Billy Bishop: 'Liar and Cheat'

First off, thanks for that excerpt of the Warneford report: trés interressant!
But I draw from it that Warneford had "considerable difficulty" re-starting a weaker engine in a heavier aircraft. Imagine starting a more powerful engine in a lighter aircraft.

"Wasn't the inflammatory book that started this thread also released this week? If so, I'll leave it to others to make what they will of the timing of the dedication..."

I happen to know the publisher rushed out copies in a near panic in order to capitalize on the "controversy" (read: free publicity) resulting from the author's interviews in the Canadian media.
And the official dedication of the Owen Sound museum (Bishop's boyhood home) was scheduled some time ago: the Canadian government couldn't organize a good conspiracy if it tried ...
:-/

[Billy_Bishop]

*I try to be fair, but I just can't buy Bishop's story. *There are too many holes in it for me, nothing about the raid sounds true! *The only reason I can think of for the British letting such a cock and bull story pass is;
*The RFC had just gone through a very bad time, Bloody April, Muderous May etc. *It needed soething to raise the spirits of the badly shot up squadrons. Bishop's "raid" would show the rest of the RFC that the offensive missions that they hated were beating down the evil Hun.
*Bishop had show the other lads how it was done! *
As my father use to say. *"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull shit.' *Bishop was full of it.
* * * * * * * * * * *Richard

quote of Capt Lee in refernce to Bishop. *"How does he do it?"

EXCEPT, even Phil Markham admits the time and distance match for the area Bishop is thought to have raided.

While he points to a lot of circumstantial evidence, there is NOTHING definitive either way.

As many have pointed out, there is simply NO HOPE of proving either for or against Bishop.

And while the RFC may have had their reasons for wanting his story to be true, the RFC was not the final arbiter of whether or not Bishop would get the VC.

AND while there is no definitive proof that there were any witnesses, there is substantial anecdotal, as well as 2nd and 3rd hand testimony to that effect.

On the negative side, while we do have a denial by the Germans in one of their reports, it is for the wrong date. Typo? Coincedence? Or maybe they wanted to deny that it happened, knowing it did, but by using the wrong date, they can't be accused of directly denying it. I don't know. Seems strange to me, considering their reputation for keeping "impeccable" records.

What else do we have on the negative side? Willy Fry for one. Grid Caldwell for another. Maybe one or two others who flew with Bishop.

Then, on the plus side, there's Bishop's CO, Maj. Scott. Some would say that maybe Scott thought he owed something to Bishop for saving his life. Perhaps he did. But I'm also lead to believe that men then held personal honour much higher than we do today.

I don't know about anyone else, but even if someone had saved my life, I would not risk my honour on a person I thought was telling a bunch of stories out of school. But, maybe that's just me.

Then there's the idea of "no witnesses." I know, nothing in the award citation says there were witnesses. But there's nothing that says there weren't any witnesses either. And with the normal paperwork missing/destroyed, we'll never know if there were any witnesses.

But I have to tell you, I think there were witnesses, and I believe they signed an affadavit that was with the now lost paperwork. Why? Simple, I just don't see the British government devaluing their highest award for valour in the manner some of you suggest.

The problem is, it's my opinion, my theory. And there's no proof either way.

So, I guess we're stuck at an impasse.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[SEDieter]

"Wasn't the inflammatory book that started this thread also released this week? If so, I'll leave it to others to make what they will of the timing of the dedication..."

I happen to know the publisher rushed out copies in a near panic in order to capitalize on the "controversy" (read: free publicity) resulting from the author's interviews in the Canadian media.
And the official dedication of the Owen Sound museum (Bishop's boyhood home) was scheduled some time ago: the Canadian government couldn't organize a good conspiracy if it tried ...
:-/

As I mentioned over the past couple of days, yes the book did get shipped 3 weeks early. The publisher wasn't going to pass up the free publicity, given that their office was deluged with requests for the book.

As a point of reference, when I was speaking with a reporter from the National Post Thursday evening, the story from 17 April was picked up by the Canadian Press newswire only after it had been "trolled" in front of various other national papers, who wouldn't touch it!

The Museum only received the official confirmation on its Status on Friday. It had been a hot topic because originally they were not granted National Historical Site Status.

But then, these are comments that were posted on here over the past several weeks.

