Mannock & McCudden Presentation

[Ginger.]

Tom, you're right mate, I sometimes forget that there's sprogs coming out to the Salient all the time, and it's our job to look after 'em before the Hun in the sun pounces!

[Raineranton]

Originally Posted by Ginger.

Yep, if memory serves he got his defective eyesight from an infection he caught in prison, made worse by a sliver of metal that broke off his engine and hit him in the same eye?

Gentlemen,

according to Mannock, VC - Ace With One Eye by Frederick Oughton & Commander Vernon Smith, Mannock became just about blind in the left eye when he was a boy!

Regards

Rainer

[Graeme]

Rainer

Which just goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you read.

If Mannock had been blind in one eye, he would have had no depth perception so would not have been able to judge distance.

It would appear that he picked up an amoebic infection while in India which did affect his eyesight for a time, but Grid Caldwell later said that there was nothing wrong with Mannock's sight. Since he flew with Mannock, I'd say he called it right.

The twaddle about him passing his eyesight test by a ruse should be taken with a pinch of salt big enough to flavour food for the world.

Graeme

[Gregvan]

Hi Graeme,

Thanks for clearing that up. I knew I had read somewhere that the old "ace with one eye" thing was a myth. Right up there with Voss being Jewish, etc.

Greg

[Raineranton]

Originally Posted by Graeme

Rainer

Which just goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you read.

Graeme

Yes, that's right Graeme,

but, if nobody would say (like me) it stand's so or so in this or that book, nobody would (like you) make a correction.

And I think it's very important that some written errors find at least a correction in public in this forum.

Thanks for clarification, Graeme.

Best regards

Rainer

[Graeme]

Hi Rainer

Agree with you 100%.

It is of the greatest importance that the misconceptions generated by the early researchers are not so much corrected as re-aligned in light of more recent information having become available - I don't believe that anyone set out to deliberately distort the truth, it was more a case that the truth had not then been established.

I think that all of us on the Forum "do our bit" to present the facts as fully as possible.

Who knows, one day perhaps we'll know for certain who got whom?

Graeme

[RAF56_Ball]

Originally Posted by Graeme

... If Mannock had been blind in one eye, he would have had no depth perception so would not have been able to judge distance.
... The twaddle about him passing his eyesight test by a ruse should be taken with a pinch of salt big enough to flavour food for the world.
Graeme

The report of a fellow pilot, but untrained in the medical field, is not a qualified observer.
Being blind in one eye does not prevent depth perception, it requires a change in how it is obtained. Stereoscopic vision is only one way of gaining depth perception. The other is head movement, wherein the visual cortex then assimilates and processes the information and the perception of depth is thus revealed.
Wiley Post was blind in one eye. In fact he is used as the example of why the FAA is willing to give waivers to one eyed pilots if they can demonstrate the ability to obtain the perception of depth.
If there were no outward indication that one eye was blind, an observer may never know it. And I know that pilots try to cheat eye exams, having observed it while I was a flyer in the USAF, and later when I began doing exams as an AME. Shoot, I even "cheated" to get 20/20 on my first exam by using a "pin-hole" technique to see if I could do it, but told the examiner first. We then did it truthfully.
This does not prove Mannock was visually impaired, but it does prove it is not unreasonable to think he may have been.

[RAF56_Ball]

I am barely containing my anger about this entire thread. An educator comes to the supposed "premier" learned men and women of information on World War I, with a mind to help teach and develop a group of youth that may someday stand up to protect us, likely to be leaders of your future, to inspire them about the history of flight, and the twits show up in force, failing to read, leaping to tired and fallacious conclusions, and in general doing their level best to poison the atmosphere.

Worse yet, those that did were rude to a member of a military auxiliary unit that came “hat in hand” asking for their wisdom. You who do nothing would insult those that lovingly and faithfully serve you?!?!?

And the insecure egotism that was behind those that served it up is beneath them. Am I angry with those? Hell YES! Not because I think you worthless, but because I know you are priceless, and not only expect but will only accept, better of you.

The cynicism that insinuates that no warrior can be anything more than an assassin or murderer, that sadly assumes the warrior cannot possibly deduce for themselves the missteps and impure motives of their leadership while maintaining at least some sight of the worthy goals of a nasty endeavor, that maligns the gut wrenching self recriminations that the VAST majority of these pilots (and the PBI’s to be more inclusive) had to unfairly try to resolve independently in a young mind at a time when even less was known about and resources even more limited to deal with professionally and yet they most often worked through to become the leaders and producers of the post war era (search your own posts if you are unwilling to read what you have published in your own texts), this cynicism diminishes to nearly nothing everything that the majority of these august members hold as valuable, the people of this forum. That win or lose, war sucks is not the issue. It is the nature of the people that needs understanding, and that which is good should be emulated and enhanced, that which is evil should be cast down and trod under our collective feet. These regardless of side.

PhD or no, tenured or substitute, none of us is higher than any other in our value to the world in general, or to those that would learn from us. Those of you who know more are not superior, just more Knowledgeable. So I call to you that stumbled to value those that would learn from you. It might even be appropriate to proffer a true apology. At the same time, I congratulate, and thank those that were kind.

As an aside, I wonder if it is because there is such a lack of integrity and honor in all of our cultures and daily lives that so many of us struggle to believe that integrity and honor can even exist in imperfect people. Maybe we look to the wrong source for what we desire and is able to manifest in us?

Back to the point, is there any other information that can be kindly offered to "Spiggy"?

[Bruno Stachel]

Saburo Sakai did rather well with one eye (left?) late during WWII. If memory serves, he turned is head slightly, in order to center his one good eye when looking forward. He did well enough that he survived a single handed dogfight with 15 Hellcats, returning home without a scratch.