! ? i don't see anything wrong with that , i get called a jock.. my english and australian mates at work call each other 'poms' and 'aussies' , new zealanders get called 'bro's' i even call my american family members when their here visiting 'yanks' though granted thier all pretty much thick skinned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

The way i view it is 'jap' is short for japanese which dosen't seem or sound derogatory to me .

Bartman.

Feathered_IV
06-06-2009, 03:52 AM
P-51 pilot, Richard Peterson describes how he killed a Luftwaffe pilot in his chute here:

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

Can't say I blame him either. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Bearcat99
06-06-2009, 06:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bartman.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jayhall0315:
Jap </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You better correct this one quickly to "Japanese",Johny. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I thought that administration here was looking over such comments,even if they were posted without any negative feelings. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why! ? i don't see anything wrong with that , i get called a jock.. my english and australian mates at work call each other 'poms' and 'aussies' , new zealanders get called 'bro's' i even call my american family members when their here visiting 'yanks' though granted thier all pretty much thick skinned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

The way i view it is 'jap' is short for japanese which dosen't seem or sound derogatory to me .

Bartman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bartman is absolutely correct... I missed that or I would have said something myself.. we discourage the use of the term here... if one is typographically challenged then IJN/IJA (Imperial Japanese Navy/Army)should suffice..

J** is a slur and can not be put in the same category as "jock" .. or Brit.. or Kiwi for that matter.. those are more nicknames.. J** is a slur.... and to this day most Japanese folks I know, either personally or indirectly find the term offensive so please refrain from using it as you would other derogatory terms. This has been the standing spoken policy here since PF came out...

BillSwagger
06-06-2009, 09:06 AM
I also think that aside from Geneva, it would be a waste of ammo to shoot at someone when their threat has already been neutralized.

The pilots in my family who've flown in US combat at one time or another, including WW2, all seem to suggest for the most part pilots dont really give a crap about politics. No matter what country they were from it was recognized that if you had made it into a cockpit of a fighter plane you were part of a select group of individuals.

Burckhardt
06-07-2009, 06:48 PM
In the 8th AF, I have read where escort pilots who shot Germans in their chutes were looked down upon. Maybe they didn't get in trouble but their peers would probably say something about it. But then again there sure was alot of hate and intentional rumors spread to increase the fury of the allies, but I have heard of both ways of doing it.

Crazy_Goanna
06-07-2009, 08:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bartman.:

Why! ? i don't see anything wrong with that , i get called a jock.. my english and australian mates at work call each other 'poms' and 'aussies' , new zealanders get called 'bro's' i even call my american family members when their here visiting 'yanks' though granted thier all pretty much thick skinned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

The way i view it is 'jap' is short for japanese which dosen't seem or sound derogatory to me .

Bartman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah It's the Okker rhyming slang that might annoy some 'sep...s'
We don't complain when we get called Skips(skippys)
gotta get a thick skin and not be so politically correct-

Bearcat99
06-07-2009, 08:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Crazy_Goanna:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bartman.:

Why! ? i don't see anything wrong with that , i get called a jock.. my english and australian mates at work call each other 'poms' and 'aussies' , new zealanders get called 'bro's' i even call my american family members when their here visiting 'yanks' though granted thier all pretty much thick skinned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

The way i view it is 'jap' is short for japanese which dosen't seem or sound derogatory to me .

Bartman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah It's the Okker rhyming slang that might annoy some 'sep...s'
We don't complain when we get called Skips(skippys)
gotta get a thick skin and not be so politically correct- </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has nothing to do with PC. Stow it or take a vacation. This debate is old news and it WILL NOT BE RESTARTED.

Take it for what it is worth and move on. This is the last time this will be discussed in this thread. If you have further issues either take it up with me in a PM or talk to another mod. If it comes up in this thread again the poster will have a week off.

Let it go and move on.

jayhall0315
06-07-2009, 09:05 PM
Thanks for adding to the original post Bearcat. I usually dont go for moderation in posts because I believe in letting people have their say, even if politically incorrect, but in this case, yeah... it was totally fast typing that is to blame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I didnt even think about it to be honest, just smacked some keys and kept on going.

Good correction.

Bearcat99
06-07-2009, 10:24 PM
Check PM........

ibeagle
06-09-2009, 02:43 AM
Back to topic, as far as I know, official US and UK policy was in line with the legal requirements of war for the time, which, as far as I know, were clearly defined. For example, it was illegal to shoot an enemy who was wounded and offered no resistance. As for shooting parachutes, I don't know, but I would assume that it would be illegal, and therefore against policy.

dieg777
06-10-2009, 12:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bartman.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Flight_boy1990:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jayhall0315:
Jap </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You better correct this one quickly to "Japanese",Johny. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I thought that administration here was looking over such comments,even if they were posted without any negative feelings. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why! ? i don't see anything wrong with that , i get called a jock.. my english and australian mates at work call each other 'poms' and 'aussies' , new zealanders get called 'bro's' i even call my american family members when their here visiting 'yanks' though granted thier all pretty much thick skinned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif.

The way i view it is 'jap' is short for japanese which dosen't seem or sound derogatory to me .

Bartman. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bartman is absolutely correct... I missed that or I would have said something myself.. we discourage the use of the term here... if one is typographically challenged then IJN/IJA (Imperial Japanese Navy/Army)should suffice..

J** is a slur and can not be put in the same category as "jock" .. or Brit.. or Kiwi for that matter.. those are more nicknames.. J** is a slur.... and to this day most Japanese folks I know, either personally or indirectly find the term offensive so please refrain from using it as you would other derogatory terms. This has been the standing spoken policy here since PF came out... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please be more careful in your assumptions.
Jock is used in a derogitory manner by some, particularly some English people, towards the Scots so I fail to see how you can differentiate on this and call this a nickname. As always, when using such definitions, context is important.