Just because the guns are grouped together at point of origin ,doesn’t mean that the groupings would be any tighter at point of impact; in fact guns weren’t harmonised to a pin point early in the battle, it was only the more proficient that “dared” alter the “accepted” settings ,and had their guns harmonised at much shorter range (and to pin point). I have never heard it said that the Spitfire would vibrate to the point of losing the target, as for the thinner wing , it is precisely that which put the Spit ahead of the Hurri as the thicker wing reduced its top speed . Quoting from figures published by Alcorn ;19 spitfire sqn’s shot down 282 fighters,and 247 bombers with a total per sqn of 27.8 . 30 Hurricane sqn’s are credited with 222 fighters and 434 bombers a total per sqn of 21.9 . Al Deere (who was there) said in his opinion that the Hurricane was able to shoot down more bombers (than it other wise would have) because of the protection afforded by the Spitfire in tackling the fighters (as well as the bombers). The figures show that the Spitfire did indeed shoot down more fighters than the Hurricane and by considerably less A/c. Al Deere goes on to say that in his opinion the Hurricane could not have won the battle alone, but the Spitfire (in sufficient numbers) could have.

This programme has certainly got people talking!I’m sure after it has screened there will be even more comments, I think people should watch the programme and also read ‘Baders Tangmere Spitfires’ Dilip Sarkar 1996 & ‘Spitfire Courage & Sacrifice’ Dilip Sarkar 2006 and make up their own minds! I’m sure Dilip will post his veiws on his website, http://www.DilipSarkarMBE.co.uk, at some stage, as we have read the veiws of Andy Saunders on this forum, this will give people a balanced veiw from both parties, and from which the public can then come to their own conclutions.

Having seen seen the programme, and on a separate note, i will say it is interesting to hear Mr Saunders saying about past digs , and i quote ” It wasn’t so much a search for bits of metal, or bits of aircraft, it was the human interest and the story of the pilots and eyewitnesses that interested me”. For someone not interested in bits of metal he seems to have a lucrative career selling these ‘bits’ on Ebay, although i must point out he is not the only so called ‘ historian’ doing this, i wonder what these pilots, some of whomb were killed in the crashes would make of this? And i wonder if any of the proceeds are given to a relavent charity.

I see nothing in this post that is liabel, it is a point of view it is not defamatory towards Andy Saunders,it askes the question “what would these pilots make of this?” undoubtably some wouldn’t care a hoot; how many do you see on programes getting into A/C and saying “I haven’t been in one of these for sixty years” if they were that bothered about Spitfires and the like, they’ve left it a few years, to get reaquainted . It also asks whether any procedes of the various sales are given to charity,and Andy Saunders had the opportunity of saying which charities he does support. It also introduces the idea that the forth coming programe might not be exactly what happened , merely supposition, based on information to hand ,and interepretation of information newly discovered; we can never know who shot the “red Barron”, much of the supposition in that programe assumes he was facing forward in the cockpit ,and that he hadn’t bent down to pick up his box brownie that had just fallen on the floor! It is perfectly possible that Baders plane was hit by friendly fire, it might even be full of spent .303 rounds ,but that doesn’t mean that is what brought him down.

There was an article in “another magazine” some years ago which argued very much the same point so the argument is not new. That article pointed out how what happened in the Far East and the Mediterranean was not relevant to 1940 since
(1) as pointed out here, the Germans did not have in 1940 bombs which would penetrate battleship decks
(2) in 1940, the Germans did not have any decent torpedo planes, the only ones being floatplanes. Someone will no doubt correct me if I am wrong, but weren’t PoW and Repulse sunk prinicpally by torpedoes rather than bombs?

Paul

So what sank all of those ships at Dunkirk? not mines alone ;in any case it is not necessary to penetrate the deck armour of a ship to render it incapable ,look at the Bismark .it is true that the Germans feared the British navy but that was one area ,possibly where the Gemans went down the road of conventional wisdom ,rather than developing new strategies like Blitzkrieg ; (unless you count the use of U boats in wolf packs , in any event that only reinforces the view that the German war machine had at it’s disposal ways and means to deal with “the Royal navy”).The one thing to come out of ww2 was that the battleship was history, before its time.

You only have to look at the number of ships sunk at Dunkirk to see what happens when you don’t have air superiority.

I’m with Damien on that (did I really say that?); there is room for everyone under the preservation umberella , the real enemy is bureaucracy, and it’s coming to a town near you.

Even with those odds, someone somewhere does win.

Although not every week ,hence the rollover thing .Maybe the winners should have their names and address’s published, and they can have another begging letter (or 50) to put through their new paper shredder; point is that we don’t need to donate £500- each, what is needed, is for the net to be cast further, there is almost certainly people out there that don’t even know about VTTS (in fact I spoke to one this morning , he saw the Vulcan flying ,maybe 15 years ago but was unaware of the project ,even after the BBC1 spot this morning).

You could always keep livestock; just 1 animal will trigger an avalanche of paperwork, and ministerial visits that will bury you (probably quite literally!!)