Parachutes ?

[susan kitchen]

Hi

I heard the other day that German WW1 pilots had parachutes and they had them from the beginning of the War whilst the British didn't. And that the British got their parachutes about 1916. My interest in the War has mainly been focused on the Armies etc, so i don't know an awful lot about War in the Air.

I couldn't imagine their being enough room for a Parachute.

Is this true. ?

Susan

[centurion]

No pilots had chutes before 1918 when both the Germans and Austro Hungarians (KuK) had some (but by no means did every one of their pilots t have one). Crews of balloons (all sides) had parachutes from quite early on. Zeppelin crews had them at the beginning but didn't carry them much. Parachutes had been ordered for British aircrew before the war ended but insufficient had arrived for training, fitting, issue etc before the war ended. Finding somewhere to put the chute was indeed one problem and some early designs were intended to be carried in a container on the outside of the fuselage (eg on the under carriage) and the pilot falling would pull the chute out of its container. Having an external parachute like this had an adverse effect on performance which increased the need for one! It would only work properly if the aircraft was flying straight and level when the pilot bailed out - which was highly unlikely in combat situations. Back packs were introduced (half the British chutes on order were back packs and most of the German and KuK ones were of this design) but not every aircraft cockpit or seat was amenable to this. These also depended on the weight of the pilot falling pulling the chute clear from its container which was fixed to the aircraft and they sometimes didn't deploy correctly or at all. The rip chord was a post war invention.

Agents (French British and Italian) were dropped from aircraft by parachute - in this case the pilot could keep the plane nice and level. By the end of the war the French were also dropping two man sabotage teams behind German lines

There are more threads on this subject if you do a search.

[susan kitchen]

Thank You Centurion for a really good and detailed reply.

Much appreciated.

Susan.

[Jasta72s]

The German standard parachute for balloon observers – introduced after increasing enemy balloon attacks in 1915 – was the "Paulus-Fallschirm" (Paulus parachute. The name of this design came from the famous German parachutist and later parachute industrialist Käthe Paulus. The parachute designed by this lady was an external parachute hanging on the basket of the balloon. This parachute was not good for use in airplanes as mentioned before by centurion.

[/size]

The German standard parachute for aviators was developed by a former member of the German Balloon Troops ("Feldluftschiffer"): Unteroffizier Otto Heinecke. After spring 1918 his parachute was introduced step by step in German figher squadrons as well as in Flieger-Abteilungen with double seaters (however, not so wide-spread) – but there were never enough parachutes produced to give them to all aviators before the end of the war. There are a number of niece photographs of this parachute existing, e.g. the well-known of Jasta 72s-pilot Fraedrich. By the way one can find a considerable number of seat-packs – used as pillow for the pilot – among Heinecke parachutes).

Accounts of German aviators indicate also the earlier use of parachutes because of "private initiative". Already in pre-war times one can find different designs and tests of German parachutes, however, afore mentioned two types of parachutes were the standards in war/late war. Parachuting was still a dangerous business and many of the parachuting aviators died because of failing parachutes. I have also one German source reporting the death of an Allied spy who´s parachute had failed.

[centurion]

The Paulus parachute appears to have been a copy of the pre war version of Calthrops's Guardian Angel design. This was also eventually adopted, with some improvements, for British and American balloons replacing the Spencer design. (I don't know what the Belgians, French or Italians used or even if the Russians had chutes - just brace your knees Vladimeer - simples). The two types of chute ordered by the British for aeroplane use were a modified version of the Guardian Angel (by Calthrop who bust a gut trying to produce enough only to go bust as a result when all the orders got cancelled at the end of the war) and the Mears (which was cheaper than the Calthrop and could be worn rolled up across the shoulders) 500 of these were on order. Both were a form of static line with the chute being deployed by the weight of the falling airman but the Mears was less affected by the position of the aircraft. At RAE work was carried out on the fitting of chutes to aircraft. The SE5a, RE8, Dh9 (&9a), Sopwith Snipe and Bristol Fighter all proved amenable to modification (although the Calthrop did prove susceptible to catching on the Brisfit's tail skid) but the Sopwith Camel proved to be an intractable problem.

