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


Dutch NX3418 B-3119



 
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Why is that unfortunate?
Let me answer. Most of my post in specific aritplanes etc are pictures from eBay. That is to prevent book copy without source and the main reason, new unpublished shots.

I missed putting in the eBay part in the title for this one (corrected today) but mjfur is a visiteur of said threads so he knows what i am attending to do i think.
If he wishes he is very free to create his own threads offcourse.

 

Very, VERY minor nitpick but AN194 only ever flew with 21 Sqn RAAF. It was lost during the evacuation of Sungei Patani, 8-11 Dec 1941. The merged unit 21/453 Sqn was only formed after the Commonwealth Air Forces pulled out of Malaya entirely at the end of Dec 1941.
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
A caption from 1942 German propaganda can be excused for being wrong. They didn't have all the facts.
What I find offensive is when a caption like that turns up in a modern publication.
 
A caption from 1942 German propaganda can be excused for being wrong. They didn't have all the facts.
What I find offensive is when a caption like that turns up in a modern publication.

Agree entirely...I was only messing around.

Also agree when authors are lazy and simply repeat the mistakes of the past. There was a long thread on Britmodeller a while ago about the colour photos of Blenheims taken in Singapore in 1941. The airframes all wore the PT codes of 27 Sqn but a book published in the 1960s mistakenly associated one of them with the airframe which Arthur Scarf flew during his VC mission. The original caption was totally incorrect, as proven by the Operations Record Books for both 27 and 62 Sqns...but the mistake persists and has been repeated scores of times.
 
And nobody sees how big the buff in comperison with the japanese soldiers is. Nor that they are not armed for that matter.
 

Users who are viewing this thread