Bomber Boys. Patrick Bishop

But it was not unusual for a sergeant pilot to be outranked by his navigator or bomb-aimer. Operating a heavy bomber involved shared responsibility and intense mutual dependence. The anomalies and injustices of drawing distinctions of status, as well as pay and conditions, between men who fought and died inside the same claustrophobic metal tube grated particularly on the Canadians who were providing so many men.

      The matter surfaced in May 1942 at an air training conference in Ottawa. It seemed to the Royal Canadian Air Force that there was ‘no justification for the commissioning of some individuals whilst others are required to perform exactly the same duties but in NCO rank.’ The Canadians pointed out the inequities of pay, transportation and travel allowances. Dividing crews into commissioned and non-commissioned officers meant, in theory at least, the end of socializing on an equal footing. Sergeants would go to the sergeants’ mess, officers to the better-appointed officers’ mess. They argued that it could only be bad for team spirit if ‘the crew, as an entity is not able to live and fraternize, the one with the other, during leisure and off-duty hours.’ A radical solution was proposed. Everyone flying in a bomber should be an officer.

      The RAF avoided answering the Canadians’ detailed points, but did try to define the qualities that made an officer. Commissions were granted, ‘in recognition of character, intelligence (as distinct from academic qualifications), and capacity to lead, command and set a worthy example. Many aircrews (sic), although quite capable of performing their duties adequately, have no officer qualities.’ The debate fizzled out.

      Despite the relative absence of awkwardness about class in the RAF, there was plenty of evidence to suggest that being educated at a public school was no handicap when it came to obtaining a commission. Arriving at Brize Norton Flying Training School in April 1941 Brian Frow and his fellow-trainees were addressed by the chief ground instructor, a squadron leader aged about fifty, with First World War medals on his chest. After a welcoming speech he told his charges he was going to select flight commanders and deputies from among the cadets who would act as leaders and principal contacts between students and staff.

      ‘We were all sitting in the hall and he started. “Stand up all of those who were in the OTC (Officer Training Corps) at a public school.” About twenty stood up. “Any of you who failed to pass Cert A, sit down.” This left some ten standing. “Sit down those who failed to reach the rank of corporal.” Two more sat down. “Failed to reach sergeant.” Three more sat down. (He) then said, “You five airmen report to my office for interview.”’

      When Frow arrived, ‘The first question was “Do you have any close relations who were commissioned in the Royal Air Force?” I had two brothers, and when I said that one was a squadron leader … that was sufficient.’ He was ‘amused and somewhat embarrassed by this method of selecting the cadet flight commanders and their deputies … By a process of elimination, he had dismissed all cadets who had not attended public school, who had not been in the OTC, who had failed to pass Cert A and who had no close relations commissioned into the RAF.’ Frow was duly appointed commander of ‘A’ Flight.

      At the same time as they were graded by rank, the cadets earned the right to wear the brevet appropriate to their aircrew category. To outsiders there seemed something unformed about the single wing and circle insignia. It prompted an article by Godfrey Winn, a star writer of the day. ‘Don’t ask the man with one wing when he will finish his training and get the other half of his wings,’ he advised. ‘Don’t ask him anything. Just shake his hand and offer him a drink.’

      Aircrew members were proud of their trades. Many had started out hoping to be pilots. Few of those who were reassigned resented for long the new roles they had been allotted. It was the crew that mattered more than one’s individual part in it.

      Flying a big bomber was entirely different from flying a Spitfire or a Hurricane. It was the difference, it was sometimes said, between a sports car and a lorry. A four-engined bomber was an immensely complex machine, whose systems needed constant checking. It was a responsibility rather than a pleasure. Tony Iveson who flew Lancasters with 617 Squadron believed that bomber pilots needed ‘a steady personality, and you could tell that from what you heard about how they behaved off duty … I was a natural bomber pilot. I was patient. I liked precise flying.’¹³

      Fighter pilots wrote about flying in the language of love and passion. There are no descriptions in letters and memoirs of the joy of flying a Halifax or a Lancaster. In fighter squadrons it was considered disrespectful to refer to your aircraft as anything other than an aeroplane. Bomber Boys called theirs ‘kites’. Operational flying over Germany could mean trips of seven, eight, nine hours. These journeys involved high drama at take-off and landing and intense fear over the target area. But between these peaks of feeling there were long passages of boredom and fatigue, especially on the journey home, even though the danger was far from over.

      Crews were organic entities and the prevailing atmosphere was egalitarian. Nonetheless, there was no doubt that it was the pilot who ultimately was in charge. He was responsible for the lives of the other six members of the crew, to the extent that if the aircraft was irretrievably damaged or on fire and about to explode he was expected to stay at the controls until the others had baled out.

      The pilot, together with the navigator and the bomb-aimer, were essential for a bomber to be be able to bomb. It was extremely desirable to have a flight engineer, wireless operator and mid-upper and rear gunners. But a sortie could succeed without them.

      The pilot’s concern was to reach the target. The navigator’s job was to find it. Don Charlwood, a navigator himself, felt that ‘as a group [they] tended more to seriousness than the men they flew with’.¹⁴ The job, and the training it required, were demanding and exhausting. Noble Frankland, like many navigators, had started off wanting to be a pilot but failed to make the grade. Despite his high intelligence he found the course at his elementary navigation school ‘academically the most difficult thing I had ever tackled’. Astronavigation required an ability to think in three dimensions, ‘a very, very difficult concept for somebody who is not mathematically gifted or trained’.¹⁵ In the early days navigators had no radio aids to guide them to targets. Even with the advent of Gee, Oboe and H2S, which used radio and radar pulses to direct aircraft on to targets, the navigator’s job was the most mentally testing of aircrew tasks, requiring constant alertness at every stage of the journey.

      Once the navigator had guided the aircraft to the target area the bomb-aimer took over. As the aircraft went into its bombing run, he became the most important person aboard. He lay face-down in the Perspex nose, exposing the length of his body to the flak bursting all around. Pressing his face to the lens of the complicated bombsight, he called course corrections to the pilot as they went into the final run, ordered the bomb doors open and, when he was satisfied, pressed the button that sent the bombs tumbling into the night. In those final moments, every man aboard was clenched in expectation, pleading with him to finish the job and let them head for home. Good bomb-aimers possessed an almost inhuman sangfroid which allowed them to divorce all feelings for their own safety and that of the crew from the necessity of getting their bombs on the target, or the colour-coded pyrotechnic markers dropped by the leading aircraft to highlight the aiming point. On his debut trip with 49 Squadron to Hagen, in the eastern Ruhr, Donald Falgate, who had defied his parents’ wishes to join up, was ‘determined I was going to get my bombs slap-bang on the target and there was no way I was going to release them if I couldn’t get the markers in the bombsight.’

      The pilot weaved to avoid the bursting flak as they went in, toppling the gyroscope that kept the bombsight level, making it impossible for Falgate to aim accurately. He ordered the bomb doors closed and insisted on going round again. ‘I won’t repeat what was said over the intercom by various crew members,’ he said when telling the story later. It was only on the third run that Falgate was satisfied and pressed the bomb release. ‘I was unpopular, very unpopular,’ he recalled many years afterwards.¹⁶

      The complexities of four-engined bombers created a need for an extra crew member to assist the pilot. Many flight engineers were ex-groundcrew airmen who already had mechanical skills. Their training included a spell at an aircraft factory producing the type of bomber they would fly in to ensure that they