CAF's JU 52

k5083 · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 11:50 am

I commend Greg for making an effort to understand why people have different views on the display of things like the swastika. Tony, I think, may be trying hard not to understand, but just to belittle differing points of view.

What saddens me about all of this is that the 52 is not recognized as a great airplane that should draw airshow crowds whatever paint scheme it carries. First and foremost, it was a great civil transport, not just a military transport and mediocre bomber. Ironically, the reason why it was objectionable in Lansing -- its connection with the Nazi war machine -- seems to be the only reason anybody wants to see it at all.

It has been said before, but if only there were less "war" in the warbird scene, and people didn't need the greatest-generation morality play wrapped around their history to appreciate these planes. Oh well, it is what it is.

August

TonyM · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 1:41 pm

It seems that none of the WWII Vets--you know, the guys who actually fought the Nazis--ever complained about the swastika on our airplane at the events we attended. Whenever we took that airplane to an event, it drew crowds like crazy, even at Lansing Airport (IGQ). The airplane was featured at least twice in the papers in a non negative light with no mention of the Nazis. The stories did not generate any adverse publicity. In fact, we had a lot of positive interest in the airplane.

A special note for August:

As a professionally trained historian (WWII is my field of study), I am very aware of the different attitudes concerning this symbol and its use by the Hitler regime. I am not attempting to "belittle" an opposing point of view and I resent your baseless and ignorant accusation. The fact that the complainer would not come out in the open in public to complain about our airplane says a lot about that person. We were called "Nazi sympathizers" by somebody who hid anonymously while he threw his bombs at us and the CAF; that was a very unfair and hurtful accusation and if those types of accusations were hurled at you and your organization in the press, maybe you, August, would have a different opinion.

I have never ever heard of the Museum of Science and Industry being labled a Nazi sympathizer organization for their display of the U-505 and the CAF should not be labled as such for their operation of the JU-52.

TonyM.

bipe215 · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 2:11 pm

August said:
"and people didn't need the greatest-generation morality play wrapped around their history"

I think this country could use alot MORE of that greatest generation morality!

Steve G

k5083 · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:21 pm

TonyM wrote:

It seems that none of the WWII Vets--you know, the guys who actually fought the Nazis--ever complained about the swastika on our airplane at the events we attended. Whenever we took that airplane to an event, it drew crowds like crazy, even at Lansing Airport (IGQ). The airplane was featured at least twice in the papers in a non negative light with no mention of the Nazis. The stories did not generate any adverse publicity. In fact, we had a lot of positive interest in the airplane.

A special note for August:

As a professionally trained historian (WWII is my field of study), I am very aware of the different attitudes concerning this symbol and its use by the Hitler regime. I am not attempting to "belittle" an opposing point of view and I resent your baseless and ignorant accusation. The fact that the complainer would not come out in the open in public to complain about our airplane says a lot about that person. We were called "Nazi sympathizers" by somebody who hid anonymously while he threw his bombs at us and the CAF; that was a very unfair and hurtful accusation and if those types of accusations were hurled at you and your organization in the press, maybe you, August, would have a different opinion.

I have never ever heard of the Museum of Science and Industry being labled a Nazi sympathizer organization for their display of the U-505 and the CAF should not be labled as such for their operation of the JU-52.

TonyM.

Well, Tony, here's the thing. You accused people who object to the display of the swastika on the plane as wanting to "forget" history. If you are a professionally trained historian or just a regular thinking person, you should know that's not true; in fact, it's a "baseless and ignorant accusation" on your part. People who object to the display of the swastika do not want to forget history; on the contrary, they think that it is the CAF that is forgetting history, or at least remembering it selectively; because, they reason, if the CAF truly remembered and appreciated the history of Nazi Germany, it would have a big problem with displaying the symbol.

Now we both know that's not true. But, you do have to realize that some people who display the swastika, as also the confederate flag that you mentioned in your post, do so because they have forgotten history, or outright deny it, or worse still, harbor reprehensible views that the program of the Nazis (or the confederate slave system) was not really so bad. So that box of "People Who Display Swastikas" holds some pretty unsavory characters, and why would an organization like CAF want to put itself in the same box with such people? The answer, "because it's history," is inadequate, because the particular tail marking used on German WWII aircraft is historically trivial and whether it is deleted has no bearing on the ability to educate about the significant issues of WWII. So some people are likely to conclude, maybe the reason the owners of this plane are willing to display the symbol is that Nazism doesn't trouble them all that much. This is wrong, of course, but it comes easily to mind. The true reason is that the airplane is maintained by history buffs obsessed with getting details right. But CAF doesn't always get a chance to explain this, or else they don't because it's a little bit embarrassing, and could even be seen as slightly hypocritical given the lack of attention to detail on some of the organization's other paint schemes. Whatever -- the point is that people don't understand, the reasons they don't understand are not crazy, and if you are going to do something easily misunderstood, there are going to be consequences. You can either try to understand why people misunderstand, or dismiss and belittle them as trying to "forget" history.

