Interesting discussion, and it's got me thinking, so here's some thoughts.
FWIW, I find advancing open formation across a lawn looks a bit odd, but no more than flying obsolete combat aircraft in circles near a crowd, if you think about it...
Quote:
I think the point here is the shock and awe at the misguided aspirations of grown men dressing up in costumes and playing soldier!
looks mighty like:
I think the point here is the shock and awe at the misguided aspirations of grown men getting into old airplanes and playing war-pilots!
Brad wrote:
The difference is that most of the warbird folks aren't dressed up like a bunch of little kids, pretending to be something they aren't, wearing uniforms, medals and rank that they certainly never earned. Being able to buy them and earning the right to wear them is two different things.
Uh, how exactly is sitting in an ex-military aircraft with an ace's name under the cockpit and a row of kill markings (usually nothing to do with that particular aircraft and rarely that person) different? Or, if we are throwing stones at the glass houses, putting your own name under the canopy rail implying that 'you' served with that aircraft in that war - rather than the reality having the money and sweat to get to play with it?
It's also a good thing that some warbird pilots are getting dressed up in period or look-alike gear, as it makes the whole thing look better - thinking of the flying Happy Jack's Go Buggy pics. I can also think of other current warbird pilots wearing full air force uniforms to fly displays. Some are ex-air force in other wars, and may match ranks - but that sure don't bother about the rest - and they sure weren't in that other war (a couple of notable Vietnam vets flying are the exception for that 'rule').
But, according to your criteria...
In short it boils down to the kind of religious theological arguments that seem vitally important to those involved in one or other group, but are utterly absurd for
both to anyone outside it.
Most people's hobbies and enthusiasms look pretty odd from the outside - and standing in one and chucking rocks at another is, IMHO, not clever.
FWIW, reenactors have brought a lot to the whole warbird game, and as has been said, there's perhaps good and bad ways of doing it.
It's not something I'd want to do (any more than I want to pilot warbirds) but there have been occasions where recreators have added a good deal to a display or understanding of the story behind the aircraft:
At Oshkosh this year - of course at the risk of stating the obvious, the gentleman adds a very important point to who the Tuskeegee airmen
were. Something the restoration simply does not.
My biggest problem with it is to know how to spell 're-enactors' or 're-creators'!
On the other hand I can think of a well known magazine editor who flew his own German aerobatic trainer and delighted in getting dressed up in German gear and offering Nazi salutes to all and sundry before and after flying. That was in the 1970s, and times change. Of course
no-one from Texas
ever did
that at a certain big show in the 1970s...
It's often a beef tht the re-enactors do it badly, too. As we all know, German soldiers always worse jackboots, were blonde, blue eyed and
never fat and badly dressed. Meanwhile at a certain POW camp:
Isn't that Schultz?!
Just some stuff to think about.
Regards,
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
I always laugh at the double standard of warbird folks who sneer at those of us who bring Jeeps and tents to an event, when in fact, they’re doing the exact same thing as us with airplanes, often not even on our level of authenticity.
I got mine the hard way 
To many other died earning theirs 
