V1 Buzz Bomb Aces....

[stona]

What was done after the war is an entirely different matter. Generally V-1 victories are listed separately to others.
As of June 5th 1944 pilots shooting down a V-1 were given either a half or full credit for an enemy aircraft destroyed. Maybe this was an incentive or encouragement, particularly for squadrons moved to anti-diver operations from elsewhere.
Cheers
Steve

 

[GregP]

Doesn't seem so in the lists I find. They either don't acknowledge V-1's at all or include each one as a victory.

One such site is here: British aces of WW2 . In this list, all victories are counted as one.

So your contention above may well be the one you follow (and I will not debate it, especially heatedly), but it will result in victory totals for the WW2 pilots that don't match ANY list you can find anywhere. I've never seen Joe Berry's total quoted as 18 anywhere. It is usually shown as 3 aircraft, 59 V-1's and 1 shared V-1 for an official total of 3. Roland Beaumont's official total is 6.33 ... not 41.

And I've never SEEN a list where the V-1 kills are broken out by "over land" and "over water."

Just goes to show me there's NO point in debating the German system for recognizing victories when we can't even agree on the Allied scores that are, in fact, documented. Ah well, it will probably never be settled ... at least to everyone's satisfaction.

 

[Juha]

Do you guys think I'm making it up for heaven's sake?
That was an official notification given to ALL anti diver squadrons on that date. A V-1 (destroyed over the sea) counted as "one enemy aircraft destroyed." It can't be any clearer than that. It doesn't say one missile, one unmanned aircraft or one flying bomb. It doesn't qualify the victory in anyway. One enemy aircraft destroyed could be a Fw 190, a Ju 88, a V-1 or any other enemy aircraft.
The notification is referenced in several publications. I read it recently in Sharp and Bowyer's definitive tome on the Mosquito.
Cheers
Steve

Hello Stona
it's nothing personal, I'm used to cross-check everything, especially if the info sounds even slightly odd. I don't recall ever having seen a list in which V-1s were counted to pilots' kills as normal kills and I'd think that the pilots didn't need any extra encouragement to engage V-1s which were so blatant risk to the civilians. But I agree that what had ordered during the summer 44 might well be irrelevant to that how the V-1 kills were handled later on. And Bannock's case seems to reinforce your info.

Juha

 

[stona]

No worries. I don't think any of us disagree really. V-1 Kills are certainly listed and treated differently post war, no matter what might have been the official position in mid 1944.
Cheers
Steve

 

[GregP]

Hey Steve,

Can you supply a link to that official notification?

Curiosity only.

 

[Admiral Beez]

A victory over a V-1 is not counted as an aerial victory by the RAF.

This Canadian recently passed away, an ace over both pilotless and piloted aircraft.

Canadian air ace Russell Bannock, 100, was a Second World War legend

 

[BiffF15]

This Canadian recently passed away, an ace over both pilotless and piloted aircraft.

Canadian air ace Russell Bannock, 100, was a Second World War legend

Would you be so kind as to cut and paste the article? It's a membership required website.

Cheers,
Biff

 

[Admiral Beez]

Would you be so kind as to cut and paste the article? It's a membership required website.

Cheers,
Biff

Looking for free link, stand by. Here's his Wikipedia page for now.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Article screenshot below.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Engaging V1 with Mosquitos can't be easy. The Mossie is quick for a twin seat, twin engine bomber, but it's no Tempest or Meteor.

 

[WARSPITER]

The other method I read about involved the Mossie. The account was written by the navigator who was quite shaken up after.
The pilot decided to use the turbulence of the Mosquito to disrupt the V1. This would be similar to the wing tipping method but
the pilot couldn't be bothered getting that technical so he simply dived down and crossed the front of the V1 (this apparently ended
up being pretty close and at high speed). The turbulence created by the larger Mosquito sent the V1 into a spin and that was that.

A slight miscalculation in the dive and they both would have been in a spin or worse. From the navigators point of view this wasn't
a method he endorsed.

 

[Crimea_River]

More on Bannock: