discussion Your thoughts please gents?!?!

[stona]

European and Mediterranean theatres of operation respectvely.


In the ETO the Americans operated the P-38, P-47 (always more numerous than the former) and P-51 (which replaced both almost entirely). Not really so many.


The British operated the Spitfire, Hurricane and Typhoon in serious numbers. The Typhoon was supposed to have replaced the Hurricane, but well documented development problems meant that in fact the Spitfire did to a large extent.


The Germans the Bf 110, Bf 109 and Fw 190 (including the distinctly different 'long nose' Jumo powered variants). Later the Me 210/410 appeared in serious numbers, but the Bf 110 soldiered on.


In the Mediterranean the Germans operated the Bf 109 and Bf 110, the British various versions of the P-40, Hurricane and then Spitfire.


There were of course many other types used by all sides, but these formed the backbone of fighter operations. A similar parity in numbers of types will be found in other categories with the exception of heavy bombers which the Germans didn't really operate in significant numbers at all. That's why you'll see a lot of B-17s, B-24s, Lancasters and Halifaxes built


Cheers


Steve

 

[Dave Jay]

I think may be I entered in to this thread believing that I had enough knowledge to add comment to the subject raised and now realise I was out of my depth.


One thing I have learnt from this is that sometimes it's better to sit back and observe and learn from a distance rather than get mixed up with the varying emotions than can occasionally come from such a subject as in this thread.


Another thing is that there are some really good people out there with some very good opinions and a wide knowledge base that makes this forum a great place to be and for me definitely takes more than 20 minutes away from me!

 

[Dave Jay]

No don't Dave! I hope that you haven't taken what I said in the wrong way.
You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, it's just that I feel Doog's motivation has been somewhat misrepresented.


Had he been the one who started the thread, then perhaps he might have had some hidden agenda. But he didn't - in fact he's simply replied to stuff said about him without his knowledge. To my mind he's been a good sport about it all.


Although this is a forum for model making, we're also friends - it's what sets this forum apart from the others IMHO.


So Dave, please feel free to express your thoughts & ideas!

Patrick, I will continue to make comments/points of view on here but only on subjects that I have a definite knowledge of and that the inputs I make are not beyond my comprehension, I'm not saying I'm thick/stupid but it's obvious that doogs is a far cleverer wordsmith than I for which I have a certain amount of envy in despite his fervent use of expletives on a public forum. I just believe that many of us should be a tad wary and not get drawn in to deep discussions but forward by him, especially now that he is now a member of this forum. Okay he didn't start the thread on here but nonetheless he started a thread somewhere obviously in the knowledge that it would be picked up on and torn apart on a forum such as ours.


Just be careful that's all.


Thanks anyway Patrick for your encouragement.

 

[spanner570]

Yes indeed, be careful.....See my post 'man throws chair in bar'.....be warned.


Don't be envious Dave, a clever 'wordsmith' doesn't need to resort to foul language, I'm sure you wouldn't need to lower yourself to the same level to get your written word across to the masses.


Rest assured, this type of person knows full well the game they are playing.

 

[stona]

Okay he didn't start the thread on here but nonetheless he started a thread somewhere obviously in the knowledge that it would be picked up on and torn apart on a forum such as ours.

He didn't Dave, that's true. You are as entitled to your opinion and view as anyone else and should feel free to express them within reasonable bounds. I think you have a fair point which Doogs may or may not care to rebuff. Use of words like 'fetishizing' is bound to be provocative. To fetishize something implies by definition an element of excess or irrationality which is simply not the case. A reasoned argument rather than outrage is a more appropriate response. There are many German/Nazi subjects available, though I would argue not in as large a disproportion as he argues. I also believe he is incorrect in his suggested reasons for this.


Cheers


Steve

 

[Guest]

There definitely are more models available for German armour than any other country who fought in WWII.


The simple fact that so many variants of each type were produced makes this rather impossible to ignore. The Panzer IV had perhaps the most & even a variant like the Ausf H had 3 production changes.


Add to these the 2 & 4 wheeled armoured cars, the tank destroyers, recovery vehicles etc.


A quick look on the Missing Lynx Constructive Comments page shows that of the 50 threads on page 1, 26 of them relate to German WWII subjects!


To my mind, German armour was much more interesting than the Allied stuff. No tank has the cachet of the Tiger tank, even the T-34 falls short of its menacing presence.

 

[Guest]

Don't be envious Dave, a clever 'wordsmith' doesn't need to resort to foul language

Quite right Ron I agree entirely.


There are, give or take a couple of words, a million words in English which can be used.


About 20 at a guess in use expletives. One description of an expletive which I thought


appropriate is "a word or phrase used to fill out a sentence or a line of verse without


adding to the sense."


Better perhaps explained in another way. Before finishing a career in architecture I


turned to film making which I found like model making very fulfilling.


Any way one of the first golden rules I learnt served me well. Never use gimmicks with in


a film either in the filming or editing except for a very very exceptional reason. A good


successful film should completely absorb the viewer within the story or subject of the film


without interruption of thought and mind.


Every gimmick introduced will divert and interrupt the viewer's mind from the main purpose


of the film. To tell that story with out interruption. The use of gimmicks is completely detrimental.


The same with expletives in text. They divert the reader away from the subject or story. That is


unless you have some obsession with expletives. The writer has failed


Laurie