#4234065 - 02/27/16 03:08 AM
Re: Jones Hatred Of Bishop
[Re: Boom]
|
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 214
Dark_Canuck
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 214
Canada
|
Yup old Billy would fly lone wolf patrols and his claims would sometimes be approved by his Chain of Command. Pretty sweet deal. He must have had his WOFF claims settings switched to Easy.
One lesser known fact about Bishop is that he finished dead last on his class at the Royal Military College in Canada. Hell of a pilot, not much of an acedemic.
Last edited by Dark_Canuck; 02/27/16 03:09 AM.
|
|
|
#4234119 - 02/27/16 07:39 AM
Re: Jones Hatred Of Bishop
[Re: Boom]
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,532
DukeIronHand
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,532
High over the Front
|
Well I am not trying to blame Bishop here. He flew, shot at planes, they spun down, he claims them. OOC claims didn't stop being good until 1918 I think. Anyway his claims were confirmed by higher authority so if there is blame I guess that's where it goes.
Sometimes the "anti-Bishop" stuff may go a little far. Like the story that during his VC mission (that folks claim didn't happen and granted independent confirmation is not there) he landed his plane somewhere, removed his Lewis, and shot his own plane up.
I read somewhere recently that some modern author, using German records, was able to confirm %-wise as many possible victims from the loss records for Bishop as any other British ace. IIRC the % of confirmations with German records was, generally speaking, in the 20's % wise for most of the big names - even Mannock.
Bottom line: I don't know what to think except Bishop was probably over optimistic like most pilots but his were always confirmed by HQ.
|
|
|
#4234177 - 02/27/16 12:40 PM
Re: Jones Hatred Of Bishop
[Re: Boom]
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,532
DukeIronHand
Hotshot
|
Hotshot
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,532
High over the Front
|
EDIT: Hasse posted the same time as I.
HS and DC: Dark Canuck - You are correct in that is what I am saying but I did not do the research and this is the claim of another person. I will see if I can find it again and post the link here. IIRC it was not meant to be a blanket statement for all as only a few of the "big guns" we're checked. And how complete the records are, after the records disaster of WW2, only an expert can say.
And again I will stress that in British claims FTL (Forced To Land) and OOC (Out Of Control) claims counted as a perfectly fine victory depending on the time period of the air war. So to our previous example if a British pilot shoots at a German plane and its pilot, realizing he is in trouble "spins away into the clouds" we now have a perfect OOC claim for the British pilot. His victory if seen by other pilots but no German plane is destroyed nor pilot killed as he flew home for a schnapps to celebrate his close call. Going strictly by memory FTL victories were good in 1916 and OOC victories were good until very late 1917/1918? Taking Albert Ball as an example (by memory) 16 of his 42/44 claims were FTL's and OOC's and this was fine and accepted.
If I was forced to guess I would say the British system was never meant to be a "serious" one just a ball park figure done for the morale of the pilots and observers who were suffering awful losses with little to show as 90% (if not more) of the action occurred over German territory. They did not have the luxury of taking a touring car or making some calls or having an aide chase down the claim confirmation for them. Or a Department made just for that. Victories for the Brits were recommended or not by the squadron CO then confirmed or not by Wing. Simple as that and not much fuss.
Last edited by DukeIronHand; 02/27/16 01:18 PM.
|
|
|
#4234370 - 02/28/16 02:02 AM
Re: Jones Hatred Of Bishop
[Re: DukeIronHand]
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,401
Smosh
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,401
Gisborne, New Zealand
|
A further thought, as it pertains to this whole thread just to muddy the waters further (I just remembered it) is in regard to German records. Apparently a plane could be burned up or smashed into a thousand pieces but if the pilot was unhurt (or just very minor injuries) the loss was not always recorded in German records. I have to say that that statement seems rather strange to me. Surely any loss of a plane would be noted. If you needed a replacement aircraft you would have had to justify it.
Rabbits, break right and climb.
|
|
|
#4234674 - 02/29/16 05:18 AM
Re: Jones Hatred Of Bishop
[Re: Boom]
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,495
Boom
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,495
Culcairn
|
Peter Kilduff has written a new book on Bishop, titled "Billy Bishop VC Lone Wolf Hunter: The RAF Ace Re-Examined". Awful title, but a very good read. Kilduff is non judgemental, simply puts out the facts as he ahs been able to determine them. Seems he has managed to account for roughly 20 of Bishop's claims, and has also found some very interesting facts concerning the airfield raid. Well worth reading. http://www.amazon.com/Billy-Bishop-Lone-...OS5C4VX4J4VERWSBut back to Jones. Bishop certainly did have the reputation of being a lone wolf, but that mostly stemmed from his activities in 60 Sqn. And not at all unusual for a good pilot in 1917. When Bishop took over 85 Sqn as commander, he was more....shall we say......disciplined in his approach to leading. He insisted in formation flying and co-operation in the air; although he wasn't the kindest (or caring) of commanders to new pilots. And yes he did swan off by himself every now and then, but woe betide anyone else who did. But Jones wouldn't have been aware of that as he never crossed paths with Bishop during the Great War. So either his dislike of Bishop grew after the war or......was he influenced by 'Grid' Caldwell, his commander in 74 Sqn? Caldwell and Bishop did serve together in 60 Sqn in 1917, so perhaps Caldwell made caustic remarks about Bishop from time to time. If so it would have had to be more than once, for any impression to be made on other people such as Jones. It's the only explanation I can think of.
"Somewhere out there is page 6!" "But Emillo you promised ....... it's postpone" ASWWIAH Member
|
|
|
|
|