The first account of a German pilot successfully baling out is in August 1917 before the Heinecke design was available. This may have been a private purchase of an American Broadwick or Stevens both of which used a rip cord but were banned in the USA by the pre WW1 equivalent of 'Health and Safety' (if not packed correctly they didn't open properly). On one Broadwick demo in 1908 the inventor lit a cigarette on the way down - arrrgh! I believe that these were still available through some European outlets. An account by Hefty a KuK ace who escaped wearing a Heinecke-Sipholster suggests that the German product was extremely uncomfortable to wear and pilots had to be ordered to fly with them. Possibly the American designs were easier on the bum! However I have seen other indications that the Heinecke design was not the only one made available to German aircrew

[Jasta72s]

Hello,

I think I have a bit different position concerning some of the raised questions.

>>The Paulus parachute appears to have been a copy of the pre war version of Calthrops's Guardian Angel design.<<

Hm, why? Please, could you tell me some reasoning or a trustworthy source for this assumption?

Käthchen Paulus (1868-1935) had developed and tested successfully own designs already since the 1890s. She invented also the later generally used knapsack. At the start of the war she was handing over her own balloons and parachutes to the German Army and later she made a lot of suggestions for improvements in the field of parachutes to the German military (hard job, military was conservative and often advise-resistant and she was "only" a woman). So, I have problems to believe she would copy a whole pre-war (!) "Guardian Angel" if she could get a totally new one fresh from the battle fields!

Note, during the war the Germans did indeed capture, photograph and test some "Guardian Angels" (pictures sold on ebay) but parachutes for German balloonists were in use a long time before that happened.

>>The first account of a German pilot successfully baling out is in August 1917 before the Heinecke design was available. This may have been a private purchase of an American Broadwick or Stevens ...<<

Maybe, but IMHO rather unlikely.

Any US-products were hard to get in war in Germany before April 1917 and impossible to buy after the US declaration of war. It is more likely that afore mentioned aviator in August 1917 used one of the available German parachutes of pre-war designers and parachutists like Thomik (or one of his competitors) who tried to improve their designs or even to develop an own design. Furthermore, a number of German aviators, balloonists and engineers was working with the goal to develop a safe German parachute for aviators in airplanes in this time. And by the way the date of the afore mentioned parachuting in August 1917 is located after the first successful test of Heinickes device on 1 May 1917. We can not exclude that Heinicke himself was giving rather untested chutes to friends or military persons too.

>>However I have seen other indications that the Heinecke design was not the only one made available to German aircrew.<<

There is a huge difference between "made available" (IMHO by orders and higher authorities) or "private initiative" (often without support or even against the blockade of parts of the miliary decision makers). The German (British, Russian, French ... etc etc) military was conservative and rather a hurdle than a help for engineers of parachutes. Even Heineckes parachute would not have succeeded without his permanent private efforts, fight and tests risking his own life. We do not know how many others were demotivated or badly refused like the Russian inventor Kotjelnikov. His RK-1, successful tested already in 1915, was refused because the Tsarist military was afraid pilots would give up airplanes too easy in combat.

Finally, all German General staff history works are definitive giving all merites for successful parachutes to Paulus (for Luftschiffer) und Heinicke (Fa. Schroeder for aircrews). Both were the standard and exceptions may have occured but they were without siginificant influence for the German military in WWI.

Indeed, the first Heineckes had some flaws but they were available and even a a chute with some risks (e.g the problems with the early harness) is better than no chute at all! Contrary to the wrong believe of leading generals in many countries the parachutes supported the fighting spirit of German aviators in WWI. Many, among them famous aces like Udet, would have died without the Heinecke.

Best regards,

Jasta72s

[centurion]

See The Silken Canopy - a history of the parachute for starters.

[centurion]

A few snippets to add

British intelligence identified 3 types of parachute in use in German aircraft - 2 seat types and one bag type. One seat type had more panels and was larger than the other.

With regard to the Heinecke type one should be careful of sources. This chute was marketed post war by Schroeder Gmbh who were naturally keen to claim that theirs was the only chute to have been used successfully in combat. Much materiel seems to be derived from a pamphlet written by Schroeder's agent for sales in Sweden - a rather large fellow called Goering - not always to be trusted.

The Paulus type chute did not enter mass production until late in 1916 - after captured Guardian Angels were available. Obviously another parachute design was in use earlier

Briish emphasis was originally not on developing a chute for use in combat but to reduce deaths in training by the use of a parachute.

The Mears chute during testing at Orfordness C early 1918 http://www.culture24.org.uk/asset_arena/7/...7/v0_master.jpg

[Jasta72s]

A book "for starters" does not sound exactly like being a scientific book but I will see íf I can get the potentially relevant chapters of the book.

