Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:19 am
whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote: I personally don't look at it as we have several of them flying so if one goes down, it's not that big a loss.
whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:Maybe it's a New England thing were we are attached to the plane just a bit more.
Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:16 pm
JDK wrote:whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote: I personally don't look at it as we have several of them flying so if one goes down, it's not that big a loss.
Neither do I, that's not what I said. It was a point about relative rarity and history.whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:Maybe it's a New England thing were we are attached to the plane just a bit more.
Fair enough; but again, I was talking in global terms.
Just thinking about the matter.
Regards,
Sun Jun 19, 2011 6:24 pm
JDK wrote:Fair enough; but again, I was talking in global terms.
Just thinking about the matter.
whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:Australia doesn't count
Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:08 pm
Sun Jun 19, 2011 9:20 pm
Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:01 pm
whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:Australia doesn't count
JDK wrote:Again, once we get past the irrational attempt to keep all our childhood's toys aspect, then the hard, thinking, work begins - what's worth preserving, and why? How do we make the choices (that the more idealistic WIX posters never consider, let alone address)? What is historical? What's going to be important historical material for 'tomorrow' that we don't even see 'today'?
Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:53 pm
Jollygreenslugg wrote:whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:Australia doesn't count
Hmmm. I wonder if my late friend, Flt Lt Maurice Carse, RAAF would agree. He won a US DFC for his part in the destruction of the Japanese destroyer Arashio in March 1943. He was one of the hundreds of Australian airmen who was on strength and flew missions with the USAAF during the Second World War. If Australia (and by extension, any other allied nation) doesn't count, then his mast-top height bombing doesn't count. The US Government certainly thought it counted when they awarded him the DFC.
Now, back to regular programming!
Despite the fact that I have emoted in my first paragraph, I justify it as it was a response to a specific point raised, which rears its head from time to time, the idea that other nations don't count.
James, I tend to agree with you that the objective numerical reality of this loss mitigates the emotional reality for those not intimately connected with the aircraft. It could become part of a rebuild and would certainly provide enough provenance for reuse of the identity. I imagine that cost factors will be an important factor in that particular decision.
It is indeed a terrible loss, and that loss does represent an emotional reality for those involved, less so for those who have a casual interest. Thankfully a multi-ship formation can still be assembled.
James, your following point interests me;JDK wrote:Again, once we get past the irrational attempt to keep all our childhood's toys aspect, then the hard, thinking, work begins - what's worth preserving, and why? How do we make the choices (that the more idealistic WIX posters never consider, let alone address)? What is historical? What's going to be important historical material for 'tomorrow' that we don't even see 'today'?
I don't think that an objective answer is possible, unless a rather arbitrary set of guidelines is established. It's difficult to apply objective decision-making to a topic which is inherently subjective. My own thoughts in the first paragraph are a good example. My relationship with an Australian who served in the USAAF colours my view of the importance of his, and their efforts. Had my father served in Vietnam (for example), I may have a different idea of what is important there.
I believe that national heritage institutions have a responsibility to collate and portray the story of that nation's people in times of conflict and peace. They are free to determine the most appropriate way of doing this, and most would agree that this is being done very well in many cases, and not so well in others. Objective factors limit the ability of a national institution to 'tell the story'. As an example of this, Lancasters are used to tell the main part of the story of Bomber Command in various institutions, in a disproportionate factor to their numerical percentage. Decisions have to be made, and as airframes were available when these institutions were collecting, they were chosen. Just one example showing that arbitrary decisions must be made, and cost or practicality factors have a large part to play in such decisions.
Private groups and single individuals can do what they like. I'll expound more on this later.
Cheers,
Matt
Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:35 pm
Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:08 am
Nowadays, folks in the U.S. that haven't traveled outside of CONUS may not be able to perceive the overwhelming nature of U.S. culture in what is written, researched and discussed. I think this plays a role in how they respond to the way we describe them, and in the way we talk about ourselves. When we in the U.S. talk this way, I can't help but cringe behind my monitor. They are worthy as allies, then and now, and deserve our admiration and careful respect.