Billy Bishop was the Greatest (For Jasta 8)

The reason why so many of McCuddens victories can be confirmed by german records is that they were over two-seaters. The way i read the stats is that both sides would admit losses over two-seaters more readily than over scouts. Therefore McCudden would have less problems than Bishop who i think (Al help me on this one!) has more credits for scouts.

Mark

[Michael]

Boys, I think it's time to give this one a rest.

When Reinout, who so far has shown infinite patience, starts to lose it, you KNOW things have gone too far.

Go to bed early tonight and you'll feel better in the morning.

Michael

Mark said:

The reason why so many of McCuddens victories can be confirmed by german records is that they were over two-seaters. The way i read the stats is that both sides would admit losses over two-seaters more readily than over scouts.

I don't buy this one. I'm more apt to beleive that Bishop scored later in the war when records were not as well kept, and Bishop did more solo flying which made his records harder to verify than those of McCudden.

Combine that with the fact that if a plane was repairable it probably wasn't considered a loss. what is more, if the plane was destroyed but parts could be salvaged from it that could get another plane in the air, it may have not been considered a loss either.

For instance Bishop's VC statement says

• On 2 June 1917 near Cambrai, France, Captain Bishop, patrolling independently, flew to an enemy aerodromewhere several machines were standing with their enginesrunning. One of the machines took off, but Captain Bishop fired at very close range and it crashed. He fired at and missed, the second, but his fire made the pilot swerve and hit a tree. Two more aircraft then took off - he emptied his Lewis gun into the forward fuselage of the first and it crashed. He then emptied a whole drum into the fourth machine which had come up behind him and it dived away. Captain Bishop then flew back to his station.

Now set aside any skeptism you may have about this event, pro or con and take it exactly at face value.

No where does it say the planes were totally destroyed only that they crashed. We already know that many planes crashed but flew later that day or the next day and the pilots were unhurt. Bishops says the planes got ariborne but doesn't say how far "airborne" they got. Now lets suppose the planes could be repaired and no one was actually hurt in the attack.

If you were the Jasta commander and some one had done this but none of your men were killed and you could get the machines repaired and up and running by the next day. What would you report. Perhaps something like E/A strafed our aerodrome resulting in no casualties and and minimal damage. He escaped before we could effectively engage or persue.

A mere footnote in a Jasta Duty Log vs. a VC for a British, uh Canadian, pilot. Both accounts are correct but from a different point of view. Bishop gets 3 victories but the Germans report no losses.

[Billy_Bishop]

Well, of Bishop's victims, the vast majority were single seat scouts (Fighters).

But I do tend to go with Tobias' idea also.

Again, though, I'd like to reiterate that I don't consider anyone who "admires" the WWI German air service pilots as "cultists". It those few that seem to worship the WWI German records that I tend to get mad at. The reason? From their point of view, if your records aren't corroborated by the German records, then your records are wrong, and/or you're lying.

Hell, I Like VOSS!!

Maybe instead of "IGAF Cultists" they should be referred to as "REMF"? After all, those were the guys who traditionally did the record keeping.

VBR,

Al Lowe

Tobias,
You have probably stated the most plausible conclusion as to what may have been occurring. I read about Bishop's VC and the subject of his disparagement came up. The author Peter G. Cooksley stated " Yet the situation is complicated by a Col. George Drew at the beginning of 1935 that the exploit was 'confirmed in the next few days by German pilots who had been taken prisoner'. So perhaps we will never know but I for one, would not doubt the word of this courageous man. He has the medal, and is officially recorded as a hero. That's the long and the short of it.
VBR,
Jim

[wings]

On August 16, 1917, Bishop claimed that he shot all the wings off a 2-seater. His son adds that the crew fell out in mid-air. No witnesses. No corresponding German loss. These are the same German records that confirm other British pilots' victories. Conclusion?

[Billy_Bishop]

Conclusion: The record keepers missed one.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[rammjaeger]

Mark claims or believes that double seaters got easier confirmation as kills. That is wrong, the British claims show an (unjustified) overproportional share of Albatri D-aircraft. It seems the Brits claimed more than ever were produced. After some studying of the Grub street books it is obvious that the OVERCLAIMING (and therefore acceptance) of victories against Albatros D-types was enormous. The victories over doubleseaters reported by the Brits are more - NOT less - reliable. One point more which supports McCudden and Mannock. The mostly used typ of all German aircraft was the DFW C.V - this aircraft was more often produced and used than all Albatri together but the aircraft seems to be unknown to Bishop. He is never meeting this type - or unable to cope with this doubleseater! Strange that Mannock and McCudden have at least 8,9 of this typ downed but Bishop 0.

One remark about Drew. If this man is the same Drew who was reporting with an enormous amount of mistakes about the fight of McLeod against "the red aircraft of Jasta 11" than I would rather prefer not so easy to believe his words, Jim.

Hannes

I am not saying that pilots were more likely to be believed about two-seater claims, i was saying that it was easier to pin-point where they went down so it is easier to verify the records. The numbers of claims about single seaters is also going to be out of proportion as 5 or 6 pilots could easily claim the same victim. As a lot of these planes would be lost in a dogfight where the same plane could be attacked by several different pilots, it stands to reason that if they all then see that plane crash, they will put a claim in for it.

I am not attacking McCudden, he was a fine pilot and the RFC suffered one hell of a loss when he died.

Mark

[Billy_Bishop]

Hannes, I think the point about single-seaters versus 2-seaters is that the 2-seaters were easier to verify since they tended to fly over or beyond enemy lines while single-seaters (especially German) tended to fly on their own side of the lines.

Consequently, there were probably more German 2-seat aircraft that crashed on the Allied side of the lines that there were German single seat fighters that crashed on the Allied side.

VBR,

Al Lowe