Improper research (aka confused historian?)

[edNorth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hfiwueKKU8

So whats strange here? Yes, Ju 88 flown Cyprus to Wright field in 1943 was a Romanian Ju 88 D-1 "Bakseesh" (430650 Recce) but never a captured Ju 188 "Glass Bubble Bomber" as moving pictures in the video show. (posted 4 days ago)
Am I the only one here watching Youtube (Off the record I say this guy likely was drunk when writing that script???

What that actually is, is "factory fresh" ex-Ju 88 A-4 airframe, airframe converted in FZD to the Ju 88 V61 DF+EV 140700 (alias Ju 88 E redesignated Ju 188). Well, USAAF did get a Ju 188 at later stage, postwar from UK, but not related to this story in any way.

Thanks for watching.

Best
Ed

[TigerTimon]

In the description of the video: "Junkers Ju 188, a new multirole fighter bomber"


No, not a fighter bomber...

[edwest2]

A lot of nonsense gets posted on youtube, along with videos made by amateurs, and it shows. Posting such material is easier than writing a book but it lacks the hallmarks of true, actual scholarship. None of the rules have changed. Research takes time, and it has to be done correctly. Just because video cameras are cheap does not mean no understanding of production values is OK. It's not. Presentation, obvious scholarship and providing evidence for any claims made. All of that is required. I generally stay from such videos but I do notice them. Cheap and shoddy turns me away from bad books and badly done youtube videos. I know a few authors who think they are now professionals just because they self-published their work. I can assure everyone, the internet has not changed the rules for producing quality work.

[Chris Goss]

I have seen such postings being described as "never before been told" when if you have a look at what has been published (by many on 12 OCH even), it was obviously not the case. Designed for mass consumption of those not in the know and I would not waste my time watching them-only gets one's blood pressure up, especially when they are making money out of it

[edNorth]

I agree, but need point out scholarship alone or self publish are not hallmarks for rubbish, some scolar (?) still writing rubbish for well known magazines in Germany and UK, this year on Ju 88. I do not try live off such as quantity needed raise funds for living (off such here) will erase quality, quickly, I guess, and this need be taken seriously by (a) person writing for mainstream "Le Aeroplane and "du Flypst. Of courst I refer to Ju 88 family articles only, other I know nothing (serius) about. I guess its called recycling old rubbish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgk2fAf3IJQ

FYI, reason did I notice first UTube link was, I did the 15 km torture walk Friday, to this new Iceland eruption site, along with 5000 others (4000 forein tourists). (Doing 14th trip since 23 March 2021)
Still aching all muscles but lived tell the tale.

[edwest2]

I'll add that some quality historical books are self-published. There are certain titles a "real" publisher might pass on for a number of reasons,
but without competent reviews, another failing enterprise outside of places like this, the interested reader might be put off as well.

[edNorth]

I intend self publish. Last winter I manged do cross check with multiple BAMA documents of one aspect of recent 2015 Mistel book. Green was wrong in the 1960s. None so far has manged solve the Ju 88 corrcetly, but I am on good overall track, it seems time for this news leaking out.

[ju55dk]

Yes we are still missing the book on the Ju 88 series.
Junker

[edNorth]

Thanks, I will do my very best.