Thoughts ?
 

Seen this before. I think the snippets of comments are based on pilot ability but are cut down and are not complete and must be taken with salt.

The spit and the 109 were very close in performance. Later on it was an arms race.

I think the major point of this documentary is "the luftwaffe dictated the terms" because they were usually higher in the BoB. This is especially interesting for all you radar fans!

The guy presenting the documentary is a c$%^, hes patronising the the RAF guy and going on about the size of shells.... Ive seen the rest of this documentary...

Its two different methods, 8 machnine guns or two cannons and 2 MG's... They both work just you have to implement them differently.

There are allot better documentaries than this but it is interesting...

My thoughts are?
If there's nothing to read substantive?
Might as well be entertained:grin:

There really wasn't anything that hasn't been said before.

Planes (at this stage) were close in performance - so close that success was more an issue of individual pilot skill than aircraft performance. If you use the stengths of your aircraft and exploit the weeknesses of your opponent you will have an advantage. The Germans always had a height advantage because they were the ones that initiated combat. The British were reacting to their raids and were climbing to meet them.

Spitfire +'s good manuverability and handling
easy to fly

-v'es negative G cutout
no cannons.

109 +'ves - no negative g cuttout
good dive speed

-'ves less manuverable
limited time in combat area

If we look at the cannon issue, The British did not have a mature weapon system developed in time for the Battle of Britain, simple as that. So they stuck with the proven system they had at the time (eight colt/brownings)

Why didn't the British go for a more proven cannon design like the German gun's?

Muzzle velocity. The Hispano Cannon had a initial velocity of about 880m/s compared to the german MG FF at 550-700m/s. The Hispano had a lot flatter trajectory and less time of flight.

Rate of fire. The Hispano at 750rpm fires a lot faster than the German MG FF at 540rpm.

Although the British didn't have a workable cannon for the Battle of Britian they ended up with a more effective 20mm aerial cannon for the rest of the war and after.

Cheers!

For every 109 pilot that says he could out turn a Spitfire.. There is a Spitfire pilot that says he could out turn a 109.. And vise versa

Which says more about the realitive pilot skill than realitive plane performance

No aircraft ever produced has ever out turned any other aircraft ever produced.

Many PILOTS, however, have out turned many other PILOTS.

For example...

When the first MiG-15 was received from a defecting Korean pilot, two test pilots put it to the test against an F-86. They each took a turn flying each aircraft and performed the same scenarios each time. Test pilot A (Chuck Yeager) was all over test pilot B (Some Other Hot %h1I Test Pilot whose name is lost in history because he didn't get his P-51 shot out from under him and, by luck, later get chosen to fly the X-1) regardless of whether he was flying the F-86 or the Mig-15.

In a real combat situation using pilot reports, it's impossible to say that one aircraft's advantage in some measure of performance over another aircraft resulted in victory. There are just too many variables. A tired pilot can't turn as hard as a fresh pilot, especially in a 109 due to the cramped cockpit. Most pilots back then would include the initial roll into the turn as part of the "turn" and due to the aforementioned cramped cockpit 109s at speed had poor roll performance. A glance over the shoulder to check for bandits might delay an attacker's entry into a turn leading the defender to state that he easily out turned the attacker. What he would not realize is that the attacker did not even start to follow for some amount of time. And that's just one of a gazillion reasons an attacker might delay following a defender into a turn (or any other maneuver for that matter).

I could go on and on but the bottom line is that pilot reports from actual combat are useless when it comes to making specific judgements of the opposing aircraft.

In the future, it will be SOFTWARE out turning other pieces of SOFTWARE.

--Outlaw.

PS
I'm just picking on Chuck, he's one of my heroes.

Well Im glad you all agree with me.


Just off the cuff:

Ace of aces, just a though but do you ever go online? You are always on the forum. I was talking to a few guys today and they had never seen you online...

Nothing hostile just an obsevartion.

I've flown with him lots of times.

Truth be told I almost never see anyone from the forums when I was flying IL2, and since I've stopped flying CloD for now I don't see any of you.

:-P

Strange, I see lots of people...

James Holland (no relation by the way), hmmmmm.....

Saw the whole documentary twice and also read the book twice.

The book is fine, although he doesn't seem to understand the difference between positive and negative 'G' (in the book that is), and seems to want to uphold the mythical 'David and Goliath' image of the Battle. 'How on earth did we win??'

