Panzer Vor!!! Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Depends if you are dropping the bombs or are being bombed But it as stupid as Boeing killer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panoz Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Depends if you are dropping the bombs or are being bombed But it as stupid as Boeing killer Precisely. I posted this to show that either side can come up with insensitive titles, images whatsoever... I think that Giorgio's posts #11 & #19 summarize what should be the healthy reaction towards such "offensive" material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver66 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 (edited) Don't find it offensive , just absurd. But many will find it insensitive so I wouldn't promulgate it, I don't like hurting people and don't like people being hurt. Come on guys it's Easter! Edited April 19, 2014 by Driver66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted April 19, 2014 Author Share Posted April 19, 2014 Yes, it's Easter, when we remember when someone got hurt..... Interesting discussion, thanks for staying calm, guys. I nearly lost my rag, but, in the end, it isn't worth it. Can't change the world, or people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Vor!!! Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Allways remember the saying One man's terrorist is other man's freedom fighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Sorry but I'm totally unable to be bothered by this one at all. Outrage over a kit of an aircraft that shot down innocents yet eff loads of 109's and panzer tanks are built by many without a whimper. Lots of lovely figures of SS officers an the like are always ohhed n ahhed over at model shows conveniently forgetting these were the a holes that threw kids into ovens. Reality check I think. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panoz Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Sorry but I'm totally unable to be bothered by this one at all. Outrage over a kit of an aircraft that shot down innocents yet eff loads of 109's and panzer tanks are built by many without a whimper. Lots of lovely figures of SS officers an the like are always ohhed n ahhed over at model shows conveniently forgetting these were the a holes that threw kids into ovens. Reality check I think. I can't speak of the others but i"m not of the Nazi worshiping crowd. Their WWII exploits in Greece included machine gunning scores of unarmed civilians,raping and torturing women (even pregnant ones), looting and then burning entire villages to the ground, etc. All those despicable acts committed just for "the hell of it". But I have far better things to do when visiting this forum than getting into flame wars with their supporters - apologizers. And BTW the fuss was about the title of the article not the kit of the aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Lambess Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 my two cents worth is that "Boeing killer "as a nickname or article header , seems pretty insensitive to me (as it seems to glorify the incident) , its also diseingenious to the SU 15 Flagons history (as it only applies to one particular Aircrafts actions), and its also inaccurate in the broader historical sense as well , as any aircraft that has shot down a Boeing aircraft (B-29s anybody?) could also be called a "Boeing killer" with equal or more justification . (as an aside i have yet to read any article about the B-29 Enola Gay that glorifies it ,instead of reflecting upon , and questioning the devastaion of its actions.) its a tricky issue though and i agree with the posters who have reminded us all ,that some of us do model "weapons of death" i guess its a thin line between historical reflection and tasteless glorification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabat Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 All good points, whichever side you're on. How about 617 Squadron Tornado fin markings? Lots of civilian casualties. These things go round in circles as 'the victors write the history books' so it all depends on whose story you get to read, or even believe. There is always a counter argument. We model the artifacts or instruments of war, because we admire the ingenuity of the subject design or the ability to depict an event or article in miniature, not because we're ghouls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Kunac-Tabinor Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 One person's caption on a website review. Does it bother me? No not at all. He's Russian, its a sub-title that may have resonance within his country. Combat aircraft are designed to do things we probably dont think about as much as we should - destroy things. Their crews are military and follow orders and training. Right or wrong this results in things some people don't like, and others have no problem with. Storm in a teacup to my mind - much more sympathetic to Venom Vixens POV - as a publisher friend of mine put it, "books about things with Swastikas on them sell 10 times more than those that aren't" Joners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Noted the follow up comments in post 27. My mistake and my apologies. Edited April 22, 2014 by venomvixen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I believe he was posting that as an example, rather than in approval. Incidentally, that photomeme is an antiwar meme here in the USA. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cooper Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The problem in this specific case ('Su-15 Boeing Killer') is actually much more complex. Namely, the people who did most intensive research into this affair have concluded that the Su-15 in question has 'only' damaged the KAL 007, but did not shot it down. Complete transcriptions of intercepted Soviet radio traffic (see here for example) are confirming them beyond any doubt, otherwise the Soviet general in charge of that intercept wouldn't have ordered his GCI to bring in a MiG-23 (which was few kilometres behind the Su-15) to 'finish' the Boeing. Correspondingly, building 'that' Su-15 (whether TM or not) as such is not really 'wrong'. Somebody else was _actually_ responsible for the demise of KAL007, her crew and passengers. That said, - While the Su-15 pilot has seen that KAL007 is an airliner (he clearly identified it as such) he didn not forward that information to his superiors. So, he knew, and it didn't matter to him, but they didn't, and it's unknown if it would matter to them. - The actual tragedy of USS Vincennes shooting down the Iran Air Flight 340 was not the incorrect IFF, but the fact that the ship came into that situation because her skipper ignored Iranian territorial waters while searching for a fight. That all said, I do wonder why is nobody comparing these cases with the Israeli downing of a LibyanAirlines B727, over the Sinai in 1973 (see here - scroll down a lil' bit - for details)? That plane was shot down by two F-4Es, in broad daylight, and this despite it being obvious that it is a civilian airliner and despite its crew's attempts to return back over the Suez Canal into Egyptian-controlled airspace... