Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Thanks for the info Brian. I presume these are entries are from the Blitz Then & Now I,II,III? I have not got round to purchasing these volumes yet. I knew about the Strood (River Medway) FW190 and I have research including the local newspaper report on the incident if you are interested? Let me know?

Clint

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

PLEASE CAN A SEPARATE ENQUIRY BE DEALT WITH ON A NEW THREAD?

ITS VERY DISCONCERTING TO LOOK AT 10 REPLIES, 8 OF WHICH ARE REPLIES TO AN ENQUIRY REGARDING MATERIAL WHICH SHOULD STRICTLY BE DISCUSSED ON A FRESH THREAD?

(Peter C you must be very popular!)

Dave

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

I accept that you will only be as good as your sources but the trick is to identify those you can rely upon and those that are best ignored. In order to make that choice you may well need to access surviving contemporary primary sources to satisfy yourself of the actual facts. It has been my experience that these sterile reports are often infinitely preferable to previously published accounts or even eye-witness accounts. I have already suggested Kent County Archive in Maidstone to you. This holds useful documents that would assist in your local research and your RDC may also hold similar material; ARP Incident Reports, Police Reports, Burial Registers, Coroner's Records etc. The NA(PRO) at Kew also has a wealth of documentation relating to enemy casualties in AIR2/8736-6, AIR22/266, etc etc

My comments above as to sources refers. And as someone who appreciates all too well the challenges of tackling the occasional 'huge project', I may be forgiven for appearing unimpressed by certain content of 'Aircraft Casualties in Kent' as queried elsewhere in this forum. Granted, no reference book ever produced by mere mortals will be without its share of errors, but it seems clear that little real care can have been given to substantiating the 'facts' presented in this book before its publication in 1990 when much of the information necessary was freely accessible. But it clearly provides ample scope for further in-depth research in resolving many apparent discrepancies in the historical record and I wish you every future success in doing so.

As for my popularity or otherwise, I have no idea and even less interest.

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Apologies Uckwash for the slight Hijack. (hey at least your thread was getting bumped?)

Clint

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Thanks chaps for taking the trouble to in part explain things better.

I've already discovered an anomaly in regards to Cebrzynski's Spitfire, which a little bit of 'ironing' of the facts could prove interesting.

In ernest I need to collect information from 'across the board' and will in time get across to Maidstone Archives too.

RAF records at Kew are great, generally accurate too. I've found local knowledge to be frequently (not exclusively) accurate, sometimes even humourous if a little 'reshuffled' with age, soon to be lost forever!

But as most of the sites reveal themselves to be of BoB vintage, very little is now left either of what passed before, by way of the weekend groups of excavators, and I'm finding it impossibly hard to locate who these people were, and in which corner of the World their earlier research findings have ended up in? Or where or how I might accost them in my quest to extract the truth.

I could bury myself deep in researching one crash site or alternatively in order to produce a bigger picture, I have had to scrape the barrel perhaps with whatever kind of methodology that is within my grasp. Remember this is Kent! the County which witnessed perhaps more arial actions during the BoB, than any other County only then to throw away at least part of the evidence

Dave

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Many thanks Peter for the confirmation reg Jessen, much earlier!

Best regs,
Steve.

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

One further point, although I'm not sure it will hold any interest.

That is this:

Artefacts, remains & the accompanying research & findings from a/c crash sites in Kent seem often to be almost exclusively kept within the domain of a few bands of brothers? Clubs (& individuals) past & present operating during the window of opportunity that was, with metal detecting in its infancy?

Information not freely circulated, or obtainable? Therefore whilst it is easy to be disparaging about using books like 'A/c casualties in Kent' written probably mainly 'in the dark' so-to-speak 'A/c casualties in Kent' is a bloody good effort, at least as far as was possible, by a group not engaged at the time during the first 'age of opportunity'?

Lets say I was trying to write such a book, without the help & support afforded to other publications from such groups, without Internet forums, how otherwise would I get anywhere near the Scientific accuracy & factualness Peter is aluding to without any privileges that might be possibly have been afforded him in 'BoB then & Now' (of access to such data)?

If I'm wrong to think rivalry doesn't exist amongst individuals & societies of Aviation historians & archaeologists, over the sharing of information, please feel free to correct me for intuitively believing for some obscure reason is a problem.

I myself have only been following up the current line of research, a decade, so excuse me if I appear surprised. I defy any relative newcomer to break the ranks of those 'in the know'.

If all information has in fact always been available to one and all, I am indeed wrong.
Then there is, I agree, a case to be disparaging about 'A/c casualties in Kent' on the basis that very little effort was therefore expended in its preparation, and editing, to ensure that it was worth the paper that it was indeed written upon. However if there were issues relating to the above, regarding accessability of certain records, I can't blame Baxter, Owen & Baldock, for their seemingly superficial presentation, of whatever they had on hand.

Dave

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Mr Cullen,

With some effort. But you seem to be expecting something for nothing. Privilege, like respect, is bestowed by others - it is not a divine right. So, if I was afforded access to ‘privileged information’ during the time that I have been actively engaged in this type of research, it was invariably through somebody else’s choice and, presumably, because (a) my approach was correct, and (b) they felt I deserved/earned their co-operation.

Psst, your paranoia is showing. It is my experience that those with little knowledge tend to guard it closely while the converse is also usually true. There are, I am sure, other visitors to this forum who as ‘relative newcomers’ themselves could dispute your comment.

I repeat, the information required to document aircraft losses in Kent more accurately than was apparently achieved by Baxter, Owen, & Baldock in ‘Aircraft Casualties in Kent’ was freely available to them and in the public domain back in 1990. Certainly that for 1939/40 which has been the period mainly queried in this forum to date. Anyone who cared to do so could consult the appropriate public archives, refer to available published sources, or approach others for required information. Had the publication appeared 30 years earlier I would have no grounds to be at all critical.

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

Hi Peter.
Since the thread has now turned in essence into an appraisal, I need to look in more detail at what you have stated above.
I'm sure & accept you likely earned the rights to access certain bits of information.
What do I mean by that?
Well I'm refering to records, photo's & documents, not in the Public domain, but gathered in connection with excavations, by individuals, as souvenirs, or as worthy additions to Museums past or present. For some reason which I rather wonder now was sometimes once possibly financial, was almost always exclusively in connection with the Battle of Britain, & the period involved.
I accept that 'Aircraft Casualties in Kent' when published in 1990 could have leant more heavily upon your earlier commendable publication, as that by then was in print?
Why was 'A/C casualties in Kent' never completed?
Well, please tell me if my paranoia is clouding my view, because my hunch Peter is that information (not always in the public domain) pertaining to the remaining 'sites' (exclusive of BoB) will remain water tight, until they too have been sucked dry. And exhausted of all artefactual evidence, by brothers. Then as with BoB sites of interest, all will be revealed, as the sites are no longer risks as they have been sucked dry.
But from what you are saying, its not this at all.
You suggest that actually its perfectly possible, given the right approach, from outside the brotherhood, (I'm paranoid again! damn) to figure out, in these cases, as I myself am endeavouring to do, & to obtain a complete picture, (& picture's'!) potentially as good as, or, extending even beyond the scope, of what the excellently (for its day) comprehensive, factual 'Then & Now' series definately achieved, & therefore that A/c casualties was indeed a weak effort, by a group of 3 men who had not 'earnt' by correct approach, sufficient privileges to access all that was required, to make it good.

Dave

Re: 2 unidentified axis losses, Kent?
 

I can't wait to join this "Brotherhood." Do we get a free apron and a secret handshake?