Spitfire pilot pistol

[bedford]

Hi,

I'm making a diorama of Spitfire belly landing on France during D-Day's period. I would like to show the pilot on the wing but I have a doubt about pilot's pistol. Did Spitfire pilots have a pistol while going in combat ? If yes, which model would they have and where (waist, boots,...) I've read a forum question about this question but answers were really contradictory and most were more guess than real knowledge.

 

Thank you for your help and have fun modelling.

 

Gabriel

[MilneBay]

It would depend very much on the theatre and operational practice. Pilots were sometimes issued with sidearms but a pistol really is useless if you come down in enemy territory because the enemy will be using squads of soldiers to pursue you and if a pistol is all  you have to fight off a squad of soldiers armed with rifles then your lifespan is negligible. One sees pictures of American aircrew with pistols but in reality they wouldn't use them to avoid capture, they'd just get shot by the better armed enemy. To be blunt the general rule was "throw away the pistol and surrender".

 

Now on the off chance that a RAF pilot in Europe was issued with a pistol it could be a .380 calibre Enfield revolver, a .38 calibre Smith & Wesson or Colt revolver or even a .45ACP Colt. However I would think that it would be unlikely for a pilot or any aircrew to carry one. The pistol and holster would be too bulky anyway to fit comfortably and, like I said, what use would they be against an armed squad of enemy soldiers. Using it would risk getting shot rather than captured and if the pilot used it to threaten civilians then he would lose any POW status if caught. Pistols really are a pretty difficult feeble weapon to use in combat.

 

Officers in the army etc. carried them, but in combat they would use, if they had to, the normal soldiers' weapons of a rifle or machine gun. The real truth behind issuing pistols to officers was that they were there for the purpose of urging on your own troops if they refused to obey an order to charge.   

 

 

[MSnell]

I would imagine if carried it would be some kind of revolver but not sure what kind I'm afraid, Enfield or Webley maybe?

 

I seem to remember that masterpiece of the silver screen "Pearl Harbor" [sic] showing Ben Afleck (or was it the other one?) shooting his way out of a Spitfire with a revolver of some sort (I'm joking of course, please don't use that movie as any type of reference material!).

 

I've just found this, described as an RAF Webley revolver:

 

Edit: I'm thinking the poster above makes a good point though. That's a big weapon to have in a Spitfire cockpit and it's not going to be much use to you other than get you killed. Maybe your diorama should have the pilot throwing it in a bush?!

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by MSnell

[Troy Smith]

Interesting points above

This shot of 73 sq Hurricane pilots in France in May 1940, note the chap with the tie, Fanny Orton, has a pistol in jacket pocket, with a lanyard round neck.

 

 

Not a direct answer,  but the only image I can think of with a sidearm, and maybe more indicative of the chaos in France at the time.

[Modelholic]

Have you thought of the pilot waving a flare gun to destroy the plane with rather than a pistol?

Tom

 

[FinnAndersen]

Fanny Orton being mentioned by Paul Richeys in his epic of the Battle of France is the only time I ever seen a reference to a RAF pilot wearing a pistol while piloting a fighter.

 

As other have said, there was enough straps from parachute and seat harness make the wearing of a pistol an uncomfortable ride.

 

You can certainly get away with a pilot without one.

 

Good luck

Finn

Edited June 8, 2018 by FinnAndersen
Clarify

[Giorgio N]

There are pilot accounts mentioning handguns being carried and there are a small number of pictures showing pilots with holsters, so it was done, but the points made by MilneBay are perfectly valid and really many, probably most, pilots didn't carry them at all. A Spitfire cockpit in particular is not the largest of spaces and any additional item on the clothing would make moving quite uncomfortable.

Regarding weapons, RAF officers were issued the Enfield No2 but later in the war they started to receive a number of US weapons. Of these, the most widespread was the S&W Victory Model, in the same .38/200 caliber of the Enfield. A number of M1917 revolvers also seem to have been used, likely the ones in .455 Webley received during WW1.. Speaking of .455, the RAF also had a batch of Colt 1911 in this caliber (different cartridge of course) and while these were also WW1 supplied guns, they were used again in WW2. Other 1911s were received through lend-lease.

