In WWII captured vehicles, air planes, tanks and munitions were very commonly used by opposing forces, more so in some campaigns than others. When captured they were always painted in each factions colour scheme and symbol for obvious implications. But, is there any cases where enemy vehicles were captured but not retro fitted and used as is for ambushing or flanking maneuvers unnoticed? By unnoticed I mean the enemy not knowing enemies were inside their tanks or air planes. Or was there just too much risk of being taken out by your own forces?
It is not inconceivable, but pretty much everybody had to be very careful about it, as shooting at someone when wearing the uninform of, or displaying the symbol of that enemy you are shooting at is a war crime. Not shooting at someone while displaying the enemy symbol is fine, unless you are spying.
Perhaps the most common form of subterfuge was on the high seas, where it doesn't take very long to run down one flag, and raise another. As a result, combatants such as commerce raiders or Q ships would not unusually sail under an enemy or neutral flag. A more extreme example was the St Nazaire raid, where's British warship was modified to look like a German one, and sailed under a German flag until finally the Germans copped that something was wrong and started shooting at her. HMS Campbletown then ran up the White Ensign instead, and shot back, before ramming he dock and unloading troops. However, the use of captured enemy ships would have been very rare, given that ships were not normally captured to begin with. The few I can think of were retrofitted and pressed into regular service.
On land, the most famous such example was Operation Grief, in the battle of the bulge. However, not enough Shermans were available, so they had to mock Panthers up to look like M10s. They did use captured jeeps. Again, though, I'm not aware of the Germans ever actually shooting at the Allies while in these pieces of equipment. Anything I've read has been along the lines of "Americans figured it out and shot them or captured them". It is to be noted that I have seen reference to US forces using captured German equipment around Aachen for similar infiltration purposes (and that that's where the Germans got the idea from, it's a passing reference in "snow and steel" by Perer Caddick-Adams), but have not been able to confirm it.
A pretty common tactic in fluid warfare was to place an enemy vehicle at the front of a column to help surprise an enemy, especially in a situation such as trying to take a bridge or fortified village. I have read a few references to this- one by Heinrich Eberbach of Panzergruppe Guderian- in the opening phases of the invasion of Russia, when Wehrmacht units would close up on the rear of retreating Soviet forces and try to trick their way into, or onto, defensive positions. The idea was to gain a few hundred extra meters and minutes, rather than overrun a position unnoticed.
I have read after action reports by Allied bomber crewmen, claiming that attacking formations would be 'shadowed' by captured aircraft, but given aircraft identification was pretty grossly unreliable in action, this is far from definitive. In fact, given the difficulties of piloting a 'foreign' aircraft and the limited advantage gained, this may never have happened. The real value of an enemy plane was to allow side-by-side testing to determine combat tactics, and a plane would only last so long before being crashed or needing major mechanical work.
The vehicles issued in Allied markings for the Ardennes Offensive (Battle of the Bulge) were intended to secure key Allied points in the attack, but in the event were deployed and used alongside ordinary panzer units. These included 'disguised' Panthers rigged with sheet metal to resemble, in silhouette, the M10, as well as StuG assault guns which were simply painted green with white stars.
There is no shortage of front line accounts of tired and weary soldiers allowing armoured or motorised columns to drive right up to or past them, without noticing they were enemy, even when no subterfuge was intended. War is confusing and on the front lines, soldiers were chronically sleep deprived.
The risk of being destroyed by one's own forces was bad enough when using issued equipment, in situations where enemy equipment was issued ID markings were often grossly oversized, examples including the T-34s issued to the Totenkopf division in 1942.
Fighting In Hell: the German Ordeal on the Eastern Front Peter Tsouras (ed)
Operation Bluecoat Ian Dalgleish
As a point of clarification, what evidence exists for the claim that "captured [..] airplanes" were "very commonly" used by opposing forces? I am aware of the use of captured munitions and small arms in both sides, but does this also apply to aircraft?
