|
|
Actually I should be apologising, after all you helped Danny out first and I missed it.
|
Jamster 21 (#119) and Nutloose (#120),
Thanks a lot - will look up ASAP. Cheers both, Danny. |
Somewhere, on PPRuNe, I read a reference to an article by Wg Cdr Stanford-Tuck, to the effect that many of the Battle of Britain pilots were not the extrovert Rugby Club hearties of public imagination, but often quieter, introverted types. Google cannot find it for me: can anyone here please trace it for me ?
More in hope than any expectation, Danny. |
Originally Posted by Danny42C
(Post 9904792)
Somewhere, on PPRuNe, I read a reference to an article by Wg Cdr Stanford-Tuck, to the effect that many of the Battle of Britain pilots were not the extrovert Rugby Club hearties of public imagination, but often quieter, introverted types. Google cannot find it for me: can anyone here please trace it for me ?
More in hope than any expectaion, Danny. OAP |
Originally Posted by Danny42C
(Post 9904792)
Somewhere, on PPRuNe, I read a reference to an article by Wg Cdr Stanford-Tuck, to the effect that many of the Battle of Britain pilots were not the extrovert Rugby Club hearties of public imagination, but often quieter, introverted types. Google cannot find it for me: can anyone here please trace it for me ?
More in hope than any expectation, Danny. Regarding the title of the book, Aces High, I found myself flinching slightly at this, as I think most fighter pilots always have done. The term, fighter ace, always seemed to me to conjure up the mental picture of some gay, abandoned, almost irresponsible young pilot leaping into his aircraft and rearing off into the sky to chalk up victories like knocking off glass bottles in the circus rifle range. Nothing could be further from the truth. Any fighter pilot, after his first combat, is very well aware that air fighting on the scale of the last war was a cold, calculating, cata and mouse type combat, which required great preparation, lightning reactions, first-class team work and above all, cool decisive leadership |
OAP Bearing in mind of course that about one third (approximately 1,000) of Battle of Britain pilots were NCOs,
|
Danny,
I remember reading a comment from Wg Cdr Stanford Tuck to that effect, but it was an introduction to a book (not the one mentioned by Archimedes ). Maybe "Spitfire in Colour" of the seventies? As best as I can recall: "Wartime propaganda depicted Spitfire pilots as ginger, beer swilling types. Indeed, with very few exceptions, nothing could have been further from the truth. Flying fighters was very much a cat-and-mouse affair, and woe betide the pilot who was casual, or who daydreamed. He would soon 'cop it up the back end' or one of his pals would." |
Originally Posted by Tankertrashnav
(Post 9905031)
OAP Bearing in mind of course that about one third (approximately 1,000) of Battle of Britain pilots were NCOs,
Formal dinning every night, formal system for any late night returns, 48hr passes etc. Things were more restrictive for more junior ranks. OAP |
Originally Posted by Buitenzorg
(Post 9905126)
depicted Spitfire pilots as ginger, beer swilling types. Indeed, with very few exceptions, nothing could have been further from the truth. "
;) OAP |
Originally Posted by Danny42C
(Post 9904792)
Somewhere, on PPRuNe, I read a reference to an article by Wg Cdr Stanford-Tuck, to the effect that many of the Battle of Britain pilots were not the extrovert Rugby Club hearties of public imagination, but often quieter, introverted types. Google cannot find it for me: can anyone here please trace it for me ?
More in hope than any expectation, Danny. I'll type it up fully later, but the key bit is: 'I think the average member of the public during the war thought of Spitfire pilots as being gay, carefree, beer-swilling types, rather like the rugger club members one could see being very noisy in any pub on a Saturday night. Indeed, with a very few exceptions, nothing could have been further from the truth. Wartime flying and especially air combat in Spitfires, was a very cold calculating 'cat and mouse' affair. Woe betide any fighter pilot who was casual or who daydreamed - he would soon 'cop it up the back end', or one of his pals would.' |
The full version, which - unsurprisingly - does the necessary duty of saying good things about the book, offered so that the observations about rugger types can be seen in their context.
