Grumpy old men?

EN 830

The endless Mig 31 v F22 or Mirage 2000 V Typhoon type threads I see when passing the MM forum. What is the point ?????????????????????????????? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Couldn’t agree more – Put them all in one each and let them fight it out I say and put the rest of us out of their misery!!!

Regards
john P

The endless Mig 31 v F22 or Mirage 2000 V Typhoon type threads I see when passing the MM forum. What is the point ?????????????????????????????? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Grumpy Old Men

Two things get me aereated. One that comes up regularly is the radio reporter who tells us that “the aircraft is parked on the runway”. The other is more common when actors using radio finish a conversation with “Over and Out”.

People-particularly media-who make ill informed comments when there has been a crash at an airshow.

What I really hate are films / dramas that portray non commisoned ranks, particularly low ranking aircraft mechanics as incompetent idiots.

Well we are aren’t we, thats why we work to the highest of saftey standards in order to show off these aeroplanes to you.

Mind you some people seem to think aeroplanes tow themselves in and out of the shed, fix themselves and then pilots gets in and fly them.

Some airshow commentators need to learn about this as well…..

AF (Ex BBMF)

People who derride all the efforts of grass roots enthusiasts who save aircraft and lumps thereof…..armchair enthusiasts that put all their efforts into criticising restorations/owners without lifting a finger to restore something.
People who criticise colour schemes.

Standing near to the 2 people at an airshow or museum, you know who I mean, the one who knows nothing and the one who knows next to nothing.At least you get a laugh at the answers ‘next to nothing’ gives to ‘knows nothing’

Lindburgh’s baby son was kidnaped by a derranded student. The baby was sick and required regular medication. The kidnaper did not realise this and the baby un- fortunately died. When the body was found a photgrapher broke into the mortuary and photographed it and pictures were printed on the front pages of various news papers in the U.S. Poor little mite.

Rgds Cking

A bit of useless info here, but one of the people to investigate the Lindburgh case was General Norman Schwarzkopf’s father.
phil.

Lindburgh’s baby son was kidnaped by a derranded student. The baby was sick and required regular medication. The kidnaper did not realise this and the baby un- fortunately died. When the body was found a photgrapher broke into the mortuary and photographed it and pictures were printed on the front pages of various news papers in the U.S. Poor little mite.

Rgds Cking

Sheesh, that’s nasty.

I would love to see a list of films where Hollywood came close to the TRUTH or got it RIGHT

Here’s the beginning of a list…

EDITED to say I started a seperate thread on GD to stop this one going too off track: Click here –
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?p=749631#post749631

Lindburgh’s baby son was kidnaped by a derranded student. The baby was sick and required regular medication. The kidnaper did not realise this and the baby un- fortunately died. When the body was found a photgrapher broke into the mortuary and photographed it and pictures were printed on the front pages of various news papers in the U.S. Poor little mite.

Rgds Cking

What I really hate are films / dramas that portray non commisoned ranks, particularly low ranking aircraft mechanics as incompetent idiots.

Movies where an airliner takes off as (say) a DC-10, cruises as an A300, and lands as a 707. So easy to get right

Well, distracting as it may be, this is almost always seen in low budget productions because they can’t afford to send a film crew to different airports and film the same plane. They resort to clips from a stock film archive and hope they can piece together a suitable string of shots that represent the story.

As for Lindbergh versus A&B, I’ve never taken any special interest in the crossing of the Atlantic and can only base any knoweledge I have learned on what I’d seen on TV over the years. I always was under the distinct impression that Lindbergh was the first to fly across the Atlantic, full stop – not the first solo, and I had never heard of Alcock and Brown till only a few years ago. I wonder how much emphasis is really ever put on the fact that it was not the first crossing in a plane. I’d never heard it wasn’t till recently as I say.

John, what was the story of the Lindbergh baby? I’ve heard something that his kid was stolen? Is that right?

The term “Tailfin”! The Fin is only ever on the tail. Anything else that sticks up, down or sideways on an aircraft to keep it pointed in the right direction is called something else.

The term “Wing flaps”

The term “Back wings”

The story that a 747 flew with one of it’s engins fan secured with seat belts is another!

People who move near an airport and complain about the noise.

Reality T.V. programs that show airlines and airports that fail to mention that there are people who fix the aeroplanes.

