Martin Caidin's WW2 aircraft related books still stand

[Felix C]

as accurate reads?

Just wondering. I read many of them as a youngster and still recall the contents. Wondering if they are still considered accurate or has more recent information degraded their quality.

[taitbb]

I know there are definitely inaccuracies in the 109 book, but in general, not sure if it is so much a case of inaccuracy...there is just so many more books now that have so much more depth on the subject matter than was around at that point in time.

They are kinda like an Osprey book...can be a nice primer on a subject, but usually better books if you want depth.

[kaki3152]

Some of his books were pretty good.
He did an illustrated book on the USAF that consisted mostly of photographs.
Still, he perpetuated many myths which turned out to be false. I admit to having a soft spot for him since he was probably the first author I personally recognized in the 1960s, when I started reading this genre, as having many books published on WWII military aviation. He was certainly prodigious.

[Jim Oxley]

If you want hard factual books then Martin Caidin isn't the author you would want to turn to.

However, if you want to read exciting seat of the pants air fighting based solidly on facts then MC is up there with the best.

Yes you learn over time that he took liberties. But his books are fantastic reads. And IMHO very worthwhile.

[David N]

I read Black Thursday when I was 11 years old. It was the first book I ever read on the subject.

[AMC]

I think I have just one of his books, "Flying Forts" and I love it. With regard to accuracy, I think it only fair that his books be judged against the times. After all, authors can only work with the information available at the time of writing....

[David N]

In the early 1960's, Caidin was one of the few writers with books about WW II in the air.