But of course that was part and parcel of the attacks on everything
American
over on the moderated WWII newsgroup.

Walt

I don't know him personally but I have read his info for years - Mr. Gustin
has
written thousands of pages of aviation history and none that I've seen can be
considered "anti-American".

Fine.

I think there's an anti-American coterie on the moderated WWII newgroup.

Your mileage may vary.

Mr. Gustin said he'd need a better source than Martin Caidin for the
B-17/FW-190 story. In this case, although it's been amply shown that Caidin
shouldn't be trusted on much, he was pretty much correct about this story.


I believe the same thing as he does about Caidin - he filled his books with
bar
stories and genuine historians are going to be cleaning up his mess for the
next 100 years.

You are probably right.

snip agreed stuff

Getting back to the original FW 190 / B-17 story, which is more accurate,
Caidin, or the other...? Marty wrote to thrill; the other guy wrote his
account to tell the story accurately.

Based on the two accounts, Caidin inflated 2 FW's to 3. It would be hard to
gainsay the other account, as he was sitting about six feet from where the FW
struck. Nothing else in the co-pilot's account contradicts what Caidin said,
although the co-pilot has the FW strike inboard of the #3 engine and Caidin
indicates a strike on the engine itself. That's a difference of a few feet.

I appreciate your comments.

Walt