Fair to say he'd done his bit by then! That's what I was trying to find out, thanks Kyt, when the switch to the XIVe occurred. Off to get the eyes checked and rub the nose marks off the screen!
Re Clarence Athol Rice, he was discharged in Sept 1945 and married in Nov 1945. He died in July 1954 aged 37 leaving behind a wife and 2 children aged 6 and 4 John
Reading the ops record of 453, it seems that the Squad/leader spent a lot of time in the air where as other pilots seem to have breaks between missions. Was this due to the lack of planes ?? How many pilots would share a plane, say J ?? Regards John PS I have a couple more pilots in the family that I want to check out, both in diferent Squadrons. Question= Should I have a new thread for each Squadron???
Yep, new thread would be cool I reckon, John, so it's a stand alone of sorts and we can start afresh. Time in the air for an S/L depended on what type of guy he was and the make up of the sqn. I've noticed that S/Ls in some sqns often led flights (units within the sqn) and the overall CO was a Wing Commander. So, in this case, S/Ls would fly quite often. On a personal front, there were overall commanding S/Ls who left leadership in the air to the flight commanders (F/Ls) and there were others who believed in doing their fair share of flying. Being quite general here as I only know what I've read and haven't done an in depth study but pilots in fighter squadrons probably had more of a chance of having a specific aircraft assigned to them. Of course, this would depend on maintenance availability, pilot vs aircraft numbers etc. I think it would be more a "perk" than a requirement, so to speak. Patrick Gibbs, famed W/C of 39 Sqn on Malta, flew Rovers over the Channel approaches, in his first tour, as a flight leader. His W/C (can't remember the sqn, 20-something) had a great leave spreadsheet worked out for the crews and never swayed from it believing the crews should know when to expect their leave and look forward to it regularly. Perhaps the breaks between missions you mention was because of something like this? I wouldn't have thought there would have been a lack of aircraft in '44 and '45 as the factories would have been well and truly hitting their straps.
John, Andy has given a pretty comprehensive response. In most cases, it wasn't the shortage of aircraft that was a factor but experience and the enthusiasm of the leaders. In the case of 453, the CO was generally a Squadron Leader, or Acting Squadron Leader. As you go through the ORB you will notice that their workload did get heavier, especially when they were tasked with anti-V2 patrols. As to sharing aircraft, apart from possibly flight and/or squadron leaders and higher, it was very rare for an individual aircraft to be allocated to an individual aircraft. A squadron usually had 12 aircraft operational, with some spares. The pilot roster would usually e higher, so that some could be stood down for leave etc. Sorry to sound rather vague but each quadron was different.
To make it even more fun, John, S/L "Pedro" Hanbury (BoB 602 Sqn vet) would occasionally let Flt Sgt (!!!) Ron Cundy RAAF lead the Kittyhawks of 260 Sqn in North Africa as he was the most experienced pilot. This is not saying Hanbury was avoiding flying but sometimes the admin was too much, I suspect. Hanbury's digs on the landing grounds were a caravan that he stayed in...including during air raids! Again, letting an F/S lead would depend on the type of person the S/L was. Group did get hold of it and told them off. http://ww2chat.com/forums/biographies/1196-s-l-osgood-pedro-hanbury.html http://ww2chat.com/forums/books-films/1223-gremlin-my-shoulder-ron-cundy-dfc-dfm-mid.html
Andy and Kyt, Thank you both for your answers. It has helped to understand what happened in WW2 re planes and flying schedules I hope I am not taking up to much of your time with my questions. John
It's cool, John, breaks the day up. Wish I could work for the government and get paid to help people with such queries. The days would be so much more fun...and I could claim buying books as tax deductions because they're research material. LOL.
