#BCATP | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

esprit-de-corps-magazine · 6 years

Text

Arizona Commemorative Air Force Museum B-25 "Maid in the Shade"

By Richard LawrenceOnce again the Commemorative Air Force is visiting the Ottawa area as the Arizona Airbase’s North American B-25J Mitchell bomber, “Maid in the Shade”, set down at the Gatineau Executive Airport and taxied over to the Vintage Wings of Canada ramp as part of the “Flying Legends Of Victory Air Show Tour”. This specific aircraft flew fifteen actual combat missions (13 x Italy, 2 x Yugoslavia) from Seraggia Airport on the island of Corsica in November and December 1944 as Battle 18 with the distinctive blue tail and blue ring cowls she now displays. She also participated in America’s first large-scale bombing offensive in the Philippines where “the Maid” is credited with eight ships sunk and five planes shot down. After she retired from the military in 1959 she was used as an aerial pest spray aircraft until 1980 when she arrived at the Arizona Airbase of the CAF (AZCAF) and was in restoration for almost 29 years until her first flight in May 2009.

The B-25 bomber, built by North American Aviation and named after Major General William “Billy” Mitchell, was one of the best known and versatile bombers of the second war. It was a heavily armed medium bomber which served in every theatre of war in roles from bombing, anti-shipping, to tactical ground support. It was an exceptionally sturdy aircraft that could withstand tremendous punishment. One B-25C (nicknamed "Patches “) of the 321st Bomb Group, had the aircraft's holes patched with the bright yellow zinc chromate primer. At the end of over 300 missions Patches had been belly-landed six times and had over 400 patched holes. The airframe was so distorted from damage that straight-and-level flight required 8° of left aileron trim and 6° of right rudder, causing the aircraft to "crab" sideways across the sky.

Of the nearly 10,000 B-25s produced, there were many variants with this “J” version having over 4,300 siblings. The “C” version (known as the Mitchell Mk II in the RCAF/RAF) would have been most familiar to Canadians, the “G” version had the nose plexiglass replaced with skin and two additional .50 calibre machines added PLUS a 75mm (3 inch) cannon, and the “J” version as a Strafer variant was outfitted with most of its 14 to 18 machine guns facing forward for strafing runs (8 machine guns in the nose position, 2 fixed on either side of the fuselage below the cockpit, and 2 in the dorsal turret). In short, there was no shortage of variations of this aircraft or job it couldn’t be thrown against.

One of the techniques for which the B-25 was known was “skip bombing”. This entailed the bomber to fly between 200-250 feet above ground at 200-250 mph and then drop a stick of two 1,000 pound or four 500 pound bombs that would then skip off the water (like skipping a stone) before hitting a ship and exploding (4-5 second delay fuses) or sinking below the ship and exploding next to her. Mast-height bombing was similar where the B-25 would come in at a slightly higher altitude and faster speed and then drop down to 10-15 feet about 600 yards back of the target. At about 300 yards, the bombs were released into the side of the ship.

The B-25 is most notably known as the bomber selected to make the first air raid against the Japanese home islands in April, 1942. For that raid 16 B-25B Mitchell bombers were stripped down of all unnecessary equipment, including most of the defensive machine guns and ammunition, and launched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet (for which they weren’t designed) without a fighter escort. LCol. James Doolittle led the 80 man raid for the six hour, 800 mile flight after which they were to go to China to land, another 7 hours. However, one aircraft had issues in flight and diverted to Russia where they were interned and eventually escaped to get home. The 15 other aircraft successfully carried out the raid creating minor damage but a huge success as far as damaging the morale of the Japanese civilian population and boosting the morale of American Troops.

All 15 bombers made it to China where they had to crash land, bailout or ditch and all but two crews (10 airmen) made their way home. Not all crew members made it back with three KIA and eight taken as POWs (3 executed, 1 died). There were also reprisals against the Chinese who assisted the downed airmen with one city, Nancheng, burned to the ground for rendering assistance.

There is a Canadian connection to the B-25 as Canadian aircrew served on them when they served in RAF units which flew the B-25. The RCAF did fly them during WWII but Canadian usage was mostly after the war. The first B-25s for the RCAF were originally destined for the RAF but were diverted to the RCAF and redesignated using the Mark system. These included 1 x B-25B (Mitchell Mk I), 42 x B-25C (Mitchell Mk IIs), and 19 x B-25J-NC (Mitchell Mk IIIs).

No 13 (P) Squadron was formed at Rockliffe in May of 1944 where they operated Mitchell Mk IIs on high altitude aerial photography sorties and became No 413 (P) Squadron in April 1947, flying the Mitchell until October, 1948. In January, 1947, No 418 (Auxiliary) Squadron received its first Mitchell Mk IIs, operating a mix of Mk IIs and Mk IIIs until March, 1958. No 406 (Auxiliary) Squadron flew Mitchell Mk IIIs from April 1947 to June 1958 with No 12 Squadron of Air Transport Command flying Mitchell Mk IIIs from September 1956 to November 1960. No. 5 OTU (Operational Training Unit) at Boundary Bay, British Columbia and Abbotsford, British Columbia, operated the B-25D Mitchell in the training role together with B-24 Liberators for Heavy Conversion as part of the BCATP.

In 1951, the United States Air Force provided the RCAF with an additional 75 x Mitchell Mk IIIs (B-25J) so that second-line units could be equipped and to help alleviated shortages caused by attrition. In all, 164 B-25s served with seven RCAF squadrons in light bomber, navigation training, photo recon, and transport roles.

On a personal note, I had the good fortune to be selected to go for a ride in the “Maid” as part of a media flight and because I’m a veteran. My position was as the left hand waist gunner. From the pictures you can see that there were four of us in this space which normally accommodated two. As well, we had seats which the gunners would not have had, having instead to sit on their parachutes for the entire journey. After a flight briefing by AZCAF’s Ted Lloyd we got into the aircraft’s waist via a ladder just aft of the bomb bay and then wrestled into seats and seatbelts and waited … and sweated … and waited and sweated. It was a hot day with high humidity and there is no air movement in the waist until the engines start and the B-25 starts to taxi. As the engines turned over, we all put on ear protectors as the B-25 is noisy, so much so that just ear plugs are not deemed sufficient. The first smell is that of exhaust as we are seated just behind the engines but that clears soon enough as you start moving and you start to get some airflow into the cabin. The taxi out to take-off position is not much different than any other aircraft, other than it is 74 years old.

Once the take-off roll started, I was surprised by how much I was pushed into the back of my seat as I expected something gentler. After passing V1 and Vr speeds she jumped up in to the air and started a gentle climb for a couple of seconds and then did what felt like a 60 degree turn. Again, more abrupt than I would have expected. What I gathered from this little bit of experience is that this aircraft handles very nimbly and that the pilots have no compunction about throwing it around the sky.

A couple minutes into the flight, Ted gave us the OK to unbuckle and I was allowed to crawl from the waist position to the rear gunner position in the tail. And that’s the only way you can get there is on your belly. It’s a small little seat about 12-16 inches off the floor with the machine guns at knee level. Your head sticks up into a blister so you can see targets but your field of view is limited, especially if

you’re shorter than six feet. The others moved about standing at the waist gun positions tracking whatever they could see with the guns. A few minutes of this and all of a sudden, we’re bidden back to our seats by Ted as we’re starting to setup for landing. It’s surprising how fast a 25 minutes flight goes by.

I must say that the experience is not a lot different than flying in any other airplane EXCEPT that when you think of it in a historical perspective. You see how these young men, 18, 19, 20 years old with no worldly or life experiences yet, were crammed in together and sent up into the air to bomb another country – to execute government sanctioned killing. Imagine being airborne for hours, knowing that fighters were going to come at you for hours and that you only carried a limited supply of ammunition. Knowing that they could weave all over the sky at double your speed and that you were essentially a sitting target travelling straight and level. Knowing that anti-aircraft fire could bring you down in seconds. Put that together with an uncomfortable working environment, whether it be heat on the ground or cold in the air, and machine gun cartridges bouncing all over the aircraft’s inside as you blazed away hoping to hit a moving target and not even having enough room to fully traverse your gun without hitting your buddy on the opposite side. Take a look at the structure of the aircraft from inside and realize what a flimsy vehicle this is to do the job that it has been assigned. I can only commend the courage of any man who would go up and do this a second time. Most went up dozens of times without a second thought. Many didn’t return.

As a last historical note, I noticed that the bomb bay doors had a lot of graffiti on it and upon closer examination saw that it was inscriptions from men who had actually flown B-25s. It was pointed out to me that two of the signatures were of aircrew of the Doolittle mission, Ed Sayler (crew #15) and David Thatcher (crew #7). It’s worthwhile just to sit there a read the names for a minute or two.

I’d like to express my thanks to Corey Paul and her staff for their excellent service and response times in providing information to me and for thinking to include me in the media flight as a veteran. I’d also like to thank Ted Lloyd for getting me to the tail gunner position in flight, something I’m sure he didn’t have to do, and also thanks to Paul Hlavaty for letting me up into the cockpit once she was on the ground, again something he didn’t have to do. The Arizona Commemorative Air Force Museum (AZCAF), based in Mesa, Arizona, is one of 86 different airbases, wings, squadrons, and other unit types comprising the Commemorative Air Force organization that fly and house the largest collection of flying vintage aircraft in the world. The CAF is the nation's leading organization devoted to preserving American military aviation history through education, flying and exhibition.

For more photos: http://www.richardlawrencephotography.ca/rlpgalleries/2018/maid/index.html

0 notes

nocternalrandomness · 1 year

Text

A restored 1944 Avro Anon Mk V in RCAF markings

The Anson Mk. V trained BCATP aircrew in bombing, aerial photography and radio operation, but its main role was in navigation training. After WW II, Ansons continued in military service for quite a time. They were retired from the RCAF in 1954, but continued flying with the RAF until 1968. When manufacture ceased in 1952, over 11,000 Ansons had been built - nearly 3,000 of them in Canada.

#Vintage aircraft #Avro Anon #passenger plane #airplane #Anon Mk V #plane #aviation pictures

33 notes · View notes

vanwartime · 4 years

Link

#rcaf #boundarybay

0 notes

aviationhistory · 7 years

Photo

First BCATP pupils report to No. 1 SFTS at Camp Borden for service flying training.

#aviation #history #aircraft #aerospace

0 notes

aviationgeek71 · 8 years

Photo

9 Mar 1942: Sqn Ldr Lloyd V. Chadburn 1st Cdn trained in BCATP to command a RCAF sqn (416 Sqn)

#avgeek #aviation history #aviation

6 notes · View notes

esprit-de-corps-magazine · 6 years

Text

THE "CANADIAN" FACTOR: The Importance Of Canadianizing Our Aerial Forces In WWII

(Volume 25-01)

By David MacLellan

The creation of Royal Canadian Air Force No. 6 Group in Bomber Command in 1942 was a very important “landmark” for the RCAF and it did play a major role in Bomber Command’s efforts for the remainder of the war. The adaptation from Larry Rose’s Ten Decisions: Canada’s Best, Worst and Most Far-Reaching Decisions of the Second World War (Volume 24 Issue 10, November 2017) doesn’t, however, properly deal with the real issue of “Canadianization” of the RCAF … there was a huge “elephant in the room” that was not addressed in the article at all.

Not one single aircraft on strength of the RCAF squadrons that formed the group in 1942 actually belonged to Canada, and the RCAF and that situation would continue for years. The aircraft were supplied by the RAF, bought and paid for by the British government. No wonder the British resisted Canadianization — they were just protecting their assets.

How did this situation come to be? You cannot really blame the British; failings in the Canadian government and specifically the policies, or lack thereof, of Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King are at the core of this “problem.” King totally failed to insist that the clause in the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan (BCATP) ensuring graduates “be identified with their respective Dominions” be followed. This failure would have consequences, not just for the issue of Canadianization. This was very much rooted in the underfunding of the RCAF in the 1930s, King’s initial vision of a “limited liability” war for Canada, and just a general failure of the King government to defend Canadian interests.

A little background. There were no Canadianization issues with the Royal Canadian Navy or the Canadian Army because previous Canadian governments had dealt with British pressure to create “imperial forces” and had owned up to the responsibilities of a sovereign Canadian nation. In 1911, instead of giving money to the British government to build warships for the RN as asked, the Wilfrid Laurier government created the Royal Canadian Navy and, in 1914, the Robert Borden government resisted British pressure to incorporate Canadian soldiers as replacements in British Army regiments, thus Canadians served in Canadian regiments in the Canadian Expeditionary Force (CEF) and eventually a Canadian Corps was created under a Canadian general, Sir Arthur Currie. The RCAF in the Second World War would be the least Canadian branch of the armed forces because the King government allowed it to happen.

