The Stirling was a particularly good glider tug, becasue it didn’t stretch after towing! I’ll try to find a good piccy of the tow rope attachment later.

DS

hope he makes a speedy and full recovery asap.

kind regards, steve

And from me.

I am sure Bruce and the others will be happy to put on another visit later in the year for the two of you.

DS

Remarkable coincidence: last weekend I spent a very cold 3 hours standing ‘guard’ whilst my kids were doing something in the warm. Whenever I have to do this, I recall a play I saw yonks ago about a man on guard duty…you know the rest. I particularly remember the bit where he lays down the guard hut so he can try to get some rest! And IIRC it was a particularly pointless piece of guard duty as well.

DS

Hi Bruce

Thanks for the reminder…unfortunately I have to work in the morning, but may get a chance to pop in after midday, for a while.

DS

I’m quite sure it is not from a Stirling, but I thought the Whitley did have 3 bomb bays. However, the relic certainly looks identical to the souvenir 682al showed.

DS

DS – will be there all day – perhaps we can persuade Fluffy et al to also come down to the DH museum, and we can reciprocate later in the year!

Bruce

Yeah, show him what the contents of a *real* vintage aviation hangar is supposed to look like…. 😉

DS

If we compare the XN923 and Doc Sterlings Posts, we come up with another problem – what exactly do we mean by revisionism? I’m quite sure that the people with accademic historical training would veer towards XN923’s view but can’t help thinking that the general public would be more in tune with Doc Sterling (appologies Doc if you are an accademic).

snip

.

Sort of an academic, but happy to be a man the people understand!!

For me, revisionism is personal. When someone trys to say that my mothers Dutch family didn’t really all get reduced to ash, its just a longstanding conspiracy, I get a little unhappy.

DS

Revisionism, the Dams and Harris

In my book, Revisionism is the tendency to deny or alter the truth about what actually happened, rather than ‘reinterpreting’ the effects of what happened. History is more about looking at putting the event in question into context with what was happening at the time, rather than just reciting dates. The Dam’s raid was a success in many terms, not necessarily the destruction of the Ruhr industry that may have been the initial, primary aim.

As far as I recall the morning that the raid was headline news in England, Churchill was in the USA, drumming up support for something critical to the war effort (sorry, I cannot remember if it was the Allied landings in Italy or for D-Day). The news that we were able to deliver a technically challenging, daring raid deep in the heart of Germany was both a morale boost for the public, and a massive political boost for Churchill in his efforts to woo US politicians.

The book ‘Bomber Boys describes the decision to introduce the bombing of civilian and industrial targets in Germany as Churchill’s’. This is despite him saying during WWI, that ‘terrorism from the air would never bring a country to its knees’ (he was describing the effects of Zeppelins bombing schools in London etc.). Harris was put in charge of this plan, which he set to with great dedication, and did not flinch when Churchill started to distance himself from Harris, and even claim that the bombing campaign was Harris’ idea in the first place.

DS