Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Beale
“rfo120” if you persist with posts that are wholly or largely off-topic, then expect them to be edited accordingly. It would also be welcome if you were to abandon your tired practice of erecting straw men (in the shape of what you claim everyone else believes) simply to demonstrate what you apparently imagoine to be your superior knowledge by demolishing them.
|
Added a little later: I don't get it.
------------------------------------------
What's the matter with you Nick? What wrongs did I do?
Clearly a fighter's performance, especially in speed and climb, is a function of its engine and has a direct influence on its pilot's score. So I can't see what disturbs you. Fighter aircraft engines are NOT off topic when discussing their pilots' scores. It is not coincidental that 1940 fighters equipped with the best engines were the most effective fighters in air combat: Spitfire, Me 109 E, Hurricane too, and also Dewoitine 520. This was still true 1944-45 with the Merlin-equipped Mustang P-51 Ds and several German types like Fw 190-D, Ta 152 and more.
I am just trying to inform possibly interested readers about the tremendous fight put up 1940 by - among others - French fighter pilots. The Germans lost MORE aircraft in the 38-day air French Campaign than in the 83-day Battle of Britain. There must be some Reason for this and the by far main reason is the fight of about 1,000 French fighter aircraft and 700 pilots, one thousand including replacements. They were not alone, I know this, but their contribution was mumerically much greater than British fighters' (approximately 100 fighters or less, 250 during the 9 days of the Dunkerque evacuation, very weak forces afterwards, i.e. from June 4, 1940, on), other nations' fighters', AAA etc. - all these not being negligible of course, far from it. French fighter pilots would not have achieved much if their fighter aircraft had been "so few" as so many people claim and as poor as the same people keep repeating, which is simply not true. "Even" Morane fighters shot down dozens and dozens of Me 109s and 110s and a grand total of well over 100 German combat aircraft, not to mention other fighter types (see other posts above and in the preceding pages 1-5). What I wrote and am writing here is entirely or partly new to most people in the world. Nick, don't you like me to tell the truth? Is the RAF the only force worthy of mentioning? Oh, I know the British magazines: FlyPast and Aeroplane: RAF, RAF and RAF again, of course with a pinch of Luftwaffe for they need some villains to look like heroes.
I don't need answer your heavily off-topic remarks. You should delete them in order not to look… hmmm… accordingly.
I never claimed that "everyone else believes" something. Most people making TV-programs on WW II and air combat have a limited knowledge on these things and talk nonsense all the time, this is a fact. Every single TOCH-member knows this. Most of the TV-people, not all of them. I insist it is terrible to see French fighters, type Morane 406 (aka Morane), all the time in all possible TV-programs on the Battle of Britain and other battles too, and to see large twin-engined, twin-fin Japanese bombers in almost all (not quite in all) TV-programs about Pearl Harbor. Such ridiculous errors are a disgrace and can't be accepted. Those who collect film footage for such programs watch each other very jealously and imitate each other without even trying to know if it's right or wrong to show Moranes in the Battle of Britain.
What do you - TV-viewers all over the world - say on this? Hmmm? No opinion?
I never imagined I had a "superior knowledge" but I certainly claim to be serious and try to write messages which are as accurate as possible and do not contain such ludicrous nonsense as MS 406s in the BoB. It takes more time to be cautious and try to eliminate any errors for the benefit of all readers (about 7,400 views up till now and still going strong).
Could it be that you contributed to such TV-programs as a counsellor and expert, and feel targetted by me? I didn't target anybody in particular. I gave no names. If you feel that my criticism applies to you this is your privilege and your private pleasure. I gave no names of historical TV-"experts" who show us a Fw 190 shot down 1940 in the Battle of Britain. Aviation enthusiasts have been laughing at this, and at other bullshit, for DECADES but it didn't change anything in the minds of TV-"experts".
So be reassured: Nick Beale is not targetted in my criticism of poor TV-authors. No hard feelings, hey?