There was an anomaly in this as well. In Canada, the Canadian government / RCAF bought and owned all BCATP aircraft as well as all the aircraft flown and operated by the RCAF’s “home squadrons” — those numbered in the No. 1 to No. 170 block. These squadrons included fighter, army co-operation, bomber, flying boat, torpedo bomber, general purpose, bomber reconnaissance, communications, seaplane, coastal artillery co-operation, composite, ferry, transport, heavy transport, etc. — in other words, what you would expect to find on strength of a “balanced” air force component. The operational squadrons fought and engaged the enemy on both coasts, but primarily the Atlantic where a number of squadrons, No. 10 and No. 162 for example, had major success engaging German forces in battle. There was never a Canadianization issue with the BCATP or RCAF squadrons at home.

When RCAF No. 1 (Fighter) Squadron arrived in England in August 1940, its Hawker Hurricanes came from Canada, bought and paid for by Canada; this was the only truly “modern” war-ready squadron in the RCAF. But this would not be the standard pattern. The squadrons that followed — such as the No. 400 block of squadrons serving overseas — would have no aircraft to bring and the Canadian government would not buy or supply any. The renumbering of No. 1 as No. 401 and all subsequent squadrons formed made sense as a command and control issue. During the Battle of Britain, having RAF No. 1 and RCAF No. 1 in the air at the same did time did lead to some confusion in the heat of battle.

As the number of RCAF No. 400 block squadrons was increased, all were equipped with RAF-owned aircraft. The RAF was totally responsible for the initial supply of aircraft and for replacement/upgraded marks and types as required, not Canada or the RCAF.

The consequences of Canadian government policy meant that:

Thousands of RCAF personnel were assigned to RAF squadrons and not RCAF. (As pointed out and supported by my own research, many RCAF crew in this category didn’t mind at all flying with a mixed Commonwealth crew on RAF squadrons as it made for an all-the-more interesting experience, Empire and “all that” and, of course, they were still getting the job done.)

Often the No. 400 block of squadrons received older, used, less state-of-the-art RAF aircraft. Highly decorated RCAF No. 406 Squadron commander W/C R.C. (Moose) Fumerton DFC and Bar got in a bit of trouble for complaining publicly about “being sick of receiving clapped-out RAF Beaufighters” while RAF night fighter squadrons seemed to always be first in line for better radar and, more importantly, DH Mosquitoes. No. 406 didn’t get Mosquitoes until 1944, even though there was Canadian production. Until the Canadian-produced Avro Lancaster B. Mk. Xs started to arrive, most RCAF bomber squadrons flew on with increasingly aged Halifax bombers with RAF units getting Lancasters much earlier.

There is some evidence that the RCAF’s use of older aircraft (see point 2 above) lead to higher aircraft losses and casualty rates on the No. 400 block of squadrons.

The RCAF overseas was not a balanced force (unlike the RCAF home squadrons) — too many bomber squadrons and higher casualties.

So, what we really have with the RCAF overseas is the King government’s total failure to articulate and support an RCAF policy that truly represented Canadian interests as a sovereign nation. King abdicated his responsibility and thus created an overseas air force that was not what it could have been, doing a disservice to Canada.

This, of course, is a political discussion and in no way diminishes the enormous contribution to victory made by all of those who served in the RCAF.

Ten Decisions author Larry Rose responds: My article, according to Mr. MacLellan, does not deal with the “real issue” of why Canadianization was delayed in the RCAF. He notes that the Canadian aircraft in the UK were British-owned so the British were “just protecting their assets.” Throughout the war, planes, ships, tanks and artillery pieces were transferred wholesale back and forth between the British and Canadian forces. By 1945, thousands of British army trucks were Canadian-made but no Canadian officer went to British army supply depots to “protect their assets.” A much more important issue in the early years was that the British paid salaries for Canadian RCAF members posted to Britain.