Note that my comments are addressed, like your post was, only to the display of the swastika, not the plane itself. If you don't think museums like the Smithsonian get some flak and nasty letters for displaying planes with swastikas painted on them, you should read up on it.

August

brucev · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:50 pm

TonyM wrote:

I am a member of the Great Lakes Wing CAF and we--until recently--had operated the JU-52.

The Swastika Issue
We had overcome the swastika problem at Gary Airport, Gary, Indiana (GYY) many years ago by covering up the swastika with a removable panel that clipped into place; the panels were removed for flight. We ran into our most recent problems when we tried to move the Great Lakes Wing CAF to Lansing Municipal Airport, Lansing, Illinois (IGQ). Some coward (he can't be anything else since he acted anonymously) wrote anonymous letters to the Mayor of Lansing, the FBO operator, local politicians and the local newspaper, complaining that the airplane was a "Nazi Tribute" airplane and that the CAF members were nazi sympathizers. The local newspaper, at that time, would actually publish anonymous letters to the editor. Well, the paper did a story, we kind of got some bad press and our PIO did a fine job of defending the CAF and its mission to local reporters, but the damage was done and we were asked not to bring the airplane to Lansing (IGQ).

The fact that the airplane could not generate any revenue for our wing certainly hamstrung our efforts to operate the JU-52. And with three engines, it took money to make it go. We were prohibited from giving rides so we could not realize the extra revenue that would come from those types of operations. We in the wing all loved the JU-52 and would have been happy to keep the airplane had it been able to pay its way. It could not. And we could not.

I regret the day that Jim R. had asked me to fly back to base in the JU-52 after a successful airshow. I declined and flew back on board the C-47, the airplane I was a crewmember on that day. I wish I would have taken that last ride in the JU-52.

We all are happy the airplane now has a good home.

TonyM.

i do not see where this post belittled anyone, :?:

nor do i see anything about forgetting history :?:

is my reading comprehension that bad, or is it yours august?

TonyM · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 4:24 pm

August,

In all due respect, you are confused.

I never mentioned anything about people wanting to "forget" history in any of my posts concerning this topic. Nor did I ever mention the "confederate flag" in any post of mine concerning this topic. Nor did I belittle anybody in my post. I called the man a coward not because of his opposition argument but because he hid behind a cloak of anonyminity while throwing bombs at the CAF and our members. We went to the press and our PIO presented our argument in plain language in a daily newspaper. So we were able to respond to the unfair attacks on the members of the Great Lakes Wing. Anybody who knows me or is familiar with my work knows how much care and sensitivity goes into my projects. I have helpled hundreds (if not thousands) of vets and their families. My good work speaks for itself.

I would ask that you please refrain from putting words in my mouth. Go back and carefully re-read my posts. I refuse to address this any further in public on these forums. If you have any more to say, you can contact me on the phone or by e-mail. I am easy to find and I would be happy to talk to you.

TonyM.

TonyM · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 4:25 pm

k5083 wrote:

TonyM wrote:

It seems that none of the WWII Vets--you know, the guys who actually fought the Nazis--ever complained about the swastika on our airplane at the events we attended. Whenever we took that airplane to an event, it drew crowds like crazy, even at Lansing Airport (IGQ). The airplane was featured at least twice in the papers in a non negative light with no mention of the Nazis. The stories did not generate any adverse publicity. In fact, we had a lot of positive interest in the airplane.

A special note for August:

As a professionally trained historian (WWII is my field of study), I am very aware of the different attitudes concerning this symbol and its use by the Hitler regime. I am not attempting to "belittle" an opposing point of view and I resent your baseless and ignorant accusation. The fact that the complainer would not come out in the open in public to complain about our airplane says a lot about that person. We were called "Nazi sympathizers" by somebody who hid anonymously while he threw his bombs at us and the CAF; that was a very unfair and hurtful accusation and if those types of accusations were hurled at you and your organization in the press, maybe you, August, would have a different opinion.

I have never ever heard of the Museum of Science and Industry being labled a Nazi sympathizer organization for their display of the U-505 and the CAF should not be labled as such for their operation of the JU-52.

TonyM.

Well, Tony, here's the thing. You accused people who object to the display of the swastika on the plane as wanting to "forget" history. If you are a professionally trained historian or just a regular thinking person, you should know that's not true; in fact, it's a "baseless and ignorant accusation" on your part. People who object to the display of the swastika do not want to forget history; on the contrary, they think that it is the CAF that is forgetting history, or at least remembering it selectively; because, they reason, if the CAF truly remembered and appreciated the history of Nazi Germany, it would have a big problem with displaying the symbol.

