dark light

Smith

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 586 through 600 (of 1,284 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Revisionism in History ~ discuss #1347426
    Smith
    Participant

    Summary attempt – no. 1

    Jolly interesting thread, but my brain hurts now so am going to stick it in the lavatory….

    I’m with you TT.

    When I kicked off this thread I was mildly interested in whether we continue to propogate myths about (Bomber Command’s actions in) the Strategic Bombing Campaign. Now I’m reminded of my uni days/daze and the fun I had with Foucault et al.

    And I thought perhaps I might summarise where we are … but am finding that a rather daunting prospect … let me try.

    1. Revisionism is as noted above, both a formal and a popular term. The very idea that it can be popularly formed/defined is almost tautological. I’m going to say “revisionism is the rewriting of history from an alternate point of view”. Is that too broad/loose?

    2. We don’t mind revisionism based on greater accumulation of facts and points of view (eg: original source information from all sides of, in this case, a conflict) but recognise that in editing, using and otherwise moulding those findings into a newly written history, we impose our own world-view.

    3. And it is always fair and reasonable to re-present the commonlyheld views of protagonists at a given time as that is itself informative/revealing (eg: brave lads doing their duty – terror fliegers) but we offer the proviso that that is someone else’s view, not necessarily ours.

    Let’s not stop yet – my main interest in this forum, much as I like those magnificent old machines, is the history of WWII air-war in the ETO. Sharing and expanding my “knowledge” (although I’m now doubting such a concept) is to me the power of this forum in particular.

    in reply to: Scottish Aviation's Liberators #1347454
    Smith
    Participant

    Great website – I find it very interesting to learn of the post-war service of combat aircraft – and I’d be fascinated to see the Qantas aircraft !!!

    in reply to: late war B17G's without chin turret #1347467
    Smith
    Participant

    Hmmm … so my memory, and Roger Freeman’s reliable observations (thanks Dan J) is that some 8th AF B17’s did operate without chin (and ball) turrets in the closing months of the European war (Spring ’45) – but 15th AF retained full defensive armament (thanks James). Interesting. Still love to see some pics.

    James, where were you guys in the 15th operating from?

    in reply to: Messerschmitt 163 #1349294
    Smith
    Participant

    I have had a quick glance through ‘War Prizes’ by PHIL BUTLER and have a possibility for you.
    191060 ??? – RAF reg VF241:- is mentioned as being flight tested, towed behind a spitfire to altitude and released. Landings were made at RAF Wittering until 15th November 1947 the skid collapsed and the 163 scrapped.

    Any chance this is werk no. 191660? That aircraft is not scrapped – now in Paul Allen’s hands if this website accurate
    http://www.preservedaxisaircraft.com/

    edit … I guess not – have looked at Flying Heritage Collection website and no such aircraft listed in their possession – was this true at some stage but moved on?

    in reply to: Messerschmitt 163 #1349427
    Smith
    Participant

    On the website I mentioned above Post2 (and specific link below) it’s listed as a Postwar Komet VF241
    http://www.xs4all.nl/~robdebie/me163/vf241.htm

    in reply to: Revisionism in History ~ discuss #1349444
    Smith
    Participant

    I am mightily impressed by the quality of thought and discussion evidenced here. Clearly we all dwell in our own world view so I daresay we exercise bias even in our attempts at objective commentary, nevertheless this is shaping up as a first-class example of the power of this forum to debate issues. Well done everyone, many thanks, Don

    in reply to: Messerschmitt 163 #1350530
    Smith
    Participant

    I don’t know the answer to your question – but I reckon if you look long enough on this amazing website you’ll find out. There is simply heaps of information and photos. I was/am especially impressed by the material held on the Australian War Memorial example. Very comprehensive.

    http://www.xs4all.nl/~robdebie/me163.htm

    in reply to: Dambuster's re-make ? Discuss #1352242
    Smith
    Participant

    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

    Yes, you’d want to be careful with casting … and script (not being too revisionist, I can almost hear some PC-type say…”Lets be sure and show the effects of the floods on a poor German family”) …

    I agree 100% with J Boyle, there are two (or more) sides to all stories. It would be good, and not at all revisionist, if the remake provided an objective view of the raid – its preparation, its conduct and its effect.

    On the one [English] hand we have an exceptionally daring and bravely delivered strike, and a tremendous public relations success. King George awarded Guy Gibson the Victoria Cross, headlines hailed a “decisive blow.” Britain was justifiably proud of its accomplishment even if 40% (53 of 133) of the aircrew were killed. On the other [German] hand we have a relatively minor source of disruption, soon remedied.

    I quote from Wikipedia (IIRC recently said to be a fairly reliable source on things encyclopaedic) …

    Effect on the war ~ The tactical view

    The Moehne and Eder lakes poured around 330 million tons of water into the western Ruhr region. Mines were flooded and houses, factories, roads, railways and bridges destroyed as the flood waters spread for around 50 miles (80 km) from the source. Estimates show that before 15 May 1943 water production on the Ruhr was 1 million tonnes, which dropped to a quarter of that level after the raid. In terms of deaths: 1,294 people were killed, 749 of them Ukrainian POWs from a camp just below the Eder Dam. After the operation Barnes Wallis wrote, “I feel a blow has been struck at Germany from which she cannot recover for several years”.

    However, on closer inspection, Operation Chastise did not have the military effect that was at the time believed. By 27 June, full water output was restored, thanks to an emergency pumping scheme inaugurated only the previous year, and the electricity grid was again producing power at full capacity. The raid proved to be costly in lives (more than half the lives lost belonging to allied POWs), but in fact no more than a minor inconvenience to the Ruhr’s industrial output. However, the pictures of the broken dams proved to be an immense morale boost to the Allies, especially to the British, still suffering under German bombing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dambuster_Raids#After_the_Raid

    in reply to: General Discussion #330005
    Smith
    Participant

    BLOC PARTY

    in reply to: Fave singers/bands of 2005 #1924821
    Smith
    Participant

    BLOC PARTY

    in reply to: US Use of Tallboy / Grand Slam… #1376757
    Smith
    Participant

    Cooey a New Zealand thing? Dave I do believe you’re walking down a path strewn with Vegemite and Pavlova. 😉

    in reply to: Dambuster's re-make ? Discuss #1377745
    Smith
    Participant

    re. the Dambusters – well said Dave. I’m 100% with you ~ I find the original stilted and boring – rather like 12 o’clock high (egos and drama – oh dear). But remakes are tricky when the reviewer is knowledgeable on the topic – I much prefer the original Memphis Belle (1940’s documentary), and loath Pearl Harbor (vs Tora Tora and standalone). So if this goes ahead it had better be well done or I’ll be up there on my own soap box. As to actors, I’d like to see 20’somethings all through (for realism), don’t care how famous they are provided they’re good actors.

    in reply to: Aussie Vampire #1378670
    Smith
    Participant

    Nice shot! Given the keys et al … where’s the snapper – a mile away with the longest lens on earth?

    in reply to: Would the B-36 really have bombed Germany? #1380124
    Smith
    Participant

    LOL – they’d have been based in the USA.

    in reply to: General Discussion #331456
    Smith
    Participant

    Couldn’t agree more SOC – to say “at least 437” is a leap of faith on the data available.

    That said, the thing I find concerning in all this is the extraordinary Janus like positioning of the US administration in all this. Since when have “enhanced interrogation techiques” as I think they’re called (the alleged purpose behind these flights, however many there were) been acceptable in a “civilised” Nation fighting terrorism? I struggle to understand the thought processes at work here.

Viewing 15 posts - 586 through 600 (of 1,284 total)