Billy Bishop was the Greatest (For Jasta 8)

[Billy_Bishop]

Previously, in another Thread, Jasta 8 said...

Nobody could care less what you think! They'll just think back to your previous Bishop threads and will know how baseless and lacking in thought your opinions really are. Stick to weather reports from Chicago. It's the only accurate information you've ever brought to the table. Bishop wasn't half the man or fighter pilot Mannock was. Rest easy with that thought.

Jasta 8, take comfort in that this is the LAST time I am going to bother replying to you, since you are obviously a crass, self-centered person who only gets off by insulting others who happen to hold an opposite opinion, rather than trying to have any kind of civil discourse.

Other than citing your own opinions you have offered no evidence to back up YOUR opinion, therefore placing in no better position than the opinion that you attribute to me. If you have some proof, such as a picture, signed affadavit or eye witness report that Bishop is NOT who I, and virtually 75% of aviation historians claim him to be, then show it. Otherwise, go play in the street where it's imminently safer.

And no, German records alone are not proof. As has been shown in many other cases, military records are NOT 100% infallible.

You see, I'm not claiming that Bishop absolutely shot down (des, OOC, FTL, and DD) 72 enemy aircraft. I am more than willing to admit that mistakes happen in combat. I know all too well that they do. BUT, NO ONE has been able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was a liar and a cheat.

So, unless you can, please stop this harrassment. It's pointless and only goes to show how inconsiderate and uncouth you really are!

VBR,

Al Lowe

Al,
I think that Jasta 8 and Jasta could be lumped together into the IGAF cultists. Once again we have those that claim the German confirmation records are the Holy Writ of any confirmations. While the Germans did have the highest scoring, non-surviving ace of the war (FOR GOD'S SAKE DON'T SAY ANYTHING NEGATIVE ABOUT HIM), the Entente seemed to have a couple that were right up there in the same class as him that DID survive. But according to Jasta 8's one post there weren't any Allied Aces that were worthy of being put into the same category as those of the all knowing, el supremo, invincible IGAF. Well, at least we know where his sympathies lie. Might as well not try to convince him of anything as he's probably out on his own wavelength, and not willing to listen to any reasonable explanation anyway. Just another one of them to deal with.
Regards,
Jim

Jim, there was someone claiming that MANNOCK (not Richthofen) was better than Bishop.

That has NOTHING to do with IGAF-cultist.

And on the total the British claims (already excluding shared victories) are claiming 4-6 times the numbers of German losses, and I have not yet seen any reknowned historian who blamed this on the German documents.

regards

Axel

Jim,

Why not check out EB's thread of Nov 6th Mick Mannock and then let me know if uou have trouble getting you foot out of your mouth.

VBR,

Jasta 8

Jasta 8,
I did check out the whole thread and thought that your posts were just the very type that an IGAF cultist would post. My foot isn't in my mouth, the feet seem to be in another location...ON THE GROUND! You come across in the very same manner as another person who is currently disparaging F. Luke, but at least he is realistic enough to know that records can be flawed, but you don't demean the veracity of the Ace's claim. You seem to have trouble with the fact that Bishop may have very well had more victories than Mannock, so what...get over it! It doesn't do your credibility any good without sound proof that Bishop inflated his claims. We all can speculate all we want, but in the end the records stand as mute testimony. I say that Fonck, no matter how much of a braggart he was, may very well have een the highest scoring ace of the war, surpassing even the 'Golden Boy' MvR. But IF those claimed, yet unconfirmed victories aren't allowed, then he stays at 75 doesn't he?! If the historians have found two more confirmed claims to Bishop's credit, that weren't previously recorded, and aren't in the German records...then he gets them. Just because you don't like Bishop, doesn't mean that everyone else should believe he's a liar. I honestly feel that each ace who put in claims, thought they had downed an E/A. Their reputations were at stake and I'm sure that they were secure enough in their own abilities that they didn't stay up late nights sweating out one or two unconfirmed. In the end I'll say this... until you have put yourself under the same stresses, and in the same situations as Billy Bishop... you try to defame a better man. BY THE WAY, what branch did you serve with, and with what outfits? If you haven't served, then you have only the questionable books and your own opinions to base your allegations on. You don't have enough PRACTICAL experience to render a sound judgement.
Regards,
Jim
P.S. Axel,
There ARE a lot on here who ARE cultists, and take German documentation as Holy Writ. They seem to forget the key elements of politics and war. You don't want the homefront to know that you're losing, and you must be creative to keep the morale up to bolster your cause.

