Do You Have an Illogical Hatred of an Aircraft?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Waynos

Staff Sergeant
1,309
10
May 18, 2008
On another thread a poster has 'confessed' a hatred for the P-51 and another poster, not unreasonably, has questioned the root of this hatred.

It's an interesting question and one I could ask myself, although 'hate' is a strong word in my case. 'Ambivalence' is more appororiate, perhaps.

I never had a problem with the P-51 as a boy. I greatly admired it, and the B-17 too, and the linking of the two brings us closer to the reason in my case.

Its definitely not through any fault of the planes themselves, its more of a knee jerk reaction to many years of being 'told' that the B-17 and P-51 were 'the planes that won the war, boy. Yes siree!'

The utter disdain this sentiment has for the contribution of everything else really gets my back up and so after years of conditioning I now see these aircraft almost as a symbol of the 'ignorant American' and the great 'We Saved You - you did nothing' attitude that stinks in my nostrils so much.

Please don't misunderstand. I am perfectly aware of the vital part the US played in first helping Britain survive and then in taking the fight back to Germany. Its true that without America, we couldn't have done it. But some people cannot understand that the opposite is also true and while these puerile few are hammering their point home they always seem to cite the B-17 and P-51 to back up their statement. Maybe because they are the only planes they actually know? And I know its not fair or rational but it has coloured my views of these two great aircraft and thats what this thread is for.

I also greatly dislike the P-38 but that is because its ugly and spindly and the booms are too far apart, give me a Beaufighter - to look at - any day :)

But how about you. Any irrational hatreds of your own that don't relate to anything logical like performance or death toll?
 
not for me - my perspective is fairly objective (I suppose the engineer part takes over).

I think I understand bias against the Mustang or B-17 because of so much ignorant television documentaries stating 'best of breed', best fighter, savior of the world, I'm American and You are Not B.S.

I don't get upset about it. Historical facts are easy to look up, judgment is a different question.
 
I can understand someone hating the Stuka for what it did, or even what it represented, but would you like to pass on why your hatred is illogical syscom?
 
When comparing WWII torpedo bomber performance I don't think it would make the top 10 list. The Stringbag might make the top 5 if the list is limited to only CV capable torpedo bombers. But you would never know it from reading popular histories of WWII.
 
I really do not think there is an aircraft that I "hate" for an illogical reason. I think there are plenty of aircraft that I consider overated (but that does not mean they were not great aircraft):

P-51 Mustang
A6M Zero
Ju 87 Stuka
B-17 Flying Fortress

All great aircraft in their own regards. I just think that many other aircraft that were just as good or better get overlooked because of them.
 
I'm with you, Waynos, on the whole "the B-17 the P-51 won WWII" thing; it ignores the contribution of not only other great a/c, but the other countries that built and flew the other a/c. The P-51 is the a/c that I "irrationally" hate the most, probably because everybody seems to think it was the greatest a/c of WWII, and I inherently dislike being told which a/c was the greatest (which, I suppose, is part of the reason the P-38 is my favorite a/c; a lot of people seem to NOT like it).
 
Spitfire, I get tired of being told it's the most beautiful plane ever built when to me the tail is ugly.
 
The P-51.
It isn't that I hate it, it just doesn't mean anything to me, like the Supermarine Spitfire or the Messerschmitt Bf-109 does.
But hate?
Nope, I can't say that I hate any particular plane...or maybe I just hasn't run into the right kind of "wrong" plane yet. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Spitfire and P-51 Mustang... Not that I hate them but I'm also tired hearing over and over again just how beautiful Spitfire is and how Mustang is the best of the best. Then again when Bf 109 is mentioned, its weaknesses are always pointed out - like if other aircraft were completely flawless. Also some good Soviet or other country's planes are not only neglected but often not even mentioned...
 
I also greatly dislike the P-38 but that is because its ugly and spindly and the booms are too far apart, give me a Beaufighter - to look at - any day :)

The P-38 is a BEAUTIFUL fighter, especially the XP-38. The Beaufighter looks like some mutant insect experiment gone horribly wrong from some deranged evil scientist. Beauty and the Beast.

No disrespect of course. :)
 
I have to say I feel the same about the P-51. I don't hate it, I'm just sick of hearing about it. Plus I think its overrated.

Besides, everyone knows the Corsair was THE BEST PLANE EVER!!!! :twisted:
 
Its only illogical cause the aircraft was actually ahead of it's time. It just outlived it's usefulness:

Douglas TBD Devastator

.
 
I dislike all civil aircraft and 95% of helicopters . I dislike most general aviation aircraft mainly because I have to waste so much energy swivelling my head around to see whats flying over my head and helicopters because where I live they are a constant blight:)
 
The only illogical hatred I could have for an aircraft is either the one I'm shooting at or the one shooting at me!
 
I don't have any hatred against any machine. That having been said there are ofcourse machines which I don't like (Mostly the ones which are dangerous pure deathtraps IMO), and then there are those which I am just completely tired of hearing about, and the P-51 falls in under that last category.

The P-51 was an awesome aircraft for its time, it really was, and it also helped a lot in the ETO because of its long legs. BUT it was far from the best fighter to grace the skies during WW2. IMHO the P-51 owes A LOT of its fame to its long range, everything else about it was completely conventional IMO. It was a good, solid and dependable fighter, which is exactly what the Allies needed. And so when some documentary states it as being the best of the best I feel they are misinforming people and are being kinda propagandistic. That bothers me abit cause it sometimes ruins an otherwise good show.

As for machines falling in under the first category, well Soviet tanks have a rather prominent place there. I mean they often look terrorfying and powerful, but looks can be very decieving. One thing is for sure, the Soviets didn't have much regard for human life!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back