Windsock datafiles vs Squadron Publications

[leo]

Given a choice ahere would you spend your loot? I like the data files, but find them pricey, here in the US. In the Aquadron Pubs, I seem to find information which I find doubtful. What do you guys think?

Although I tend to pick them up for the photo's only, the majority of the Squadron titles are full of errors and poorly written. From a history perspective, the Datafiles are much better.


Matt Bittner

Leo,

I agree with Matt here. I've previously posted a partial list of errors in the Squadron DrI book, and don't want to take up all that space again, unless someone wants it. Overall, the others seem not to be as bad, but the cover of the Nieuport book even reversed the US cockade colors, and although I was glad to see a picture of Hawker's DH2 on that cover, I have my doubts about the pattern of the red/white stripes on the cover painting. Others are a mixed bag. However, I do have a large collection of "in Action" titles, and have to say I'll often use information from both.

The Datafiles, although pricey over here, are simply magnificent. I've read discussions which do find flaws, or disagree with items in a Datafile, but at least for the ones I have, they're really nitpicking type items, or differences in interpretation. I have an old issue of Windsock magazine, with a very polite discussion between Alex Imrie, Ray Rimmell, and a couple of others, about Ray's Windsock Special on the DrI. Alex's suggestions really added to, and complemented, the Special, but they really got into some minutiae.

I wish I could afford all of 'em (and a Windsock subscription)!

Rich

Rich,
If you could tell me where u posted the info on what is wrong in any of the squadron books, id be appreciative.
I try not to take any book as gospel, even the winsocks, as all have errors or qoute from other books.
At least the winsocks will not bibliographys from other sources.
If one follows the Luftwaffe board, one has noticed that Osprey titles are not held in the highest esteem, even tho they are very popular.

thanks,
Ron F.

Windsock datafiles ,definitely. I am always amazed at the job they do, the detail, and the always in-depth photos; especially with aircraft that are not the "usual suspects"...(LOVED the recent issue about AGO C1!!!!)...IMHO,well worth the price. JimR

Ron,

It's probably in the Forum Archives somewhere, but I also saved it in Word. Here's the text, which was posted in response to a similar query:

"On Page 3, is a full-page photo described in the caption as Manfred von Richthofen’s 152/17. The caption goes on to describe the extent of red coloring on that aircraft. However, under magnification, the number is actually 127/17, and the upper wing and aft fuselage are obviously still in Fokker factory finish, olive streaking over clear-doped linen. The thin outline of blue on the horizontal stabilizer, continued from the underside, is also obvious. On page 18, another picture (which is blurred) is supposed to be of 152/17, even though the black/white stripes of Jasta 6 can be seen on the tail. The same photo is in both the Windsock “Special” and Alex Imrie’s Triplane book, described as being flown by Richthofen on a visit to Jasta 5 (and as 525/17). On the following page, is a photo, supposedly of von Richthofen’s 425/17, but which appears to have a white cowl (perhaps actually von Tutchek’s 404/17, as shown on the cover?).

A photo of Lothar von Richthofen’s crashed triplane of 13 March 1918 is on Page 20, but the more well-known angle (also in Imrie’s book) is on Page 17, labeled as a Dr1 of Jasta 12! A lineup on Page 24 is supposedly from Jasta 11, even though the yellow/black stabilizers of Jasta 19 are obvious.

The color plates all have olive streaks over turquoise on the upper surfaces, even though it is now generally accepted that most production Triplanes were olive over clear dope with turquoise undersides (the F1 prototypes, and perhaps a FEW production DrI’s, were apparently turquoise/olive). Lt von Raben’s machine is shown as blue and white, although other sources insist it was red/white (Windsock uses the words 'now discredited blue'). Lt “Kichstein”’s (sic) striped machine is shown overall black/white striped, and the stabiliser stripes are wrong. In photos, it has the typical Jasta 6 tail stripes, the forward fuselage is streaked, and the cowling is dark (probably black). The rear cover, with Oblt. Weiss’ all-white machine, is also highly unlikely."

A few more, from a Windsock review:

The profile of the striped No. 4 of "Jasta 12", which was actually of Jasta 19, does not show that unit's tail colors (it's even in the J19 group photo on Page 24, captioned as "Jasta 11" - a multiple error!). Comment is also made about the 8 pages devoted to other Triplanes, postwar, and replicas, taking away from the limited space available.

I realize nobody's perfect, and each book probably contains some errors, but this one's truly amazing - especially from a recognized expert like HJ Nowarra.

I've also seen the comments about the Osprey titles, some of which are valid (I think the color profiles, not generally the most detailed anyway, should always be taken with a grain of salt) they do contain very detailed, and interesting, historical information from some very well-known names in the field (including a certain Mr. Tillman).

Not meaning to throw stones at those who actually do for a living that which most of us can only wish we could do, but there's no sense in letting bad information pass without comment, if the real story is available.

Rich

[PeterL]

Thanks for taking the trouble of repeating that Rich. Squadron Signal seem to have a problem with WWI subjects generally, and in particular on the artwork side. The photos are still good photos though, and often printed larger than elsewhere, we just have to take the captions with a pinch of salt. All very well for those of us who are savvy, but I've already seen one otherwise superb triplane model painted in that blue scheme. Still a good model, just the wrong colour.

Has anyone seen the latest Nieuport and Albatros Ospreys yet? I've seen comments posted on another forum by those who have seen the proofs, the consensus it that they will be pretty good.

Peter L

How do the old profile series measure up?
They are available as individuals for about $3 each.

andy

[PeterL]

Andy, IMO the Profiles hold up pretty well, after nearly forty years for of the early ones. In a few cases some of the art work, which was why most of us bought them for in the first place, disagrees with current thinking on some schemes, good reason not to rely on just one reference for any project. Most of the text though is still good enough to get plagerised all over the place.

Peter L

Andy,

My pallid little collection only has four of the profile series, one V Bomber and the Hart & Audax/Hardy and Wapiti. They are pretty much the same style, content and delivery as the Datafiles.

As always a grognard could probably pick them to pieces, but for 98% of the buying public they are great and highly detailed. The Wapiti profile has a picture of an Australian Wapiti on Ski's!!!! in Antartica Definately one for the ski inflicted Golden Age modellers.



cam