scottmarchand Posted 5 April , 2015 Share Posted 5 April , 2015 Hmm, one minor point with respect to earlier pots about training etc. is that from the first flight of a fledgling pilot they recorded all flights in their logbooks and them officially endorsed by the relevant officer in command on a regular basis, e.g. monthly, at waypoints in training, postings etc. These were official military documents issued by the Crown like a paybook and such and are not diaries or things easily subject to falsehoods so the information in BB's first books would be pretty authoritative and would remove all doubt of his actions in confirming or refuting his claims at the time. David's point in post #48 is interesting with respect to new information. I am not aware of any medical historians sinking their teeth into the great war pilots and VC heroes, PLM heroes etc. It would be fascinating to have an evaluation of these personalities from a perspective other than 'complete heroes' vs 'complete frauds' frame of reference - how did physical, psychological and social development influence their conduct . A hero is often meant or desired to be a simple creature (most useful if killed in the act) a human is much more complex and vexing in the role of a hero especially in the times after the heroism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Burns Posted 5 April , 2015 Share Posted 5 April , 2015 A little off topic perhaps... but here goes. Mick's comments about captions being the author's responsibility are 100% accurate. We see things in images that the general public would never notice, and it is our responsibility to be as accurate and informative with captions as it is with the text. A good editor, and trust me Mick is one of the best I've worked with, will be able to select what is truly important if the caption needs to be trimmed. Better, he will check back with you. But, if we do not provide that information to begin with... well, we cannot expect an editor or publisher to fill in the gaps. Today's publishers are not the publishers of a few decades ago. They are there solely to print and sell books. In the majority of cases they no longer have knowledgeable copy writers on staff. From my personal experience today's publishers are but one step removed from self publishing. So, if you are writing for a Journal or publisher it is YOUR responsibility to check your facts. I say this with a red face as I slipped up in one caption in my latest book. Aircraft recognition should be one the basic skills of all aviation authors. If you don't know, there are plenty of people willing to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 6 April , 2015 Share Posted 6 April , 2015 Alex, Yes. A very fair comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 7 April , 2015 Share Posted 7 April , 2015 Mick, I so agree. Every man and his brother without any knowledge of the subject are now writing about it on commission, usually culling everything from previously published books. I've been pretty involved with McCudden for the last year or so, writing a biography. A couple of days ago I was in Waterstones looking at all the general books on our subject, and in three or four looked up what they had to say about McCudden. On the subject of his death, all differed in essential details, one author, who should know better, presenting as facts a sequence of events which are simply not possible for McCudden to have done. A very good example of culling is in a recent book covering WWI aerodromes. CCI members will know what I mean by the Gazetteer of Flying Sites 1912-1920, which is the product of work by myself and my late friend Bill Morgan. If the book isn't a rip-off of the Gazetteer, then I'm a Dutchman's uncle. Anyone could take our tabulations and convert them into longhand and that has happened. Unfortunately for the author, he perpetuated a few mistakes we'd made - mistakes which will be corrected as an addendum when the series finishes this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loader Posted 8 April , 2015 Share Posted 8 April , 2015 I've never seen a WW1 logbook but have several from WW2 RAF aircrew. All the entries for a month are tallied as to time in the air & signed off by I think the Sqdn CO or rthe Adj. as to correctness. Was this done in WW1 too? I realize it was 20 yrs later & things had changed & grown more sophisticated as to records keeping but wonder if anyone knows if BB's logbooks or anyone's officially totaled & signed as correctness. Seems his early ones before he became famous would have been honest & correct to be ok'd by his CO. If I'm wrong please let me know how it was done if it was done. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 8 April , 2015 Share Posted 8 April , 2015 hello all, Just read the latest review of the Peter Kilduff book on Bishop posted on the Aerodrome site by the author. With its (the review's) talk of details given of everyone of B's victories, and such statements as 'It is highly recommended as a reference book by air historians but would also appeal to anyone interested in air fighting of the Western Front in the last three years of the Great War.' I'm beginning to wonder if we are all reading the same book! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 8 April , 2015 Share Posted 8 April , 2015 Alex - April Fools was last week!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICM - RAF Retd Posted 8 April , 2015 Share Posted 8 April , 2015 Loader: I can't speak for all of the RFC, but a WW1 pilot's logbook of which I have copies, and covering service with 10 Sqn, a detachment to 21 Sqn, and later time at a Training establishment, has no countersignatures at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loader Posted 8 April , 2015 Share Posted 8 April , 2015 Loader: I can't speak for all of the RFC, but a WW1 pilot's logbook of which I have copies, and covering service with 10 Sqn, a detachment to 21 Sqn, and later time at a Training establishment, has no countersignatures at all. Thankyou for that info. I guess that could be the norm in WW1 unless someone can offer an example of such countersigning. New arm of service & all I expect they had to feel their way along with procedures & paperwork & did not happen overnight. Might have provided some help re: BB's early flights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Martyn Posted 8 April , 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April , 2015 hello all, Just read the latest review of the Peter Kilduff book on Bishop posted on the Aerodrome site by the author. With its (the review's) talk of details given of everyone of B's victories, and such statements as 'It is highly recommended as a reference book by air historians but would also appeal to anyone interested in air fighting of the Western Front in the last three years of the Great War.' I'm beginning to wonder if we are all reading the same book! Alex, I believe Specsavers have of late reported an upsurge in the sales of rose-tinted glasses! Errol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex revell Posted 9 April , 2015 Share Posted 9 April , 2015 Errol, More like white sticks, I'd say. :-). What I love is people who review books from a position of complete ignorance of the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete-c Posted 15 August , 2015 Share Posted 15 August , 2015 A very good example of culling is in a recent book covering WWI aerodromes. CCI members will know what I mean by the Gazetteer of Flying Sites 1912-1920, which is the product of work by myself and my late friend Bill Morgan. If the book isn't a rip-off of the Gazetteer, then I'm a Dutchman's uncle. Unfortunately for the author, he perpetuated a few mistakes we'd made - mistakes which will be corrected as an addendum when the series finishes this year. I had a quick scan of the book in question whilst I was at the RAF Museum yesterday. It's a pity the author couldn't even get your name right Mick - even though he does give fulsome praise for all your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 16 August , 2015 Share Posted 16 August , 2015 I had a quick scan of the book in question whilst I was at the RAF Museum yesterday. It's a pity the author couldn't even get your name right Mick - even though he does give fulsome praise for all your help! Not as such - My only contact with him was by e-mail, when he asked for information on later entries in the CCI Gazetteer and I refused on the grounds that it was for CCI - hence the erroneous material re such sites as Wigsley and Wolverhampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete-c Posted 16 August , 2015 Share Posted 16 August , 2015 Not as such - My only contact with him was by e-mail, when he asked for information on later entries in the CCI Gazetteer and I refused on the grounds that it was for CCI - hence the erroneous material re such sites as Wigsley and Wolverhampton. Perhaps his lengthy appreciation - and his recommendation of CCI - were more from a sense of guilt than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 17 August , 2015 Share Posted 17 August , 2015 Perhaps his lengthy appreciation - and his recommendation of CCI - were more from a sense of guilt than anything else. Water under the bridge now. The final, 4 page, CCI Gazetteer listings are in the next issue, with two more OS maps showing Irish locations. The final OS map will be in CCI 46/4, backed by UK maps showing changes to RAF Area Commands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now