Billy Bishop was the Greatest (For Jasta 8)

14 November 1999, 11:31 AM

Axel,
I am in agreement with you. For once somebody sees that I AM speaking with good common sense. For example in Vietnam, after a firefight where say 25 enemy were actually killed, the body count that was turned in was around 75 to 125 (counting actual bodies and blood trails), this way the brass could show that they were being productive. This in turn kept the politicians happy and they could justify the "winning" the hearts and minds of the common Vietnamese (who could've given a sh-t anyway, all they wanted to do was farm their rice paddy) to the American public. The kaiser's PR staff could use the fact that the few planes actually admitted to were to show the home folks that Germany was strong and still winning the war, even when they couldn't keep bread in the food stores. Got to keep the home volk believing in what they are dying for.
VBR,
Jim

Billy_Bishop · 14 November 1999, 12:01 PM

The problem with any document concerning Bishop coming to light is that most of those documents associated with his VC award were lost during WWII. This is what officials at the IWM told the late Phil Markham when he went there in search information on the VC raid.

However, in addition to the information that Lt. Col. Drew provided, a Capt. George Stirrett also mentions knowledge of information received from a captured 2-seater crew. This is not however definite info as it is at least 2nd hand, and possibly even 3rd hand received. So, while taken seperately, these two reports would be doubtful, but taken together, I'd think they have some substance, even if not definitive.

But that's just my opinion.

VBR,

Al Lowe

wings · 14 November 1999, 05:48 PM

If the German records are so incomplete, why do they confirm so many of the victories of McCudden and Mannock, and so few of Bishop's? Use some common sense. The problem is not in the records.

Billy_Bishop · 14 November 1999, 09:15 PM

I know, the problem is in LACK of records.

Billy_Bishop · 14 November 1999, 09:46 PM

In another thread, replying to Lt. Dwight Rudder, Jasta 8 was heard to mistakenly say...

Quote:

The only documented eveidence I can find that he ever engaged in combat was the wounds he sustained when von Tutschek shot his ARSE down on March 31, 1917.

I find that interesting, as March 31, 1917 is the day when Bishop got his 2nd victory. This was also his 2nd WITNESSED claim as well. But I guess this is the quality of information we must come to expect from Jasta 8. Not only misinformed, but misinforming as well.

I guess that the 72+ combat reports that Bishop filed don't count as "documentary evidence" with Jasta 8, nor with any of the other the IGAF religion. What Jasta 8, and the others don't realize is they are not only accusing Bishop of lying, but they are also accusing his CO, Maj. Scott, as well as those who witnessed 24+ of his claims and signed to that effect. Of course, now they're going to deny it, but we KNOW they think the Entire RFC/RAF was a pack of liars.

As far as I know, the closest Bishop came to death (other than the daily flying patrols) was in late Summer of 1917, when his SE-5 was struck by ground fire, the engine caught fire and he crashed into a tree. Other than being rendered unconcious in the crash, Bishop was unhurt. In fact, of Bishop's entire time at the front, as an observer, and later as a pilot he was never struck by a bullet or shell fragment, althought several did come close.

VBR,

Al Lowe

15 November 1999, 08:04 AM

The way i have always understood it is that most of Mannocks and McCuddens kills were witnessed by Britsih pilots at the time, so no one questioned them. However bishop with his habit of flying alone had no such chance to have his kills witnessed, this DOES NOT mean that he did not get the kills it just makes it very difficult to PROVE.

I have said it before and i will say it again Fonck put in claims for well over a hundred aircraft, but was only credited with 75. I guess he should have taken a pictures!!!!

Thats my 10 cents worth.

Mark

15 November 1999, 08:42 AM

I'm sick of this:

"I guess that the 72+ combat reports that Bishop filed don't count as "documentary evidence" with Jasta 8, nor with any of the other the IGAF religion.

First of all, I fall into the category of this so called "IGAF religion" I am more fascinated by German aces than those of other nations but this doesn't mean I doubt the records of other aces simply because they are not German. Nor does it mean I accept the German side simply because they said it.

I get tired of being blasphemed by these generalizations simply because someone has picked on someone's hero.

I acccept Bishop's record. I believe he was a man of integrity. I also beleive that his reports were truthful. He may have got some facts wrong but if he did I think it was an honest mistake.

Bishop said he attacked an airfield, damaged a certain number of planes, so on and so on. I beleive him. He may have gotten the location wrong. He may have miscalulated the amount of damage he did. I don't know and frankly don't see this as important. I believe that he made every attempt to be truthful and accurate in his report and if he was wrong it was an honest mistake.

At the same time, I raise an eyebrow to any suspect act if there isn't solid evidence to prove it. Why? Because some times you get your facts wrong. I don't care if it is Bishop raiding the airfield,

LvR shooting down Ball, or Luke and his gunfight.

All of these events have reason to bring doubt to one's mind regardless of what is the "official version"

Anyone with half a brain knows both sides had well organized propoganda machines hard at work turning the enemy into devils and local boys into heroes.

The intitial comments made by Jasta 8 to Al were unjust but so is the comment about this "IGAF Religion" Jasta 8 does not speak for me and unless there was some secret election I haven't heard about, he doesn't represent "IGAF enthusiasts" on this list.

Billy_Bishop · 15 November 1999, 12:20 PM

Again, miscommunication has caused problems where there should be none.

The way I see the "IGAF Religious" is this. Jasta 8, and certain others apparently think that the German documents are above reproach, totally 105% complete, and should NEVER, EVER be questioned as to their veracity.

MY definition of the "IGAF Religious" has nothing to do with those who admire the pilots and aircrew of the WWI German air forces. There are many pilots (aces) in those forces that I admire!!

Ok?

Ok!!

VBR,

Al Lowe

wings · 15 November 1999, 07:43 PM

German records don't have to be 100% accurate to show a pattern of honesty in McCudden's victories and a pattern of dishonesty in Bishop's. Same German records, different patterns. Obvious conclusion.

Reinout · 15 November 1999, 11:39 PM

I agree totally with Tobias here. Since a few months, there has been a tendency to denounce any person who happens to interest themselves in the IGAF as "sycophants" and "IGAF religious" types, thereby automatically dissolving any creditworthyness beforehand.

I disagree with both Jasta's whose methods and names discredit not only themselves, but others (bystanders) as well. As has been amply demonstrated here, yet another thread has almost gone down the drain because of this surmised IGAF occultism and the prejudices stemming from that attitude.

Do you really think it helps discussion when a person is labelled "IGAF occultist" because he is more interested in the Germans? What if you were called a "Luke sycophant" or a "Bishop occultist"? Would that help make the Forum better? We could do that, but then every discussion will end in a stalemate with all factions calling each other names and no longer accepting any info from the other as the source is naturally "tainted" by a person's inability to see "the right way".

Give me a break.

Reinout