The documentary was enjoyable on first viewing, but pretty biased on the second in some unusual ways. For instance, the implication was that the 109 (all of them) had 55 seconds of 20mm ammo, because he mixed the mg info with the cannon info. Of course this could be the editor's fault.

55s of 2x7.92mm is the same weight of lead as 15s of .303. But of course if you can only keep your sights on target for 1 or 2 secs this makes a big difference.
The cannon armed 109s had 7s of cannon fire in addition to this and I'm not sure what the wing mgs had in the earlier versions.

Tom Neil's comments had also been suitably edited to make out that the RAF won from a terribly inferior position, 'We had peashooters against these cannons' etc, just before Holland emphasised the 55s of 20mm cannon fire.

Ludicrous.

Doesn't do anyone any favours. Not the layperson, not the historian, not the brave men who did what they did on both sides.

The man's a charlatan. Holland that is.

Queue Sternjaeger.

the game got the turning issue right on spot at the begining, it was up to the pilot

after succesive patches i dont feel like taking a 109 for a circle dogfight however bad is my opponent

None taken..

Yes all the time.. Not as much as I use to though.. Been working on my webpage when I get some free time, i.e.

IL-2Compare Online

Basically an online version of IL-2Compare.. but I provide more graphs and options than the orginal IL-2Compare

When I am at home coding.. It is easy to pop into the forum and see what is going on.. much easier than when flying online! ;)

Was playing IL-2 4.11 alot tonight..

But probally the reason you don't see me has alot to do with the fact that STEAM does not require you to use your 1C forum handle when flying CoD ;)

Ahh your that guy!

erm, I'm afraid you don't fully comprehend how aerial gunnery works..
The efficiency is not based just on how many seconds of fire it takes to deliver the same amount of "lead", but on how it is delivered.
The RAF was stuck for a good time on the "Dowding Spread", which proved ineffective, dispersing the potential pack punch of gun convergence.
The 8 brownings of Spits and Hurries would have been effective if converged, and even then you need to make sure to hit the target at your convergence distance to achieve maximum effect.
In the heat of the battle it's kinda hard to always be at an ideal distance from your target, and considering the weak .303 calibre, achieving effective hits on a target was not an easy task.
The Germans got around this by using simpler converging (the two cowl mounted guns were very near, making for a longer converging range) and above all making every single hit count with cannons.

So yes, in terms of gunnery, the Germans had the edge, at least until the .50cal M2 was introduced (and even then converging was crucial).
you're confusing facts with propaganda.
It's a hard job being a historian, especially when your work confutes well established theories, based on national pride or political matters. It's like what happened to Fritz Fischer and his research on the causes of WW1, which sparked very harsh reactions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Fischer but hey, it's part of the game..

lol seriously? He didn't do too bad for a "charlatan", but I'm sure you know better ;)

Hmmm......did you hear that?.......I swear I just heard a floodgate creaking. :grin:

What's his name then? I have him on ignore.

Yes I know, I'm a terribly dense person. I also forgot to mention that the synchronising gear on the cowl mounted guns of the 109 reduced the rate of fire to quite a bit less than the Brownings, thus reducing the weight of lead delivered per second even further. I have a feeling they also had a lower muzzle velocity, but not sure about that one. Sorry for being such a thicko.

The Dowding spread was soon chucked out of the window, but has no relevance to Holland's blatant exaggeration of the 109's firepower.

I say again, 55 seconds of cannon fire? Is that a fact, or just propaganda? Not confusing anything here mate. Poppycock and balderdash Old Boy.

'Charlatan - One falsely claiming a special knowledge or skill' - OED. Sound familiar? :rolleyes:

To me it's pretty obvious, the RAF won the battle due to fighter command network and tactics... Also with the "help" of retarded Göring on the German side. IIMHO it's not about a question of Spitfire Vs Bf 109, although if I was to choose a side in BoB as a pilot, looking at the whole picture, I would have joined the RAF in a glimpse. Looking exclusively at the planes in question, I would go for the 109 (more suitable to my flying approach and tactics). Documentary only shows that the British approach to the battle was brilliant and that the Germans had a slight better fighter.

Regards.

He says 55 second of FIREPOWER! If you hold down all the triggers in the 109E you indeed have 55 seconds of firepower, nobody said 55 seconds of cannon fire in this 6 minutes of video.

