#1 Piston Fighter was British

"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" wrote in
message ...

It's a bit sad really, and sounds paranoid. I hope he finds what he
wants from veterans groups or lists, as it doesn't sound like he's
getting the audience he would prefer in r.a.m.

The starting point for this inanity was my repsonse to Dan Ford about
the Mustang and Spitfire "shooting aircraft down over Berlin". Art
went on, in response, to describe everything that happened in the west
before D-Day as "trivial" or "impotent thrusts that lead to nothing".
While this annoyed me, I initially responded with moderate followups
which included statements like:

"I'm grateful for what you did, Art, but you weren't completely alone
in what you did. That takes nothing away from the risks you and your
crew and group ran and had to face every day to get your job done."

This, of course,was immediately cut from Arts response, which was
characteristic of his standard "You weren't there so you know ****-all
about it" approach, which has been a staple of r.a.m. from at least
1998 and has been used to delegitimise numerous poster's contributions
since then.

I gave Art the option of responding to reasonable discussion over that
issue and make the effort to explain my motives:

"I'm not questioning your personal experience or trying to discount
it, I wish you could see that."

Or he could opt for a flamewar if he preferred. He clearly prefers to
cut the relevant rational discourse and go for a polarized flamewar.
The only explanation I can think of for this is deliberate trolling.


Agreed.

Dave Holford wrote:



ArtKramr wrote:


I never read any books on the subject.


It shows.

I was there. I looked for you but didn't see you, where were you? Read a
thousand books. You still won' t have the feeling of what it was all about..

Arthur Kramer


Then I guess there is no point reading your writing.

Dave

The boys do seem to have a valid point here Art...I think you
might do well to retract that view or at least modify it
slightly. Don't worry, you won't be the first poster who's been a
bit wrong on this ng.
--

-Gord.

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Gord Beaman" )
Date: 7/2/03 1:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

Dave Holford wrote:



ArtKramr wrote:


I never read any books on the subject.


It shows.

I was there. I looked for you but didn't see you, where were you? Read a
thousand books. You still won' t have the feeling of what it was all
about..

Arthur Kramer


Then I guess there is no point reading your writing.

Dave

The boys do seem to have a valid point here Art...I think you
might do well to retract that view or at least modify it
slightly. Don't worry, you won't be the first poster who's been a
bit wrong on this ng.
--

-Gord.

...Gord you don't understand. He said there is no point reaiding my writing.
This means that he won't read my writing and I will never hear froim him again,
I don't want to do or say anything that will change that decision on his part.

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Air University at Maxwell this fall. I'll go
through the operational records of the three groups for that day and see
what individual crews had to say about bombing altitudes.

I'd appreciate that, thanks!

all the best -- Dan Ford (email: info AT danford.net)

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message rthlink.net...
"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" wrote in
message ...

It's a bit sad really, and sounds paranoid. I hope he finds what he
wants from veterans groups or lists, as it doesn't sound like he's
getting the audience he would prefer in r.a.m.

The starting point for this inanity was my repsonse to Dan Ford about
the Mustang and Spitfire "shooting aircraft down over Berlin". Art
went on, in response, to describe everything that happened in the west
before D-Day as "trivial" or "impotent thrusts that lead to nothing".
While this annoyed me, I initially responded with moderate followups
which included statements like:

"I'm grateful for what you did, Art, but you weren't completely alone
in what you did. That takes nothing away from the risks you and your
crew and group ran and had to face every day to get your job done."

This, of course,was immediately cut from Arts response, which was
characteristic of his standard "You weren't there so you know ****-all
about it" approach, which has been a staple of r.a.m. from at least
1998 and has been used to delegitimise numerous poster's contributions
since then.

I gave Art the option of responding to reasonable discussion over that
issue and make the effort to explain my motives:

"I'm not questioning your personal experience or trying to discount
it, I wish you could see that."

Or he could opt for a flamewar if he preferred. He clearly prefers to
cut the relevant rational discourse and go for a polarized flamewar.
The only explanation I can think of for this is deliberate trolling.


Agreed.

Art's typical approach of denigrating the efforts and contributions of
others in order to somehow make his own seem more valiant or valuable
is unfortunate. He could be a good source for information specific to
his experiences, but his continual belittling of anything and
everything that does not involve B-26 operations in whatever group he
was in in the ETO merely makes him sound rather shrill and casts
doubts regarding his veracity on anything of value that he may
actually have to offer. Kind of sad, really.

Brooks

Cub Driver wrote:


As an aside on the aside, one of the 386th BG crewmen I talked to told
me with great feeling how he looked down from 1,000 feet or so to see
the water at Utah beach choked with bodies of American infantry. As
previously noted, only 12 men were killed in the initial assault on
the beach. What he was remembering was what he'd heard about the
carnage at Omaha, and he'd melded it into his own memory. That's the
problem with eyewitness testimony--it sometimes is actually a memory
of a photograph you've seen or a thought you later had.