Rgds Cking

There are several reasons why Lindbergh’s flight is more famous than Alcock & Brown’s.

1. The time period….there was more media in 1927 than 1919. Newsreels were new and a lot more people went to see “talkies” in the late 20’s than films a decade before.
2. Lindbergh was an American so the flight naturally got more play in the US than the Vimy flight. Also, with the Ortig prize there was more of a race atmosphere in the spring & summer of 1927. That too made for more publicity.
3. He was solo….in a single engine airplane. Without taking anything away from Alcock & Brown, the idea of a lone pilot in a small airplane seemed to be a greater feat than two guys in a converted large bomber. Call it “rooting for the underdog”.. Lindbergh’s success against rivals with greater financial backing is a great story. Here he was, a former mail pilot who begged for money to buy a plane and got one at a rock bottom price from an unknown firm after other manufacturers said no…thinking he’d never make it. If it were a film or novel, you’d never believe it.
For a period example of how the story struck a chord with people around the world, witness the reaction of the crouds in Paris. That can’t be dismissed as simple PR or as an American nationalistic fantasy.
4. Destination….Landing in Paris ensured more publicity than landing in an Irish bog.
5. Throughout history it has been shown that it’s not always the first person to do something (or the greatest or the best) that gets the fame…timing, luck and a lot of other factors decide who gets into the history books.

Very good summation, but I feel one is missing:
6. The distance covered. Lindbergh flew from New York to Paris, which is significantly longer than Newfoundland to Ireland. Linking two major cities also seems a lot more practical, and of use to the common man than linking a rocky outcrop with an Irish peat bog. (But that was already covered in point 4 of course.)

Hollywood came close to the TRUTH or got it RIGHT…bet in these forums that list DOES”NT EXIST….
M

The original Memphis Belle?

Moggy

Blimey, we’re not back to M/s York’s underwwear again, are we? 😮

G’day 😉

THANK YOU, JBoyle, for a very straightforward and rational explanation of these events with which I wholeheartedly agree….could’nt have said it better myself….won’t even get into the perceived bit of yank bashing that was starting to fester in a comment further up….Americans don’t control Hollywood, HOLLYWOOD controls Hollywood and unfortunately that means they do their own bit to slander history…I would love to see a list of films where Hollywood came close to the TRUTH or got it RIGHT…bet in these forums that list DOES”NT EXIST….and ‘Battle of Britain’ shines as a light for all movie producers to follow…

M

Why is Lindbergh famous?

There are several reasons why Lindbergh’s flight is more famous than Alcock & Brown’s.

1. The time period….there was more media in 1927 than 1919. Newsreels were new and a lot more people went to see “talkies” in the late 20’s than films a decade before.
2. Lindbergh was an American so the flight naturally got more play in the US than the Vimy flight. Also, with the Ortig prize there was more of a race atmosphere in the spring & summer of 1927. That too made for more publicity.
3. He was solo….in a single engine airplane. Without taking anything away from Alcock & Brown, the idea of a lone pilot in a small airplane seemed to be a greater feat than two guys in a converted large bomber. Call it “rooting for the underdog”.. Lindbergh’s success against rivals with greater financial backing is a great story. Here he was, a former mail pilot who begged for money to buy a plane and got one at a rock bottom price from an unknown firm after other manufacturers said no…thinking he’d never make it. If it were a film or novel, you’d never believe it.
For a period example of how the story struck a chord with people around the world, witness the reaction of the crouds in Paris. That can’t be dismissed as simple PR or as an American nationalistic fantasy.
4. Destination….Landing in Paris ensured more publicity than landing in an Irish bog.
5. Throughout history it has been shown that it’s not always the first person to do something (or the greatest or the best) that gets the fame…timing, luck and a lot of other factors decide who gets into the history books.

AND WHAT REALLY GETS ME GRUMPY…..

…And don’t even get me started on movies where the US won the war single-handed, while we British simpered and did the catering…

People who underestimate the part the US played in the war. :rolleyes:
Any rational person wouldn’t claim the US won the war singlehandedly…but I think we can agree that the allies would not have won without the US.
Also, people in this forum who seem to demand the repatriation of former lend lease warbirds by calling them “theirs”….when in fact they were always US Government property.

Why do people thing Lindberg was the first person to fly the atlantic?

And someone not knowing why Hornchurch Country Park is referred to as the airfield upset me quite a bit.

Jay