"As for myself, I tend to disbelieve his claims mostlty on the basis of reading accounts written by a number of those who were stationed with him and flew with him. Most stated that Bishop was a" likable bird" in the mess but they simply didn't see those kills."
The only problem I have with David's statement above is this. As far as I know, only about 4-5 men in Bishop's 60 Squadron ever wrote anything that was published. Grid Caldwell, and Willie Fry were two of those. Another was Maj. Scott. And yet another was Sgt. Maj. A.A. Nicod, the chief mechanic for 60 Squadron, and last but not least was Maj. W.E. Molesworth, MC.
For the first two, though they both wrote and published books before Bishop's death, in neither case did they come out publicly and say anything bad about him. It was only AFTER he was gone from this world that they started to actually be more vocal in any doubts they may have harboured against the man.
Some will likely discount Sgt. Maj. Nicod as he was a mechanic and therefore wouldn't have had a chance to observe any victory claims that Bishop might claim. But he could and did attest to the battle damage that Bishop's plane came back with on various trips, including his early morning raid of June 2, 1917.
And still others will claim that Maj. Scott was biased in Bishop's favor, confirming all of his claims without question. However, I have to ask the question, what about 4 KNOWN Unconfirmed claims that Bishop claimed while Scott was in command? Doesn't seem that Scott did confirm them all out of hand now does it?
But then there's Maj. Molesworth, who has nothing BAD to say at all about Bishop. And he flew with the man.
So tell me, who besides Fry and Caldwell could possibly say anything bad about Bishop? As for their not seeing his claims, well, they weren't along with him when it happened, were they. And they didn't have the roving commision, nor were they told, as he was to go and seek out the enemy whenever and where ever he could find them. Though in fairness to Fry, he did witness 3 of Bishop's claims. I guess he can't say he didn't see Bishop shoot down anything, as he witnessed at least 3 different claims, along with some others of Bishop's flight.
Some have tried to make it look like Bishop's "lone-wolf" flights were his idea alone. In fact, he was practically ordered to do so, the same as Ball before him. The big difference between Ball and Bishop was that Ball PREFERRED to fly alone, and didn't like flying as part of a flight. Bishop didn't seem to mind in either event, and handled both team and solo flights equally well.
Or at least he didn't complain about it.
Unfortunately, this argument is likely to run on for quite some time, unless some new evidence turns up some where. But at this late date, I think that the "
Billy Bishop Controversy" is doomed to an eternal life.
VBR,
Al Lowe