Billy Bishop

[Billy_Bishop]

Just because someone may doubt Bishop's record doesn't make them pro-German. By the same token, you can be "Pro-German" and still believe Bishop claimed in good faith.

I just don't see the point in dredging up arguments that have been repeated here too many times already, and really go no where.

To answer the next question, do I think that Bishop shot down 72 enemy aircraft? No. As most of us know and realize, mistakes are made in wartime. And with a system as loose as the RFC/RNAS/RAF's was, mistakes are likely to abound.

BUT, I also don't think he made claims for victories that he didn't think were honest victories.

By the same token, I'm sure that the Red Baron honestly thought he'd shot down 80 enemy aircraft as well. Even though we now know that he didn't.

BUT to put the burden of proof on Bishop, seems to me to be a bit too much. He made the claims, provided the details, such as they were, and it was up to his Squadron CO as well as higher HQ to confirm or deny his claims.

To say that RFC/RNAS/RAF victory claims rules were lax, is an understatement. BUT, by some accounts, Bishop had at least 5, and as many as 25 UNCONFIRMED claims that were not allowed by his superior officers.

As to his VC raid of 2 June, 1917, there is at least evidence that he flew out, went over the enemy lines (his aircraft was pretty well damaged) and flew back.

Whether he did what he said, I doubt we'll ever find anything that will prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt at this late stage. But, lacking any real proof to the contrary, I don't see what's so wrong with believing his side of the story.

As to the completeness of German records, well, let's just say that if you consider handwritten copies of them, taken between wars to make them complete, that's your opinion. But it has been said to me that only TWO original Jasta War Diaries still exist. And so far as I know, neither of them belong to units that Bishop fought against.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Craig]

"But, lacking any real proof to the contrary, I don't see what's so wrong with believing his side of the story."


Al:
This is precisely what I have a problem with. And I'm not trying to change your mind. It would be safe to saty that it is pretty well made up! It was Mackenzie that I was trying to straighten out.
Anyway, you can believe BB if you wish. I just think it's wrong to simply take one person's word for it, and hand out the VC, or any other award. It cheapens it, if there is no more proof than "I said so", especially when the "I" is the recipient of said award.
As always, I maintain that you gotta prove it happened, NOT that it didn't happen.

Craig

It's been stated here (accurately) that manfred didn't get all the victories he claimed or was credited with, but he got the huge majority. According to the grub street histories, 73 or 74 of his 80 have been positively identified, not 62 (which still would be a very high percentage.) I think Voss got 46 of his 48 while Wolff and Allmenroder also got nearly everything they claimed. Too bad there aren't better French records to ID the claims of Guynemer, Fonck, etc.

Since Bishop's CHARACTER comes into question by refuting his claims, do examine his character. Not every mission was a lone wolf mission(though he did fly a lot of them, so did his hero Ball). People he DID fly with said he was aggressive(his first kill saved his flight commander on his FIRST sortie or does that one not count??). Can we safely assume he stayed aggressive alone? Aggressive pilots who are good shots score "victories", usually.

Yes this is speculation but so is calling him a liar. Not all are directly calling him a liar here, but the allusions are there. Yes he got many OOC victories but we've been over it before that's the system the RFC used as they had to go find the enemy over his own airspace, and wanted to keep the hero's who, if the system demanded visual destruction, would die following their victims low over their own airspace and get shot down by someone else. The alpha male wants his kill scored however dangerous it sometimes is.

So this guy survives countless sorties and many of them during "bloody april", and somehow he gets the rap of a total fraud. Well i can understand some high browing GASoPhiles pointing at the mighty german records and say this or that may not have happened, but a liar? I personally think not. Yes i'm Canadian, yes i'm biased, so is everyone on this board.

[Craig]

Yes, we are all biased, I suppose. It is important, though, what causes this bias. If it is a national hero, of your country, that is one bias. If you sympathize with the war aims of one of the belligerents, there's another. But if you are biased by empirical evidence, or lack thereof . . . get my point?

