Swaztika on a Vildebeest

[Dave Homewood]

In the February 1995 issue of Aeroplane Monthly there is a Keith Woodcock painting of a Vickers Vildebeest (K4111) from 84 Sqn in the middle East in 1937. On it's nose there is a Swaztika, though it is clearly an RAF aircraft.

Was the Swaztika used by 84 Sqn as a symbol? Or was it just that aircraft that carried it? On its tail is also a scorpion. It seems pretty odd that even in 1937 the RAF were displaying the Swaztika on one of its planes.

Does anyone know the reason?

It says in the srticle it carried on next month, an issue i don't have, so maybe it's explained there. Does anyone have the follow-up article/s? If so, I'd love a scan. I am hoping to attempt to scratchbuild a model Vildebeest - if i can locate some good 3-view and section drawings from somewhere.

[Melvyn Hiscock]

The swaztika, or broken cross, was a symbol of good luck way before any middle-European countried hijacked it for their own political ends.

Apparently it goes back to ancient Greece and many WW1 aircraft were decorated with it.

Hitler just stole it.

MH

[Dave Homewood]

I was aware of this Melv, thanks, I just thought it odd that by 1937 when the RAF was already very anti-Nazi policy that the use of their symbol was still used, even if it still had other meanings of good luck.

What I wanted to know is was this on all the sqn's aircraft or was this personal noseart?

Cheers
Dave

[Melvyn Hiscock]

Sorry Dave, you are right. I had only skimmed the message (down to having spent WAY too long at the computer trying to do the layouts on a book that was very badly presented).

1937 would seem late to still be using the swaztika as a good luck symbol but we were still taking to Germany at that point. It was around then that Milch and other top officials came over on a visit and were shown the reflector gunsight! There is a photograph of them at Andover airfield. I am sure someone will come up with a better stab at the date but we had not gone 100% anti-nazi at that time. I would imagine that the symbolism only really leapt to the fore when we started fighting!

Melv

[JDK]

Don't forget that it was only really when W.W.II got going that the Swastika became mainly the Nazi symbol. There was another air force who used it as their national marking...

[DazDaMan]

A little off-topic, but I recall reading somewhere that a Luftwaffe squadron commander once painted over the swastikas on the tails of his unit's Bf109Es at some point during the Battle of Britain, but can't recal who or why

[Dave Homewood]

No worries Melvyn.

James, the black backwards Swastika on a white circle and red background became the national symbol of Nazi Germany in 1935.

Even before then the western world was fervently against the German government. I was surprised to see a lot of anti-Hitler articles in the 1933 New Zealand newspapers when I recently did some research, and even then they were predicting war! So why a British plane should wear a Swastika in 1937 puzzles me a little.

[Entropy]

The other air force that used it in WWII was Finland. Though the Finns fought with the Germans (and later against) the blue swastika has nothing to do with Nazism. The first aircraft the Finnish Air Force received was given by the Swedish Count von Rosen whose family's good luck symbol was a blue swastika and was applied from 1919-1945.

[mike currill]

Also a good luck sign to the North American Indians(not that it did them much good)

[Melvyn Hiscock]

The other thing that could be a factor is that the old Vildebeest was hardly a new aeroplane in 1937 and may have been carrying the marking for some time. After all, it was photographed in 1937, not necessarily applied then.

Melv

[Papa Lima]

As an example of the blue swastika applied by Finland, here is a photo by Mike Shreeve of the Gladiator in the RSwAF Museum at Linköping.

[Dave Homewood]

Originally Posted by Melvyn Hiscock

The other thing that could be a factor is that the old Vildebeest was hardly a new aeroplane in 1937 and may have been carrying the marking for some time. After all, it was photographed in 1937, not necessarily applied then.

Melv

Yep. that is a possibility. You'd think the commanders would demand it removed though.

It is a painting in the magazine, not a photo by the way.

[Flood]

As a personal good luck symbol it was used on several inter-war FAA aircraft that I have seen pictures of - a Flycatcher springs to mind - but I won't go looking for them because I couldn't immediately pin them down (and I can't spare the time to get distracted!). Also I recall a DH9 or Bristol Fighter used in Afghanistan with swastikas on the wheels.
And didn't another Baltic inter-war state (Estonia?) use the swastika as their national marking?

Flood

[Arthur]

Latvia had a red, diagonal left-handed swastika as it's roundel in the interbellum. Not that they were really consistant with it though: some Latvian aircraft had a cross-like marking instead. On some aircraft the swastika (or cross) was on a white disc, while on others it was simply painted over the normal paint the aircraft wore. The pic shows one of Latvia's Gladiators.

Estionia did use the swastika (the same one as the Finnish, but darker blue) as a national symbol between 1921 and 1940, but never had it as a roundel on it's aircraft.

[JDK]

Even before then the western world was fervently against the German government.

Really? How interesting. I'd go and have a harder look at the 1930s newspapers if I were you. There were quite a lot of people in Britain and the USA and just about anywhere else who either didn't mind, liked or admired Hitler and what (was known of) the Nazis were up to.

There was quite a substantial lobby in Britain (for instance) who were quite happy to see Hitler carry on. When he turned out to nbe quite as bad as we now know, there was rather a lot of foot shuffling and cover up going on. Hindsights a wonderful thing, but mightly innacurate.

Just because (as he was seen mid thirties) 'some tinpot dictator of a thouroughly beaten country dragging it into the 20 cent' uses something doesn't stop other people who see themselves as superior from using it.* Hitler wasn't taken seriously by Britain until (nearly) too late. That includes trademarks, logos and attitudes!

