New book 'Fury', by Arnaud Gillet

[Chris Goss]

Ah that makes things clear which the original posting did not (unless one already knew which Brian & myself & no doubt others did not)

[CJE]

The "fury's head" (from a famous painting by Michelangelo) was the insignia of one escadrille of GC III/7, involved (after Gillet) in the shooting of friendly aircraft over Sedan on that fateful day.
I'd have rather called it the "spitfire's head", but it could have been still more misleading...

[Iain Torrance]

My apologies, I should have referred to the subject matter of the book.

regards

Iain

[Many Souffan]

Hello.

I have finished reading the book of Arnaud Gillet, the title is "La Furie" the Fury. I would like to be in Fury, but I can't so my consternation is deep...

88 pages in format A4, Left page in French, right page in English. The subject, the possible mistake of the French "Groupe de Chasse" GC III/7, the 14th may 1940, which would have been able to shoot down Fairey Battle in place of Hs 126.

Maybe some readers remember the long thread and for some, boring (May 14th 1940 and few little things) where Mr Gillet said, he was sure that 7 pilots of GC III/7 shot down 4 Battle for 4 Hs126 the 14th may 1940.

So, why to write a special issue about this fact? (Without introduction). In this book Arnaud Gillet change a little the story. Now the French Pilots has shot down 3 Battle and a French Bomber: a Leo 451 a twin engined medium bomber with 2 drifts.

Arnaud Gillet had modified some hours to reach to his conclusion, he did some arrangements with the facts, with the translation of the words of 2 German Sergeants and an unknown Officer, the three belonging to the Grossdeutchland Division. When the officer speak about “Messerschmitt 126” Mister Arnaud Gillet write exactly: “which were in fact Fairey Battle”… Without a little “maybe” or a little “possibly”. He is always sure...

Sorry for my silence and my delay about my article (to lose 4 very close persons of your family this last 2 years is not evident for whoever). But be sure Peter, my article will be published in Avions n°177, issue of September with all infos, all documents some photographs and the address of the archives about the loss of Hs 126… Sometimes the truth is more simple then we think...

Sorry again for my bad English.

[Peter Cornwell]

Thank you Many. I look forward to considering the merits of both cases. My commiserations on your recent losses.

[Iain Torrance]

I agree with Peter that we must now look forward to the alternative version.

Meantime a few other points from Arnaud's book that are interesting:

Arnaud spotted Hobler in a couple of photos from the phoney war in the IWM 'C Series' (402 & 403) so they must be of 142 Squ - be grateful if anybody can identify some additional faces.

Hobler's plane is now almost certainly (from French records and various photos) P2195 and not P2246 as stated in the ORB. P2195 is definitely the much photograhed wreck at Artaise which finished up at the edge of the road. For those who have a copy of Peter's T&N there is a photo of the wreck at p394, although there is no grave as captioned. The camera angle is just misleading on a fencepost and the top of the ditch.

The issue of timings is interesting. The draft 142 Squ ORB has timings not included in the finished version. But why? We can only hope some log books surface !!

Best regards

Iain

[Many Souffan]

Hello Ian.

I agree with you only for the Battle P2195, It is proved also by English Archives: Aircraft casualties AIR35/196 at the date of 14th may 1940. the only one Battle described is the P2195.

The timing given by Arnaud Gillet is wrong. The take off of the 76 Wing ( 12, 142, 226) was 3 PM and as I will explain in my article, S/L Hobler received from a personal call from a high officer to take off early than 3 PM after he learned the failure of the mission of the French Bombers.
And Hobler, himself, said he took off 20 minutes before 3 PM with another Battle. 142 sqn was the first off all Battle squadrons to take off this afternoon of 14 may.

The GC III/7 took off at 0.25 PM for a free chase in Zone, not to protect the French bombers in their mission, the base of the III/7 was in fact bombed the 12 & the 13 may and their mission( in low altitude) this 14th may was to prevent a new attack of the German bombers. It was for the same reason that the GC I/3 with their new Dewoitine d520, was also in free chase but in high altitude.

Another thing about these French pilots of III/7 They knew very well the Battle, they shared the base of Mourmelon during the fall 1939 with 88 Sqn equiped with Battle.

The last thing, I would like to say, to understand the events, you must put in perspective what happen on earth with the Panzer Divisionen, very important, because the luftwaffe units of Hs 126 were attached to these Panzer Dv (1, 2 and 10) and all they did during these times were written in the diaries of the Heer.

And you will see that the French claims and the German losses ahave the same hour, the same minute and the same place for the 2 first losses of Hs 126.

Now, I know, that I will nevermore trust the work of Arnaud Gillet. he have written in his last book that the fourth battle was in fact a French medium bomber of GB I/12 n°48 before to explode a witness saw 2 parachutes. One of the 2 parachutes was Henry Lebeaupin. I have his account.

1/ the take off of the bomber was the morning,
2/ the bomber was shot down by Messerschmitt 109

As he has written to his parents from the stalag. When he go down slowly to the earth he was surrounded by the messerschmitt 109, wounded, he reached the earth among the panzer, he rememberered he was put on a panzer with others French prisoners, and went to Chéhéry, he had to answer some questions, after he went to the hospital of trier, and after a stalag...

after that how to believe this author who write this conclusion:
" Regarding the archives of III/7 & I/12 groupes, it is now public knowledge that the account concerning this account is far from the truth..."

It is easy to say it is a good work if you don't know that the hours were changed to give a good proof for the concordance of the facts, but unfortunatly the approach of the facts are not in this book from an historian. or maybe a mystic historian.

I will publish all the proofs and you will think it was more terrible than you could imagined.

I feel more sad than happy to have written above...