It’s only got four letters, so they’re able to spell it.

It’s something I’ve never found, either. The only mention, that I’ve seen, is in Amendment 10 to the 1st edition of A.P.1565A, dated April 1940, which includes an instruction to include all the details of the new retraction system; whether that pre-dated the change, or was playing catch-up, I haven’t a clue.
Just to add a note of confusion to your first enquiry, I missed mod 118 “To reposition hole in frame 8 for slow-running cut-out introduced by Alt 43,” and is dated 17-11-39, which hints at the cut-out having been introduced earlier than the date on the leaflet. Sorry about that, but the Spitfire/Seafire ledger can be a minefield.

What’s the purpose of those oblong “blocks” on the back of the Irish shirts, roughly between the shoulder-blades? Didn’t see anything similar on the French shirts, and haven’t seen any other games/teams.

The Taylor book is not a particularly even handed analysis, any more than the Irving nonsense is. Both take a highly partisan viewpoint and seek to twist the facts to suit their own agenda.

So, from your obviously comprehensive study of the raid, whose account do you recommend?

Bowyer, in “Aircraft for the Many,” lists 64, 118, 130, 234, 303, 345, 350, 402, 501, 504, 611 Squadrons, plus around 40 in U.S.A.A.F. hands.

There were two modifications numbered 375; for the Seafire it’s as “Mark 12” says, but, on the Spitfire, it’s “To provide new type of Dunlop brake relay valve A.H. 10233” and was “Class 4B” on the Mk.II & V.
On the Spitfire mod 1372 was the equivalent to 375 on the Seafire, and was for the Coffman starter on the Spitfire 22 & 24.

Churchill was a great statesman, a great orator, a great politician (combined, that makes him almost a perfect Prime Minister) he was also intelligent and ruthless, but, in my opinion, he was a terrible military strategist.
For example, since we’re on the subject, immediately after ‘defeating’ the Luftwaffe in the Battle-of-Britain what was Britain’s (Churchill’s) strategy in the air-war over Europe?

It was to leave the tactics to be decided by the senior RAF officers and the Air Ministry. The disastrous “Leaning into Europe” was Leigh-Mallory’s brainchild, not Churchill’s; one pilot told me how there was a universal sigh of relief when he was killed, because it was felt that he was getting his promotions by climbing over the backs of dead pilots. When Johnson commanded a Wing, he had to appeal to L-M’s superior to get it stopped.

Any of this sounding familiar?

Yes, look for the easy (and traditional) target, without bothering to do any research.

Of Plymouth, neither naval personnel at sea nor casualties explain it. About 1200 civilians were killed of a civvy population of 220,000. Children were evacuated of course, but even so that does not account for a near halving of the resident population.

During the mid-1950s, I went to Plymouth, during the school holidays, and was staggered by how the city was still nothing but a huge bombsite. A relative lived in nearby Saltash, and told us about what it had been like. Virtually all businesses, and huge numbers of residential properties were completely wiped out; people left because they had nowhere to live (or work); they did not “flee,” but were forced out. “There are lies, damned lies, and statistics” still holds good, and Calder and North are two prime examples of the misuse of information to suit their own nasty ends.