It takes both The Witness and a lot of cross-checking to sort out
events. You need both, and even then you don't have the truth but only
your best approximation.


all the best -- Dan Ford (email: info AT danford.net)


This is extremely on target, especially during a traumatic event.

It's why accident investigators take with a very large grain of
salt testimony from eye witnesses at an air accident. I read a
lot of NTSB and AIB reports and you'd be amazed at what some
people firmly believe actually happened. An aircraft fully
enveloped with fire crashing straight down when it was a rather
benign 'crash-landing' with no hint of fire. One woman (with a
good imagination?) described the 'Avianca' (?) crash at Chicago
(?) where she 'saw' the pilot 'standing' at one of the cockpit
windows 'waving a little red flag'...oookkk...

As you say, people subconsciously substitute events in their
memory for other events, readings, impressions. The mind is a
wonderous instrument but you must be aware of it's limitations
and various quirks.
--

-Gord.

In message , "Gord
writes
Cub Driver wrote:


As an aside on the aside, one of the 386th BG crewmen I talked to told
me with great feeling how he looked down from 1,000 feet or so to see
the water at Utah beach choked with bodies of American infantry. As
previously noted, only 12 men were killed in the initial assault on
the beach. What he was remembering was what he'd heard about the
carnage at Omaha, and he'd melded it into his own memory. That's the
problem with eyewitness testimony--it sometimes is actually a memory
of a photograph you've seen or a thought you later had.

It takes both The Witness and a lot of cross-checking to sort out
events. You need both, and even then you don't have the truth but only
your best approximation.


all the best -- Dan Ford (email: info AT danford.net)


This is extremely on target, especially during a traumatic event.

It's why accident investigators take with a very large grain of
salt testimony from eye witnesses at an air accident. I read a
lot of NTSB and AIB reports and you'd be amazed at what some
people firmly believe actually happened. An aircraft fully
enveloped with fire crashing straight down when it was a rather
benign 'crash-landing' with no hint of fire. One woman (with a
good imagination?) described the 'Avianca' (?) crash at Chicago
(?) where she 'saw' the pilot 'standing' at one of the cockpit
windows 'waving a little red flag'...oookkk...

As you say, people subconsciously substitute events in their
memory for other events, readings, impressions. The mind is a
wonderous instrument but you must be aware of it's limitations
and various quirks.

Absolutely. I distinctly remember flying in an Anson 50 years ago and
having to wriggle past the guns in the upper turret. 5 years ago a
friend gave me a photograph of the same Anson at the same airfield taken
at about the same time. No guns. No turret.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Chris, does your source say at what altitude the Marauders bombed
from? (I realize that they were stacked up.)

Tomorrow's Thursday, the day a bunch of us old pilots have lunch at
the local American Legion. One of the bunch flew a B-26 on D-Day.

If he attends tomorrow, I'll ask him.

vince norris

(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Gord Beaman" )
Date: 7/2/03 1:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

Dave Holford wrote:



ArtKramr wrote:


I never read any books on the subject.


It shows.

I was there. I looked for you but didn't see you, where were you? Read a
thousand books. You still won' t have the feeling of what it was all
about..

Arthur Kramer


Then I guess there is no point reading your writing.

Dave

The boys do seem to have a valid point here Art...I think you
might do well to retract that view or at least modify it
slightly. Don't worry, you won't be the first poster who's been a
bit wrong on this ng.
--

-Gord.

..Gord you don't understand. He said there is no point reaiding my writing.
This means that he won't read my writing and I will never hear froim him again,
I don't want to do or say anything that will change that decision on his part.

Arthur Kramer

Oh...I assumed that you wrote hoping that readers would read your
output. ... ??...hummm...no, there must be some error that I'm
making here...perhaps you could help me out a little?...you write
because...??.

Damn...I must be declining faster than I thought...
--

-Gord.

" wrote:

(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Gord Beaman" )
Date: 7/2/03 1:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

Dave Holford wrote:



ArtKramr wrote:


I never read any books on the subject.


It shows.

I was there. I looked for you but didn't see you, where were you? Read a
thousand books. You still won' t have the feeling of what it was all
about..

Arthur Kramer


Then I guess there is no point reading your writing.

Dave

The boys do seem to have a valid point here Art...I think you
might do well to retract that view or at least modify it
slightly. Don't worry, you won't be the first poster who's been a
bit wrong on this ng.
--

-Gord.

..Gord you don't understand. He said there is no point reaiding my writing.
This means that he won't read my writing and I will never hear froim him again,
I don't want to do or say anything that will change that decision on his part.

Arthur Kramer

Oh...I assumed that you wrote hoping that readers would read your
output. ... ??...hummm...no, there must be some error that I'm
making here...perhaps you could help me out a little?...you write
because...??.

Damn...I must be declining faster than I thought...
--

-Gord.


You're OK Gord, your memory still works well and you don't find it
necessary to denegrate anyone who fails to agree with you.

Art's the one who is fading fast; a shame since he has some useful facts
to pass on but they are becoming buried in his biases.



73
Dave