Jump to content

Who needs history books when you have the Internet?


gwb123
 Share

Recommended Posts

We've had a number of threads decrying the lack of historical perspective on the part of our younger generation, with a lot of blame towards the current state of education and "teach to the test" curriculums.

 

But there are other sources of confusion out there as well, masking themselves as "authoritarian".

 

Case in point, a friend of mine recently sent me the following story...

 

Luftwaffe Over New York, a WW2 Secret

 

The Most Dangerous Photo-Recon Mission of World War II

 

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/03/11/86523/

 

The short version of the story is that a Luftwaffe Ju-390 "twice the size of the B-29 Superfortress...with a range of of 18,000 miles without refuelling"

managed to fly as far as central Michigan and then over New York City on a recon mission, flown, no less, by an intrepid female pilot named Anna Kreisling.

 

Ms. Kreisling is supposedly the source of this information, only recently revealed in the memories of her old age... at Oktoberfest!

 

The story engendered over 40 eagerly believing remarks on the cited website, and has appeared elsewhere on the net.

 

While intriguing, the story is unfortunately full of holes.

 

To start with the operational range of the Ju-390, which did exist, was 6,030 mi at operational weight.. somewhat further stretching to 8,000 miles theoretically projected if fully stripped down. As far a size, the Ju-390 was 112 ft 2 in length, wingspan 165 ft while the B-29 had a length 99 ft 0 in and wingspan 141 ft, which is proportinately about 15% bigger. This hardly qualifies as "twice the size" and in fact was part of the aircraft's downfall as it was seriously underpowered.

 

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ju-390, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress

 

The Luftwaffe dearly wanted to bomb any part of the USA, for both political and practical reasons. Like the US's Doolittle Raid, they calculated the US would tie up aircraft and pilots for homeland defense even if nusiance raids could be carried out. But in the end, they could never develop an aircraft that had either the range or reliability to accomplish the feat and return back to Germany. (There was apparently some discussion of one way missions.)

 

For those really interested in the subject, I recommend the thoroughly researched "Luftwaffe Over America: The Secret Plans to Bomb the United States in World War II" by Mangried Griehl. It's not exactly the most flowing narrative, but it is full of technical details that will convince you the project was doomed by the inefficiences of Luftwaffe armament procurement.

 

So why bring this up on the US Militaria Forum? Because I am sure there are equally crazy stories out there regarding US forces and "newly discovered secrets from World War II", or Vietnam, or the Cold War, or take your pick.

 

With stuff like this on the internet, is it any wonder we see such distorted views of history?

 

Feel free to add the examples you have found!

NaziUFO_2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flyer333555

The Wikipedia is hardly credible as a source! :thumbdown:

Anyone can post in it, so it is laughable that you, a moderator, of any other source, chose to quote the Wikipedia. When I do use Wikipedia articles, I see if they are backed by quotes from NARA and other more reputable sources. :think:

 

 

Now having stated that, I do believe your article is highly questionable. In other words, I highly doubt that airplane was over the United States. Overall, Germany had problems with airplanes that were supposed to fly long distances. Remember the HE 177. :ermm:

 

Luis R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wikipedia is hardly credible as a source! :thumbdown:

Anyone can post in it, so it is laughable that you, a moderator, of any other source, chose to quote the Wikipedia. When I do use Wikipedia articles, I see if they are backed by quotes from NARA and other more reputable sources. :think:

 

I'll be the first to agree that Wikipedia needs to be used with caution, especially for editorial or speculative comments.

 

However, I used it here for as a quick reference for statistics, which should be fairly easy to double check and verify.

 

So was the B-29 99 feet in length with a wingspan of 141 feet? Well, let's see who agrees...

 

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheet...heet.asp?id=527

 

http://science.howstuffworks.com/boeing-b-...erfortress1.htm

 

http://www.historylink101.com/ww2-planes/a-stats.htm

 

http://www.aero-web.org/specs/boeing/b-29.htm

 

http://www.chuckhawks.com/great_bombers.htm

 

http://b17us.com/

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapo...9_variants.html

 

http://www.desertusa.com/mag98/nov/stories/b29.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on Wikipedia and The National Inquirer will never get you a research grant. :pinch:

gw, as you have pointed out, we make the internet seem like 'gospel' to our children. No wonder they life on it for school projects, it' free and EASY.

 

The internet does have uses, but not for serious research. Thank goodness we still have Libraries!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

teufelhunde.ret
The internet does have uses, but not for serious research. Thank goodness we still have Libraries!

Yes and no :think: In the past 2-3 decades we have begun to see a ground swell of books by authors who's only agenda is to re-vision history. On the web, or from Amazon, authors / bloggers are providing a new and different interpretation of the past and a starting place for re-visioning history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flyer333555

As a Library Teacher, I can say there are some resources available through the Internet that, if the Internet were not available, some libraries would not have access to.

 

:rolleyes:

 

Take, for instance, Proquest. This resource allows access to about a hundred journals, among these, Civil War History, Military History, and War in History, journals that I have never seen in print after working almost 20 years in college and school libraries. There are some other online databases-available through the Internet-as well. These are used to produce print journals for those academic libraries then are made available to those same libraries for their more recent issues. If not for the Internet, I would not have access to these journals at my high school library.

 

:think:

 

Do not decry the Internet. Decry the uneducated mentality that says "the Internet has everything" and "just Yahoo or Google it."

 

:unsure:

 

Take care,

 

Luis Ramos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

teufelhunde.ret
Do not decry the Internet. Decry the uneducated mentality that says "the Internet has everything" and "just Yahoo or Google it."[/b]

Luis Ramos

Best words I've read here today...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...
Vahe Demirjian
On 4/11/2011 at 3:03 PM, flyer333555 said:

Now having stated that, I do believe your article is highly questionable. In other words, I highly doubt that airplane was over the United States. Overall, Germany had problems with airplanes that were supposed to fly long distances. Remember the HE 177. :ermm:

The Heinkel He 177's Achilles heel was its troublesome engines, which precluded it from performing its intended role as a long-range Stuka. The Heinkel He 177B was powered by four individual piston engines which had none of the problems with the coupled engines that powered the baseline He 177, just as the Avro Lancaster was a development of the Manchester bomber that replaced the Manchester's troublesome Rolls-Royce Vultures with four of the reliable Merlin piston engines, so it could have been a true equivalent of the B-17, B-24, Lancaster, Halifax, and Stirling.

 

The Messerschmitt Me 264 and Junkers Ju 390 (which reached the prototype stage only) would have been the only German strategic bomber designs capable of reaching the US Eastern Seaboard, since Dan Sharp has noted that the Focke-Wulf Ta 400 and Heinkel He 277 projects were only intended for sinking supply convoys in the Atlantic and thus would not have had the range to reach the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...