[Billy_Bishop]

Craig, I'm not saying that Bishop doesn't have to have proof. BUT, my understanding of the the "proof" is this. What records may have existed with his VC award in London were either destroyed between the wars, or during WWII.

There is/was a review process that each set of records goes/went through to determine if they should be saved or not. IF it is determined that there is no need to save the "excess" paperwork, then it is taken and destroyed. THis would include eye-witness accounts, sworn statements and other such documents.

The BIGGEST problem we have had in trying to "certify" Bishop's VC has been the utter LACK of the documents that would normally accompany said award. It is these very missing documents that would have explained the reasoning behind the award of the VC for Bishop's 2 June, 1917 raid. And it's the lack of these documents that, in my opinion is the biggest cause of the controversy

I've talked to people who've been to the Imperial War Museum, the PRO in Kew, and other places where such records are normally kept. The basic result is they aren't there anymore!

Given all that, what I am I supposed to do? What is ANY Bishop supporter supposed to do? Throw up our hands and give up??? Not bloody likely.

But, up to this point, I had been stuck, being out of work for over a year, I had a personal lack of funds, such that I had more important things to worry about. Such as where my sons' next meal was coming from.

But, now that I've relocated to Michigan, and I have a job (At the University of Michigan, no less!!). This puts me considerably closer to Canada.

Currently my next trip to Canada is planned as a friendly visit to a friend, and former historian from the Billy Bishop Museum in Owen Sound. If it's possible during that trip, I intend to get to the museum and see what records they might have. And since I'm "in good" with someone who used to work there, and himself being "in good" with the founder, I expect I'll get better than average access.

But to be completely honest, I don't really expect to turn much up in the way of documents like what should have been with his VC papers in London. But I can still hope.

But you can be sure I'll take plenty of notes, and all the photo copies I can get/afford. Thank God the US dollar is strong! It will go a long way in Canada.

VBR,

Al Lowe

If Bishop really scored several victories without any witnesses, what then were the criteria for them to be accepted?

[Billy_Bishop]

Who the hell knows!!! The rules in the RFC/RNAS/RAF varied somewhat between individual squadrons.

They didn't have a central Victory Credits Board. As far as I know, it was up to each individual Squadron Commander.

Although, I believe even if the Squadron CO confirmed a claim, it could still be denied by someone higher up at either Brigade or Division HQ.

But, I could be wrong!!

VBR,

Al Lowe

It's always important to remember that with very few exceptions (McCudden being one) German records don't confirm the majority of victories claimed by most British Empire or US aces.

Ball won the VC for scoring a dozen victories in the spring of 1917, few of which were witnessed, none of which show up in German records.

If German records are to be believed, we must conclude the following:

1) Ball won the VC for 12 phantom victories.
2) Bishop won the VC for three phantom victories.
3) Barker won the VC for four phantom victories.
4) Hawker won the VC for scoring seven kills, only one of which is confirmed by German records.
5) Rickenbacker won the MoH for two phantom victories.
6) Jerrard won the VC for three phantom victories scored over an enemy airfield.
7) Alan McLeod won the VC in an action in which his gunner scored three phantom victories.
8) Collishaw won the DSO, DSC and DFC for 60 kills, almost none of which show up in German records.

[Graeme]

Combat Reports compiled at squadron level were then passed on to the parent Wing HQ where the Wing Commander would make an assessment of each claim - number of rounds fired, range etc, plus potential confirmation from other pilots involved. Regardless of the Wing Commander's decision, the Combat Reports then went up the tree to Brigade HQ where a further assessment was made.

In this way it was possible for a claim disallowed at Wing level to be allowed at Brigade level. More bizarrely, a claim disallowed by both Wing and Brigade might yet appear in a Communique!

Earlier in this thread, Craig related that the RAF claimed 500-odd victories over Fokker DVIIs in September 1918. I've had a quick run through my victories database and have found claims for 706 victories over DVIIs, 378 classed as "destroyed". While this is probably a more realistic figure, it is undoubtedly too high (try matching this number of claims against the losses listed in Casualties of the German Air Service when you've a day or three to spare!)

Regards

Graeme