Cannons can be very effective under any angle of attack, in a very short amount of time you can inflict colossal damage to an enemy aircraft. Which is extremely important in the way the 109 is best flown against the Spitfire.

Overall this short documentary contains no new information for me, but it's nice to hear the real fighter pilots talking though!

But apparently it was not a 'battle', it's now a well established concept that the british were innept monkeys who wasted all their time waving union jacks and trying to figure out where the keyhole was for the clockwork winding mechanism on the merlin, meanwhile the glorious Luftwaffe were sunning their aryan bodies and berbequeing Bratwurst on the Normandy beaches as a wind down for their European tour, everyone knows the German bombers were dropping candy and flowers but the evil British empire were dedicated to prevent the spread of peace and love. :grin:

Quite true, but at no point does he say that the cannons had only 7 seconds of fire. He first states 55 seconds of machine gun fire, then shows us the difference in size between .303 and 20mm. This is misleading.

He confuses the two issues such that someone with little or no prior knowledge is left with a completely distorted opinion of the true state of affairs. As I said, this does nobody any favours and gives an impression of biased representation rather than fact.

We Bavarians prefer Weisswurst :P

Traditional English Pork Sausage from the butcher up the road for me.

With Black pudding, mushrooms and fried eggs. :)

I just googled Black Pudding, now i lost all appetite :shock:

:grin:

infidel!!!! black pudding is the food of the gods.....that and biltong.......ooohhhh! I'm getting a meat-on

I think you'll find that the universally recognized food of the gods is KFC.

Nah, me just hates dried blood in a sausage, biltong on the other hand sounds interesting :D

actually I could recommend the 'king' of sausage which is the Boerewors

right, let's do some maths together...

the .303 had a blistering 20 rounds per second, the synchronised MG17 shot 17, frankly not that much of a difference, especially cos the .303 bullet weight was around 10 grams and the 7.92 is 11.5 grams, but the MG/FF (in its AP format) had a poor 8 rounds per second, but was a blistering 117 grams with 3.5 grams of explosive.

Now let's look at the damage factors*: both the MG17 and .303 had an average damage factor of 10, while the MG/FF went from 90 of an AP to a staggering 206 of an HE. This is again for one round.

so (and again this is a theory that doesn't take external factors into account) 8 .303s would deliver at their convergence point 160 bullets in a second, for a total damage factor of 1600; 2 MG17 would deliver 32 bullets and a damage factor of 340; 2 MG/FF would deliver 16 rounds with a damage factor of 1440 (the HE would reach a blistering 3296).

So all in all we're there (unless we use HE), but in terms of efficiency per single round, it's quite obvious that one MG/FF round would cause enough damage, being the most efficient of the lot.

How soon exactly?

I believe he referred to total firepower, and in terms of destructive power the 7 secs of MG/FF were surely comparable to 55 secs of .303s.

Ah so you're implying I'm a charlatan? Funny that, we lot living on Planet Reality Check thought that the charlatans were you and your esteemed colleagues coming from Planet I Fill My Mouth With Nationalistic Ideas And Never Open A Book On The Subject, go figure :rolleyes:


*for further info on damage factors, look here http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Can I just have a pint of bitter please?

I do miss a good English bitter.

It always used to shock the locals at the pub when I (a scrawny at the time American, all of 18 years old) would order a pint at the local when I was in Cambridge in 1972...

Oh, and some good English stilton or cheddar as well please?

But I digress.


One thing I rarely see in these arguments about the real BoB, is the discussion of the production/industrial aspects of the campaign.
Just as the RAF was better organized for the defense of the homeland that the Luftwaffe was for attacking it, British industry was on a far more organized war footing than German industry was.

Aircraft production was constantly rising over the time of the fighting, in stark contrast to German aircraft production, that was not really keeping pace with losses, though the Germans did not understand this at the time.

Also, the British aircraft industry was dispersed enough that taking it out in total could not happen.

And we must also take into account the fact that the RAF was a very mature organization. It had a depth of experience that the very young Luftwaffe simply could not match. Add in all of these factors, and the fact that the Luftwaffe was so overly politicized, and the outcome should never really have been a surpise.


Carry on.

Biltong's almost identical to Beef Jerky if you ask me. Both recently available in the UK. Bloody expensive for what you get though. My brother reckons you may as well buy dog chews. Maybe he's right but I wouldn't like to try.

