Chasing a story of a Spitfire in a tree

I wonder if Geoffrey Wellum has any recollection of the incident?. As a pilot who flew with 92 Squadron right through the Battle of Britain, he may be able to clarify the events surrounding Howard Hill. It maybe worth asking the question if anybody on here knows him.

Knowing whether the incident at West Hougham was a freakish smooth touchdown or an impact is quite important to untangling what happened.

The following explains the situation regarding recoveries in Kent during the Battle. It includes a mention of how bodies were dealt with – or not. I have left off some of the more unpleasant details that occur later on in the text, but the gist is direct identification of an individual by whatever might be visible to an intelligence officer might be near impossible. If, on the other hand, the record shows recovery of Hill’s aircraft from a tree (rather than wreckage from an impact) before the date of the funeral (even though it wasn’t struck off charge until afterwards) – then it’s straightforward enough, and just an exaggeration of timescale (which still seems an odd thing for Bartley to do, Tuck’s version notwithstanding).

From ‘Missing Believed Killed’ by Stuart Haddaway:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]257270[/ATTACH]

Andy, what do you have on the recovery? The bit about it not being a civilian crew indicates there is some record that you have, outside of the casualty pack?

Britain At War Magazine has covered the Deborah story with two articles so far including the move to the Cambrai Tank 1917 Museum, her purpose-built new home.

Those who watched the Guy Martin tank programme would have been interested to see that it is in fact possible for a replica tank to trundle up a road without squishing passers-by.

There will be more coverage when the public can get access to the Museum, probably March or April 18.

It’s well worth the trip. Poignant and emotional.

Moggy

I hope you had a good look at Deborah, Andy!

My grandfather might well have seen her in the distance – he was following the “G”s across the fields at Ribecourt.

Adrian

Here we go. Memoir of Reg Miles, 34 MU, October 1940:

I was posted to 34 Maintenance Unit Shrewsbury in Shropshire 5-10-1940, this unit was housed in sheds on the out-skirts of Shrewsbury and was responsible for the repair on site of crashed aircraft and the recovery of crashed aircraft that could not be flown away, this included both British, German, Italian, and later on American. The Flight Sergeant in charge of the crew of about six airmen was about sixty, was an optician in civvy street, had been a driver in the 1914-18 war so had no knowledge of aircraft, the rest of the gang were ex-garage workers only about one had any experience with spanners so it was finding out the hard way how ‘planes came to bits! We also had a driver for our Chevy truck and could call on “Queen Mary” low loaders and Coles cranes to lift things, but many times we were unable to get cranes or trucks to the site and it was sheer legs and muscle that were used.

It does seem there was a mix of civilian and RAF crews/gangs doing the recovery jobs on behalf of MU’s. Just no mixed crews, as I had for some reason imagined?

Excellent, thanks Andy.

One thing, it must have been a regional variation as 29 Gang of 67MU Taunton definitely had an RAF supplied vehicle in 1940 – I have the diary of Jim Wilson, the (civilian) gang leader, and he seems very proud of this vehicle!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]257232[/ATTACH]

As I understand it the Crossley 3-tonner was essentially produced for the RAF? The two attached RAF personnel I may have imagined – that might have been attached to the depot, not the associated gang. I am still trying to find my references.

Of course it was pure speculation to connect Eyles and Hill. It was an attempt to reconcile two conflicting accounts. More about the nature of the incident at West Hougham would help – are you suggesting, from the above, that the aircraft ended up in a tree there, rather than impacted the field?

I’ve been a bit busy and unable to properly get into this story.

However, the first note of caution should be not to attach too much reliance on the veracity of some of the accounts in ‘Fly For Your Life’.

I think this story is also given some coverage in Graham Wallace’s history of RAF Biggin Hill.

Tony Bartley may well have followed the story trotted out by Tuck, but I don’t know.

Hill’s Spitfire does not seem to have been recovered by a civilian gang. Also, civilian gangs were just that. Civilian. They had no RAF vehicles, equipment or personnel.

Connecting Hill to Eyles seems to be pure speculation, from what I can see.

I would only say that the story of Hill’s Spitfire, found with him in the cockpit ages later, may have some element of truth. But it may not be exactly as the legend would have us believe.

The release of the files at Kew from the MOD (not directly from AHB) will possibly provide some answers and clues, and I think the files in question will be released soon. They are certainly at Kew and have been released from the MOD facility.

The sorting of the casualty packs by staff and volunteers is going well – including help from at least one member of this forum!

He is already aware, but having spent the weekend on a press trip to Cambrai 100 may have more pressing matters than this.

Moggy

Can someone prod Saunders with a stick?

Yes, that is true – but do not underestimate how hard it can be to produce a tag from burned human remains. This is not a job for the recovery crew. If available and removable then a tag might be passed to the IO, but if not it would only be made available by the mortuary. Bear in mind that at the height of the battle it could take a week for remains to be extracted from a crash site, an operation that required the MU crew and someone to receive the remains.

Then there is the fact that the standard issue chord was cotton. This burned, so the tag of a casualty that had suffered burning might not be attached to the neck, even if the neck remains intact. This is the gruesome stuff that needs to be considered, unfortunately.

So essentially an ID disc was just one way of establishing identity, and often ID was already established by the logical process above well before tags were found, if they ever were.

As I explained above, a recovery crew’s job was to clear up a site, and were not the first on the scene (sometimes getting there several days later) nor were they responsible for checking ID’s. They MIGHT be instructed to look for dog tags but I have never heard of this happening. I have a copy of standard instructions to recovery MU gangs issued in 1940 and there is nothing about aircrew ID in the prescribed procedures.

