KG30 losses - 15 Aug & 9 Sept 1940

[Peter Cornwell]

The differences you mention are not the result of any new archives being located I regret to say. They are due to the Luftwaffe Crash Archive choosing to duplicate information as originally documented in the wartime A.I.1(k) Reports held in the AIR40 series at the National Archives in Kew. As a result, the vast bulk of the textual information the Luftwaffe Crash Archive contains was over 70 years old on publication and, as such, full of such errors. Interesting maybe from an historical viewpoint but far from being historically accurate which is a great shame as the series otherwise provides very good photo coverage. I was unsuccessful in my efforts to persuade the publisher to adopt a different approach when first provided with an initial draft of Volume 1 and despite printed acknowledgements have had nothing to do with the series. My own lists enjoy the benefit of considerable post-war research and incorporates information from a wide variety of additional sources unavailable to RAF Intelligence back in 1940. So the differences you note are not the result of research over the past three years but a far longer period most of it prior to publication of the Luftwaffe Crash Archive series.

[Stig Jarlevik]

THAT Peter, was quite a relief

Even if I have to admit I feel slightly 'tricked' by the approach from the Crash Archive, it is good to know that research always is an ongoing thing, but not as fast as I thought.

Must say I never realised the approach taken by Nigel Parker.....
Thanks for telling us!

Cheers
Stig

[John Vasco]

Stig,
If I may just explain further on the approach of the 'Crash Archive' series.

The intention was to use the 'K' summaries (note: not the 'Reports', as they were the actual interrogation files) to show what the Intelligence officers first picked up. These would be supplemented by additional information that had since come to light. The example that I can give you is in Volume 4, page 511, concerning the loss of Bf 110 C-4, 3U+FT, W. Nr.3297, of Jakstadt and Liedtke. The RAF report said it had collided with a Hurricane. It had in fact collided with the 609 Squadron Spitfire of Pilot Officer Miller, and this is mentioned as a correction in relation to the loss of 3U+FT.

There are other examples of the information in the 'K' reports being corrected in the volumes.

The volumes must be read with that caveat in mind. Hope this helps.

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks John

I understand what you mean and I appreciate such steps taken by Parker.
When I said I felt slightly 'tricked' it was not ment in a bad way. I do enjoy the booklets (got all of them in fact).

The problem is when you are not British to try and get a sentiment across. To try and strike a relevant balance is not always that easy you know....

Cheers
Stig

[Juha]

On 15 August attack on Driffield, mostly from British perspective, there is 23 pages (pp. 44 – 66) in Paul Bright’s Air War Over East Yorkshire (2005) and 7 pages (pp. 61 – 67) in Geoff Simmons’ and Barry Abraham’s Strong Foundations. Driffield’s Aerodrome from 1917 to 2000 (2001).

Juha

[James Farrimond]

Thanks everyone for our help on this. Ill keep a look out for those Juha.