As usual ,”a picture is worth a thousand words”, sadly we have at least a thousand words if not ten thousand; but tell the truth, when you posted that pic, were you not tempted to ” photo shop” Julie Andrews into the field? “the thread is alive with the sound of bullsh*t”

Is this the bit where I say “actually old chap I’m 45”, and you say “oh really ,judging by the intellectual maturity of your post, I would have said you were still at school” ?

I think the only illumination this document provides, is how DB’s legs were attached, and what they were made of; he wrote a letter to his wife asking to be repatriated, much like I asked my mum not to send me to school after my very first visit, unfortunately my school days were as long as they were unproductive ,I suspect Bader’s internment was much the same.

Hah….thats the last time we invite you along as the Spitfire guru for the TV cameras, then. Imagine the scene:

Director “Can you tell us what this interesting piece from Douglas Bader’s Spitfire is, Mark?”
Mark 12 “Well….um…see…its a wind up clockwork thingy in a wooden boxey kinda thing with a label on the lid thats says “Replace Lid Immediately After Winding” “
Director “What does it do exactly?”
Mark 12 “Well…it …well…its a sort of a wind up thing”
Director “Oh, I see. Wind up. Is that as in a wind-up Spitfire then?”
Mark 12 “Oh no, much more technical than that. It allowed Dogsdody to tell if any of his pilots had the wind-up” (GROAN!)
As you can tell…I dont have much else to occupy me at the moment! Andy
( PS Mark….see me at Shoreham and I can bore the pants off you with diagrams, AP’s and pictures of Master Contactors. Do you want 12 or 24 volt ones?!) 😀

Andy , if you are at a real loose end, can you shed any light on this piece, which I believe is from the Tangmere collection, is it in any way relevant to this thread?

Shame that the B-1 4-6-0 and train that Steve McQ drove rather enthusiastically into Liverpool Street had very little done to it to make it look period, it could have been returning from a 60’s excursion to Hunstanton, but the trains always suffer in these epics.
Anyone see that film the other week with Dirk Bogarde as an NCO POW in Germany, the name of it escapes me, but the scenes of the POW’s working in an engine shed in ‘Germany’ were obviously shot in Cricklewood sheds in the 60’s, they didn’t even bother masking out the BR signs on the locos, carriages and wagons, it was ridiculous, the bits of plywood stuck on the LMS class 5 at what I think was Marylebone, didn’t disguise much either.

“The pass word is courage” ; have you noticed all the key scenes from The great escape, were borrowed from this film (notwithstanding the factual content)

Stuart, XN923 is correct in his assessment re. my meaning in this thread. I confess absolutely to using a phrase I know people misinterpret (also ran) but I also very carefully did not use the common phrase “an also ran” as you have done. I used the phrase in its original (racing) context and meaning. A horse wins, the others “also ran” by which it means they competed.

My meaning is clear … would the outcome (of WWII) have been any different without the Spifire, which is often accorded much glorification? Is it worthy of all that glorification?

To my mind NO. But don’t get me wrong here, I think it’s a beautiful machine, a credit to its designer and an all round fantastic aircraft. But I don’t think anything swung in the balance on its presence. I think it punched above it’s weight … but that’s not the same thing either!

The argument I am inclined to listen to is Alertken’s … that the sheer versatilty and effectiveness of the Spifire and its production enabled other production to be freed up and that may well have been crucial to the outcome. It’s a very good argument and I’m swaying on that point.

But I don’t think you’re right to allege, as I think you are doing, that the Spitfire won the BoB and if that battle hadn’t been won the others wouldn’t have happened. I disagree with you on a couple of points there …
(a) I believe the BoB was won on superior tactics as has been noted a few times above, and
(b) the Russian/Eastern front would almost certainly have started anyway … without it who knows what might have happened.

I am not suggesting that the Spitfire won the BoB, it played its part, and that is well documented, but as to the rest of the war ,you have to look at the mood at the begining; the BEF, Dunkirk, an unmitigated disaster, Norway, ditto, if the BoB had gone the same way, would Churchill have kept his job?

He had many enemies, the idea of apeasment hadn’t gone away (Halifax) ;if we had settled for a negotiated peace, them the eastern front would have happened anyway, because Hitler made no secret of his desire for “living space”, but Britain would at that stage either have been neutral ,or else a Vichy style govt would have been installed, either way Germany would not have had to divert manpower to fighting Britain ,and Britain as a neutral” would not have sent armaments to Russia.

The next question you need to ask yourself, is would the US have embroiled themselves in a “European” war? there would have been no “unsinkable aircraft carrier” (Britain) from which to base their forces , no special relationship between Churchill and FDR, and the isolationists in the US , might well have won the day.

Therefore the ensuing aerial battles just wouldn’t have happened (that is what I was tring to show), it is my opinion, but also an accepted view, by some historians; yes America may have still gone to war with Japan, but on their own,(which is basically how they fought the campaign anyway).

If none of this is relevant to your thread ,I can only say that ,the use of the words “also ran” was too ambiguous ,where do you think the phrase “an also ran” comes from? it is derived from the racing speak, to mean not worthy of mention, i.e not 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

Discussions in the early part of this thread centered around the Merlin XX, I don’t recall any suggestion, from you that, it wasn’t what you wanted to discuss (at that stage), but apparently now I’m way off the mark, so I’ll leave it with you.

When I looked at this thread I didn’t realise that it was essentially a yes or no answer required, foolishly I thought that there might be a need to quantify any statement, and inevitably that would involve encompassing aspects other than those directly within the parameters set out.

To show whether something was “an also ran” it is neccesary to look at its performance against its nearest rival, (which I did) ,if indeed something was “an also ran” then it is reasonable to suggest that it’s shelf life would be a short one; to show that in this case it wasn’t, there was a need to show its longevity, beyond the time period of 1940.

In this case the only way of showing the Spitfires “also ran” status or otherwise is hypothesis ; to say whether it was a vital element or not you need to look at two scenarios ; 1 what would have happened if there were no Spitfires, and 2, what would have happened if there were only Spitfires (no Hurricanes).