Now we both know that's not true. But, you do have to realize that some people who display the swastika, as also the confederate flag that you mentioned in your post, do so because they have forgotten history, or outright deny it, or worse still, harbor reprehensible views that the program of the Nazis (or the confederate slave system) was not really so bad. So that box of "People Who Display Swastikas" holds some pretty unsavory characters, and why would an organization like CAF want to put itself in the same box with such people? The answer, "because it's history," is inadequate, because the particular tail marking used on German WWII aircraft is historically trivial and whether it is deleted has no bearing on the ability to educate about the significant issues of WWII. So some people are likely to conclude, maybe the reason the owners of this plane are willing to display the symbol is that Nazism doesn't trouble them all that much. This is wrong, of course, but it comes easily to mind. The true reason is that the airplane is maintained by history buffs obsessed with getting details right. But CAF doesn't always get a chance to explain this, or else they don't because it's a little bit embarrassing, and could even be seen as slightly hypocritical given the lack of attention to detail on some of the organization's other paint schemes. Whatever -- the point is that people don't understand, the reasons they don't understand are not crazy, and if you are going to do something easily misunderstood, there are going to be consequences. You can either try to understand why people misunderstand, or dismiss and belittle them as trying to "forget" history.

Note that my comments are addressed, like your post was, only to the display of the swastika, not the plane itself. If you don't think museums like the Smithsonian get some flak and nasty letters for displaying planes with swastikas painted on them, you should read up on it.

August

TonyM wrote:

August,

In all due respect, you are confused.

I never mentioned anything about people wanting to "forget" history in any of my posts concerning this topic. Nor did I ever mention the "confederate flag" in any post of mine concerning this topic. Nor did I belittle anybody in my post. I called the man a coward not because of his opposition argument but because he hid behind a cloak of anonyminity while throwing bombs at the CAF and our members. We went to the press and our PIO presented our argument in plain language in a daily newspaper. So were able to respond to the unfair attacks on the members of the Great Lakes Wing. Anybody who knows me or is familiar with my work knows how much care and sensitivity goes into my projects. I have helpled hundreds (if not thousands) of vets and their families. My good work speaks for itself.

I would ask that you to please refrain from putting words in my mouth. Go back and carefully re-read my posts. I refuse to address this any further in public on these forums. If you have any more to say, you can contact me on the phone or by e-mail. I am easy to find.

TonyM.

k5083 · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:28 pm

I apologize, Tony. In my initial email about belittling, I was talking about Tony C's post, not yours. I just now realized there are two Tonys in this thread! :oops:

August

TonyM · **Posted:** Sun Jan 31, 2010 10:56 pm

August,

No problem. I apologize as well, I shouldn't have assumed I was the only Tony either.

Electronic communication is tricky too; the language sometimes seems brusque or rude since it is not tempered with tone, inflection and gesture.

TonyM.

JDK · **Posted:** Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:01 am

So no pistols at dawn? No lifelong grudges?

What's the point? Where's the internetfun in that?

:lol:

(And it's still representing a Ju 52/3m, not a Ju 52 or a JU52. It's a CASA 352L in reality.)

Scott Apple wrote:

Sorry guys! I miss spoke in my earlier post on this thread. We (the AZ Wing) did have a game plan and the income to operate the Ju-52, and notified HQ that we would like the reassignment. But they decided to sell it. Not sure if they had a buyer already at that time. And not sure if they formally offered it up for reassignment. Quite a rare piece of history!

Hi Scott,
Thanks for that. Do you know that the plan you talk about was viable? My understanding is there were issues over using this aircraft for rides for hire.

How rare? To quantify that, there are at least five currently airworthy Junkers Ju 52/3m aircraft, at least four of those being original German built Junkers examples, as well as several others (at least two CASAs and a CASA / Junkers id) flying. There are over 40 surviving identities of Junkers/CASA/AACNs worldwide.

Regards,

Scott Apple · **Posted:** Mon Feb 01, 2010 12:56 am

Hi JDK,

We would not be able to use the aircraft for the ride program. We would have done some limited touring with our B-17 like we did with the He-111. You would be surprised at the amount of people that come to see Allies and Axis airplanes together. We would also use the airplane as an added attraction at the AZ Wing Museum in Mesa, AZ. It worked with the He-111. We didn't see why it wouldn't work again.

JDK · **Posted:** Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:04 am

Hi Scott,
Firstly, my apologies - I misread your latter post - my error.

Secondly, I'm glad to hear your view that 'people that come to see Allies and Axis airplanes together', certainly would be worth a try, and variety in preservation and presentation is important, as well.

