Warbird Information Exchange

Most of the time, I don't get him either.

That is quite a shot Dave. Can you share any more details behind the recovery? Thanks.

Cool, looks like the cockpit was cut away from the center section (drat) I wonder if the data plate is still attached and what the SN is....what is the date time frame of the photo please?

_________________
Kind Regards,
Gary Lewis
J.A.F.O.

If you don't understand, just ask.

Simply, the Russians are unlikely to have seen any need preserved an aircraft of American fame and import, as it wasn't their hero - additionally, as Ken touched on, the Russian state's ever-changing version of history would be particularly likely to delete any US achievements and their remnants.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Not to beat a dead horse, but I guess I will. I simply meant that there were, let's assume, 50 Russians who witnessed the arrival of York's plane. Of that group, maybe only 1/3 knew what they were looking at or cared to remember it beyond a week; 17 guys. Of that group, those who re-told the story or retained the details of what made that plane unique were probably another third; 6 guys. Now how many of them survived the war? 1 or 2? And all this occurred in a time without cell phone cameras, Twitter, in some cases phone lines or electricity, etc. Oh yeah, also in a fairly closed, scripted society. This has little to do with the country of origin or poh-poohing their accomplishments; this is pure human nature at play. It was a B-25 and, within a couple years, they had plenty of B-25s, so one would really have to know what they were looking at AND care for it to be noticed, forget significant.

The fact that the photos of York's plane survived and are available today is an amazing miracle. Glad they did, but a miracle.

Ken

_________________
"Take care of the little things and the big things will take care of themselves."

Sure, Ken. If York and the B-25 had been Russians, those guys who saw it would've had reason to pass on the info, and people with authority reason and kudos to undertake some preservation. But it was just another American bomber to them, no mileage.

The means of communication aren't as important as the reasons for passing information on.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Well if the Raiders used B model's, and the Russians didn't really like the B model, you would think they knew what they had if they kept it until 1949

_________________
My racing will fund my warbirding. Hopefully...

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/ChristopherDeshongRacing
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisDRacing

Well, they may not have liked the B model as a combat aircraft, but the Doolittle bird did have mods (such as the previously-mentioned extra fuel capacity) that could have made it desirable as a squadron hack. IIRC the B-model -25 was also a bit faster and more maneuverable than the heaver C/D/G/H/Js (iirc Lawson says in 30 Seconds that when the Russians were evaluating them for Lend Lease they were flying them like pursuit ships and actually popping rivets from the aggressive maneuvering). So the logical conclusion is that the York B-25 became a favorite play-toy of a local-area commander.

One other thing that I recall from some earlier discussions is how, had they survived, the Doolittle Mitchells would have required engine swap-outs due to component burnout from the special range-enhancing mods.

WN/Gary

More info here:

http://www.wingsmuseum.co.uk/north_amer ... ration.htm

Dave

_________________
Classic Wings Magazine

https://www.classicwings.com/

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/ClassicWingsMagazine/

Preserved Axis Aircraft

http://www.classicwings.com

Right! And in this case, they may have been lacking in both arenas.

_________________
"Take care of the little things and the big things will take care of themselves."

Agreed! And I can hear a faint noise that sounds like a dying horse asking us to quit...

So I'll stop there, but it's been an interesting thread, as ever. Ken, if you're ever likely to be in my neck of the woods, or the paths look likely to cross, drop me a PM for a cold one meet.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

What is the difference between "reality and external realities"? Is there an "internal reality"? Which reality is WIX a part of?

What exactly were the "requirements" of the Communist party's ever-changing orthodoxy?

Dave, thanks for the lead, it is appreciated.


I was wondering if anyone has seen the portion of the right engine cowling from 40-2303 "The Whirling Dervish" Crew 9 from Lt. Watson's plane, it was given to Mrs. FDR in July 1944 that was subsequently mounted by North American Aviation and presented to the Tokyo Raiders for their archives....anyone?...anyone?....Buler?....Buler?

_________________
Kind Regards,
Gary Lewis
J.A.F.O.

WIX reality? Sometimes I wonder.

In the above quote, what really happened and what was real had little chance against the requirements of the Stalinist system which told people what was real. Arguing about it was not possible. So what was 'real' in Stalinist Russia was what you were told, not what you saw. In this case, 'external reality' refers to things outside Russia, such as the role and actions of the USA in W.W.II. What people in Stalin's Russia were told was driven by the current needs and paranoia of the Communist Party, and were not based on reality at all.

1984 by George Orwell is a good answer to both questions, being based, in part, on the changing paranoid world of 1940s Russian Communism under Stalin. I was referring to how people and events were simply written out of history and had never existed or happened; how Stalin was always 'right', which gets interesting when his mind changed; and how people were (rarely) brought back in to favour and re-entered the historical narrative. (See the story of Vladimir Petlyakov, designer of the Pe-2 medium bomber for an example of disgrace and then rehabilitation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Petlyakov )

As a citizen, you were required to be current and 'convinced' by the ever changing version of history (and current affairs, and governance) that the Communist Party were continually re-writing. Offering an out of date version, or dissent could be fatal. That's the requirements of their ever changing orthodoxy.

Hope that helps.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Here's something for ya...

(sorry for the size)

_________________
My racing will fund my warbirding. Hopefully...

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/ChristopherDeshongRacing
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisDRacing