I’d say it was the government of the time. Churchill’s cold memo repeated below shows how willing he was to betray what he had supported for years.
Quote:
“It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land… The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests than that of the enemy. The Foreign Secretary has spoken to me on this subject, and I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives such as oil and communications behind the immediate battle-zone, rather than on mere acts of terror and wanton destruction, however impressive”
Did he not have something of a point? Also, to me, that statement appears to be questioning the conduct of the campaign rather than the conduct of the aircrews (And at the end of the day he was supposed to be in charge of it all) I don’t think that this matter is or ever was a black and white issue.
…. and ze French types again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-pan
…. and ze French types again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-pan
A quick google found this:
http://www.feldgrau.com/alphabet.html
A quick google found this:
http://www.feldgrau.com/alphabet.html
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.
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.
My favourite book in this genre is ‘Night Fighter’ by Jimmy Rawnsley and Robert Wright, but harking back to the OP, I have no real idea of how accurate it is; I hope it was something close to the facts.
At least it is probably streets ahead of “Fly For Your Life!” in that respect.
I never realised that book was so bad … Is there a decent biography of Tuck available?
GoOnly thing is that the crew would have exceeded 10 or 11, since the 100 Group aircraft carried German-speaking operators for misleading enemy nightfighters and their ground-support buddies.
True but they carried less gunners that the USAAF; so maybe the numbers are about right? Am with you on the geographical bit though.
A B17 at night? I wonder if it could have been an RAF (100 group) one?
Congratulations on identifying this aircraft – and thanks for all the great work that you and your team do.
Can’t help you with the Lightning question (would BAC not have been more likely to ‘entertain’ the customers in the UK?) Excellent book though – the involvement of the Israelis both fascinating and perhaps unexpected, quite an achievement in itself.
Well said, we shall remember them.
A perfectly reasonable stance, signed, (#461!)