New book 'Fury', by Arnaud Gillet

[Peter Cornwell]

Iain,

Many thanks for the confirmation - I am totally satsfied that it was P2195 photographed burned out at Artaise. I will, of course, be pleased to compare notes with you on other Battles down in France in 1940 and am happy to do so 'off-line' as you suggest. Thanks again.

[Many Souffan]

Hello Ian.

I don't know if it's too much for you, I would like also to see this évidence with your photo. Naturally, if you want.

I think I am concerned as the same level as Peter with this thread. So I can send you my private email by PM.

Thank you.

[Iain Torrance]

Sure Many, no problem, will send to you straight away.

Kind regards

Iain

[Iain Torrance]

Many - you'll need to send me your email address, thx, Iain

[Many Souffan]

Hello Ian.

Thank you very much, I send you my email address by PM

[Many Souffan]

Hello Ian

Thank you very much.

Obviously, the proofs are 1000% correct, nothing to say more. it is the P2195.

Now, the question is, is it really the kite of Hobler ? nothing say that ?

In AIR 35/196 AASF aircraft casualties, the only one Battle of 142 sqn. found for the 14th may is the P2195 where are the others ?

Between the account of Hobler in Valiant Wings and the photograph, there are some differences. Even my English is not good, I understand the words "Folded back" and it seems there are nothing in these wings. I was photographer (professional and artist) during 23 years I may to advance my conclusion.

I am sorry to not show a photograph of a wreck of Battle ( I will share with who want after the printing of my article) without wings and it seem's stopped by trees (it is surrounded by trees). Naturally I have no proof actually that is the Battle of Hobler, we can see only QT-H. This photograph is more closed to the account of Hobler... that all.

Thank you again Ian for the photograph.

[Iain Torrance]

Many

Thanks, glad that you also agree the ID.

Afraid I can not answer your question on AIR 35/196; but as you know the records are seldom fully accurate nor complete.

In respect of your photo of ‘QT-H’ ‘without wings and stopped by trees, surrounded by trees’ I would be cautious.

There are a huge number of photographs of a QT-H facing forward from the edge of a wood. I have noted the bomb crater under wing in many photos, the cut poles, the wheels visible and having been seemingly blown forward under the wings and many photos marked ‘bei Reims’. I take the images as highly consistent with an aircraft bombed in its standing. Refer IWM C401 for a 142 Squ aircraft in standings and note the consistency of the surrounds with those many photos of QT-H.

142 ORB for 16 May states:

The Squadron left Berry-au-Bac by convoy. Two a/c were left unserviceable in their standings, one in “A” Flight, K9259 (which had received a direct hit during the enemy bombing raid on 12.5.40) and one in “B” Flight L5880. A third aircraft which was standing on the aerodrome was sabotaged by F/Lt Wight.

As L5880 is not a valid Battle Srl No so it is a miss-type and I take L5440 (after researching possibilities)and that would be my main contender for that QT-H.

I wonder if the angle in your photo could be deceptive? I have seen photos of the fuselage of QT-H that does indeed deceive by appearing to be in a wood but I have seen no photo with wings off. I have also seen photos of a QT-H seemingly dragged forward from the standing but those photos clearly show the wings still on.

Of course I have to accept that ‘your’ QT-H may be a different plane that has crashed into a wood and has lost it’s wings. However if that is the case it is almost certainly a replacement plane to 142 Squ after the retreat from Berry-au-Bac (in order to account for the ‘H’ plane code) so it would not be the Hobler plane.

As I’ve noted previously on this thread my only problem with P2195 as being Hobler’s plane is his wings ‘folded back’ comment. Everything else fits and I am aware of no better possibility. Remember also that as he was crashing the plane he was under sustained ground fire, then the plane hit trees, then immediately skidded on the ground and he finally suffered burns. So I am inclined to forgive his precise recollection of the ultimate plane damage - absent any more credible clear alternative.

In any event I very look forward to your article and photograph.

Kind regards

Iain

[G-ASEA]

As Ian states their are many photos of a Battle QT-H in front of a hedge. This aircraft looks bomb damaged. The propeller has not bent, So i would think it had not been crash landed. See photo.

Dave

[arnaud]

Of course...

[dave gaydon]

Dear Iain
A while ago Ed West posted two photographs of a Battle QT-H apparently force-landed and a photo of the rear section with the s/n L5231. I never saved the photos at the time and only have two poor photo copies. I know the two seperate photographs are not proof positive of the a/c, but I value your opinion as to the possibility that this QT-H could be Roth's a/c.
kind regards
David.