>>With regard to the Heinecke type one should be careful of sources. This chute was marketed post war by Schroeder Gmbh who were naturally keen to claim that theirs was the only chute to have been used successfully in combat. Much materiel seems to be derived from a pamphlet written by Schroeder's agent for sales in Sweden - a rather large fellow called Goering - not always to be trusted.<<

Please, have a look at the German edition of Neumann´s "Die deutschen Luftstreitkräfte im Weltkrieg" (1920). In this general staff work (and several other contemporary publications of the German military) you can find clear words concerning Heineckes earnings and also photographs of the Heinecke chute. There is written and photographic evidence that the Heinecke chute was available in both versions - back-pack and seat-pack - so (at least) 2 of the afore mentioned "3 types" could be Heinecke´s designs. As well the Heinecke chutes were in a process of development in and after WWI - later chutes did not look exactly the same way like the first designs. I find it highly unlikely that Neumann and his authors were on the pay role of Schroeder or Goering during their work in 1919. If any other designer or manufacturer would have come up with a really successful parachute, produced and used in great numbers, then we should have military reports, many photographs and especially very detailed descriptions.

By the way I did not claim a single time in this thread that other German inventors did not try to design, test or manufacture own parachutes. I am also aware of the fact that an English-speaking author asked us (German researchers) for help for an own article about different German chutes. So, why are you again trying to convince me that there were other chutes existing? I did use the word "standard"! So, is my English that poor or do we have a different understanding of the simple word "standard"? You are always implying the meaning "the one and only" for standard. For me standard and non-standard items exist.

>>The Paulus type chute did not enter mass production until late in 1916 - after captured Guardian Angels were available. Obviously another parachute design was in use earlier<<

In 1914/15 one needed hardly any mass production for the limited number of German balloons in this time. Paulus herself had designed and tested parachutes from balloons for more than 20 years when the war begun. She was the most experienced person in this field in Germany and "the earlier" design was without any doubt her own design as well.

[egbert]

Käthe Paulus the renowned pioneer in parachute jumping and parachute manufacturing made her first jump in 1893. Until 1909 she summed up more than 160 jumps from baloons. In this year she developed and patented the new Paketfallschirm , also called Doppelfallschirm which was a design of 2 parachutes in one Paket (main chute plus reserve chute).

In 1913 she ended her Fallschirm-career and 1914 wrote her famous petition to the Prussian Government , offering her patented parachute design for production for the German Army needs.

It took some time for the ultra- conservative military to overcome mistrust against female ingenuity and took until early 1916 when she received the contract to mass produce her patented Paketfallschirm. In her memoirs she wrote"

„So habe ich bis Kriegsende etwa 7000 Fallschirme geliefert. Welche Arbeit hierzu gehörte, geht daraus hervor, dass ich wöchentlich etwa 125 Fallschirme lieferte, je Woche etwa 20.000 Meter Stoff zuschneiden musste; denn diese Arbeit selbst auszuführen, ließ ich mir, angesichts ihrer Wichtigkeit, nicht nehmen.“ which roughly says that she produced some 7000 parachutes until the end of the war at a weekly rate of some 125 pieces.

After the war the Allies confiscated German patents and Käthe Paulus sucessfully regained the patent from the Swiss authorities in 1921.

Easy to answer who used what first and who "stole" what from whom.

[centurion]

Calm down I'm not doing anything "again" much less trying to convince you. I'm merely pointing out that there is some evidence that the Heinecke might not have been the only type used - obviously more data is needed to determine this one way or another. Arguing over the meaning of standard is somewhat sterile and will get us nowhere. BTW do you have any evidence of when the first Heinecke was used?

Sack type usually does not refer to a back pack but something more akin to Calthrop's design. I assume British Intelligence was based on what captured airmen were wearing and what was found in crashed aircraft.

Its quite possible that an earlier German chute for balloon use was designed by Paulus but equally possible that it was not - there is simply no evidence so far. I'm merely pointing out that the Guardian Angel design (accepted in many circles as the best design ever produced for use from balloons was available when the Paulus was put into mass production. BTW Germany had more balloons in service than any one else in 1915 and certainly needed to mass produce chutes. Elements of balloon design and associated equipment were merrily copied from each other by all sides so that the Allies started using German Drachen copies and the Central powers ended using imperfect Caquot copies (they didn't get hold of one until late 1918 and couldn't see some of the internal stabilisation widgets). Only the US tried to go with their own design and not for very long.

PS I fear you mistake my use of the phrase 'for starters' this does not refer to the book itself but to the first source I was going to post.

