How has this site changed / affirmed some of your opinions of WWII aircraft?

[MikeGazdik]

I post this because personally I have had several of my own beliefs changed or affirmed because of the vast knowledge on this site. Just wondering if I'm alone. As examples I will list just a few of mine:

I always liked the F4U Corsair, but have grown to realize that it MAY be the best overall fighter the U.S. produced during WWII.

Again, I liked the Mustang. But the true genius of the design has opened my eyes. It is certainly deserving of all the accolades it gets in the various articles I have read and continue to read. It was certainly THE airplane for the U.S. in Europe.

Despite its shortcomings, the P-40 is one airplane that has been severely glossed over in the historical overview of the U.S. fighters in WWII. This airplane is my "baby". My first love of the WWII aircraft as a kid, but it has not been given the credit due in most of my past readings. It remains at the top of my list as favorites.

I "thought" I knew a lot about WWII aviation. Until I found this site. I learn something every time I check in!!! To me that is invaluable.

And because this forum is international, the amount I have learned of aircraft outside of the U.S. is incredible. It is surely one of the best aspects of this forum. I sometimes cannot believe that I am talking to people with intimate knowledge of these aircraft. I am a kid in a candy store!

What say you? My viewpoints are obviously from a person from the USA, would like to hear from others all over the world.

 

[cimmex]

Yes, you can get some good information here but it is not easy to recognise what are real history facts and what are "What if" postings. There is no separate line in the forum and even inside the same thread there is a mix. It makes fun here but for facts I prefer TOCH or LEMB.
Cimmex

 

[zoomar]

It hasn't really completely changed any of my opinions, but has made me reconsider at least one:

The He-219. For years I accepted the 1960's 1970's Wm Green gospel that the He-219 was hands down the best night fighter in WW2 and that high-level opposition to it was political and personality driven. While I'm not ready to completely abandon my opinion that the 219 was an excellent aircraft, enough people on this board have written enough to make me consider the possibility that the He-219 has been overrated.

 

[A4K]

The best thing here IMO is the pool of photographic information and personal experiences. The 'facts and figures' quoted (and contested) in the topic threads often not so, they are always subject to debate. All depends on who believes which source is correct, or how clever member X thinks they are.

I'll just keep loving this place for the photos and good mates.

 

[N4521U]

Changed?

Not so much Changed but reaffirmed there are like people out there who enjoy the hobby and are willing to share, and help others grow in the hobby. I am continually amazed at the speed help arrives, and the quality of that help, both in information and generosity of materials, even whole kits. Case in point are my entries in the Captured GB.

I had never even considered the amount of research we do for our GB's. I have been even more enlightened about the pilots who flew into battle. I had never before looked for a Davidson in the world's air forces. Now I have a list I couldn't have imagined. And, to be building several of them is exciting for me. One of which will be a bit of a surprise for the grand daughter of one RAF pilot.

To all of you who share, and have helped, myself and the others on this forum, I thank you, it is much appreciated.

Big Bellied Bill

 

[bobbysocks]

hasnt changed any of my opinions per say but has provided me with more depth and a more " panoramic" view of situations from those days. i can see what provoked conditions and why they came into being. there is a wealth of good info and knowledge on this site......but like anything else in life you may have to sift it out...

 

[davebender]

Both of these might have been fighter aircraft intrigued me but I knew little about them before discussions on this forum.

Since then...
IMO the He-100 is interesting but the small airframe and internal fuel capacity limit potential for development. RLM probably made the right decision not to fund production.

Fw-187 is a different story. This could have been the Uber fighter aircraft of WWII.
- Outstanding aerial performance.
- Outstanding endurance thanks to large internal fuel capacity plus fuel efficient DB601 engines.
- Focke Wulf quoted a production price of RM 140,000. If that price can be achieved it's relatively inexpensive.
- Four nose mounted cannon would provide the best firepower of any WWII fighter aircraft. On a par with Me-262 jet fighter aircraft.
- Space for 2nd crewmember offers potential for night / all weather capability. You've got an on board navigator.
- Wing loading low enough to offer potential for a ground attack variant. No need to build the underpowered Hs.129.
- Could perform the same long range recon mission as Ju-88 and Me-110 but at lower cost and better survivability.
- Could have been in production by 1940. Newer model DB601/DB605 engines would keep performance at the cutting edge through 1945.

 

[parsifal]

learning about model making is the best thing I have taken from this site.

in terms of information, i dont think I learn so much as am given cues and direction for further investigation.

Some stuff turns out to be real gems other stuff is just chaff

the friendships are quite unique for an online forum.

 

[VBF-13]

These forums overall are a good opportunity to sharpen one's understanding, if one is so inclined, and that counts me in. I find the historical threads engaging. The technical threads, they're rather engaging, although, for the most part, over my head. The hypothetical threads, I can take or leave most of those; they don't really turn me on.

