Glad to hear everyone had a great and safe Airsho.
Regarding the Wildcat... Excuses, excuses.
I wonder if anyone would accept such poor excuses for an equivalent lack of effort in maintenance or flying safety? As Dan Newcomb follows up with my acknowledgement of the differentiation between restoration quality and paint scheme, the fact remains
only excuses have ever been offered for a remarkably inaccurate and poor paintjob on the 'Martlet'. Coupled with the squirts of disingenuous and misleading ink when it's been challenged, it does no one any favours even if it 'sort of helps the plane stand out'.
It would 'stand out' better if it were painted in something a bit closer to an accurate scheme, and as I demonstrated above the first two hits on a sub-one minute search on Google provided significantly better references than were used. I'd be interested to know if recently any other warbird was painted with nothing more than a single off-colour profile view.
Yes, it's not my 'plane, and I'm expecting to be told to get back in my box or cough-up to paint it better. But before we go down that worn route, let's just take a moment's thought.
Most of us like to claim that we support warbirds to honour and acknowledge the effort and sacrifice those who flew and died in W.W.II. We'd also agree it behoves us to try and get those tributes right, in
fact, history, tone and approach. It's harsh to say, but it is ignorance, and a lack of respect, at base, that comes up with such a careless approximation of something that should be a creditable and appreciated rendition of a close allies' aircraft.
Yes, it's offensive to get the colours of another nation's aircraft so wrong. It's like flying a visitors' flag upside down. Good manners and etiquette.
The Martlet (as a type) was flown by Captain Eric 'Winkle' Brown, among many other great, brave and mostly no-longer with us pilots. He achieved kills on the type, against Focke-Wulf Fw-200 Condors. Eric was one of the most skilled pilots of W.W.II, and remains one of the leading authoritative test-pilots of W.W.II aircraft of all major combatant nations. It would be nice to have the aircraft better presented for him, wouldn't it? Doesn't he deserve it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_%22Winkle%22_Brown
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/case_na ... rview.html
There is plenty of noise here about 'dumbing down' and poor history. This is a fine example of it within our own arena. An accurate scheme provides a learning opportunity, and stands as a credit to
all - those who flew in it, those who restored the aircraft. A very poor scheme, like this only reinforces ignorance and as we've seen encourages myths: (A 'New Zealand' aircraft).
I know many of my American friends care enough to try and get it right, and my British friends are keen to help. The recent restorations of Jim Smith's Seafire 47 and 'Captain Eddie's' Firefly in America are examples of successful collaborations resulting in excellent, near perfect Royal Navy schemes.
He!l, the RN FAA Wildcat and Martlet colours
originally varied so much for various reasons, you've got a lot of latitude already; but not
this much.
As has been shown here, WIX can help! Django's wonderful 'Ol 927' artwork inspired by Gary Austin's thread is an example where a
new voluntary effort can be an incredible success - so there's opportunity aplenty.
Just a couple of final caveats - this is not intended as a
personal attack on anyone, alive or dead, and I'd appreciate any constructive feedback. Finally, I reiterate, paint's nothing to safe aviating, which is what
really matters.
Rant over, thanks for bearing with me.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