[egbert]

Its quite possible that an earlier German chute for balloon use was designed by Paulus but equally possible that it was not - there is simply no evidence so far.

This thread is getting ridiculous because stubborn ignorance prevails here. But certainly typical for those who grew up with prejudices and who ignore German engineering capabilities consequently.

(BTW the G.A. came much later than the patented Paulus design.)

[centurion]

I'll ignore the first part of your response

The GA was available in 1914 - do you have details of the Paulus? If so please post

[egbert]

You really should not ignore the first part because I mean it serious; it is nerving how you oppose - not only in this thread- constantly all German originating facts. The age of enlightenment does not seem to reach you even in the year of 2010 maybe it is founded in your anti-German education. For the second part, please do some own research and google "Käthe Paulus" or "Fallschirm" or similar German key words and this will lead you to literature sources which you may consult in case you trust German primary sources . You may also consult the patent offices of Germany and Switzerland.

[centurion]

I always ignore sheer bad manners

[egbert]

Then it's time to meet at the Flanders based GWF conference to iron this out

[Andrew Hesketh]

Steady Gentlemen. Please let's take a deep breath before posting again.

[fitzee]

Then it's time to meet at the Flanders based GWF conference to iron this out

Ah, I love a good duel...Gentlemen "parachutes" at twenty paces!

[egbert]

May I suggest a competition, Centurion testing a Guardian Angel 1918 edition jumping from the cliffs of Dover and myself sitting on a Paulus Paketfallschirm edition 1914 at the opposing Bleriot-Plage?

[centurion]

The GA would work - one was filmed in 1914 with someone jumping off Tower Bridge - the clip is around somewhere. Unlike previous chutes designed for static balloon jumpers at showgrounds the GA was designed as a result of the fatal aircraft accident to Charles Rolls (of Rolls Royce) who was a friend of Calthrops and was specifically intended for low altitude bale outs. In effect it was the first parachute specifically designed to save life.

[centurion]

On a lighter note

[Jasta72s]

Centurion,

British intelligence sources are one thing and German documents and facts another thing. Some intelligence was very well on the spot - other reports were/are outright ridiculous. I prefer German sources for this topic as well I prefer to publish my vital sources and findings in my own publications and won´t make it freeware here. I have already experienced that an English-speaker has published parts of my findings for another work online without asking me for allowance. You have to wait for more information until I have finished and published my work. So, I close this discussion for me because it is a waste of my time meanwhile, especially since I feel you are making your self feeling good by nitpicking my contributions since three discussion threads.

So let me do it once too: his name was Otto "Heinecke" ... nevertheless a niece picture.

[centurion]

Centurion,

British intelligence sources are one thing and German documents and facts another thing. Some intelligence was very well on the spot - other reports were/are outright ridiculous. I prefer German sources for this topic as well I prefer to publish my vital sources and findings in my own publications and won´t make it freeware here. I have already experienced that an English-speaker has published parts of my findings for another work online without asking me for allowance. You have to wait for more information until I have finished and published my work. So, I close this discussion for me because it is a waste of my time meanwhile, especially since I feel you are making your self feeling good by nitpicking my contributions since three discussion threads.

So let me do it once too: his name was Otto "Heinecke" ... nevertheless a niece picture.

Perhaps we can leave personal attacks out of this, I'm not nit picking at you but if you feel too sensitive to take queries or corrections perhaps this isn't the place for you?

[CarylW]

Still here Susan?

No idea how accurate this is, but no doubt someone will tell us if it isn't

Came across this in The Unknown Soldier Neil Hanson

....the use of parachutes for aircrew was also rejected, not merely because of their weight but because they might diminish the pilots' 'fighting spirit'. Pilots feared death by fire or mid-air breakup of their aircraft more than any other fate 'the two situations which no self-reliance or skill could control. It was this that made the feeling about the non-issue of parachutes so deep and bitter'...................the Commander of the RFC, General Hugh Trenchard was unmoved and his '"considered attitude to this innovation (sic) was characteristically spartan. His balloon observers being defenceless, were issued with parachutes as a matter of course but never his airmen" He was more interested in armouring vulnerable parts of their machines against bullets so that they could fight with easier minds""

Caryl

[centurion]

Apart from some ground attack aircraft ( a few BE2cs, possibly some FE2s, one experimental Camel and the Salamander) can anyone think of a British plane which had armour added to protect "vulnerable parts of their machines against bullets" ?