Danvers loves to break rules. Which is a dangerous attitude to have in the middle of a war. Then his luck almost totally abandons him while out on an unauthorised and ultimately ill-fated mission with his brother. Danvers is the only survivor.
These events turn his recklessness into dangerous determination.
After he recovers he is posted to a new squadron where he gets off to a bad start with his new C.O. by turning up late then commits the unforgivable sin of running over his dog. However Danvers worst sin is to start getting his new squadron involved progressively in more and more dangerous missions.
The C.O. loses his authority, his dog and his well trained but sheltered squadron starts getting shot up. Needless to say the other pilots in the squadron are not fond of Danvers either. However, in time, because of Danvers the C.O. and squadron gain more than self respect they gain resolve.
This story is almost ruined by the last panel. Or should that be saved by Danvers’ attitude?
Things I liked: The focke-wulf pilot who says “English Pig! Die!”; the veritable tashfest; there are several excellent agghhs; and then there’s a surprising insight to the technical aspects of flying a large aircraft.
The thing that really got up my nose? You know the sticky situation where every antiaircraft gun in Germany zeroes in on your beaufighter and you and everybody else in it should be killed - but not this time. But!!??
This story is published in 1960 – only 15 years after the fact. For those of who are a little bit older 1995 was also only 15 years ago! Aggghhhh!!
Look at that tash!
What a great picture!
You know if I was in a movie I would want those to be my lines.
That's a big but...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHi John,
DeleteThanks for the kind words. As a matter of fact I do have Fear at 5000 kicking around in my collection. I'll have to dig it out and see what I can do with it. Also that other story rings a bell too. Do you think it was published around the same time?
Cheers
Jovan
...oops John, I accidentally removed your comment. Problem is I can't figure how to put it back.
ReplyDeleteHi Jovan
DeleteSorry I took so long to reply. Yes, the 'Jonah' story was published at a similar time (1962-64)
Cheers, John
Hi Jovan
DeleteSorry I took so long to reply. Yes, the 'Jonah' story was published at a similar time (1962-64)
Cheers, John