Mr. MacLellan is right in pointing out that in 1939 Prime Minister Mackenzie King utterly failed to ensure Canadian control of RCAF air training graduates. This point is made in the book TEN DECISIONS although not in the much shorter Esprit de Corps article. However, subsequently King, Air Minister Charles “Chubby” Power and top officers such as Air Marshal Gus Edwards put enormous pressure on the RAF to Canadianize the RCAF. Ultimately they were successful.

Mr. MacLellan argues that “you cannot really blame the British” for delays in Canadianization. But, as Tim Cook has pointed out, the colonial mindset of many top RAF officers, including Air Chief Marshal of the Royal Air Force Arthur “Bomber” Harris, delayed Canadianization for years.

0 notes

esprit-de-corps-magazine · 7 years

Text

DECIMATED, DEMORALIZED & DISBANDED: No. 124 (Ferry) Squadron's Demise Following The 1946 Crash Of Dakota 962

(Volume 24-7)

By Anne Gafiuk

In the summer of 1946, at the age of 17, William Cameron was awarded an Air Cadet Flying Scholarship at the Regina Flying Club. He said, “Throughout that summer, the RCAF flew a large number of Fairchild Cornell aircraft to RCAF Holding Unit No. 201 at the airport at Estevan, Saskatchewan from Elementary Flying Training Schools (EFTS) of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan (BCATP) in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, bases that are now closed.”

He explains, “The Cornell was a low-wing, two-pilot elementary training aircraft that had been supplied in considerable numbers to the government of Great Britain, by the government of the United States, for use in the BCATP, under the 1941 ‘Lend-Lease’ agreement between those two countries.”

At that time, Cameron was just learning to fly. “During the two weeks of my flying course, I witnessed, on two occasions, the arrival and departure from the Regina airport of an RCAF C-47, carrying a number of RCAF pilots. I was tremendously impressed by the appearance of those young men. Most of them were flight lieutenants or flying officers, and almost all of them wore a number of honours decorations below their pilot wings on their uniforms. There were many Distinguished Flying Cross ribbons, as well as ribbons for various theatres of war.”

Of those on board the C-47 known by its RCAF designation as Dakota 962, 11 had been awarded the DFC, with one having the DFC and Bar, another the DSO and DFC, and three had received the Burma Star for their service in the Second World War’s Burma Campaign. Twelve were flight lieutenants and eight were flying officers. The sole leading aircraftman was the airframe mechanic.

Cameron recollects, “Those men were in ‘high spirits.’ They had survived the horrors of wartime operations, and were in a holiday mood as they went off to Estevan to fly Cornells across the border to the United States. Possibly some of them had learned to fly on those very same Cornell aircraft at a Canadian EFTS. Our small air cadet trainee group was in awe of those vibrant, young, veteran pilots. The pilots that we saw at Regina Airport in August of 1946 were either on their way to Estevan for the ferry operations, or having finished their assignment, were returning to Ottawa for discharge from the service.”

On September 12, 1946, F/L Wilson Marshall Iverson, officer in charge of No. 124 (Ferry) Squadron, instructed F/L Stewart and his crew to proceed to Estevan, Saskatchewan.

On the morning of September 15, the 21 men, including one pilot, one co-pilot, 18 ferry pilots, and one airframe mechanic, checked out of the Roosevelt Hotel in Minot, North Dakota and headed to the airport. They were readying themselves for a routine 45-minute cross-country transport flight northwest to Estevan, as passengers aboard Dakota 962, getting ready to ferry another set of Cornells back to Minot.

The pilot provided the flight plan after becoming airborne at 0930 hours CST. He reported his ETA at Estevan being 1015 hours CST and did not report any difficulties, making no further contact with ground stations.

At 1020 hrs CST, the dispatching officer of No. 124 (Ferry) Squadron reported that Dakota 962 crashed upon landing at RCAF Station Estevan.

Witnesses on the airbase testified that only two men had signs of life when responders first arrived on scene, but remained unconscious. All men on board Dakota 962 were thrown to the front of the plane, many on fire, after impact. The medical officer identified the individuals by rings, laundry marks and billfolds, among other things including watches, five of which needed to be identified by the families.

The crash and the funeral procession to the railway station in Estevan made local and national news across Canada. The men’s bodies were returned to their homes coast to coast, via train, with the exception of F/O Henry Hugh Cowan, DFC, whose body was flown home to Ottawa, as his mother was on her deathbed.