[Barrett]

Ref. witnesses for VCs, remember that Alan Jerrard's action was witnessed and suitably attested by his squadronmates while he languished in captivity--and they got it wrong. I know, I know...that doesn't mean that any of the unknown, presumptive witnesses to BB's event were wrong either, but neither does it mean they'd have been right. If they did see anything.
Marion Carl was absolutely right: the Highest Gong should be deferred til after The War so these things can be thrashed out.
...aaaaaand that's 1,001!
Egad, it's been a long time coming. I see that besides Dan-San there's about 4 others ahead of me. Guess that's what comes of getting married and being in love and stuff.

[Billy_Bishop]

* Ref. witnesses for VCs, remember that Alan Jerrard's action was witnessed and suitably attested by his squadronmates while he languished in captivity--and they got it wrong. *I know, I know...that doesn't mean that any of the unknown, presumptive witnesses to BB's event were wrong either, but neither does it mean they'd have been right. *If they did see anything.
* *Marion Carl was absolutely right: the Highest Gong should be deferred til after The War so these things can be thrashed out.
* *...aaaaaand that's 1,001! *
* *Egad, it's been a long time coming. *I see that besides Dan-San there's about 4 others ahead of me. *Guess that's what comes of getting married and being in love and stuff.

I know, his witnesses could have been wrong, just as much as they could have been right. Still, if there had been something published with his VC citation saying who, what or where the witnesses were, I doubt very much that we'd be having this conversation.

I was wondering though, regarding Warneford's VC, did anyone witness the downing of the Zep he got?

VBR,

Al Lowe

[CaptainLewis]

Dear Al,

Concerning Warneford's victory, I was wondering when you'd kindly get around to that...

From the little that I've read, the victory was seen as an explosion in the night sky; when Warneford landed to refuel at Gris-Nez, the ground crew already knew that a Zep had been downed (after all, they probably saw it).

I suppose this is circumstantial, but his account matched the eyewitnesses, the time of evening, and it was his mission to attack Zeppelin sheds at that time and place. Instead, he was separated from the rest of the flight, but found LZ.37. According to Whitehouse, the airship was on some sort of test flight, with techs, mechs, and crew; it wasn't on a bombing mission in any case...

Still can't find anything on wether it was a moon-lit night or not (but I really can't imagine it otherwise, with the spotting of LZ.37, his landing, and his subsequent repairing).

Warneford really did have "the guts of a lion"...

The VC was awarded withing 36 hours -- was this unusual?

VBR,
Captain Lewis

* *Interesting to speculate that BB was ditching evidence of a jammed Lewis...but why would he draw such unusual attention to himself? *He could have tossed his other drums and claimed "Whew--good thing it happened on me last reload!" If he was determined to perpetrate a fraud, he didn't need to do it THAT day. *He could just as easily have gone solo another time and returned with the same tale about the airdrome raid. *I gotta think there was some other reason--and not necessarily a good one, either!

Out of curiosity, does anyone know where Nieuport 17 pilots (or SE-5 pilots for that matter) kept their spare drums of ammo?

[Billy_Bishop]

Dear Al,

* Concerning Warneford's victory, I was wondering when you'd kindly get around to that...

* *From the little that I've read, the victory was seen as an explosion in the night sky; when Warneford landed to refuel at Gris-Nez, the ground crew already knew that a Zep had been downed (after all, they probably saw it).

* I suppose this is circumstantial, but his account matched the eyewitnesses, the time of evening, and it was his mission to attack Zeppelin sheds at that time and place. Instead, he was separated from the rest of the flight, but found LZ.37. According to Whitehouse, the airship was on some sort of test flight, with techs, mechs, and crew; it wasn't on a bombing mission in any case...

* Still can't find anything on wether it was a moon-lit night or not (but I really can't imagine it otherwise, with the spotting of LZ.37, his landing, and his subsequent repairing).

* Warneford really did have "the guts of a lion"...

* The VC was awarded withing 36 hours -- was this unusual?

VBR,
Captain Lewis

*

I only asked as I was not familiar with the details of his flight.

With regard to how quickly his award was confirmed, as foar as I know, that probably has to be a record for how quickly it was done.

I know that in my research, Bishop had the longest delay among the aces who have received the VC for singular acts. Keeping in mind that Ball's was for a period of activity, as was I believe Mannock's award.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know where Nieuport 17 pilots (or SE-5 pilots for that matter) kept their spare drums of ammo?

There was I believe a container on each side of the seat that kept a spare drum of ammo. The normal load out for the Lewis was three drums, one on the gun and two spares.

But, I am told that observers typically carried 4-6 reloads for their guns.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Richard_Schrader]

Maybe after landing he took the gun off so he could shoot some holes in his plane. Then he could not get it back on, so he just left it!
Richard