I think my particular interest with historic aviation is in the main WWII. Why? Because in that arena we had a period of great contest (and I have the deepest respect for the human cost of that) and great advancement. WWII aircraft speak to me at a deep emotional level of that striving. I get lumps in my throat. And I love the sound and smell and everything …

But I also just plain love aircraft. If an aircraft, any aircraft, flies over, I watch it. I love to fly in them, front-seat, back-seat it doesn’t matter. I love the thunder and shriek of an F18. The grace of an Empire flying boat. I could go on forever …

Sauron infers that only 33% of eligible Spanish voters think enough of the new EU constitution to vote for it, and overall the turnout (43%) demonstrates a lack of enthusiasm. Ben refers briefly to US electoral turnouts as a point of comparison.

Let’s do that comparison.

The Spanish voted for the European Union constitution in a non-binding referendum. The percentage of votes in favour was 77%, with 17% against (of the 43% total voter turnout). The only question of any interest then is whether this is representative of the opinion of the populace at large. Over to you the reader to form your own opinion in this regard. You need to form an opinion about non-binding referenda in general, whether for instance they are ignored by those who don’t care either way or are not against the proposal.

How about the US Presidential Election? Well for one thing that’s binding. And voter turnout percentages? Over the past few decades voter turnout in US Presidential Elections has ranged broadly between 50% and 55% of voting age population (note that VAP contains a small number of persons ineligible to vote o/a being non-citizens). The 2004 election jumped to 60% of VAP. The percentage in favour of Bush was 50.8% of ballots, ie. approximately 28.5% of VAP and arguably under 30% of total eligible voters. The percentage against (votes for Kerry rather than protest votes for other candidates) was 27% of VAP.

Let’s lay those data out in a table of sorts (percentages of eligible votes)
Spain – non-binding referendum … for 33%, against 7%
USA – binding Presidential election … for say 30%, against 27+%

Hmmm … if the Spanish demonstrate a lack of enthusiasm, what are US voters doing? Can we reasonably say that because only say 30% of US voting age citizens support the current US government it’s invalid or perhaps a joke?

Well, on the one hand (bare facts) the answer is “yes”. But on the other hand, giving due allowance for the vagaries of free choice in voting (including the choice to vote or not) then I’d say “no, if you don’t vote against something, you implicitly vote for the outcome that occurs”.

Guys, please let’s be balanced in the way we challenge these sorts of things, or we’ll forever be laughing out loud at each other.

Whoa Flood – you killed that sucker

JDK and Flood. I’m sitting outside of either of your perspectives and it seems to me you’re arguing past each other – not with each other … you’re slightly missing each other’s point.

JDK you’re saying the Stuka’s (official) importance/recognition was downgraded after the war and there was a general enthusiasm to see few if any examples of it left in existence. Flood’s making the point that, except for the unusual/advanced types this fate was generally the lot of all Axis (loser’s) airraft after the war – ie. that few of any of the earlier types were preserved.

I’d extend that to say that virtually all early types were undervalued, the post-war perod was all about advancement and obsolete types were disregarded. Reflect on the lack of Whitleys, Stirlings, Hampdens .. you name it.

I think that quite probably; you’re both right.

Finally, I’ve never read the book you refer to JDK, but I’d have to say the allies failed in this endeavour. There could scarcely be a more remembered and revered aircraft than the JU87.

It’s a good start, a really good start – just needs finishing – the thumbnails are a good size (not those tiny wee avatar sized thumbs) but the full size image needs to open in a new window, then you can move on to the next one and so on. Otherwise this is going to get really tedious when Flood’s “season” gets under way.

Ahh, but see both types were used with some success, even more so if you take into account that once a Spit had dropped its bombs, it was back to a fighter again, thus negating the need for fighter cover.

Daz, I wonder if you’re failing to differentiate between ground attack and dive bombing. The German’s used the FW190 after the JU87 became a liability, it would conduct a shallow diving attack then as you say was self-defendable. And I think maybe (Andy? re. Len Deighton) in the BoB some 109E’s were used with a smallish bomb – the various attacks on radar sites etc. on the South Coast?

But shallow dive accuracy from a fighter was never as good as a dive bomber could manage – until the advent of skip-bombing (Y/N/maybe?)

I wouldnt mind seeing a Stuka fly as for the HE111 what happened to the CAF CASA 2111? is it still airworthy? If not are there plans to return it to the skies? any in Europe now? or how about a JU88 in the air?

A JU88 !!! Oh yes please. I’m not really up on JU88 survivors. There’s that one in the UK somewhere (Hendon? IWM?) which IIRC is the night fighter that landed in Scotland by mistake. And one got pulled out of a lake in Norway not so long ago (along with a HE111). What others? Any not in museums that could be a project?