In article , Dave Eadsforth
In article , Stolly [email protected]
It was recorded on a disk not tape.
If you are convinced it is not real then you are also convinced that
A. The picture of them stood outside the aircraft is faked.
B. They faked it in less than 12 hours since it was broadcast later the
C The BBC and Imperial War Museum, to this day, are in on the conspiracy.
D. 207 Squadron Association are also in on the conspiracy since the had a
renunion in 1983 and invited the BBC reporter there as reported here
http://www.207squadron.rafinfo.org.uk/default.htm . They got together 40
years later for the express purpose of remembering the recording and
broadcasting of this recording. Are you REALLY suggesting that they got
together 40 years later to remember something that never happened ?
Seriously you are ignoring all the above in favour of not believing that the
BBC knew how to filter noise. They were a world class broadcasting service.
You would certainly imagine they had sound engineers that knew what they
I have the whole 40 minute recording from the IWM sound archive. I payed
£20 for it. Are you saying that I should report the Imperial War Museum for
commiting fraud in that they are knowingly selling faked recordings ? Or
perhaps a museum with a international reputation has been duped themselves
and that you know better based on a hunch that the engines are not loud
SNIP of MJP points
Out of respect for your 20.00 worth of drinking vouchers, I will take a
look at all the recordings on your site, but as I mentioned in an
earlier part of this thread, the beef with the sound quality is only
part of it, the actual words recorded don't add up to a real-time
recording of a Lanc aircrew on a bomb run.
1. The pilot is instructed to keep weaving after the navigator has
announced half a minute to go before bomb drop (and before the fighter
puts in an appearance). If the bomb aimer were staring through the bomb
sight stabilisation glass at that time, to get a straight run in on the
target, the last thing he would have wanted was a weave. And just who
is asking for the weave? Usually such a command was only given by a
gunner who had definitely seen a fighter - not the case at that time.
Then the pilot is told to steer 'left, left' - such a precise order
would not be given by the bomb aimer until the pilot had been told to
stop any weaving.
2. Then the pilot asks for more revs. Why - just at the time the bomb
aimer needs constant speed maintained for his bomb sight predicting
computer? This doesn't feel quite right.
3. Finally, the pilot is instructed to weave again at a time when the
bomber should have been flying straight and level for the post-drop
picture to be taken, and before the night fighter is sighted.
4. And did they really put a mike in the rear turret to record the
sound of the Brownings?
The bombing sequence has the feel of jargon being bunged in by a script
writer who did not know the true sequence of events before and after a
Bother - that draft left my out-tray before I'd finished with it...
Revision to point 2. 'more revs' is a bit imprecise for a pilot -
'increase revs to so many RPM' (even if valid at that point in the bomb
run) would surely have been a bit more likely?
Revision to point 3 due to my mis-remembering: - after the rear gunner
disposed of the attacker the pilot was instructed to keep weaving just
prior to the bombing photograph being taken. Odd advice.
The other recordings do sound much more plausible, although I was quite
surprised to hear the 'bombardier' (not 'air bomber' or 'bomb aimer' - I
know that's been mentioned before - was this recording made with a view
to airing it in the USA?) fusing his bomb load as they crossed the coast
- always thought that fusing was done after they were committed to the
run in - after all, they might have had to abort and jettison, and a
hang up was always on the cards - who would want to land with a fused