Books to stay away from

[Lucky13]

Oh the backlash! The author has even deleted all his official medias for the same reason! How you can write a 480 pages book from what I understand, you can read about this character in under 2 minutes, takes a certain amount of talent! Even Japan is up in arms about the Ubisoft game Assassin Creed Shadows for all the falsehoods, mistakes etc., etc..!

 

[Snautzer01]

Anything by Yefim Gordon

Care to explain?

 

[RaptorFan]

Care to explain?

If you're looking for books on Soviet/Russian aircraft written in a form to make the Ministry of Propaganda look like incompetents, this author is for you.

 

[Luft.4]

Care to explain?

I too would be curious for factual proof as from my experience with a handful of his English translated works, they are pretty decent. Good mix of data and stories. Perhaps the only downside is the lack of footnotes or bibliographies. That being said, I seriously doubt his writings can be put into the category of 'propaganda' for WWII birds. I have been able to verify many of his statements with original documentation. He is a serial author, but a decent one.

 

[RaptorFan]

He is a serial author, but a decent one.

We like who we like. I loved his book on MiG 1.42/SU-47 where he wrote they would've been capable of intercepting all the types of NATO weapons incl guided bombs dropped on Yugoslavia.

I bought 4 of his books. That's 4 books too many, but feel free to keep financing "Yefim." Is there really someone with that name?

 

[Luft.4]

My experience with his work is limited to only WWII birds, as I clearly wrote above. Should his work turn fantastical after 1945 idk, but again am not interested in that period for my research. Claiming him to write 'propaganda' is a stretch. Factually incorrect in some instances maybe (I do not know the performance of jets so I cannot tell), but hardly 'propaganda'. Where is the pushing of politics in this works? He regularly and explicitly states the shortcomings of Soviet aviation in the book I have read: Soviet Air Power in World War II, Yakovlev's piston-Engine Fighters, Lavochkin's piston-engine Fighters, etc.

 

[Sabrejet]

Not sure what the issue is with Yefim Gordon. I have the Flanker and Bear books and both are well-researched and well-written. Neither has the feel of any propaganda.

 

[Snautzer01]

We like who we like. I loved his book on MiG 1.42/SU-47 where he wrote they would've been capable of intercepting all the types of NATO weapons incl guided bombs dropped on Yugoslavia.

I bought 4 of his books. That's 4 books too many, but feel free to keep financing "Yefim." Is there really someone with that name?

Still, you put down the work of a writer.
So you must be a hell of a researcher.

Please post a list of your papers books etc.

I ask you once again. Why.

Now not with your puberal opinion but with facts.
You know the stuff you researched so you can deal with the things wrong.

This is not facebook. Just do not blate your opinion.
Facts dear boy. Do you know them?

 

[Juha3]

"The forgotten air force" by Henry Probert. I read it a long time algo but leave me a bad taste. Quite boring and, IIRC, stated something that the main RAF adversary in CBI was the Zero.

In Probert's "defense", he claims that there were two versions of the Zero, the Navy version called Zero and a slightly different Army version that eventually became known by its Allied code name Oscar. That was too much to me, so I did not read the book much further and when the Shores et al. Bloody Shambles Vol. 3 was published I ordered it and I still haven't read more than one seventh of Probert's book.

When I heard about Probert's book, I immediately ordered it from England because I was/am interested in the battles in Burma. So I was very, very disappointed when I came across to this Army version of the Zero claim in a book printed in 1996.

 

[RaptorFan]

Facts dear boy. Do you know them?

Yes.
1. You like wasting money
2. You couldn't recognize "Yefim" if he was in front of you
3. You couldn't impress or intimidate a fly

 

[Snautzer01]

Yes.
1. You like wasting money
2. You couldn't recognize "Yefim" if he was in front of you
3. You couldn't impress or intimidate a fly

Ahh ..the wise words of a twad.

I will use simple word then. Read slowly.

So for no reason you smear a name in aviation, have no clue what you are talking about and are not telling why you think you are such a learned boy. Nothing. Just jibberish comes.

I suggest you stear toward less difficult books and go donald duck. I have a feeling it will fit your age better.
You might want to skip the text balloons though.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Without taking any side in this pissing match, it should be pointed out that poorly-researched books are worse than nothing being published. Case in point, Fuchida's "memoirs" that stilted the discussion about both Midway and the PH third strike for decades, or the various memoirs from German generals.

Historians too make mistakes. Walter Lord based a bit of his Incredible Victory on Fuchida, so while he sourced his writing, he also took what is clearly -- in hindsight --an incorrect recounting at face value.

I haven't read any of this Yefim's work and have no opinion on it. But I do know that written history can well be wrong. I don't need to have written a book to know that someone else's book can be wrong. That's really a disguised argument from authority, which is of course a fallacy in thinking.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

[Moderator Hat On]

TO ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, YOU CAN GET YOUR POINT ACROSS WITHOUT SNIDE COMMENTS AND PERSONAL ATTACKS/INSULTS.

PLEASE REFRAIN FROM THIS GOING FOWARD.

[Moderator Hat Off]

 

[Snautzer01]

Without taking any side in this pissing match, it should be pointed out that poorly-researched books are worse than nothing being published. Case in point, Fuchida's "memoirs" that stilted the discussion about both Midway and the PH third strike for decades, or the various memoirs from German generals.

Historians too make mistakes. Walter Lord based a bit of his Incredible Victory on Fuchida, so while he sourced his writing, he also took what is clearly -- in hindsight --an incorrect recounting at face value.

I haven't read any of this Yefim's work and have no opinion on it. But I do know that written history can well be wrong. I don't need to have written a book to know that someone else's book can be wrong. That's really a disguised argument from authority, which is of course a fallacy in thinking.

I do not mind some one saying it is a bad writer. I do mind if no reason is given. In this case none.
Not even when asked. That is libelous

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I do not mind some one saying it is a bad writer. I do mind if no reason is given. In this case none.
Not even when asked. That is libelous

It's an opinion. And just because it's from not-an-author doesn't make it prima facie less valid. Has anyone libeled Martin Caidin in this thread? And how many are published authors?

 

[SaparotRob]

He was right about blue exhaust flames.

 

[Snautzer01]

So in your opinion it fine to put down the work of a researcher or anybody for that matter and give no reason what so ever. Like on facebook?

I thought this was a more serious board then that.
Caiden has been proven to be a writer with imagination beyond facts. One can google that one.

 

[GrauGeist]

He was right about blue exhaust flames.

Blue is if it's running lean.

Orange/yellow if it's running rich.

Dull red if it's a dragster and it's exhaust is detonating the hydrogen in the atmophsere...

 

[Sabrejet]

So I assume we can put the Yefim Gordon criticism down to personal issues, since no evidence was proffered. I'm glad: I like his books.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

So in your opinion it fine to put down the work of a researcher or anybody for that matter and give no reason what so ever. Like on facebook?

I thought this was a more serious board then that.
Caiden has been proven to be a writer with imagination beyond facts. One can google that one.

My opinion is that a person can have his or her own opinion, and -- yikes -- offer it and perhaps have some basis for it even if they don't put it up. I myself don't take unsupported opinions as informed. Nor do I get bent out of shape over it. We're free to scroll past them who opine without support.

Caiden is not the only bullshit artist given access to a printing press.

I don't do Fakebook at all, so you're barking up the wrong tree there.