When Alfred Price invited me to write a foreword to this book I was, of course, honoured: but I had the passing thought "Oh dear! Another air book to wade through". My fears were quite unfounded. As soon as I had read the first few pages I was held by it and read on almost non-stop until I finished with Maffres's excellent 'Spitfire Swansong' I think the average member of the public during the war thought of Spitfire pilots as being gay, carefree, beer-swilling types, rather like the rugger club members one could see being very noisy in any pub on a Saturday night. Indeed, with a very few exceptions, nothing could have been further from the truth. Wartime flying and especially air combat in Spitfires, was a very cold calculating 'cat and mouse' affair. Woe betide any fighter pilot who was casual or who daydreamed - he would soon 'cop it up the back end', or one of his pals would. However, in spite of their deadly business, the Spitfire pilots had one great advantage - their aircraft - which they came to love in that strange way that men will love their cars or boats. I got my hands on a Spitfire for the first time on a crisp morning in December 1938. It belonged to No 19 Squadron at Duxford. From the first moment I sat quietly in the cockpit, going through all the instruments, cockpit checks, take off and landing procedures, etc, I thought "if it comes to a war, this is the girl for me." Later that day, after my first flight, I felt this even more and for the first time in any aircraft I felt I was really part of it. Just over a year later the tremendous thrill of getting my first Me109 over Dunkirk justified my high opinion of the handling and fighting qualities of the Spitfire. As the years went past she carried me through countless combats and difficult situations and gave of her utmost every time it was demanded. She was a true thoroughbred. I was so enthralled reading this book and recalling the memories it brought back of the airmen I had known, the flying and the wonderful spirit which exited in those years, that I was very tempted to write considerably more: but that is not my part in this book. All I can say, with sincerity, is that this is a fine book about a fine aircraft and fine men and add my thanks to Alfred Price for asking me to write these few words. |
Archimedes (#132),
Although I never got to fly them operationally, I trained on Spitfires during the war, and flew a few hundred hours in them postwar. I can endorse every word of Maffre's "Spitfire Swansong". There simply cannot ever be another aircraft like them for sweet handling and lightness of touch. Danny. |
"Wartime propaganda depicted Spitfire pilots as ginger, beer swilling types. Whilst checking my facts about Sgt (as he was then) 'Ginger' Lacey DFM and bar I noticed this quote which may have proved the propaganda as accurate. "I'd rather fight in a Spitfire but fly in a Hurricane," said Ginger Lacey. As he raised his glass of ale, quaffed the foam off the top. |
VX275 (#134),
Are you sure you've got the quotation the right way round ? Although I have only a few hours in the Hurricane, and have never fired a shot in anger in either, I'm told that the Hurricane was the better gun platform, but IMHO the Spitfire much nicer to fly in. Blowing the froth off a quiet pint hardly constitutes "beer swilling" (I have been known to chew the froth off the "dark waters of the Liffey" myself on occasion). Danny. |
Danny,
I've just seen your reply, Gen Arnold seems to have been quite a leader. I found the quote in Steven Bungays book "The Most Dangerous Enemy" I regularly lend it to people who need to know more or who don't realise how close Britain came to being out of the war. Nor indeed how "normal" The Few were. |
insty66 (#136),
Don't quite see the relevance of General Arnold to the Battle of Britain - Air Marshal Dowding was the man. But we should be eternally grateful to "Hap" Arnold (Chief of the Air Corps 1938-41), for the introduction of the "Arnold Scheme", and the "British Flying Training Schools" in the US, which trained thousands of pilots for the RAF (including me) from summer 1941 (when the US was still "neutral" (?) Have Posted on this Thread at #55; #67; #87; and #100, among others. A young man of 18, I lived through that fateful summer of 1940. You are right: in May of that year we were on the point of surrender (the Chamberlain/Halifax Government was ready to throw in the towel). Two things saved Britain: Churchill's magnificent oratory as he took over the Government and rallied the people, and the deathless performance of his "Few" over the next few months. By Christmas Britain was back in the fight - and the young man had, with thousands of others from all over the Empire and the occupied lands of Europe, (and the US ! - the "Eagle Squadron"), practically gone down on his knees at the Recruiting Office, begging for admittance to that glorious company of men. IMHO, the Battle of Britain was a "Score Draw", but one that was far more advantageous to one side than the other. Hitler planned to invade Britain, he failed. The RAF (all we had left, really) alone stood in his way, determined he should not. They succeeded. It was enough ! Our "Meeja" seem to have forgotten all about 15 September (the turning point) this year, but that is another matter. Danny. |
IMHO, the Battle of Britain was a "Score Draw", but one that was far more advantageous to one side than the other Often forgotten in the overall "Score" is the additional initial loss of R.A.F. aircraft on the ground on airfields ( an early Luftwaffe objective). By later holding the Luftwaffe to a "draw" the U.K . objective was indeed achieved. Whether Germany had already decided to hit Russia is a moot point to be argued by historians . The end result for the U.K. was the same , a turning point in the war (A fact conveniently now obscured by those with other, "common cause", agendas.) |
Re the Spitfire v Hurricane discussion. My father joined the Irish Army as a sergeant pilot in, I think, 1943. He flew with them until 1949 ish before joining the RAF.
In the Irish Army Air Corps he flew Hurricanes that had 'lost their way' as well as, after 1945, Seafires. He always preferred the Hurricane for its extra manoeuvrability and control harmonisation. That said, his favourite aircraft was the DH Hornet. The old boy is still going at 93 with, as he puts it, over 5000 hours being pulled around the skies by Rolls Royce piston engines. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:21. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.