Database :: Aircraft Serials :: Aircraft Losses

Serial (AZ-9999) -
A-Z 1-2-3-4 -
Aircraft Name - Display: by Series Or Individually
Spitfire Ia X4256 [Royal Air Force Aircraft Serial and Image Database]

 Spitfire Ia X4256

Ia 1055 EA MIII FF 2.....[TRUNCATED] More information in: Spitfire Site

Aircraft Accident / Loss Entry

Date of Crash  07 Sep 40 Aircraft Name  Spitfire I Serial Number  X4256
Unit  602 Sqdn Operating Airfield   Country  UK
Aircrew details
Source Henk Welting's Database

National Archives AIR81

Citation AIR81 Casualty File Description Link
AIR81/3139Pilot Officer H W Moody: missing believed killed; enemy action, Spitfire X4256, 602 Squadron, 7 September 1940.C16472315

Casualities in the CWGC Register for Spitfire I X4256

Rank Name, Number, Trade & Details DateUnit Country Cemetary/Memorial & Loc Ref
Pilot OfficerHenry Wollaston MOODY (81046) Spitfire Ia X4256  AIR81/3139 1940-09-07602 Sqdn AIR27 United KingdomRunnymede Memorial

Search Google for Spitfire Ia X4256

Related Posts in RAF Commands Forum

ThreadPost TextAuthor
Spitfire X4256How is it possible that P/O Henry W. MOODY - 81046, Spitfire X4256 of 602 Sqn shot down 7-9-1940, is commemorated on Panel 9 of the Runnymede Memorial, where is known (Spitfire File Aeromilitaria Autumn 2008, page 126) that he was shot down by a Bf 109 near Biggin Hill, Kent. Regards, Henk. ....Read More.Henk Welting on 17th September 2008 07:38:42
Spitfire X4256Hi, Henry Wollaston Moody 81046 P/O 602 Sqdn Failed to return from combat over the Biggin Hill area on the 7th and was reported "Missing" Aged 30 yrs. Photo of him in "Men of the BoB" Air Brit W1000 - Z9999 only has X4256 - 602 - Missing, presumed shot down by Bf109 after scramble from Biggin Hill 7.9.40. FCL V1 second edition has page 78 602 - F/O W. H. Coverley - N3198 + Patrol. Baled out over Biggin Hill in combat and died of his wounds. Body not found till 16th September. Aged 23. While for the next entery, 602 - P/O H. W. Moody - X4256 + Ditto. 1730. NKG aged 30. So, is it known if Moody baled out over Biggin Hill as Coverley did ? Alex ....Read More.Alex Smart on 18th September 2008 11:36:05
Spitfire X4256Hi Henk, according to RAF serials: X4256 Missing, presumed shot down by Bf 109 after scramble from Biggin Hill... But no info where shot down or where crashed. Pavel P.S. Ooops, I am sorry for doubling the same source but Alex a little bit confused me by adding new info into old post:-) ....Read More.CZ_RAF on 18th September 2008 11:42:45
Spitfire X4256Henk, one more source: BoB then and now: X4256 - failed to return from combat over Biggin Hill area 5.30 PM. P/O H. W. Moody missing. Aircraft lost. So it sounds like a little mystery... From this I suppose that his body was really never found although it seems to me impossible... Pavel ....Read More.CZ_RAF on 18th September 2008 11:50:58
Methodological considerationsThis topic sprouts from a Henk Welting item, entitled "Spitfire X4256", that drifted away from the original theme. Therefore a new one. This one is about methods employed when writing about history. The way towards can be summarized as follows: 1. Henk noted that the pilot of this aircraft, that was shot down in the Biggin Hill area, is listed as missing. He requests clarification: how can this aviator remain missing, after being lost over the homeland? 2. In response, several scenario's are given. 3. In addition to that, Mr. Grabowski offers the case of a Polish RAF aviator, whom he claims is still buried under the tarmac of RAF Northolt. He mentiones that it took to this year, 2008, before a memorial was erected at the crash site. The implication is that the British did a less than perfect job: the remains were only partially salvaged, the hole was filled, and that was the end of it. He offers an explanation: "that is reality of a war, sorry." I shall not try to describe the inmeasurable arrogance that speaks of giving this explanation. It sprouts from Mr. Grabowski's belief that there is one and only one historical truth, independent of its actors or its students. A truth that is of course known to him, which is the truth, sorry. It also sprouts from a curious distinction made by Mr. Grabowski between fact and opinion. I rather protest against the following: 1. The uncritical repetition of the observations of an eyewitness, that very little of the pilot was salvaged, leading to a conclusion that most of the remains are still at that crash site. 2. The implication that the British did less than what should have been done, as a result of the urgencies of war. I find such reasoning so messy, that I felt a need to respond. Especially as the implication involves a judgement about the British, that cannot be justified with the case given. My response involved a request to reconsider, and to be careful when passing judgement. This was met with insult. My request to rephrase that, was met with "I see no need". I reported the insult to the moderator, as this is against the rules to which we subscribed as members of this forum. No response. Only one person stepped into this issue that had turned nasty: Pavel Vancata, who graciously offered himself as a scapegoat because he raised a question that led to this. Raising questions is never silly or stupid; giving answers can be. I do not require others to step into my defence. However, as nobody else interfered, I consider it possible that Mr. Grabowski's modus operandi passed unnoticed by many. Therefore this post, as the real subject matter is how to write about history. A much broader matter than the case discussed in Henk's post. The topics discussed in this forum demonstrate on a regular basis that knowledge of history continues to advance, perhaps in tiny steps, as, with the help of others, there is always more information to be found. That, at the very least, ....Read More.Rob Philips on 21st September 2008 07:05:49

The URL for this page is Here is a Clickable Link
Like what you see? You can support this site!