CAF Aircraft ownership

Again, that is a wonderful act of respect. I hope one day there will be no one around who may be offended by swastikas, so that it is OK to return to the accurate scheme. However, while there is, it’s just decent.

Further to comments JDK and Janie:

A well known collector in Australia insists on accurate schemes for his museum. His Spitfire is accurately marked except for the kill markings. He was prepared to be persuaded that the swastika mark could go on the aircraft as they did represent kills however his wife would not entertain any such mark for any purpose as its reproduction was so offensive to at least two generations.

Thus the aircraft appears with no kill markings – not even Japanese marks.

Chris

Caf

Go off topic a little? lol

My main point in beginning this thread was about the ownership of the CAF NZ Wing aircraft. I don’t think we can pin going off topic on you DaveB – I don’t think the thread’s ever been on topic 🙂 🙂

If anyone out there has got an answer to the question about who used to own the Beech 18 and Harvard I’d be happy to hear. In the meantime, keep the thread meandering, it’s very interesting.

I have attempted to post back twice to reply to James’ comments and both times had computer glitches so they haven’t been posted, but I do see your point JDK very clearly. I am not completely insensitive, even if perhaps to some my posts may have eluded to this.

I fully understand the issues some people may have with the Swaztika, and with the word confederate. Both are symbols that conjur up a dreadfully shameful past. My point was that I don’t think the CAF were directly trying to envoke that reaction by using the word confederate – I don’t think they wanted people to think they supported slavery and were the Air Force of a long deposed and forgotten southern American country.

To my way of thinking, forcing the CAF to change its name is like the Indians saying George Lucas should rename The Empire Strikes Back because it reminds them of the 200 years they were ruled by Britain. Totally pointless and illogical.

More of this effort should be put into solving today’s conflicts and problems rather than wasting time trying to make people feel better about things that happened long ago.

The CAF said that they were losing Airsho’s $$$ due to the name. A lot of people said they wouldn’t approve it but stood by and it happened. The best line I heard was if they change the name Confederate, they first need to change the name of the New York Yankee’s!. They lost a lot of members over this including me.

The other dark part of history in the CAF is the Move, just ask…………..

Cheers

Go off topic a little? lol

My main point in beginning this thread was about the ownership of the CAF NZ Wing aircraft. I don’t think we can pin going off topic on you DaveB – I don’t think the thread’s ever been on topic 🙂 🙂

If anyone out there has got an answer to the question about who used to own the Beech 18 and Harvard I’d be happy to hear. In the meantime, keep the thread meandering, it’s very interesting.

I have attempted to post back twice to reply to James’ comments and both times had computer glitches so they haven’t been posted, but I do see your point JDK very clearly. I am not completely insensitive, even if perhaps to some my posts may have eluded to this.

I fully understand the issues some people may have with the Swaztika, and with the word confederate. Both are symbols that conjur up a dreadfully shameful past. My point was that I don’t think the CAF were directly trying to envoke that reaction by using the word confederate – I don’t think they wanted people to think they supported slavery and were the Air Force of a long deposed and forgotten southern American country.

To my way of thinking, forcing the CAF to change its name is like the Indians saying George Lucas should rename The Empire Strikes Back because it reminds them of the 200 years they were ruled by Britain. Totally pointless and illogical.

More of this effort should be put into solving today’s conflicts and problems rather than wasting time trying to make people feel better about things that happened long ago.

The Lafayette Escadrille I assume – but why?

http://www.acepilots.com/wwi/lafayette.html

I’ve always liked that badge. Perhaps the tattoo i’ve always searched to find.

Three cheers to The Fighter Collection who changed the totally authentic and justifiable swastika, on thier indian head logo, to a cross sign. When authenticity is paramount, that must have been a tough decision to make.

Sorry to go off topic a little here, but what is the significance of the TFC Indian Head logo?

Thanks.

Swastika

The ‘fylfot’ or swastika, clockwise or counterclockwise, goes back to ancient times and has particular significant religious association in Asia.

Here is a typical display example at Sandakan in Borneo, incidentally the starting point for the infamous ‘Death March’ in 1945.

Such brutality is still difficult to comprehend. 🙁

Mark

I know of two Mustang pilots who have swastika’s on their aircraft who recently went to Germany without getting arrested.

