dark light

VoyTech

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 953 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Ski-equipped aircraft #1156442
    VoyTech
    Participant

    Can’t believe nobody (Mark 12 in particular) mentioned the Spitfire! Especially so, as TZ138 (the ski-equipped Spitfire) is a survivor.

    in reply to: Battle of Britain pilot memorials #1156443
    VoyTech
    Participant

    Tangmere, I think your list would be much easier to look through if you arranged the names according to the alphabet.
    Is(was)n’t there a field memorial where Boleslaw Wlasnowolski (213 Sqn) was killed on 1 November 1940?

    in reply to: Ski-equipped aircraft #1156290
    VoyTech
    Participant

    🙂 I am saving the images for the book!

    Skip the images, do you know what happened to the skis? They might come in handy if global warming continues to reverse-advance at this pace.

    in reply to: 1940 Combat Reports #1149724
    VoyTech
    Participant

    I think this may be one for VoyTech?

    Sir, sorry it took me a bit long to reply. I don’t think the combined report for the entire squadron for that combat supports the ‘claim’ by Henneberg as in the ‘report’.

    in reply to: Mystery Mustang 111 – KH494 #1142980
    VoyTech
    Participant

    I have viewed gun camera footage recently of an individual with this name –

    Two individuals

    Combat Film K1416 F/O Szymankiewicz 317 20/7/42 Spitfire Ground Targets

    F/O Teofil Szymankiewicz, service no. P-0744

    Combat Film K2958 P/O Szymankiewicz 316 21/11/42 Spitfire Ground Targets, Holland

    P/O Jerzy Szymankiewicz, P-1626, who survived the war

    in reply to: Bob Stanford Tuck #1142145
    VoyTech
    Participant

    The ear and nose just don’t look right for David Niven:
    http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/00Cy6vV1cL1Md/610x.jpg

    in reply to: 43 Squadron 'Fighting Cocks' #1138673
    VoyTech
    Participant

    Very interesting thread.
    I seem to remember that 43 Sqn used to have a ‘fighting c0ck’ very much alive and pecking when I visited RAF Leuchars some years ago.
    I notice that the ‘boxer c0ck’ motif was only applied on Hunters. Can anyone here tell what is the origin of this drawing? Is it some sort of a cartoon character?
    There’s a picture (scan1) of a similar bird, with ‘POLAND’ shoulder flash, that used to be linked (by Polish researchers) with Polish pilots of 43 Sqn (there were several during WW2, including a very famous one). However, a recently unearthed photo (scan2) shows the same emblem on the wall at RAF Hemswell in June 1943. The other emblems on that wall were those applied on Wellingtons of 300 (Polish) Squadron so presumably the ‘boxer c0ck’ was, too.

    in reply to: How is LZ842 going? #1138513
    VoyTech
    Participant

    It will all be in the book. 🙂

    Shouldn’t it be spelt The Book?

    in reply to: Why did U.S not drop atomic bomb on Berlin? #1138477
    VoyTech
    Participant

    The last thing anybody at that time, except the terminally stupid, wanted was the continuation of war.

    I understand that what you present is the Western viewpoint but you might want to notice that according to this definition there were dozens of millions of terminally stupid people between Elbe and the Pacific. For many of them the stupidity was literally terminal, either by a bullet in the neck or by freezing and starvation in places like Vorkuta.

    in reply to: Why did U.S not drop atomic bomb on Berlin? #1137343
    VoyTech
    Participant

    Spare us the Cold War rhetoric – the truth is that the matter is now resolved and with far less loss of life than what you are proposing.

    I haven’t proposed anything. I just think you could spare us terms that are plain rude with regard to people who may have had good enough reason to disagree at the time with what you think on the subject now. You wouldn’t call ‘terminally stupid’ those inmates of Dachau or Sachsenhausen who wished for another world war in, say, 1938, would you?

    in reply to: Why did U.S not drop atomic bomb on Berlin? #1135761
    VoyTech
    Participant

    A very interesting thread, I really learned a lot.

    I think you should read the posts properly no one has suggesting nuking Russia to save Poland.

    Read posts 13 and 16.

    Malcolm, I think Graham is right that no one has suggested nuking Russia to save Poland, and I am positive no one has done that in posts 13 and 16. I can’t speak for CADman (post 13), but I don’t think he mentioned Poland. In my post (16) I never suggested nuking anything to save anything. I personally think it would have been silly had the Americans nuked Moscow in 1945, but I would never go on say that anybody who considered this as an opion at the time was a silly person. In post 16 I just tried to suggest that perhaps you should use less arrogant terms when referring to people who did not think what you assume they should have, especially when they were in a situation somewhat less comfortable than you are now. I then tried to explain that in more plain terms in post 23, but it seems I failed. Sorry, my fault, being a foreigner I cannot express myself properly in English.

    in reply to: Why did U.S not drop atomic bomb on Berlin? #1134747
    VoyTech
    Participant

    You might never say that someone who considered nuking Moscow was a silly person – I most certainly would not hesitate to, considering the after effects for the whole world.

    When you talk about ‘the after effects for the whole world’ do you mean this:

    in 1945 the Russians would have wiped the floor with us given the strength and fighting ability of their armed forces.

    or this:

    Russia … never recovered from the economic strains imposed by their role in WW2. It just took Russia longer to finally succumb.

    It seems to me that there is a connection between the strength of the armed forces of a country and the economic condition of said country, and in this context the above two opinions of yours seem a bit confusing. I personally tend to agree with the latter rather than the former of these. According to what I think I know about Stalin I would assume that had he been able to ‘wipe the floor’ with the Western Allies in 1945 he’d never stop on Elbe.

    in reply to: Seafire question… #1131489
    VoyTech
    Participant

    I’d say that by late 1943/early 1944 individual exhausts were pretty much standard on Mk Vs and the fishtail ones were rare on them.
    If I understand correctly, the Vokes filter was not a ‘tropical’ filter (I think filtering air doesn’t help with temperature) it was to prevent dust entering the engine. It is usually associated with tropicalised Spitfires because they happened to be the first ones used from unprepared fields in dusty conditions.

    in reply to: Seafire question… #1130319
    VoyTech
    Participant

    The Shuttleworth Trust Mk Vc has individual stacks, which I understand were original fit- but don’t quote me on it.:)

    Depends what you mean by ‘original fit’. As the Spitfire was built in 1942 it is unlikely it had the individual exhausts on leaving the factory. But it is likely they were fitted to it during WW2.

    in reply to: Why did U.S not drop atomic bomb on Berlin? #1125958
    VoyTech
    Participant

    Stalin didn’t have a causus belli to attack the western allies or advance further than he did. Had the US, Britain or others been stupid enough to attack Russia … they would have discovered the efficacy of the Russian war machine

    IIRC Poland in 1939, Finland in 1939 or the Baltic states in 1940 had not been ‘stupid enough to attack Russia’ but Stalin somehow managed to invade them without any casus belli.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 953 total)