Anyway, Black Pudding is an almost global phenomenon.

Blutwurst looks pretty much the same to me. :confused:

@ El, yes, all washed down with a nice pint of Theakston's Best Bitter. :D

@ Stern - I'm not disputing that the 109 E4 was the better armed fighter of the Battle, merely Holland's exaggeration of the fact. Those are my 'Thoughts' after viewing the clip. And your thoughts are what exactly? Relative to the clip, I mean?

Blitzpig,what you're saying about industrial dispersion is right, but defining the 1940s RAF as a "mature organisation" is laughable: they operated a fleet that had been developed in WW1 times and operated on such standards,whilst the Luftwaffe had the precious advantage of the Spain Civil War,which created a lot of "experten",brought modifications to the aircraft and above all helped developing effective tactics. It took the RAF quite some time to catch up,and it wouldn't have gone far,hadn't the Americans intervened in '41.

Bavarians are odd, too much austrian and bohemian influence for their own good. Coming from the Rhineland, this is a propper meal ;)

http://www.zenkimchi.com/FoodJournal...c6a4de998a.jpg

In regards to the debate at hand, we can concentrate on aircraft performance, we can concentrate on logistics and tactics, but none of that will change the fact that once you encounter a good pilot, it really does not matter as much what plane you are sitting in. All what counts is how good you are in using your chances to actually hit when the opportunity arises.

Dutch,I believe you're misinterpreting what they're saying there.
Cannon rounds were a big scare among pilots and crews,and as you can tell from the pilot's memories it had a big psychological effect on them (something like the Germans being scared of the Spit and believing they had been shot down by one,even when it was a Hurricane or a Defiant!).

We always seem to forget the scare factor when it comes to war,probably cos we're used to Esc+Fly Again too much..

I think it is the same, first time i tried a Blutwurst, i almost vomited it on an instant :?

@bongodriver: Now you did it, i´m hungry, damn, and no Wurst here :D

@Bewolf: Ok, i can identify Blutwurst, but what is the Rest. By the Way, real Rhinelanders prefer a good Currywurst with Pommes.
Kölle Alaaf :D

That would be 1942 I believe.

I'm not talking tactics here.

Tacitics are for n00bs in any discussion of campaigns.

The RAF was better organised as an air force, they were better led, and had better logistical support, and as we all know, logistics wins wars, not single engagement tactics.

Land Lease started much earlier, so did US involvement in the Atlantic.

But those convoys weren't bringing Spitfires, Hurricanes or even Merlins, so what exact American supplies were used in the early part of the war by the Brits?

Good Grief, that looks disgusting. And usually I love disgusting looking food.

Yep I know, but I believe Stern was referring to American Involvement in the European Air War.

Now I just did spend some time with internet research about finding some information what kind of stuff those convoys brought in, only found the canadian ones, and those include iron ore, crude oil, alloys, fuel and lub oil. Given the situation in the Atlantic, the fact that Britian was down to two weeks of provisions in 41 due to the U-Boat threat and highly vulnerable to import ruptures in general, I dare say american involvement both in regards to Land Lease and ressources in keeping up aircraft production and operation was vital at that point already.

100 octane fuel is the first that springs to mind.

Didn't you eared anything abt UK being short in supplies like food (meat, beans, sugar, coffee...), aluminium, rubber, ball bearing...

C'mon all those liberty ships were not carrying only Soda, Chewing Gum and Jazz music :rolleyes:

Oh yeah I agree the industrial readiness of the UK airpower was much higher than most of Eu counterpart including the mighty German industry but this was not an easy result and history hve shown they went "lucky". It went past near a big disaster and only individuals commitment made it past (think abt the shadow factory story with the head of the plant being sacked off went it was evident he has failed - such thing does not happen so early in a fascist regime).

So th eresult was pretty obvious : a democratic regime will prevail even after suffering great losses.

Without rewriting history, the fact that Hitler has stomached more than he was expecting and his eyes were furiously looking on the east made it happens that way. It's always good to remember instead of looking down-to super natural things.
;)

and here lies another very important aspect of the Brits performance during the early conflict, those supply ships were being sunk at an alrming rate initially, but the Brits managed to take control of that situation too without the Americans direct involvement, it's all good and well claiming the Brits wouldn't have achieved anything without US support, being an island nation there was little choice but to have supplies imported from a friendly nation, at the time the US was under no obligations and could have pulled support at any time, if it wasn't for the sucesses of the British they would have....for obvious reasons.

