Billy Bishop

jasta wrote:
<There are "official" victories, and there are real, documented victories. Bishop had the first type; Richthofen had both types. >

Hmm, apparently not even the great Richthofen can do both...62-74 being confirmed, rest in dispute...
Bishop did have both...
Cheers,
RFC

[Billy_Bishop]

Something else to keep in mind regarding Barker's last victories. They were witnessed by a trenchline full of British troops, including (so I'm told) a British General. Yet, they don't appear in the German losses.

Odd, don't you think?

Still, I guess that when you figure in was LATE in the war, probably less than a month before the end, I can see how this might have gotten lost in the shuffle.

VBR,

Al Lowe

Al Lowe

Barkers fight was witnessed by Brig Gen Andy McNaughton, head of the Canadian Corps heavy artillery, who wrote of it after the war. McNaughton, by the way, was generally regarded at the end of the war as possibly the best artillery officer on either side of the line. McNaughton wrote of the fight that "the spectacle of this attack was the most magnificent encounter of any sort which I have ever witnessed" (high praise coming from a battle-hardened artilleryman). Also "...the prolonged roar, which greeted the triumph of the British fighter, and which echoed across the battlefield, was never matched....".

Sadly, the fight is not reported in the German records, and given that they are holy, complete and infallible, the fight obviously never happened. Barker, McNaughton, and the British troops in the trenches, were obviously deluded fools, liars, or both. Same goes for Bishop, Collishaw, Ball, and the rest of those guys Bud mentioned in his post.

I AM AGAIN GOING TO QUOTE WHITEHOUSE.
It has been explained that over the years further investigation has been made and incomplete confirmations have been fully documented. However, it is noted that no ace's score has been lessened by these investigations.
Today I find names in the ace list that were never mentioned in the early 1920's I have never noted that a name has been deleted from the list.
In the light of my own experience I wonder how these records canbe kept with any degree of accuracy. I have seen all kinds of air fights involving all types of machines on both sides of the line. Inmost cases I would hesitate to declare who shot down whom, Werner Voss provides a striking example. It will be remembered that Voss had been cut off by a flight of S.E.5's led by Major Jimmy McCudden. Practically every pilot in the flight must have fired at least one burst at the galliant German. I was in a Bristol Fighter flight on the fringe of this particular battle,and several of our gunners fired at Voss; but when it was all over the victory was credited to Lieutenant Rhys Davids. Why? True Rhys=Davids followed Voss down and fired the last burst at him, But Werner may have been killed some minutes before. Was the victory awarded the younger because he was very popular in the squadron or because he followed Voss down? Or did they, as was done so many times, cut cards to see who would be given credit for the kill.

Getting back to Billy Bishop He was noted for being a marksman and wasted few bullets. He concentrated on shooting pilots and not planes.
Cheers
Ken McKenzie
www.starapex.com

[wings]

Once again. If the German records are so inaccurate, why do they confirm so many of McCudden's victories, including several on the GERMAN side of the lines? They confirm virtually NONE of Bishop's "victories".

AGAIN,
Amazing that jasta only qoutes McCudden, and not any other pilot to compare to the vaunted German records....
Which many pilots and observers had witnesses for...

keep in mind when reading the admittedly entertaining works of Whitehouse that some of the things he claims to have done include:

1. inventing the dogfight (he never sat in a plane until 1917)

2. to have been incorrectly claimed as a victim of MvR (the German ace apparently was highly preoccupied with the destruction of AW, one of the RFC's finest gunner, who could somehow be easily identified in a chance encounter in the clouds).

3. to have shot down MvR (a slight stretch of his encounter with MvR described above; rather than having been downed by the red plane as "claimed" by MvR, he informs us that the opposite is true - he actually downed the red plane in the April 1917 encounter.

4. to have been actively involved in each and every historic dogfight of war, possibly even those that occurred before he took to the skies.

5. to have been one of the highest scoring observer aces of the war. (Check the record books. Can his name be found anywhere in the highly conservative RFC victory records? )

6. a personal favorite - to have been known and loved as the guy to be counted on to show green crews how the war is waged and to get the inexperienced crews safely home. (Apparently he was the WWI equivalent to Sakai; always bringing "his" men home).

I understand that Whitehouse has written a number of books. Having read only one of these, it would be interesting to see what other things he accomplished. Excuse the derogatory reference to his name in the post above, it's just that some prefer a modest hero to a bombastic hero of one's own mind.

[Billy_Bishop]

I should also point out, that even AFTER I posted a list of victory claims by Bishop that were witnessed, and to which Jasta and others noted that some of his witnessed claims were likely to be "this one" or "that one", he STILL says that virtually "none" of Bishop's claims are verified by German records.

What he also fails to mention is that McCudden, not Bishop is the exception to the rule. McCudden is one of the VERY FEW British aces who's list of victories can be, for the large part, matched against German losses.

THAT is why, for the most part, I ignore Jasta's ramblings. He has repeated the same comment over and over to the point of absurdity. I expect to see it at least once in any thread where Bishop's name is mentioned, at least once.

So far, he has not disappointed me.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

Ken, after you've been on this forum for a while, you'll learn to NOT give much creedance to the writings of Arch Whitehouse. While he was a prolific writer, and a good writer of fiction, his "historical" writings are looked upon now adays with skepticism.

As has been pointed out, he made claims for many things that could not be. While I think the man deserves credit for being brave enough to go up in one of those cloth and wooden wonders, I think he could have been a bit more circumspect in his post war writings.

I put it this way. In my youth, reading his books got me hooked on WWI aviation history. That's gotta be a good thing. And I suspect that his books have been and will be responsible for getting more people interested in WWI aviation. BUT, I think everyone who reads his books would be wise if they read them with a grain of salt.

Don't take every published writer at his or her word. Be willing to do some of your own research. AND be willing to take the heat when your conclusion goes against "the grain", as it were.

I know that my conclusions tend to go against the grain. Some of the people I disagree with understand my position. Some do not. Those that do, we get along fine. Those that do not, well, you'll see it when it happens.

VBR,

Al Lowe

I'm glad someone brought up the Barker Fight, I was going to, but i bring it up so many times on this forum i'm sure some are sick of me bringing it up. It is Proof that german records, while way more accurate than allied ones, are NOT perfect.

The thousands of witnesses on the ground saw at least 3 German planes go down in flames, yet the by the records no one has been able to even figure out who Barker was fighting, yet the fight happened, unless all the 1000s of Canadians in that section of the front are liars too.