Ah! But that time the swastikas represented kills!

I always understood the swastika to be the reversal of an original good luck sign. However, nowadays, the association with evil is considerably more prominent than its origins, that the origins pale into relative insignificance. This is shame. It would be wonderful enjoy the symbol purely as a decorative shape. However, if your family have been murdered by a group of people, it should be very difficult for you to associate with their group badge, just for fun, regardless of how irrelevant it is.

For people who have no association with its meaning, it is just polite and decent of them to be sympathetic to the emotions of those who have suffered.

Three cheers to The Fighter Collection who changed the totally authentic and justifiable swastika, on thier indian head logo, to a cross sign. When authenticity is paramount, that must have been a tough decision to make.

I’ve always understood the swastika to be banned in Germany too, but if you look at Willow’s pics on this thread
http://forum.airforces.info/showthread.php?t=26766
there are at least three visible.
IIRC, the Nazi swastika is really a hackenkruez (sp?) which is a reversed swastika.

Ah, but isn’t the old Nazi swastika the wrong way round anyway? :confused:

The swastika is indeed an illegal symbol in many countries. When we take the Bf108 to France the old electrical tape comes out and we make a square out of ours. I also know one other owner who actually has the mirror image of a swastika on his tail, now it’s not a swastika but it fools the eye. It appears like a swastika but it just looks “wrong” and it takes a while or an explanation to work out why.

yep you’re right the swastika is banned in Germany – thats why in all Revell kits they’re missing – even on the Hindenburg – which leaves you with a white circle on a red band for the fins…the aftermarket decal boys at least thank them for that

perfectly understandable though – the most incredible place in Germany for me is Nuremburg where the old congress hall, marching roads and zeppelin platz are all still there – over grown, the police use the platz (scene of all the rallies) for training and because no one wanted the congress hall (all marble, facings but backed with brick) it houses one of the EU disaster reaction teams – MBB 105s all shrink wrapped on trailers, heat seeking kit etc ready to spring into action.

useless info really but i’m full of that if you get to know me…!

Very true, JDK.

I do sometimes wonder whether Germans feel a similar way about the kills on RAF/USAAF aircraft.

There is a difference between what is legal (the law is often an ass) what is sensible or polite and what is tactful.

Without going into great detail, my conversation with the Jewish gentleman was that he was upset by the swastika as his parents had been murdered by the Nazis in a concentration camp. He was not angy with me, but it made me think, as I hope it does you, that symbols have different meanings for different people. Respect for other’s feelings is a civilized trait, not often enough encountered I feel.

Cheers

I know of two Mustang pilots who have swastika’s on their aircraft who recently went to Germany without getting arrested.

I thought it was illigal to display a Swastika in Germany or am I getting this confused with another country?

I’ve sometimes wondered about the use of Swastikas, but the way I see it, if it’s authentic (esp. for an aircraft) then it should be used. I know there are various reasons in Germany for them not to be displayed – although I’m sure a recent Bf109 rebuild has one.

Have often noticed you never see them in computer games, either!

Hmmm.

Actually I liked (and still use!) the title Confederate Air Force, however it did confuse a lot of people, and whatever your dictionary says Dave, there were and are a lot of unpleasent associations to do with Confederate stuff, due to US history.

Having had to discuss using a swastika in a reproduction of the Battle of Britain Film poster with a jewish chap a few years ago, I have revised my views over sensitivity to offence – not just PC issues. If I may, it’s not just a black and white issue. Notfunny intended.

The world moves on. Some things once acceptable are no longer so. And vice versa.

Cheers

Well that seems like a bit of a joke to me. Typical of the PC lot.

The word confederate simply means ‘joined by a treaty or agreement’. And confederacy means ‘league of states’. (Oxford English Dictionary)

It does not mean ‘country that promoted slavery’. It has nothing to do with that. The country once known as the Confederate States of America hasn’t existed for 150 years since it was conquered by the USA. I’m sure we can all get over it now and use the word for what it truly means. I think the word conferderate is very appropriate for an international organisation that bonds together in a common cause like the CAF does, to restore and display old aircraft.

Such a pity that the vote did not allow the option to defend the proper title. No wonder very few people bothered voting. I’d say it may have come close to a 90% majority had it been an option then.

Colonel Culpepper must be spinning in his grave… 😉