Bader. Repeat. Tonight. 7.10pm. Channel 4.

…another TV Doco?

‘The recovery of Buck Casson’s Gun Camera’.

Merk

The only way that could happen is if the aircraft had crashed in such a manner that the wing containing the camera had become embedded in the ground and not recovered, which is much less likely likely than for the fuselage.

Often I’ve thought that evaluating gun camera footage must have been the most disheartening of tasks; recognising what we know now to be the countless incidences of friendly fire, and knowing that you’d never be allowed to tell anyone what you’d seen.
Strange how we don’t see those people being interviewed in these “didn’t we do well in the war” documentaries…

Hi Owen!

I think I can get a DVD organised for you. I think I have your mailing address somewhere but pm me….I have emptied some of my fan mail.;)

Hi Tangmere,

Is there any plan for the documentary to be on DVD? Unfortunately Channel 4 reception is a bit scratchy here in the Antipodes.:)

(Also, tried to send a PM, but apparently your letterbox is oveflowing>)

Cheers

Owen

It is probably the case that the wreck of Bader’s Spitfire may well have been of curiosity value to his captors, but there is no evidence that the Germans were any more interested in it from a technical point of view than they were in other Spitfires brought down.

what about the “DB” markings?

If visible at all, or in fact knowing they had captured him, would they have made it special interest?

I’ve seen a picture of Stanford-Tucks aircraft in a row of three or four wrecked spits….

Not sure that I fully understand what you are saying here….but it may just be because its too early in the morning.

As to Bader’s aeroplane being of “special interest” to the Germans because of its “unusual armament configuration”, well, a fit of eight .303 Brownings to a Spitfire during this period was not really unusual. True, 20mm cannon armament was more the norm by this date but Brownings were certainly not in any special interest category to the German investigators.

I thought that the comparative rarity of a .303 equipped machine might have made it of interest since it could have been in use as a prototype.
What I’m saying is that if the aircraft was ‘pulled out’ of the ground, then it must have been taken away, meaning that there’s nothing left to find so there’s no point in searching.
Do we know the eventual fate of crashed aircraft recovered by the Germans?

Not sure that I fully understand what you are saying here….but it may just be because its too early in the morning.

As to Bader’s aeroplane being of “special interest” to the Germans because of its “unusual armament configuration”, well, a fit of eight .303 Brownings to a Spitfire during this period was not really unusual. True, 20mm cannon armament was more the norm by this date but Brownings were certainly not in any special interest category to the German investigators.

ALL the indications were that this was Donald Bostock’s Spitfire (we’d have been surprised if it had turned out not to have been!) but it was recovered to “eliminate” the site as Bader’s. As it turned out, it was a nice story to weave into the programme. Remember: any TV documenary like this is, of necessity cut and edited. The viewer does not get the whole picture and, in this case, the whole picture was that we pretty much knew it was going to be Bostock’s machine from the outset.

Not least I suspect because with reference to the most likely crash site, one of the French witnesses clearly states “they just pulled it out”. This could not have gone un-noticed by the investigators/program makers. While it suggests a compelling explanation for why Bader’s machine has never been found, it just didn’t fit the story.
I suggest that the unusual configuration of Bader’s machine (immediately noticeable from its armament) would have made it of especial interest to German evaluators.

Before considering that I think I may need a long long rest at the Hotel Ciconia😉

Yes.

…another TV Doco?

‘The recovery of Buck Casson’s Gun Camera’.

Mark

Yes.

Is the crash site of Buck Cassons aircraft known?

..enough to know that it was Mk XVI Spitfires that were used in the film. 🙂

Mark

Sorry, I got the V and the I the wrong way round, I had my glasses on upside down.
Actually, my missus really enjoyed the programme, she’s not a keen type but having to put up with me, knows a little bit. She was quite astonished, and so was I, when obscure bits were brought out of the ground and quickly identified. I did point out that Mr Arnold had rather more than complete bits in his garage, which raised the question, ‘Where does he live then’, meaning, I hope it’s not on our street, I couldn’t cope with that.

, ….what does he know about Spitfires, after all, it was shown in ‘Reach for the Sky’, Bader was flying a MkXIV at the time.

..enough to know that it was Mk XVI Spitfires that were used in the film. 🙂

Mark

Blimey….Mark 12 miserable? By comparison to some of the others on that jaunt he was a veritable radiating beacon of joy and happiness.:)

Less of the miserable I saw him smile once, or was that wind after the prunes for breakfast ?

It was the prunes.

I think you need to either watch the film or read the subsequent book!

How do we know so precisely where the combat happened and where he was hit/collided?

Quick question for Tangmere.
We watched it again and I reckon that our formerly erratic digi reception must have been playing up first time round because we couldn’t remember the last bit.
Our impressions were that the French locals and farmers in particular seem very keen to help, all those French bashers out there, and I know a lot, please note.
What are the French regulations with regard to human remains. When the MkIX was discovered, you couldn’t have known that the pilot wasn’t still in there. Obviously the programme was edited to show the joy of discovery, nothing wrong with that, but I presume things were checked out before hand in order to make sure nothing was in there. Given the state of preservation of the cockpit area, it could have been pretty nasty I presume.
What made us smile was, what if you had found the flying helmet with ‘DB’ printed on it straight away, now that would have been interesting, what a reaction that would have been, until of course that miserable sod Arnold, cough, cough, told you it was a MkIX, what did you take him over there for, what does he know about Spitfires, after all, it was shown in ‘Reach for the Sky’, Bader was flying a MkXIV at the time.

Peter.

Your points, one by one.

Yes, the French fell over themselves to help. They always do, and with VERY few exceptions. Frankly, their attitude, keenness,enthusiasm, hospitality and eagerness to help is something you rarely get in the UK. Again, there are exceptions but the French win – hands down. I have just come back from a trip there today on another project. Once again, their help and enthusiasm was boundless.

The French, I believe, take a much more relaxed, pragmatic and, frankly, human view of the human remains issue. To them, it really is not an issue or a problem. Their belief is that if there is a missing man then he should be found.

As to the Mk IX, you suggest that we didn’t know whether there was anyone on board or not. That is not the case. ALL the indications were that this was Donald Bostock’s Spitfire (we’d have been surprised if it had turned out not to have been!) but it was recovered to “eliminate” the site as Bader’s. As it turned out, it was a nice story to weave into the programme. Remember: any TV documenary like this is, of necessity cut and edited. The viewer does not get the whole picture and, in this case, the whole picture was that we pretty much knew it was going to be Bostock’s machine from the outset.

The other aircraft recovered was flown by Flt Sgt Jack Misseldine, who also baled out and evaded, but his details were not included in the final cut.

miserable sod Arnold

Less of the miserable I saw him smile once, or was that wind after the prunes for breakfast ?