The Court of Inquiry said it was difficult to determine what had transpired in Dakota 962 between takeoff and the crash, but concluded Dakota 962 crashed on landing at RCAF Station Estevan as a result of loss of control due to an elevator control lock being in the locked position. The pilot was guilty of negligence in the performance of his duties, in that he failed to carry out a proper pre-flight check.

Questions were also raised about who was piloting the aircraft; at Minot, F/O Pond was noted as the pilot, but the seventh witness at the inquiry claimed F/L Stewart was given the responsibility as pilot. Due to the fire, “It was not possible to determine which of these two officers were occupying the left hand seat.”

The Court of Inquiry recommended:

That on aircraft using outside locks, the duties of the airman in carrying out daily inspections be amended to include the inspection of control locks, ensuring that each lock carries a red streamer at least 4 feet in length.

That all aircraft be fitted with racks, one for each control lock. These racks should be positioned in the radio compartment of the aircraft so that the pilot and co-pilot can check visually that they are in their proper storage spot prior to flight.

That all units be instructed to emphasize once again to all pilots the necessity for carrying out the proper pre-flight check.

Cameron recalls that, “A few weeks after the completion of the 20 hours of flight training at Regina Flying Club, I was shocked to learn about the crash of Dakota 962 at Estevan. It immediately occurred to me that the victims of that accident might well have been the same young men that I had so much admired at Regina Airport a few weeks earlier.”

Also shaken by the accident claiming many war heroes, the French, American and British military attachés in Ottawa sent their condolences to Air Marshal Robert Leckie.

On September 30, 1946, No. 124 (Ferry) Squadron was disbanded.

In October 1946, Mrs. Constance Marie Pond, wife of one of the designated pilots, F/O Pond, wrote the RCAF thanking them for their condolences and floral tributes, plus the honour paid to her husband at his funeral services in both Estevan and Montreal:

My husband did not even have his 2-weeks’ leave so he did not have a holiday this year, although he did not complain. The night he phoned from Ottawa to tell me they were going out West, he said he was at last signed up for his ‘leave’ and was called back and told ‘No you don’t. You’re going out West ...’

These are the things I can’t bear to think about — that seems so unfair and although I have had a report on how it is surmised the accident occurred, I believe, from my husband’s letters and cards written out there that they worked so hard, they were all tired out and the Pilot simply was so tired that he made a mistake.

With their findings and recommendations, the Court of Inquiry and subsequent memorandums between September 1946 and February 1947 made sure that this type of accident would not readily occur again.

Air Marshal Robert Leckie wrote in January 1947: “During this coming year as the Royal Canadian Air Force gets back to regular flying operations, there will be many pilots returning to active flying who have for sometime been employed on other duties. Many of these pilots will have done very little flying for some time and accidents are liable to occur during the period of their refresher training. For this reason the compulsory use of pre-flight and pre-landing checking list is to be reintroduced into the RCAF for all types of aircraft.”

“Two years later, in 1948,” recalls Cameron, “I became an employee of Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd. (CPAL) as a radio operator/agent. On those occasions, when a company aircraft was to remain on the ground overnight or was unattended for a long period in windy conditions, it was my responsibility at airports to which I was assigned, to place the elevator gust locks on the company DC-3s. The locks were put in place immediately after the aircraft arrived at the airport terminal, and removed as soon as the pilots went to the cockpit, prior to start-up of the engines for departure.”

Cameron says, “Knowing that the cause of the tragic accident of the RCAF C-47 at Estevan in 1946 was the failure to remove the elevator gust locks, it was a source of great comfort to me in carrying out these duties, to know that it was almost impossible for the gust locks used by CPAL to remain in place as the aircraft taxied away. Attached to each gust lock was a long, red canvas ribbon — easily seen — and a length of flexible cable, about four feet long, that was attached to a 10-pound metal ring. In the event that the removal of the gust lock had been overlooked prior to the aircraft departure, the heavy weight lying on the ground would pull the locks from the elevators as the aircraft moved away.”

Cameron, now 88, remembers, “How tragic that such a simple, inexpensive device had not been available for that RCAF C-47 departure from Minot, North Dakota, on that fateful day of September 15, 1946. I was overwhelmed by the seeming injustice of their death in peacetime, after having survived the many dangers of operational flying during the Second World War.”

0 notes