Myths and misinformations in 21st century

[GregP]

In their partial defense, I'm not all that sure anyone in the AVG had ever seen a picture of an A6M Zero. From what I heard it was all just verbal description along with some "preliminary" blacked out 3-views. That is, of course, second-hand information. But the blacked-out 3 views even in the TAIC manuals weren't all that good some 5 years later.

Perhaps they thought they were fighting Zeros from the vantage of an honest mistake. I don't really know.

 

[Jenisch]

Technology and the Air Force: A Retrospective Assessment

It seems that in the post-war era the idea that the Americans only learned about the benefits of swept wings after finding German research is also flawed.

 

[tomo pauk]

Thanks for the tip re. the book.
Available online: here

 

[buffnut453]

The first ones I could think of are the authors of "Bloody Shambles" (Shores, Cull and Izawa)

I think Dan Ford was the first in his "Flying Tigers: Claire Chennault and the American Volunteer Group" which came out in 1991. "Bloody Shambles" came out in 1992 and was less focused on China and more on Malaya, Singapore, Burma, NEI and the Philippines.

 

[Shortround6]

Perhaps they thought they were fighting Zeros from the vantage of an honest mistake. I don't really know.

The KI 43 wasn't deployed to China or SE Asia until around a year after the Zero, The Zero first seeing combat in the summer of 1940 and the KI 43 not showing up until the summer of 1941. The Zero's were pulled out for redeployment in late summer or early fall of 1941. Given the very similar appearance the confusion at the time is certainly understandable.

edit; They were both radial engine (same engine actually) low wing fighters with retractable landing gear, rounded wing tips and tail surfaces and both had a 'bubble' style canopy. Two more similar appearing airplanes used by the same country would be hard to find.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In their partial defense, I'm not all that sure anyone in the AVG had ever seen a picture of an A6M Zero. From what I heard it was all just verbal description along with some "preliminary" blacked out 3-views. That is, of course, second-hand information. But the blacked-out 3 views even in the TAIC manuals weren't all that good some 5 years later.

Perhaps they thought they were fighting Zeros from the vantage of an honest mistake. I don't really know.

It was an honest mistake and the typical Zero/ Ki 43 misidentification. No fault to these veterans

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I think Dan Ford was the first in his "Flying Tigers: Claire Chennault and the American Volunteer Group" which came out in 1991. "Bloody Shambles" came out in 1992 and was less focused on China and more on Malaya, Singapore, Burma, NEI and the Philippines.

Agree - I think it was about that time folks started to place JAAF and IJN units in their operational locations. The internet helped in sharing and verifying this information

 

[Zaggy]

Two of the prototypes.

If memory serves, the Prototypes (or parts there of) were found at Fw; not with JG301.

Now, pictures of completed C-1's were found ready to fly at the factory (with empty tanks - you know, fuel shortages and etc). I will have to check, but the WNr of the a/c at JG301 weren't C-0's, but were from the production C-1 batch. Same happened with the E-1 and E-11; at least a number were built, but they had no fuel to get them to the Units.


D

 

[Peter Gunn]

I'm sure someone has covered it already but the tiresome myth that the 332nd never lost a bomber under their escort, or they were so good they were requested by bomb groups to escort them or etc...

No offense but I find it a disservice not only to them but to all the other fighter groups out there (some with much better records) that so many ridiculous myths surround the 332nd. Although I've noticed that at least Wiki is now stating the "never lost a bomber" myth has been debunked. Progress.

 

[fubar57]

This is just the first page of 50....

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I'm sure someone has covered it already but the tiresome myth that the 332nd never lost a bomber under their escort, or they were so good they were requested by bomb groups to escort them or etc...

No offense but I find it a disservice not only to them but to all the other fighter groups out there (some with much better records) that so many ridiculous myths surround the 332nd. Although I've noticed that at least Wiki is now stating the "never lost a bomber" myth has been debunked. Progress.

That one pisses me off.

I have been called a racist because I told someone the truth.

 

[Peter Gunn]

That one pisses me off.

I have been called a racist because I told someone the truth.

Yeah, same here, I actually had an acquaintance of mine I did business with unfriend me on Facebook because I tried to enlighten him on this subject. I felt bad for... about two nano seconds.

 

[fubar57]

On Pg. 5, July 18th, '44, their 28th mission, 15 bombers were lost

 

[Old Wizard]

Here's something of interest.
Full text of "American Raiders"

 

[GregP]

With regard to post #31, me, too. I have no race card to play when military service is the subject, but have been accused of same when I tried to get the truth out, too.

At least the Tuskeegee Airmen themselves didn't and don't try to claim that! We get and have gotten several visits from Colonel Bob Friend, and he doesn't claim that, either. Never has. Doesn't dimish his service in the least.

Nobody was perfect in a big aerial fight unless it was by chance alone. Mostly, chance isn't on any side and neither is luck, either good or bad. It sort of evens out in the end, except we surely had better luck choosing our leaders at the time than the Germans did.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Setting the record straight on the Tuskegee Airmen

 

[tomo pauk]

The f#$%&/g idiot on the English-language Wikipedia states that P-40 was weak at high altitudes because it did not featured a two-speed supercharger.
That claim was rectified some time ago, but here it goes again.

 

[swampyankee]

We were taught Colin Kelly earned the Medal of Honor (he didn't; he was awarded a DSC) and sunk a battleship (there wasn't one there to sink). (as an aside, I think exaggerating people's accomplishments dishonors them, as it turns them into cartoon figures, removing their humanity)

Germans did not invent swept wings during WW2 (they were actually proposed well before WW2).

Despite the myth, the Soviets did not use P-39s for ground attack.

It's quite unlikely (as in there is no contemporary German or Japanese language documents showing it) that the Japanese called the Corsair the "Whistling Death" or the Germans called the P-38 "the Fork-tailed Devil."

 

[swampyankee]

Setting the record straight on the Tuskegee Airmen

The "not losing a single bomber" quote was probably an exaggeration. Certainly, though the Tuskegee Airman had to leap through far too many hurdles to serve their country, albeit one where significant portion of the population thought that hanging them from trees was a fun Sunday pastime.

Considering that German and Italian PoWs tended to be treated better than the African-American troops guarding them (I've heard this from multiple, independent threads, including former PoWs), one wonders why any African-Americans served.

 

[stona]

"The M-1 rifle is the best battlefield implement ever devised", because Patton said so. There are any number of other claims to that title, by no means all are weapons.
He did write that, but if you bother to read the rest of the letter he also claimed that American tanks, artillery, mortars and machine guns are "without equal on the battlefields of the world", more hyperbole which is, I would suggest, demonstrably untrue (to be polite).
Cheers
Steve