|
|
Post by Bruce on Jan 2, 2009 16:34:46 GMT 12
There was an article in "Aeroplane" magazine a few years ago that investigated Amy Johnsons death. The conclusion reached was the Oxford would not have run out of fuel where it did - with the auxilliary tanks filled (witnessed by the refueller at Blackpool) it still had several hours worth of fuel left. However the low approach up the Thames estuary in a twin engined type in poor visibility could easily have mislead the various AA gunners (both shorebased and on the navy vessels) that it was a reconnaisance Ju88. Witnesses do suggest that the Batteries opened fire at the time of the incident. It is a pity that once in the water Amy's life was ended in such an unfortunate way, also that of Commander Fletcher, who it appears died trying to save a pigskin bag. Messy business all round:(
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 16:36:12 GMT 12
It says on that BBC report her body wasn't recovered because it was chopped up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 16:38:59 GMT 12
Thanks Bruce, it's not surprising that the Navy may have shot her down, they shot at everyone and everything regardless, it was their policy.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Jan 2, 2009 18:55:41 GMT 12
www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/yorkslincs/series1/amy-johnson.shtmlYet another account with other accounts mentioned. I reckon we are not likely to know the truth - coverup or not. Just one of those things after so long. Just claiming it was the RN's fault is just not good enough though. You all can claim what you wish but I say: 'who knows'. Certainly it seems any worthwhile historian is not going to make any dramatic claims that the Navy shot down Amy Johnson for crying out loud.
|
|
|
|
Post by contourcreative on Jan 2, 2009 19:56:16 GMT 12
The onus of history is evidence. It is almost axiomatic that when an event involves the demise of figure of celebrity status, that exotic scenarios are proposed to provide answers, and naturally generate profitable media in its various forms. Steve Fossett's disappearance was attributed to a desire to vanish because of unspecified financial problems.
The truth is invariably prosaic, and is inevitably at variance with speculative journalism. I'm not saying that the Amy Johnson demise has the unreliability of an Elvis sighting, but large bits are missing. (if you'll excuse the unfortunate visceral analogy).
I guess , if I reversed a ship over an aviation heroine, I'd be inclined to be circumspect about it, but translating a disappearance into a cover up, doesn't make for particulary good history but does make for good press. Absence of information does not necessarily mean that individuals are withholding the 'truth', in fact the inclination of most human beings is to talk and to tell.
And sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. The disappearance of the aviator Antoine de Saint-Exupery achieved a new perspective when a manuscript, 'The Tale of the Rose' was discovered in 1999 by an academic doing research. It became a number one best seller in France, and tells the story of Consuelo de Saint-Exupery's 13 year passionate marriage to her famous aviator/writer husband. The 'Tale of the Rose' is derived from the Rose in Antoine's, 'The Little Prince' - a surreal, fantasy story that is as much an exploration of love than anything else..
On July 31. 1944 Antoine disappeared while flying a reconnaissance mission over southern France. Neither his plane or his body were ever found.
But in 1998, half a century later, a bracelet engraved with the words 'Consuelo' and 'Antoine' was recovered from the Mediterranean.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 21:10:18 GMT 12
www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/yorkslincs/series1/amy-johnson.shtmlYet another account with other accounts mentioned. I reckon we are not likely to know the truth - coverup or not. Just one of those things after so long. Just claiming it was the RN's fault is just not good enough though. You all can claim what you wish but I say: 'who knows'. Certainly it seems any worthwhile historian is not going to make any dramatic claims that the Navy shot down Amy Johnson for crying out loud. Um, I don't think anyone (except perhaps the author of the article Bruce mentioned) was suggesting the Royal Navy was to blame but they were certainly involved in her death, despite it being a very unfortunate set of circumstances. Making History is a show that has both historians as hosts and specialists in fields as their guests. I have no reason to doubt the story given of the RN ship beached on the sand being the actual cause of her death. At the time it came out there was discussion online too and there was talk of her simple drowning or crash being a cover up because of the nature of her death. The navy didn't mean to kill her, they are not responsible as such, but as the scenario played out, the ship's propellor was the reason why she died. All these other sites offering explanations have not yet caught up with the official release of the true story by the looks of things, and are relying on the previous rumours. |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Jan 2, 2009 21:37:46 GMT 12
Dave are you suggesting then that the radio story at: www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/making_history/making_history_spring2003.shtmlIs the last word on this story? I have not been able to listen to it for some odd reason. Is there a text transcription of this "official release of the true story" if that is what you are claiming. It is nevertheless curious how you describe a turning ship's propellor that apparently itself is grounded on a sand bank (in an attempted rescue) somehow is responsible for Amy Johnson drifting into that turning propellor if that is what the story (I have not heard) is about becomes the responsibility of the RN? At least I'm pleased you have dropped the claim that before that the RN had shot her out of the sky. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 22:03:08 GMT 12
I am not claiming anything is the "last word". All I know is when I first heard it, I was amazed as you were so I searched the web then and found other discussion of the fact it had been released after the 60 year rule or something like that about her death. I would certainly tend to trust the accuracy of a history programme on the BBC over a random website, personally. Wikipedia is claiming that there may have been a third person killed.
As the radio programme states there is a lot of mis-information out there about the event due to the public never being told what actually happened properly, so a lot of these websites will be passing on Chinese whispers, and perhaps some will be run by conspiracy theorists and other nuts who want to lump Johnson in with other lost aviators like Earhart. Take it all with a grain of salt till we locate the official report.
