What's wrong with this picture?

Inspired by the new Classic Airframes P-12E/F4B-4 kits (lovely old biplanes), I got out my “P12/F4B in Action” book (by Larry Davis), and started reading some of the historic background (Don’t know how many of these “references” I’ve bought, and not yet gotten around to actually reading).

Anyway, on Page 7, there is a discussion of one of the first Boeing-designed prototypes, the Model 15, which led to the PW-9 series. It contains the following passage: “The fuselage design was a direct development from the German Fokker D VII fighter of the first World War, with one major difference; the Model 15 would have a welded steel frame instead of wood.” Mr. Davis has produced several books on aircraft; he should know better.

Another History Channel howler, in the program tonight on Jet Engines – talking about Lockheed’s first jet, it was stated that Prototypes were designated with a “P”, as in P-80; when it became operational, it became the F-80. Guess all those WWII fighter (or more properly, “pursuit”) aircraft, such as P-40, P-38, P-47, and P-51 were all just prototypes (at least the Mustang finally became “production” (F-51) in time for Korea !

While we're on History Channel - I've seen this footage enough that whenever they show the stock shot of 3 US Navy SBD's entering their dives, I know this is their lead-in to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor - it's almost become a cliche. Maybe someone should clue 'em in (Barrett?)

Rich

[PeterL]

Rich, as a modeler you will know that the Suadron Signal books are famous for howlers of that kind. Their on topic subjects suffer the same failing. Take a look at the cover illustration on Sopwith Triplane in Action. The airscrew is doing what airscrews do, but the engine is stationary!

Those Dauntless masquerading as Zeros do pop up frequently on Discovery/History chanel programmes, but have you also noticed how often Hurricanes are depicted by one particular MS 406 sequence lately? But the one that realy made me sit up was not a picture but a sound. A flight of Spitfires taking off accompanied my the unmistakable sound of an American radial. May their God forgive them :¬)

Peter L

[Darryl]

Rich,

Chill out for your own sake. Blood preasure can only go so high!!!*VBG*

While we are on the subject, a shot of a Stuka through a gun camera, Stuka bursts into flames and rolls on back. Cut to next shot of a WESTLAND LYSANDER hitting the water. Voice over? "The RAF made quick work of the Stuka Bombers." Bet the Lysander crew were p###ed off!!!!

And... if I see that inverted Spitfire hit the water ONE more time with a "we get another Hun" theme, I will explode!!!!!!!!!!!!!

regards

Darryl
(who will now have a little lie down)

[Barrett]

Normally I'm good for a 10-minute or 6-page rant, whichever comes first. Film editing is one of my REALLY BIG pet peeves, but as Darryl notes, the best solution is to go lie down. Or put two mags through something with a full auto switch.
Judging by all those "documentaries" over the decades, you'd think that the US Gummint would have investigated the treasonous SOBs at Curtiss, Douglas, and the main offender, North American. Obviously they sold airplanes to just ANYBODY.
Fact is, though, most documentary producers don't care about such things, and if they do, their film editors are generalists who are ignorant and/or lazy. Also, many reels are mislabled and the ignorant/lazy folks don't check the facts. From a film editing perspective, the two best efforts I've seen are:
a CBS feature on the Pacific War in '95 with dan blather and stormin' schwartzkopf--only caught one or two errors, and
a very recent History Channel segment on the rape of Nanking. I cannot say that every single segment was actually shot in Nanking 1937-38, but much of it was from home movies by US or Brits in the city at the time. Awesome, gruesome stuff that should remind everyone (but doesn't) why Fat Man and Little Boy were ultimately necessary. Oddly enough, one of the heroes in Nanking who saved a great many Chinese was--the Nazi counsel.

[Darryl]

Hi Barrett,

An interesting one which may/may not be faulty editing.....

A section of film purporting to be "the new" FW190
but actually showing a Curtis Hawk. (those damned subversive US Aero companies again!!!!!!)

Interesting thing is that when British pilots first reported the FW190, the intel boys told them not to worry about them they were just a few old Curtis Hawks that the Germans must have captured from the French airforces.

When told that these new aircraft really seemed a bit better than that.. "up-engined" was the solution.

I wonder if this is just a fluke or did the producers actually get the wrong end of this story?

regards

Darryl

I wonder if Bell helicopters has been paid a royalty for every time the sound of a Bell 47 was dubbed over a turbine engined type in either film or tv series. The other good one being the throttling back of helicopter engines while still in the hover "to land" that would have made for a few heavy landings.

[Reinout]

My current beef is with one of the "Discovery Moments" clips on Discovery Channel.

It's about the P-51 of which it is said that with its top speed of 745kph it was the only aircraft able to shoot down the Me262. That statement is crap without adding that the only chances they had were REAL good deflection shooting, when the Me was in a turn or when it came in for a landing. And at that point, the P-47 and the Typhoon had as much chance of downing the bird.

Kind regards,

Reinout

It's always fun to pick which Spitfire mark they are showing compared with which mark the claim it to be. Mark IX's and XIV's in the Battle of Britain is always a good one.

But of course it's not just aircraft - I often see the same ground footage in two or three documentaries. One that springs to mind - a night time shot of a tank crawling over a burning wagon or something, can't quite make it out, which I've seen as a British tank in Market Garden and a German tank in action against American paratroops on the night of D-Day. How many panzers went into action that night? Even one? And I don't know how many cameramen would have been around to film it.

Countless other examples of the same footage being attributed to two different sides. I guess they just figure no one will notice.

Simon

One bit of weired info on the Nazi-Gauleiter who tried to hold back the Japanese in Nanking: Once he returned to Germany he was shoved aside and actually was lucky to get away with his criticism of the Japanese, the new ally. After the war he was unable to find work because, as an ex-Gauleiter, he was labelled as an rockbrained Nazi. He died some years later.

The saying went in Germany, that from the three features: honorable, intelligent and Nazi, you could only have two.

Completely off-topic, so I end now

regards

Axel

[mike_baram]

Rich,
I believe the "F" designation was used by the Navy for operational fighters during the "Big One", but not in general use until after the war for the Air Force as well.
Defenses down, corrections welcome.
Mike