Still, you make a very good point in that before burial at least one would imagine tags would have been thoroughly looked for among the remains. I guess the swapped ID idea is less likely now as it would rely on the tag not being present or at least visible on the East Hougham casualty.

Folks,

Just a quick query, as I seem to be missing something, but surely the identity of the unfortunate pilot could have been established by his ID discs/’dog tags’.

Despite his catastrophic head injury, they should still have been in position – assuming he had been wearing them. Bearing in mind that he was in combat, I can see no good reason for not wearing them.

Would the recovery crew have been so lax as not to check? I seriously doubt it.

I am reminded of the case of Machinist Mate (Gunner) 2nd Class Loyce Deen of VT-8, who was buried at sea in his TBM, after receiving a similar injury in combat. Despite the squadron knowing who was in the crew, and the pilot being able being able to identify who his gunner was, they still fingerprinted Loyce Deen before burying him at sea.

Just my viewpoint…

Yes, recovery of the aircraft was by civilian crews, each with an RAF-supplied lorry with one or two RAF officers at least nominally attached. They were employed by the RAF and attached to an MU. They would not be first on the scene and not involved in identifying either aircraft or pilot, instead it would be an RAF intelligence officer summoned by a report from police, observer corps or whatever. By the time the recovery crew got there usually (but not always) these identities would be known to the relevant authority within the RAF and the two joint bosses of the responsible MU, one a senior RAF officer and the other a civilian. They would not be known to the civilian crew, of course.

One can safely assume that a list of squadron codes and deployments would only officially be held by the intelligence officer summoned to the scene. That would enable a phone call to the relevant squadron IO (if it wasn’t themselves) to establish who the deceased was, often only by comparison with ORB and individual reports. One can see how a mix-up of two pilots, both missing at the time of the IO’s phone call and from the same action, might very easily happen, especially when one was seen heading inland and one wasn’t. The call to the right squadron that took Hill off the ‘missing’ list seems to have been delayed by several days, from Paul M’s evidence. This would suggest no identifying features, ie squadron codes either obliterated or not applied to the brand-new aircraft.

Weren’t the recovery parties civilian contractors? I seem to recall that from that nice Mr Saunders’ books.

The bodies were certainly recovered by civilian undertakers as I interviewed someone some years ago who remembered his father going out to retrieve bodies around RAF Debden.

So there’s another layer to add to the list of places where confusion could have occured.

Adrian

ETA – and isn’t there the supposed lost Sopwith Camel found during WW2 in the Scottish highlands? As far as I am aware that was complete spheroids, so a little exagerration might be all it took to start a story.

The two pilots are the two who make reference to Hills demise in their books. Robert Stanford Tuck and Anthony Bartley.

To be fair, anyone who wasn’t on the recovery party for the aircraft or who became responsible for the body or bodies wasn’t directly involved, and was therefore retelling a story. Being on the same squadron at the same time or not does not actually change this, while at the same time being a former squadron mate would, you would think, encourage sufficient enquiry to get the story right. But it is all conjecture, of course.

.. why would two independent pilots make up a distressing tale in the first place?

Who are these two pilots? We seem to have established that RST could only be retelling a story he’d been told and was in no way directly involved.

Moggy

On October 12th 1940 Tuck visited his old friends on 92 Squadron and actually claimed a Bf109E of 2/LG2 with a Black < marking whilst flying one of their Spitfires. It is very probable that he learned of the death of Hill then, and was told that Hill had been found lodged in trees just before his arrival, all conjecture of course, i was`nt there. I have to agree with Beermat and say that we need to be open minded about who was buried in what grave. Mistakes can be made , even more so in times of stress and worry. The Spitfire that came down behind the Black Swan pub must have gone in with such ferocity that identification of it or it`s unfortunate occupant may have been impossible. There is a precedent that can be evidenced to this and that is the case of Dennis Parnall of 249 Squadron. His remains were only identified with the aid of the serial numbers on the Hurricanes guns that he had been flying when he was shot down and killed. There is also the curious case of Hubert Adair of 213 Squadron. He was KIA on November 6th 1940 and was presumed to have crashed into the English channel. In October 1979 his Hurricane crash site was excavated at Pigeon House Farm in Hampshire, the Hurricane identified, but curiously the pilots remains were never accepted as Adairs before being sent to Portchester Crematorium for disposal. The point being that it could have been Sgt Eyles who crashed behind the pub and that it was mistakenly presumed to be Hill because the pilots involved in the dogfight had reported that they had seen Hill flying away after the fight had finished, (no one had seen Eyles being shot down) and that this was Hills crash . Tony Bartley was definitely still on the squadron and in his book he states that a Spitfire with Hill in it was found in tall trees. Someone then it is fair to say was definitely found in said location in my humble opinion, why would two independent pilots make up a distressing tale in the first place?, what would they gain from it?. Hopefully the truth will out with any future release of the casualty packs that Beermat mentioned.

There are stands of large trees behind the Black Swan in the 1940 aerials published on Google Earth. It is also possible that Hill’s aircraft became lodged here, though of course immediately found. The white scar in the centre is interesting too, however.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]257212[/ATTACH]

Andy S, from the previous thread it looks like we need your input.

And perhaps it is possible that Hill’s aircraft did come to rest gently in a field at West Hougham, with Hill in that awful condition, and the ‘tree’ part of the story was the exaggeration that reached Tuck? Perhaps it took longer than usual to identify the pilot simply because the aircraft had just arrived on the Squadron and carried no codes? Perhaps the touchdown was so gentle it took a return to an MU and an inspection before the aircraft was SoC? All things to be explored, or simply explained when the National Archive and MoD get their collective acts together over the casualty packs.