Then there were private purchase firearms and war booty...  the Beretta 34 and 35 seem to have been popular in the MTO as they were quite small and the 34 was more powerful than the Enfield, but as your diorama is based around D-Day, I'd stick with a standard RAF weapon. That is if you really want to show one

[Chris Thomas]

Pilots in the 2ndTAF were certainly issued with sidearms.  Photos from 1943 onwards clearly illustrate this, and I have an alarming selection showing young pilots doing what would now (and maybe then) be deemed dangerous things, for the camera.  I know at least one case where a Typhoon pilot (drunk) shot a fellow pilot, who fortunately survived.

 

Whether they carried them into battle was their choice.  Yes, they were not the weapons with which to fight your way out of enemy territory and they could have provoked a violent reaction from capturing troops, but I can think of instances where a pilot on the run might find a pistol useful.  I know of another Typhoon pilot who was shot down over France prior to the invasion, evaded, joined the resistance and after the best part of a year rejoined his unit in France.  Eventually he was allowed back on operations (presumably as France had been liberated) but always flew with a sten gun in the cockpit!

 

My father was a Typhoon pilot at Eindhoven in the winter of 1944-45 and carried his Smith and Wesson 38.  Although right-handed he wore it on his left hip with the handle facing forward for a quick draw. I think he'd seen too many westerns.

[bedford]

Thank to all for your answers and comments. I'll make a choice while making the pilot's figure. Hope I'll post soon the scene on the site.

 

Have fun modelling

 

Gabriel

[MilneBay]

Also pistols in the larger calibres like .45 or .455 are quite large, larger than pistols in the .38 or .380 calibres. I know this because I own examples of most of them. One pistol I have in my collection is a S&W .455 revolver that was issued to 43 Squadron RFC in WW1. Although not relevant to the WW2 question the accounts I have read of WW1 pilots carrying pistols (apart from those very early attempts to use them in air to air combat) indicate that their greatest use was taken pot shots at rabbits etc. around the airfields. In the cramped cockpits the full rig of Sam Brown belt and holster in which these large pistols were carried was simply inconvenient, especially given the need for warm clothing.

 

The same considerations of bulk etc. apply to WW2 situations - some pilots might have carried them but simply put they would be of very little use if you were on the run in enemy territory. Besides actually hitting anything with a pistol is rather difficult for the average shooter who isn't prepared to practice regularly, especially as any enemy soldiers with rifles could stay at a safe distance out of pistol range and pick off their target. In the pic of Fanny Orton in France is that a pistol or a flare pistol in his pocket - I would think that the flare pistol would be of more use.      

Edited June 11, 2018 by MilneBay

[Don149]

Gabriel, if you have the book "Typhoon and Tempest at War" byArthur Reed and Roland Beamont there`s a pic of NZ. Tempest pilots at Grimbergen airfield in Belgium

in November 44 and they are all wearing sidearms . Most likely 38 Webley ,or 38 S+Wesson chambered for the British cartridge .I read somewhere that the RAF were

issued with them. When I "joined-up" at the end of 52 there were only the 38 Webley`s in RAF service, maybe the Colts and S+W were only on Lend - Lease , although

I have a pre. L. L. S+W in my collection , chambered for the British round .

MSnell , the revolver in your post is wrongly captioned , it`s an Enfield Mk 1, the grips and fore sight are different to the Webley .

                                                                                                                                                                                                            `hope this is of interest ,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Don .

[Troy Smith]

On 8/6/2018 at 08:57, FinnAndersen said:

Fanny Orton being mentioned by Paul Richeys in his epic of the Battle of France is the only time I ever seen a reference to a RAF pilot wearing a pistol while piloting a fighter.

 

On 8/6/2018 at 23:45, MilneBay said:

In the pic of Fanny Orton in France is that a pistol or a flare pistol in his pocket - I would think that the flare pistol would be of more use.      

hard to tell, and I have not had a chance to go through Paul Richey's book to check as mentioned by Finn, but suggests it was a revolver.   I posted the photo as it was a detail I found of interest.

[Don149]

I never saw a Very ( flare ) pistol on the end of a lanyard ! .

[MilneBay]

The Very pistol was simply a suggestion. I agree that some pilots may have carried pistols however in reality a pistol really would be an encumbrance in a confined cockpit and no help whatsoever, in fact a recipe for getting shot, in an encounter with enemy troops.

 

As for having a lanyard - indeed they did, 

 

http://www.armytigers.com/artefacts/webley-and-scott-ltd-1-inch-flare-pistol   

[KevinK]

On 6/8/2018 at 1:57 AM, Chris Thomas said:

Eventually he was allowed back on operations (presumably as France had been liberated) but always flew with a sten gun in the cockpit!