Cheers

*Contender for longest most complex sentance of the week award.

[GDL]

Originally Posted by Papa Lima

As an example of the blue swastika applied by Finland, here is a photo by Mike Shreeve of the Gladiator in the RSwAF Museum at Linköping.

It's not a Gladiator. I think its a Letov, not sure.

[Papa Lima]

Oops, sorry, it's the Hart with a Mercury engine - I was too busy looking at the swastika! Four of these aircraft were "lent" to Finland during the winter war. The photo is still attributed to Mike J however!

[Flood]

Originally Posted by Papa Lima

Oops, sorry, it's the Hart with a Mercury engine - I was too busy looking at the swastika! Four of these aircraft were "lent" to Finland during the winter war. The photo is still attributed to Mike J however!

Doh! Got distracted trying to find my copy of European Wrecks and Relics...
Hawker/ASJA Hart (B.4) 714 (c/n 52, ex Finnish AF) apparently.

Flood

[Papa Lima]

Although painted up in Finnish colours, this particular aircraft did not serve there, according to the RSwAF Museum catalogue. However I don't know its real identity. Maybe Mike J does, he was looking more closely at details than I was!

[Melvyn Hiscock]

Originally Posted by Dave Homewood

[
It is a painting in the magazine, not a photo by the way.

I can bet you that if it is a painting it was a photo first!

MH

[galdri]

Just to clear up one point. The markings on the Finnish aircraft prior to, and during, WW2 is not the swastika.

The swastika is a very old simple of good luck originating, it is thought, from the himalias about 500 AD. It was also used as a religous sign by munks in that area for 1000's of years.

The thing on the side of the Finnish aircraft on the other hand, is (now my english fails me ) Hamarsmark Þórs, loosely translated as the Mark of Þór's hammer. That sample has it's roots in ancient Nordic Gothic believes. Þór was the warrior god of the ancient Nordic believes and was supposed to carry a big hammer around to hit his adversaries. Hamarsmark Þórs differs from the swastika in being upright, not tilted on it's side like the swastika.

[JDK]

Thanks Galdri,

Which kind of goes to prove the point of each user regarding an otherwise similar (or sometimes identical) symbol as their own.

Cheers!

[Dave Homewood]

Originally Posted by JDK

Really? How interesting. I'd go and have a harder look at the 1930s newspapers if I were you. There were quite a lot of people in Britain and the USA and just about anywhere else who either didn't mind, liked or admired Hitler and what (was known of) the Nazis were up to.

There was quite a substantial lobby in Britain (for instance) who were quite happy to see Hitler carry on. When he turned out to nbe quite as bad as we now know, there was rather a lot of foot shuffling and cover up going on. Hindsights a wonderful thing, but mightly innacurate.

All I can say is the press here in New Zealand were obviously much more far-sighted than those of other western countries, which is often the way with us Kiwis. We have all the brains and none of the power.

What first alerted me to even bother to look at the first article I saw was the headline "Hitler and his Terrorists". I was surprised to see it was a scathing attack on his policies, and this was in 1933. I saw a number of others after that as I went through the papers, and none were in support of the Nzis or Hitler, that's for sure. I was stunned that they were talking about the likelihood of another war because of Hitler even then.

I will concede that that some people in the west did think he was the bees knees. Around that same time the Yanks were making him Time Man of the Year - twice. But then there were a lot of Nazi sympathisers in the USA even during the war, some of whom were media moguls.

From what I've heard and read the Nazi supporters in Britain under Moseley's party were not a popular little group either, most normal people seemed to despise the national socialists or fascists from what I've come across. But as you say, this may be presented with a hindsight view. Anyway, enough politics. Or as I always like to more accurately term it, bollitics.

[Airtorque]

The main thing to remember when talking about the swastika, when related to the Nazi party was that Hitler chose to not only steal the symbol,but to change its original symbolism from peace to war,the slanting of the symbol was by way of its corruption from its original aims.
I once read an article called 'Reclaiming the swastika' which dealt with trying to put its original aims back into perspective where it rightfully belonged,incidently the four points represent the four worlds,Hitlers involvment with the occult would also seem to have some bearing on why he would choose the symbol for his own use.

[JDK]

I will obviously rely on NZ's world view from here on in Dave. Thanks for the tip off. What do they say about:

Air forces (having them, or hiding behind you neighbour's)?

Bush?

Blair?

On second thoughts, best left...

Cheers!

[Dave Homewood]

Originally Posted by JDK

I will obviously rely on NZ's world view from here on in Dave.

Good move mate.

Hey, you know I was talking slightly tongue in cheek I hope. But I am not lying about what I saw in the 1933 papers.

I could say a lot more on your other questions, especially the RNZAF, but I have deleted it out of politeness....

[GDL]

Originally Posted by Papa Lima

Oops, sorry, it's the Hart with a Mercury engine - I was too busy looking at the swastika! Four of these aircraft were "lent" to Finland during the winter war. The photo is still attributed to Mike J however!

Sure it's not the Audax with a Bristol Pegasus engine?

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by GDL

Sure it's not the Audax with a Bristol Pegasus engine?

Nope, it's definitely the Hart - there's a very nice article here:

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazin...etail_hart.htm

Cheers

Alistair

[Melvyn Hiscock]

Originally Posted by Dave Homewood

All I can say is the press here in New Zealand were obviously much more far-sighted than those of other western countries,

Not necessarily, there were voices that were saying much the same here, it is just that not everyone had caught on. Having an article in the papers in 1933 does not mean that everyone was saying the same.

MH

[Dave Homewood]

Yep, Agreed.