September 21, 2012 at 12:33 pm
From todays Telegrapgh . ..
By: Arabella-Cox - 25th September 2012 at 08:24
I don’t recall that flight being in his log book, but I will check.
He did, however, fly comparison flights against the Me 109-E in early 1940 although FFYL states he also flew the 109 on that occasion. His Log Book and other sources say not.
PS – been scrabbling around to find my copy of Tuck’s Log Book – it must be in the loft. From memory the flight in question was with AFDU and, I think, on 8 June 1940.
By: Arabella-Cox - 25th September 2012 at 08:24
I don’t recall that flight being in his log book, but I will check.
He did, however, fly comparison flights against the Me 109-E in early 1940 although FFYL states he also flew the 109 on that occasion. His Log Book and other sources say not.
PS – been scrabbling around to find my copy of Tuck’s Log Book – it must be in the loft. From memory the flight in question was with AFDU and, I think, on 8 June 1940.
By: Snoopy7422 - 25th September 2012 at 03:31
Andy;- In the case I’m referring to, the pilot, in his capacity as Test Pilot, is well known to have tested a whole raft of a/c, many of which are conspicuous by their complete absence from his logs….
I can’t claim to have any specialised knowledge of RST, however, out of interest – there is an oft used clip of a Spit on the tail of an Me110 filmed I think from the deck.
See it here at 0:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4NGf2l5PXE
It was used in the war (For example in ‘Ferry Pilot’) and many times since. I read – somewhere – many years ago, that this was staged by the Enemy a/c Flight, and that RST was the pilot of the Spitfire. Any ideas if that is true, and, if so, was it in his Pilots Logbook…? Did he also fly some of the fighter-comparison tests that they flew too, with the ‘109, Spit et al….?
By: Snoopy7422 - 25th September 2012 at 03:31
Andy;- In the case I’m referring to, the pilot, in his capacity as Test Pilot, is well known to have tested a whole raft of a/c, many of which are conspicuous by their complete absence from his logs….
I can’t claim to have any specialised knowledge of RST, however, out of interest – there is an oft used clip of a Spit on the tail of an Me110 filmed I think from the deck.
See it here at 0:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4NGf2l5PXE
It was used in the war (For example in ‘Ferry Pilot’) and many times since. I read – somewhere – many years ago, that this was staged by the Enemy a/c Flight, and that RST was the pilot of the Spitfire. Any ideas if that is true, and, if so, was it in his Pilots Logbook…? Did he also fly some of the fighter-comparison tests that they flew too, with the ‘109, Spit et al….?
By: D1566 - 25th September 2012 at 01:31
Good question Steve, I’ve always wondered about this one too. How does a Sqn Ldr get to influence RAF senior execs? Sheer balls? If my sqn boss phoned up OC 22 Gp to give his opinion on something, out of the normal chain of command, the results would be ‘interesting’. Perhaps DB had hallowed status already during the B of B.
It may well have been something to do with having this chap:
Peter Drummond Macdonald As the 242 squadron adjutant.
Friends in high places etc.
By: D1566 - 25th September 2012 at 01:31
Good question Steve, I’ve always wondered about this one too. How does a Sqn Ldr get to influence RAF senior execs? Sheer balls? If my sqn boss phoned up OC 22 Gp to give his opinion on something, out of the normal chain of command, the results would be ‘interesting’. Perhaps DB had hallowed status already during the B of B.
It may well have been something to do with having this chap:
Peter Drummond Macdonald As the 242 squadron adjutant.
Friends in high places etc.
By: paul178 - 25th September 2012 at 00:09
So who is it this week that we can pull to pieces my TV guide does not tell me?
My Late Father(who met SDB) sat and watched Reach for the Sky with me and at the end said “Kenneth Moore did not portray that effing p**ck very well.”
As a child I knew when the subject was closed so I knew no more than that or how,when and where he met him. I surmise it was after the war as my Father had just joined the RAF shortly before Bader was shot down.
By: paul178 - 25th September 2012 at 00:09
So who is it this week that we can pull to pieces my TV guide does not tell me?
My Late Father(who met SDB) sat and watched Reach for the Sky with me and at the end said “Kenneth Moore did not portray that effing p**ck very well.”
As a child I knew when the subject was closed so I knew no more than that or how,when and where he met him. I surmise it was after the war as my Father had just joined the RAF shortly before Bader was shot down.
By: TonyT - 24th September 2012 at 23:20
I have met and spoken to SDB a couple of times in the early 80,s and yes he was who he was and at the end of the day its too easy today to critise someones past when they cant defend themselves.
So true, but when I met him whilst still in the RAF he came across as a grade A knob… He seemed to think he still wielded power over serving members and was an absolute ****… Indeed he tried to get someone charged, war hero or not, the man was a total pratt, sorry if it sounds like one is spoiling the rosy image he exuded, but one is simply saying how he came across.
By: TonyT - 24th September 2012 at 23:20
I have met and spoken to SDB a couple of times in the early 80,s and yes he was who he was and at the end of the day its too easy today to critise someones past when they cant defend themselves.