Nobody talks about "direct" involvement, though, or denies the obvious achievements of the british in this time period.

No there really are some people saying the Brits achievements paled compared to the Americans floating some petrol our way.

Well they were not giving it away either..........business is business.



Anyway back to the YT clip, I hope this sim/game continues without "balancing" .





.

From an .....impartial*coughcough* position, the Russians, the British and the Americans all want to lay claim on certain achievements they only really realized by working together. None alone would have come as far as they did without the others.

Particularly if it's James Holland's idea of 'balancing', for sure. ;)

What's he balancing ?

I was more listening to the people in the clip who took part in BoB and flew.

Not the presenter.

+1 with all my heart!


Anyway back to black pudding, its delicous! :-P
I believe its a true testament to the worship of Swine to not only consume their flesh but blood. Its only right we use the whole animal!

Fried or boiled? Poll! Poll! ;)

Fried of course, boiling is for peasants

Deep fried in lard not oil :)

And back to the clip

Balancing.............






.

Butter......


oh erm....yes balancing ahem..

rotfl

are you sure about this?
Germany learned a lot about organisation and operating abroad thanks to the Spanish Civil War, Great Britain was fighting on its own soil, and that's a HUGE advantage. I can agree about the fact that the Luftwaffe had a worse leadership, but to saying it was less organised is ridiculous. Once again, let's not forget they were operating from a foreign country, with all the possible logistics strains, and still managed to bring Great Britain to the brink of collapse with their bombing campaign.
They didn't manage to overcome their opponents just because they were led by a buffoon and dispersed their offensive potential, but had all the capability to gain air superiority all the time.

.......Nope. I'm not going to bother.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=26290

in a way Germany was also fighting on it's own soil, it had after all just conquered France and was using coastal airfields and local resources with an uninterupted supply line from the the Fatherland.

Aaaah the comfort of denial :rolleyes: ;)

Thinking aloud?

So, fried or boiled?

He's right tho. The Germans didn't go on full out war time production until it was already too late. Göring or not, the anemic peace time production had a huge impact on many decisive fights early on.

Lol if there's one thing I've learned over the years I lived here is that trying to win an argument with a Brit is like trying to take a picture of a fart..

As per black pudding,I dont think I've ever tried it boiled.. But I know I love it fried! And white pudding too!

Oh dear, hes at it again...

What have us Brits actually done to you!

There is a trick to it......being right always helps ;), if a Brit wants to take a picture of a fart he set it on fire....simples.

lmao

Before L/L it was Cash and Carry. L/L didn't start til 1941 (signed into law on March 11, 1941).

Black pudding must be fried in bacon fat, then served with fried eggs, bacon and baked beans on buttered toast and washed down with milky tea from an urn!
I miss the roadside diners in north Britain ;-)

We may be sychophantic Nationalist pigs....but we sure know how to make breakfast ;)

Which begs the question why Britian didn't just modernize as well, given also their much bigger share in the Marshal Funds? I actually wondered about that for a long time.

Because only a few of out cities were bombed into oblivion compared to Germany that was basically flattened.

Believe me, you seriously do not have to flatten a country to modernize a factory or change industrial organisation. =)

Most of what the war did in this regard was destroying old structures and patterns of thinking, leading people to new ideas and ways of doing things, mixed with learned lessons from the war in regards to productivity and mass production (and a huge innovation base from the war's engeneering side)

I like the hubris of the narrator of the show- the statement that he makes that he wants to get to the bottom of the issue regarding 'once and for all' which one is better, the 109 or Spitfire.
LOL- like he is the first person ever to consider the argument and takes statements from LW pilots in WW2 and a few choice remarks from Spitfire pilots stating they respected the strengths of their opponent.
They were very different machines built with quite different methods- the remarkable thing about them both is that they were built with the latest aeronautical knowledge at the time and built for the same purpose- and that is reflected in their comparable performance despite their different construction.
Contrast that with the very different design philosophy chosen by the Japanese and Americans in the Pacific theatre- very long range and performance (Jpn) vs long range and ruggedness (USN) and you get the very different tactic needed to utilise them properly

Just out of interest, what is a typical breakfast in great britain???

the traditional 'full english' breakfast....

fried eggs
bacon
sausage
fried mushrooms
baked beans
fried bread
black and or white pudding
fried tomato
hash brown.......but this is an american infestation I believe and brings too much vegetable material into the mix.
toast
and a mug of milky tea

this breakfast crosses all class divides, even the most refined of our hoity-toit upper classes will succumb to a good greasy fry up.