Thanks again,

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:34 am

People are too worried about what other people are doing in this country. No one also wants to use any common god damned sense either. If people used any at all most racism issues and such would go away. The intent of the Swastika was never intended to mean what it does to those who study WWII. Hitler and the Nazi thugs stole it and used it to their gain. People generally not smart enough to figure out that a symbol reflects upon the person using it. I ran into this with my Charger at car shows. It was used and is painted as a "General Lee". It proudly flies the rebel flag on the roof. Some people complained it was racist. Did you ever watch the show? They are not racists in the least. I am not racist in the least. My intention on flying that flag has nothing to do with race. If people don't like it, they can just do what I do when I see something I don't like. I don't go over and look at it. What I mean by all of this is if a JU-52 full of skin heads rolled up on the ramp flying a swastika, then yeah, we may want to be concerned. If a museum dedicated to flying WWII aircraft has one, maybe they have different intentions in mind. Someone should at the very least fly a Swastika on an airplane. It should remind us of the pure evil that existed in Japan and Germany. Since both of those countries do their very best to erase WWII history, then it is even more vital that we tell the story.
As for that Greatest Generation attitude, if it wasn't for them, we would be seeing a hole lot more swastikas every day.

k5083 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:41 am

mustangdriver wrote:

No one also wants to use any common god damned sense either. If people used any at all most racism issues and such would go away.

True.

Quote:

The intent of the Swastika was never intended to mean what it does to those who study WWII. Hitler and the Nazi thugs stole it and used it to their gain.

True, but irrelevant. The meanings of symbols change. "Holocaust" used to just mean any big fire, now it means a particular episode of genocide. Swastikas now mean Nazis. For better or worse, the association is there and it's very strong and we all must cope with it.

Quote:

People generally not smart enough to figure out that a symbol reflects upon the person using it.

True, and very insightful. But then why do you say ...

Quote:

I ran into this with my Charger at car shows. It was used and is painted as a "General Lee". It proudly flies the rebel flag on the roof. Some people complained it was racist. Did you ever watch the show? They are not racists in the least. I am not racist in the least. My intention on flying that flag has nothing to do with race.

But the symbol reflects upon the person using it. You must know that the confederate flag has been adopted as a symbol by some white supremacist fringe groups. They have not completely appropriated it; it still has other meanings as well, so as a symbol it is more ambiguous than the swastika. When you display it, you might be signalling racism, you might be signalling southern pride, you might be signalling your admiration of a fine, critically acclaimed 1980s TV show. Not everyone will know which you intend. Despite our best efforts to have The Dukes made a mandatory part of the high school curriculum and Cathy Bach's shorts retired to the Smithsonian, some will not have seen the show. You will not have the opportunity to explain your meaning to everyone who sees your car, and probably wouldn't care to. You must therefore assume that some people who see the rebel flag will wrongly interpret the meaning as "I'm a racist." And you must be okay with that. No? See, this is why the CAF was right to change its name and stop using the rebel flag on some of its airplanes. People would be wrong in assuming the CAF is racist, but some of them would assume it, and to function in society you have to cope with all likely interpretations of what you say, not just the one you intend.

Of course, you may have the luxury that a public nonprofit like the CAF doesn't have, of not caring what other people think. Or, you can limit your social circle to those who will understand your intentions. If most people who see your car are folks who go to car shows, misinterpretations of your rebel flag probably are pretty rare. There are other places in this country where it would be unwise to drive your Charger.

Quote:

If a museum dedicated to flying WWII aircraft has one, maybe they have different intentions in mind. Someone should at the very least fly a Swastika on an airplane. It should remind us of the pure evil that existed in Japan and Germany.

First, history is not a comic book and "pure evil" is not a useful understanding of what went on there. Second, remembering the horrors of Nazism is exactly why people object to swastikas. They view the swastika as an obscenity, and would like for its display to be a socal taboo. Would you paint the F-word or some similar swear word in big letters on the tail or your airplane or on your car? How about an image depicting an act of child porrnnography? An Osama Bin Laden poster? Some folks would like to see displaying a swastika, no matter what you intend by it, as an act of this kind. Their point is not that we should forget how bad Nazism was, but that we are in danger of forgetting it if we wave the symbol around casually. I don't happen to agree with this, but I understand it.

Quote:

Since both of those countries do their very best to erase WWII history, then it is even more vital that we tell the story.

Not really. They do remember WWII history selectively -- rather like we do.

Quote:

As for that Greatest Generation attitude, if it wasn't for them, we would be seeing a hole lot more swastikas every day.

Maybe; maybe not.

August

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11330

Has anyone experienced similar outrage over the Japanese Hinomaru (meatball)?

Warbird Information Exchange

CAF's JU 52

Who is online