So true, but when I met him whilst still in the RAF he came across as a grade A knob… He seemed to think he still wielded power over serving members and was an absolute ****… Indeed he tried to get someone charged, war hero or not, the man was a total pratt, sorry if it sounds like one is spoiling the rosy image he exuded, but one is simply saying how he came across.
By: trumper - 24th September 2012 at 21:27
Hopefully he was the right person at the right time for the small period of time required but when put back into a “normal” existence he maybe was a bit of a square peg in a round hole.
By: Rocketeer - 24th September 2012 at 20:48
As i said before it takes all sorts to win a war. He still is an inspiration and the balance goes to the good. One positive story, I wrote to him just before he died and got a lovely dedication back. That said, I am all for celebrating all the Few, especially those that did not get the limelight.
By: Arabella-Cox - 24th September 2012 at 19:45
I take your point entirely, Snoopy. It surely happens. It seems likely it happened, for example, with a recently sold Czech fighter pilot’s log book where there is an indication he flew as an ‘accredited’ Battle of Britain pilot – although he didn’t it seems.
However, in the case(s) mentioned there is other evidence besides the pilot’s log book that confirms it didn’t happen – although I accept it is entirely possible that two other official sources, as well as a specific log book, ‘forgot’ to make the appropriate record or entry.
As with all of these things, one has to look at all available evidence. Sometimes, the picture is clear and, for instance, might well be corroborated by evidence from, say, the Luftwaffe and RAF sides. Other times, the situation is not black and white, or else is a little ‘grey’. Lets just say that there is a distinct shade of grey, for example, with regard to the 109 test flight in question – though I’d genuinely like to be proved wrong and to find or see the evidence.
By: Snoopy7422 - 24th September 2012 at 19:39
Just For The Record.
One specific point that Andy has brought up is records/logs etc. I should point out that falsifying records is one thing, but the absence of entries and detail mean next to nothing.
I have a/c logbooks from before the war right up to the present date that fail to record flights. Similarly, pilot would often, and still do, either combine, abreviate or omit flights. I’ve also seen entries made over seventy years after the flight…. Not fraudulently, just a little delay…!
Sometimes folks just genuinly forget, or they lose notes, amongst many other reasons….. I have a 1930’s – ’50’s pilots logbook that fails to record many flights and aircraft types. That doesn’t mean that he didn’t fly them, – he either didn’t think it was important enough or was just to busy. Sometimes pilots may also make duplicate entries.
It still happens too – what are a few hours to a pilot with tens of thousands of hours..? Small beer. So no, the absence of entries shouldn’t be taken that pilot ‘X’ lied. :rolleyes:
By: zouzy86 - 24th September 2012 at 19:23
I have met and spoken to SDB a couple of times in the early 80,s and yes he was who he was and at the end of the day its too easy today to critise someones past when they cant defend themselves;)
Forgot to add NO I DID NOT MEET HIM IN LIVERPOOL:D
By: Arabella-Cox - 24th September 2012 at 19:22
Yup….but the BBC paid me to!!
It was all in the narrative.
😉
By: Moggy C - 24th September 2012 at 19:00
Overclaiming was massive, on both sides. The Battle of Britain was no exception to this
Fess up.
You’ve been reading Dr North, haven’t you?
Moggy
By: Stepwilk - 24th September 2012 at 18:55
A bit off-topic certainly, but it’s interesting that during their brief air war with the Luftwaffe in the spring of 1940, the Armee de l’Aire awarded a shoot-down to every pilot who participated in the downing of a German airplane, not just to the one who actually fired the fatal shots.
The French ended up with a substantial number of aces as a result, and trying to figure out the number of German airplanes shot down by counting the number of claimed shooters was a fool’s game.
By: Arabella-Cox - 24th September 2012 at 17:58
Dave
Overclaiming was massive, on both sides. The Battle of Britain was no exception to this, but I have recently being doing a lot of work on 1941 operations over northern France where the scale of overclaiming (RAF and Luftwaffe) really is truly staggering.
It is just one of those features of air fighting that is all part of the picture. Just the way things were, and I doubt much of it was down to any blatant ‘dishonesty’, as such. More about confusion, genuine belief that a claim was definite, claiming something somebody else had claimed already and general over exuberance. Plus a need for the respective air forces to feed positive claim statistics into the press and propaganda system; hence, little real enthusiasm by the authorities to make more realistic assesments.
By: Seafuryfan - 24th September 2012 at 12:27
My problem has always been his apparent involvement in the Dowding/Park affair after the battle. I’ve never understood how a relatively junior officer was allowed to be involved in the political wrangling that occurred during and after the Battle of Britain. Unless that is, is that the books I’ve read on that subject are wrong too! :diablo: Steve
Good question Steve, I’ve always wondered about this one too. How does a Sqn Ldr get to influence RAF senior execs? Sheer balls? If my sqn boss phoned up OC 22 Gp to give his opinion on something, out of the normal chain of command, the results would be ‘interesting’. Perhaps DB had hallowed status already during the B of B.