I should really answer the original question, a typical breakfast is probably a McRon's sausage and egg McMuffin

u forgot mushrooms!

So I did....edited accordingly

dang, i´m off for a late breakfast.

We should open a cooking section in the forum. Some seems talented enough ;)

Always good to pack your stomach before pulling some G.

Thx guys was about to shoot a MP on ATAG server but I am now starving to death reading all the above.

And the open heart surgery for the double bypass you get at what age in the UK???? ROFL


@KG26_Alpha: thanks for sharing this, I did not have this video. :)
Found the whole documentary, it is a very interesting one! Some of the scenes (the LW bombing of the port) I had never seen before. Also other very interesting comments from the notes of the German pilots about the many Blenheim attacks at the LW airfields in France.
And the overall message that it is not true that "the Battle of Britain was won because Britain had the Spitfire" is great!

Also commentable that the moderator objectively states the reason for the mistaken first bombing of London despite Hitler's prohibiting order and the subsequent retaliation bombing of Berlin by the British.

To come back to the video extract you posted for feedback, I agree with the all parts I kept in memory. What I like most (and agree to it) is the English pilot's point that the Bf109 had the upper hand by being able to decide when he wanted to engage and when to disengage from a battle at his own terms.
This is how I fly online and with the exception of the Hurricane which requires some attention (and the SpitIIa which is a Tie-fighter toned down version right now) this is how it feels flying a Bf109 in CoD.

~S~


PS. By the way, the moderator clearly states that the 55sec ammo was for Bf109 machine guns.

yeah, i´m in dire need of a good, hot chili recipe :D

This is the reaction of a very wise man. ;)

Anyone thinking of commenting on anything other than black puddings and breakfasts in this thread should instead click on the link above. Set yourself a reasonable target, say 10 pages a day, and you will get through the 83 pages in a little over a week.

You will then have complete knowledge of everyone's position on this and every nuance and twist in the road that this discussion can possibly take.

This is a final warning...turn back now while you still can....

sausages....

It is OT but I can not hide my surprise that this thread, despite the apalling amount of out of content garbage and sensitive accusations has neither been cleaned up nor locked after ten pages.


.....

Hey, Fruit, up for a PM talk?

OK.

Ok after a tidy up...........................




@ 335th_GRAthos

Yes the whole documentary has some good footage in it, not the usual stock stuff you see in most documentaries of this type.



.

Just doing their job....nothing to see here.....move along

I will say Stern....whatever tone I take with you it's not because I dislike you, I just feel incredibly strongly that 'your' view of the average Brit is very very wrong....

If we are still talking recipes.

Finnish "summer soup":
Koskenkorva vodka
Bowl

Unluckily he is not too much off the mark. You have to judge ppl by what they do and say as there is no knowing what the thinking behind it may be. And from pure impression, Sterns judgement over british attitudes, at least how they come over elsewhere, is not that much off the mark, even if you do not want to hear that.

Usually the loudest people are also the most stupid ones. But if the rest stays silent, it's the only thing you hear.

I know that man, trust me! As I was saying before it's not the Brit per se, but it's a certain attitude that some (like Winny was saying) have that is dangerous and I despise.. I'd like to talk about this more, but seems like it's not welcome here.

Anyway, back to the OT, does anybody know if (other than Stephilner's memories) there are similar interviews of BoB German pilots? It would probably make for an interesting comparison. I bet there's a lot of German language material out there, but my vocabulary is very limited ("mehr lager bitte!").

And do you think every other nation doesn't have an element that feeds it's stereotypes?

Absolutely, every country has it's quirks and oddities. Usually that could even be considered a good thing, if you loved stereoptypes as much as me, hehe

I will have to meet you in the Duchess of Edinburgh for a pint or Schnapps :)


I grew up on that manor ............

.

as in this Duchess of Edinburgh? :shock:
http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs...nburgh/Welling

Nice reviews ...................

I'm 2 mins up the road Bostall Heath :)

Ill meet up for a beer or 3,im in Dartford :)

Cheese

I was gonna say! lol