Exactly as my father did when flying 253 Sqn Spitfires over Yugoslavia in 1944/45. He said the idea was that if you came down and managed to link up with the Partisans, you had to be useful to them as a fighting man. Aircrew were often with the Partisans for months before they could be evacuated and a pistol wasn't enough.

[MilneBay]

As an aside this is my .455 Smith & Wesson issued to 43 Squadron RFC. The back strap is stamped 8.16 over 43 RFC over 147. Which translates as August 1916 (date of issue), 43 Squadron Royal Flying Corps and the pistol's rack number.  It is what might be loosely called a kit bag special as it has never been marked out of service, It also bears little sign of use if any. The minor marks are simply from handling over the years. It is quite large and would be a bulky item for a pilot to carry in the close confines of WW1 aircraft cockpit.  

 

 

This is the stamping on the back strap.

 

Edited June 11, 2018 by MilneBay

[Black Knight]

In service; my Squadron leader was issued with 45 Webley and a waist belt holster for it. He disregarded the holster and kept the revolver tucked into his boot. He lost it when he had to bail out one day; it falling out of his boot. 30 odd years it was found, returned to the RAF, cleaned and serviced and given back to him. But he never got back the money he had to pay for 'losing' his revolver

A gun can be used for more than just killing the enemy; it can be used to kill wild animals or used for signalling. In WW1 my grandfather used his 1911 Colt 45 for killing wild boar in the woods in France. He said it took a full magazine at close range to bring a big boar down. During WW2 there was still plenty of wild boar in French woods - the German officers liked to go hunting for them

 

On the point of practice shooting; as a lowly nobody I was expected to use 20 rounds per month on each of; Browning 9mm pistol, SMLE Mk.4. SLR, Stirling and GPMG and anything else the W/O decided. Pilots I knew had to use a minimum of 20 rounds per week with their pistol; thats only a few minutes down the range each week, easily put in.

[MilneBay]

This is my Enfield (Webley) .455 revolver MkVI.

 

Webley actually lost the contract to supply pistols to the British military in the mid 20s. The British government owned arms factory at Enfield took over the production. Most of the WW2 pistols issued were manufactured by Enfield. The Webley and the Enfield are basically the same except for the name.  They were  and still are, excellent if large pistols with good stopping power, but weren't all that popular because the .38 version was lighter and smaller and had less recoil.

 

 

This is my .380 Enfield (Webley) - this one is called the Tanker model as they were manufactured for use by the Tank Corps. They lack the hammer spur because they are a self-cocker. That was a modification sought by tank crews prewar because in the confines of a tank the hammer spur would catch on things. So unlike the .455 they are not a double-action arm. Both have very heavy trigger pulls. The standard .380 Enfield (Webley) was just a smaller version of the .455 MkVI.

 

 

One of those threads where two of my interests coincide. 😀

[Giorgio N]

Reading through various accounts of pilots, I found that these broadly followed two lines of thought: some realised that a pistol would have been of little use and didn't carry them. As said above, they are not enough to bring up a defence against enemy forces and while an airman surrendering would have most likely been taken to a PoW camp, an airman drawing a pistol could have been shot on the spot. Not saying it happened but some feared this could happen. Using a pistol for hunting could have made sense but really shooting at wild animals isn't the best way to stay hidden. Even a pistol shot is very loud and would draw attention from patrols or civilians, at least in Europe.

Others believed that having a pistol would give several advantages, none would have likely been so foolish to attempt attacking a patrol but a pistol could have been used to "convince" a civilian and maybe scare some second line troop. In the PTO some pilots also believed that having a pistol in case of dropping in the Jungle would have been useful to defend against wild animals.

 

Spaeking of RAF pistols, the S&W Victory Model (or Model 10, as was the official name) was delivered to the British in very large numbers and many of these seem to have ended up in the RAF. Not all of these were Lend-Lease deliveries as S&W had built a good number for the British earlier, mainly to repay money that the British purchase commission had given to the company for the development of a semiautomatic 9mm carbine (the S&W 1940 Light Rifle), a project that failed. Those guns not part of Lend-Lease did not need returning at the end of the war but IIRC they were retired and sold on the civilian market pretty quickly while the Enfields remained in service.

 

Flare guns: Spitfire seats could have a provision for fitting a flare gun, provision that IIRC was added starting in 1941. Such a weapon could therefore have been carried in the aircraft but it's unclear to me if they were commonly carried or not. They were however carried on Seafires, and I can see how such a tool would be more useful for an aircraft flying over the see than for one flying over enemy territory.

