Quote:
Dear Forum,
*Regarding the Caldwell's report (above), I've often wondered, is there anything significant in the fact that it came almost a month after Bishop's mission? Did it serve to confirm Bishop's feat, or was there doubt, even then, as to his veracity?
*Well?
|
The thing about Caldwell's report, it's obvious that it was in response to a telephone call, either from Wing or brigade HQ. If Caldwell, who was Acting CO at the time due to an injury, Maj. Scott was in hospital, or on medical leave.
IF Caldwell had any doubts, that was his chance to express them and likely stop any medal from being awarded, or at least, delay things even further. So, if he had doubts, why not express them?
The other thing that stands out is the description of the damage, "..17 bullet holes and trailing edge of plane shot away in two bays." My only question would have been WHICH plane? Upper or lower, left or right?
Another thing. Someone, I forget who (conviently I might add) stated that the mechanics had doubts about Bishop's raid on 2 June, 1917. If so, why didn't Sgt. Nicod say so in the article he wrote for Popular Flying in 1935? He didn't you know. Instead he said, "...but he had a very warm time returning to the aerodrome, as his machine was badly damaged by anti-aircraft guns and machine gun fire. There were a dozen bullet holes in the radius of just a few inches just behind his head as he sat in the cock;pit. A miraculous escape."
No mention of doubt. But wonderment at Bishop's "miraculous escape."
VBR,
Al Lowe