The historian said that the ship was beached on a sand bank and at the time of the incident the ship had just gotten off the bank and had the propscrew going. I don't know if it was turning backwards or forawrds but she went through it, according to the historian on the radio. Find a computer that works and play the link, and then you will understand.
I never claimed that the Royal Navy shot her out of the sky. Bruce suggested that from an article he read. I know for a fact that the Royal Navy shot at anything that came near them, it was their policy and the responsibility of the friendly aircraft to avoid friend;y ships as they would not appear too freindly for long. I even know someone who was shot at by the RN over the Tahmes Estuary in his Mosquito when the ground radar controller brought him down out of thick cloud over top of the ships (similar situation, eh?)
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Jan 2, 2009 22:11:49 GMT 12
Firstly let us go back to your claim that the 'RN killed Amy Johnson'. Did they? All the rest seems to be speculation or first person accounts that tell part of the story. Notwithstanding any (unheard) BBC radio story I would say that it will take some documentation to be made public. Why are these documents not availalbe on the web given such public interest. You have heard the BBC program Dave - does it say anything on this score.
BTW 'Chinese whispers' are what? Please explain. I still don't understand how the RN policy of shooting anything that moved has anything to do with Amy Johnson. Also please explain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 22:32:56 GMT 12
Firstly let us go back to your claim that the 'RN killed Amy Johnson'. Did they? When I made that comment, I sincerely believed that this was the official story now, based on what I read a couple of years back, as I have explained. It seems you and others perhaps don't believe it, and there are lots of differeing versions in the public, so perhaps I should amend it to the "Royal Navy possibly killed her. (by accident of course)" All of it is speculation, the versions you quoted are more speculative than the BBC one because they have so many variations based on rumour. The BBC have gone to an expert historian who has studied the case and one imagines has found evidence, or they would not have allowed it to go to air. Another seperate BBC programme has apparently made the same claim/come to the same conclusion according to this page which includes a quoted witness statement which supports that the prop of the Hazlemere kileld Johnson. www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/yorkslincs/series1/amy-johnson.shtmlI agree, and from what I had read in the past, it had been. You'll have to find it to believe it I guess. The programme doesn't mention documentation at all, it was not from there that I heard about the official release of info, it was elsewhere on the web (Gawd knows where - it was three or four years ago). It's a common expression in the English language (perhaps not in Australia?) where a story is passed on from person to person and changes each time it is told. It is actually based on a party game that was invented by the Chinese where you begin with a message and you pass it in whispered tone from oen person to the next and when it gets to the end of the line it is said aloud and they see if it's still the same. You'll have to find the article Bruce mentioned. The Thames Estuary, as you can imagine, was full of warships in wartime and was basically a forbidden no-go area for piltos as the chances of being shot at by the RN or shore based flak was very high. Not surprising when you consider the bashing London and the Estuary was getting from the Nazis in 1941. I should think it is fairly obvious how a theory of possible friendly fire shootdown could occur. The RAF and ATA, etc, were aware they weren't to fly there, but sometimes it happened and the Navy did take immediate action and ask questions later. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 22:45:00 GMT 12
By the way, one thing about the series Making History is that they always prepare more information than what is heard in the half hour show, and they present it in the form of a factsheet and also on their website, with additional links to related sites etc. This usually explains the topic in more depth and also cites the sources of the information that the particular expert has talked about, as well as a bit about the expert themselves.
Sadly the link to this page from that episode is no longer available, but perhaps if you're really interested you could email the programme and ask for the fact sheet as it may reveal more. They probably email it I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 2, 2009 23:20:23 GMT 12
And another thing that perhaps many people don't know about Amy Johnson is that her instructor when she learned to fly was none other than the great Will Hay.
|
|
|
|
Post by contourcreative on Jan 7, 2009 13:20:33 GMT 12
Question: Who was the greatest female aviator of all time? I'll make it easier...Who were the Top three female aviators of all time?...:  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2009 16:33:28 GMT 12
Earhart Johnson Batten?
|
|
|
|
Post by fletcherfu24 on Jan 7, 2009 16:40:47 GMT 12
Hanna Reitsch,no one else come close to this lady.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2009 17:45:16 GMT 12
Touche!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 7, 2009 17:50:33 GMT 12
"Who was the greatest female aviator of all time?"
A difficult question and it probably depends on what they were doing. I have to agree that Hanna Reitsch was certainly a tremendously brave and impressive pilot, despite her Nazi leanings, testing experimental rocket and jet types and being the first woman to fly a helicopter.
Some of those Russian Night Witches would have been pretty impressive fighter pilots too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 7, 2009 17:59:12 GMT 12
Or as far as female aerobatic pilots go, Svetlana Kapanina must rate up there at the top.
|
|
|
|
Post by contourcreative on Jan 7, 2009 18:41:11 GMT 12
Hannah Reitsche, Jacqueline Cochran and for a wild card...how about Pancho Barnes
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 7, 2009 19:38:53 GMT 12
I was going to suggest Pancho barnes too, but decided that perhaps not. I don't know enough about her to know if she's right up there with the top female pilots. I was reading a little about her the other day though and it seems she was well respected. In fact if the excellent film The Right Stuff is accurate, she was respeced enough to be allowed onto the flightline during the Bell X1 flight where Yeager broke the barrier - which I thought very odd when I noticed it while rewatching the film on the weekend, as I'd thought she was just some crude bar woman. So I looked her up to see why she was there I discoverd she was a famous pilot of great note who happened to own the bar. But what did she actually do, in terms of firsts or records? I did discover there was a 1980's TV series about her, and also a major documentary being made right now on her.
|
|