Yes, overall, I've learned a lot. I've also revised views. I'm more discerning, now, too, I think, than when I started. Credit you boys for all that.

 

[nuuumannn]

With all of you and your comments. This forum is a terrific resource and extremely valuable from a research point of view; not surprisingly however, there is a little too much reliance on the internet as a source of definite information for my liking, which can be tricky in deciphering between the wheat and chaff; - I still prefer a good, well written book! From a personal point of view, I love it! I share the comments of Evan and Big Bellied Bill. It has broadened my knowledge and my interest and introduced me to all manner of opinions and perspectives from all over the world - a valuable thing for all of us.

A wholehearted thanks to the moderators and originators of the site - also to each and everyone of you for making it awesome.

 

[CobberKane]

This forum has allowed an intellectual midget such as myself to contradict and irritate countless of my betters. It has added to my quality of life immeasurably.

 

[meatloaf109]

Changed?

Not so much Changed but reaffirmed there are like people out there who enjoy the hobby and are willing to share, and help others grow in the hobby. I am continually amazed at the speed help arrives, and the quality of that help, both in information and generosity of materials, even whole kits. Case in point are my entries in the Captured GB.

I had never even considered the amount of research we do for our GB's. I have been even more enlightened about the pilots who flew into battle. I had never before looked for a Davidson in the world's air forces. Now I have a list I couldn't have imagined. And, to be building several of them is exciting for me. One of which will be a bit of a surprise for the grand daughter of one RAF pilot.

To all of you who share, and have helped, myself and the others on this forum, I thank you, it is much appreciated.

Big Bellied Bill

Ditto!
Pot Belly Paul.

 

[MikeGazdik]

The technical information that people know about the certain aircraft is amazing to me. I have done, and do ,quite a bit of reading of WWII. The vast majority has been autobiographies of pilots. I really enjoy those. I understand sometimes those are jaded because the particular pilot was so intimate with his airplane, and thus sometimes the airplane is described to be larger than life. But I get that. Anyone in life and death combat, that has lived another day because of the tool (in this case, the war plane), will usually have a great affection for that plane. Or great hatred if he felt it almost killed him!

I am a bit too busy now in life, work, family, etc, to do as much reading as I once did. I look forward to a time where I can read up on some of the stuff I know way to little about, particularly the Japanese aircraft and Russian.

For me, the postings by Drgondog, with his great knowledge of the Mustang and 8th AF is awesome. And because I am an Allison engine anything fan, GregP's info on that engine and aircraft is just great. There are many others here I really appreciate, so just because I didn't name you please don't feel left out. A great downfall of mine is the inability to remember names, including internet "handles".

A great thanks to the moderators and creators of these forums is sent out as well.

I guess the one opinion of mine that has been changed with all of the readings on this forum, is that of the P-38. I felt (and stated so previously) that it could hold its own with ANY single engine fighter of WWII, one on one. It was obviously a great airplane, but in reality only a great pilot in a P-38 could fight and win against some of the top single engine fighters of WWII. The average pilot would do better in one of the greater single engine fighters of the war. (Mustang, Corsair, FW190, Spitfire come to mind) This does not change my view of how great of an airplane it was, but my opinion has changed in as far as it facing some certain single engine fighters in a one on one fight. Though it still remains one of my favorite airplanes, and in my view, one of the sexiest fighters to take to the sky!!!!

 

[VBF-13]

not surprisingly however, there is a little too much reliance on the internet as a source of definite information for my liking, which can be tricky in deciphering between the wheat and chaff; - I still prefer a good, well written book!

I missed this. Let's add another creditable source--pilots who weren't authorship-inclined. Most pilots didn't write books.

It gets confusing, huh?

 

[fastmongrel]

I have learnt that wikipedia should be treated with a large pinch of salt and that uncorroborated 1st person testimony should also be treated with caution. Especially many years after the fact.

I was also surprised to find that if only the war had lasted another 6 months then the Luftwaffes Vunder Veapons vould haff vun ze varr

 

[meatloaf109]

Nein! Ve ver bizzy mit der bazes on der bak-zide of der Moon!

 

[VBF-13]

I have learnt that wikipedia should be treated with a large pinch of salt and that uncorroborated 1st person testimony should also be treated with caution. Especially many years after the fact.

Which would include uncorroborated 1st person testimony in books, I presume.

 

[nuuumannn]

I was also surprised to find that if only the war had lasted another 6 months then the Luftwaffes Vunder Veapons vould haff vun ze varr

Du haff only just lernd zis???!!! Pfff! Englanders...

 

[syscom3]

I learned something fairly quickly.

When Erich talks about the Luftwaffe (and US night fighters), he knows his stuff.

 

[A4K]

Hear ya on Wiki... come across a few mistakes myself (WW II started in 1938 according to their thread on the Rheingold train route, for example!)

(reply to Fastmongrel's earlier post)