I have seen some combat reports from various pilots in WWI who either mis-identified their targets, or, as in Fonck's case, didn't even TRY to identify their target, simply labeled them as "EA" for Enemy aircraft. I'd like to see ANYONE in this forum put in a position of defending their life AND try to get the correct identification of a machine that's trying to shoot them at the same time.
Bishop merely filed a report, HE didn't confirm his claims, and HE didn't put himself in for the VC, yet that seems to be what you are insinuating.
Why should I defend Fonck? So he wasn't liked. So he was a braggert. So he claimed more victories than were actually confirmed. Still doesn't make him a liar either. He just thought that ALL of his claims should have been confirmed. They weren't, and he didn't like it. Oh well. Besides, I don't like the man, and I've never met him!
Glory seekers, maybe. But then I think most of the big aces were glory seekers to one point or another. Liars? Well, no one has been able to prove it beyond a doubt. Though I am sure that some may claim it, they still can't prove it.
I think instead, you have to look at a system that would take some at their word that they shot down enemy aircraft without any witnesses present.
Funny thing is, the RFC still didn't confirm EVERYONE of Bishop's claims, so there must have been some sort of criteria that they followed.
As well, of his 80+ claims, 72 of which were confirmed, he had witnesses for 20+ of those, yet I would be hard pressed to find any evidence of his WITNESSED claims. Did his witnesses lie too?
Finally, if his raid of 2 June, 1917 didn't really happen, why then did the RFC award him the VC? Propaganda maybe? Still, they took 2 months before they announced the award. That's longer than any other Air VC announcement for any Ace, with the exception of
Mick Mannock, and his award was likely for propaganda purposes as well. Not that Mannock didn't deserve it. I think he should have been awarded it sooner.
But I get from your tone that had Bishop been killed in the war, you wouldn't be questioning him. As for the others, there are plenty of people who speak up for them.
Yet, in case you haven't noticed before, hardly anyone is willing to take on the masses in defense of Billy. It's more or less fallen to me. It's not a position I relish, but someone has to do it.
And yes, you should have used something other than "worst ace" for this thread. But it's too late now.
One more thing, do you think you could break up your paragraphs, one HUGE paragraph makes it hard to read.
VBR,
Al Lowe
"On the edge of destiny, you must test your strength."
-
Billy Bishop-