[Billy_Bishop]

Axel, a lot of the "reknowned" historians don't question German documents because they don't take casualty lists into consideration. MOST of the professional air historians don't bother matching claims to losses because they already know that they're not going to match. In general it's assumed that people make mistakes. Both the pilot putting in the claim, as well as the clerk typing up the day's combat reports and casualty lists.

I know it, you know it, almost everyone else knows it. So, why get so worked up about it?

The problem is, as Jim'ACE' has pointed out is there are people who seem to think that the German documents were written with the help of God. Therefore they must be the "Holy Scriptures" of aerial claims and losses.

Unfortunately, I'm not one of those people. I guess that makes me a Pagan.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

I just wanted to add, that while "many" do not take the casualty lists into consideration, I should probably amend that to "many have not taken casualty lists into consideration in the past."

NOTE: I did not say that NO ONE did, but that many did not. Some have, and more are now. BUT time is the great enemy.

VBR,

Al Lowe

[Billy_Bishop]

It has come to my attention that Lt. Col. George Drew wrote an article for Popular Flying Magazine's March 1936 issue about Billy Bishop. In it, he tells that the raid of 2 June, 1917 was confirmed by German pilots who were taken prisoner days after the raid.

Of course, he doesn't mention any names, but this is not the first time that I've seen mention of German prisoners confirming an allied attack, or the results of such an attack.

Is there any reason to think that this isn't so?

VBR,

Al Lowe

[rammjaeger]

Al,

"any reason"? Study some interrogation reports of captured pilots and you will find that these pilots told the wildest stories and sold the biggest lies to fool the interrogation officers (I did just read some dozen examples of these literature last week). And if the enemy likes to hear a specific story - why not saying "Yes, that happened" or "Your assumption is right". Famous POWs like "Seeteufel" Graf Luckner fooled their counterparts exaktly on this way.

Additional a simply claim by Mr Drew (without every source!) proofs nothing. If this document comes to light than it is worthy to be discussed - not before.

VBR

Hannes

For once I can only agree with Jim. The homefront has to be kept happy.

I assume that the Germans did not count a plane as "lost" when it came down in their lines with a living pilot (or observer). If this means that for every five claimed German planes only one had to burn down, I am sure the Germans AND the British were quite happy with it, for the Germans saved valuable lifes and the statistics looked better, while the British could proof to their homefront that they were winning the airwar. Kind of a gentlemens agreement

IMHO those records that were kept are usually correct. I doubt that you will find any straight lies in it (or someone would have pointed this out long before), though of course they do not offer a full picture, nor are they (today) complete anymore - I doubt that they ever were, given the problems of a war going on.

What remains (totally unrelated) is the fact that the British lost more lifes in training then the German airforce in the whole war (including training). This does not help for the Mannock/Bishop debate nor does it includes any judgement on the pilots. In WWII the US and British aces had very low scores compared to the Germans, which does not say that they were worse flyers but simply that they had less opportunities to get their scores. I would be highly surprised if a similar develoment had not shown up to a degree in WWI. I certainly won´t going into revision any CONFIRMED victories, for CONFIRMED is confirmed and says NOTHING about the pilot in comparison to ANY other pilot around.

Well, thats my ramble for today.

Yours aeronautical

Axel