 

Last but not least... nice collection MilneBay ! Regarding the .455 Webley, large calibre pistols were sometimes carried by crews of observation balloons. These often carried rifles as room was less of a concern compared to aircrafts of the day but I've read accounts of pistols being carried as well.

 

[Don149]

I`m envious of your 455 S&W , Milne Bay. It`s the one piece my collection is missing . My 455 Webley has just made antique , being dated 1918 .

[MilneBay]

13 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

Spaeking of RAF pistols, the S&W Victory Model (or Model 10, as was the official name) was delivered to the British in very large numbers and many of these seem to have ended up in the RAF.

 

This is my S&W Victory Model (aka S&W M&P 10). Despite that pitting on the rear frame it is in excellent internal condition. This particular example has markings that suggest issue to the Chinese at some stage. The grips are not original to the pistol, they are a spare set I have. The pistol was actually issued with the civilian style grips with the inset S&W medallion logo. I swapped them over for the photo. The reason for that pitting is that the civilian grips normally cover that part of the frame and they are a real moisture trap*. So in swapping to the thinner simpler military grips normally used I exposed the pitting. The finish is the usual wartime Parkerized type. It never seems to photograph well. 

 

 

* I have a S&W .357 Magnum Combat Masterpiece which was used by a buffalo hunter in the Northern Territory which has exactly the same problem.   

[stevehnz]

On 6/10/2018 at 11:55 PM, Don149 said:

Gabriel, if you have the book "Typhoon and Tempest at War" byArthur Reed and Roland Beamont there`s a pic of NZ. Tempest pilots at Grimbergen airfield in Belgium

in November 44 and they are all wearing sidearms .

In reading this thread over the last few days, I've been wondering if once the 2nd TAF was operating mainly over Reich territory & a hostile reception from civillians on bailing out became likely, side arms would become an important morale booster even if the use of them was not necessarily a guarantee of safety, it might have seemed good to have another string to ones bow. 

Steve.

[593jones]

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 5:05 AM, stevehnz said:

In reading this thread over the last few days, I've been wondering if once the 2nd TAF was operating mainly over Reich territory & a hostile reception from civillians on bailing out became likely, side arms would become an important morale booster even if the use of them was not necessarily a guarantee of safety, it might have seemed good to have another string to ones bow. 

Steve.

That's an interesting idea, I suppose a downed pilot being threatened by a vengeful mob might fire a round over their heads hoping to keep them at bay until soldiers/police arrived who would probably be less inclined to lynch him.

[Giorgio N]

24 minutes ago, 593jones said:

That's an interesting idea, I suppose a downed pilot being threatened by a vengeful mob might fire a round over their heads hoping to keep them at bay until soldiers/police arrived who would probably be less inclined to lynch him.

 

If a couple of hostile guys are around, a pistol can sure be used to disperse them. If a large vengeful mob is around, drawing a pistol is the kind of act that practically guarantees being lynched. It's also the kind of act that gives a good excuse to any enemy patrol to shoot the pilot on the spot.

In fairness though the presence of a sidearm can indeed be a powerful morale boost to a pilot having to fly over enemy territory and from what I found many pilots felt this way.

Edited June 15, 2018 by Giorgio N

[Black Knight]

On 12/06/2018 at 05:05, stevehnz said:

In reading this thread over the last few days, I've been wondering if once the 2nd TAF was operating mainly over Reich territory & a hostile reception from civillians on bailing out became likely, side arms would become an important morale booster even if the use of them was not necessarily a guarantee of safety, it might have seemed good to have another string to ones bow. 

Steve.

 

35 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

 

If a couple of hostile guys are around, a pistol can sure be used to disperse them. If a large vengeful mob is around, drawing a pistol is the kind of act that practically guarantees being lynched. It's also the kind of act that gives a good excuse to any enemy patrol to shoot the pilot on the spot.

In fairness though the presence of a sidearm can indeed be a powerful morale boost to a pilot having to fly over enemy territory and from what I found many pilots felt this way.

At the time the 2nd TAF pilots were more likely to carry side-arms there were reports coming through of both civilians and local German militia murdering Allied aircrew.*

Most tales were unfounded, but several were true and led to War Crimes trials post-war.

Having a side-arm for self protection would certainly have boosted morale and confidence

 

*Hitler had also issued an edict to kill downed allied aircrew - some of his followers did so