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cooper Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) If I might add slightly more 'oil to the fire'.... it was one of the most successful air defense interceptors" Successful for shooting down two civilian airliners???If that's not a celebration then I don't know what it is. Wasn't it '3 civilian airliners', actually? I think to recall an Argentinean CL-44 air-freighter shot down by a V-PVO Su-15 (which rammed it, if my memory serves me right), somewhere over Armenia, in 1981 or so. Admittedly, the CL-44 in question was smuggling arms and spares from Israel to Iran, but still: it was definitely a civilian aircraft, manned by a civilian aircrew... Edited April 21, 2014 by Tom Cooper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimmer Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 If I might add slightly more 'oil to the fire'.... Do we really need this fire here? Happy Easter has passed, now bring in the hardcore? No, thanks - KAL007 case forum discussions are already an i-net meme, full of defecation masses thrown to the fan from both sides Mr.Cooper's usual desire for precision is understandable, but directing our dear audience to questionable resource is strange for well-known aviation researcher. Why don't we bring in the actual documents and let everyone to make his own view (obviously if interested) MiG-23s from Smirnykh AB were in the vicinity, were participating in the tragic events, but were not involved in damaging HL7442. From modelling point of view, Su-15, bort number "17 red" is the choice. 1:48 Trumpeter kit is full of inaccuracies, by the way Below is the cover of July, 16 1993 ICAO report - it has all the FACTS carefully restored with participation of all parties involved, as well as conclusions, based on this facts. This document still remains the major and only official source of data, connected with the incident. In 2004 remaining data omissions and unclear information, which could have helped to have the full and final picture, was labeled "classified" for another 25 years by U.S. Department Of Sate (such as, for example, the exact flight instructions and mission description of two RC-135 aircraft circling in the vicinity of incident over international waters) Quote: Coclusions (page 66) 3.26 The USSR air defence command centre personnel on Sakhalin Island were concerned with the position of the intruder aircraft in relation to USSR sovereign airspace as well as its identity. further on: 3.28 Exhaustive efforts to identify the intruder aircraft were not made, although apparently some doubt remained regarding its identity. further on: 3.32 The USSR air defence command assumed that KE 007 was a United States RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft before they ordered its destruction. For those who wants to back up his (or her, as we have a lady here ) opinion on the event discussed, I may share this document in full - it's 20Mb *pdf file (PM me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panoz Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I'd pay more heed to your comments had you not posted that "If you don't come to democracy" garbage. I'll leave it at that. That was only posted as an example of "offensive" material. Clearly you didn't read my following post. Pity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cooper Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 K, seems my attempt to start it on the lighter side was not accepted. The word is also, that forums are there for people to 'meet' - and discuss things. Seems my info is wrong because of religious holidays, though. K, I'll make a mental note for the future. Anyway, I do feel I have to observe that I do not know what would be 'questionable' about ACIG, or complete transcription of the Soviet radio traffic? Perhaps observations in that regards are related to the need for some more careful reading of my post, then I nowhere said that the 'MiG-23 has got it' (the KAL007)? Rather that a certain V-PVO general ordered a MiG-23 to attack the KAL007 - after it became clear that Osipovich's Su-15 didn't do the job. And that all said, the ICAO report from 1993 can't be complete not only because the exact flight instructions of the two RC-135s are to remain locked for another 5 years (perhaps longer, we'll see in 2019), but also because 'exact flight instructions and mission description' of those two RC-135s simply do not include intercepts of Soviet radio traffic mentioned above. And because few other things were missing as of that date (1993) too. In summary, whether I'm 'well-known' or not, I do have the right to conclude that something is 'nifty' about this affair (at least the fact that any of relevant documentation is still locked is not making it smell any better). So, back to the actual topic - and flashy media titles by side: but, if what I mentioned is making it any easier for somebody eager to build 'that' Su-15... well, where is actually the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennings Heilig Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I can tell you with direct personal first hand certain knowledge that the PVO was 100% sure that the KAL aircraft was the Cobra Ball (there was only ever one RC-135 anywhere in the Soviet Far East that day, not two), right up until Ossipovich eyeballed it. The Cobra Ball was on the ground at Eielson AFB long before KAL entered PVO radar coverage, but a radar op made a very bad assumption... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrobeson Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Side note, didn't the German government create some sort of medal about the sinking of the Lusitania? I remember seeing it mentioned in a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Not exactly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_RMS_Lusitania#Goetz_medal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony.t Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Paul, I think exactly as you do that it was a deprecable act. At the same time however we should keep in mind that we celebrate other actions that killed innocent civilians for no reasons and have no issue with this. How many villages in Vietnam were destroyed during bombing missions even if they were not a target ? How many times aircrafts strafed villages during the many colonial wars in the '50s ? Yet we have no problem in celebrating the aircrafts that were used in these actions. And going back in History, don't we celebrate this or that general or sovereign for what they did in building empires ? Yet these empires were built on the blood of milions of civilians and the enslavement of entire populations. Our heroes are somebody else's villains, we have to accept that others may see as legitimate certain acts that we find wrong in the same way as we find legitimate acts that others find wrong. Of course I believe we all the right to stand by our moral values and think or say "these guys are all wrong". Sorry, actually no, the two situations are very different: USS Vincennes shot at an aircraft that was incorretly identified as a military target and as a result shot down an airliner. Nobody on the ship in that moment understood that they were shooting at an airliner, it was an error caused by an incorrect judgement from some of the ship command team during an encounter with enemy forces and it was recognised as an error by all the parties involved. KAL007 was shot down intentionally even if it had already been identified as an airliner, in this case the command chain decided that killing innocent lives was not an issue. While it's true that airliners often intruded into other countries airspace, the standard procedures usually do not involve shooting them down. Just to show that others do things differently, Soviet recce aircrafts often intruded into other countries airspace, for example in Italy we often had aircrafts bound for Lybia that entered Italian airspace to test the air defences reaction. In these cases the interceptors just had to make clear that they were there and the intruders left, but had a commander ordered one of these to be destroyed it would have been a legitimate act. Yet it was never done for the simple reason that everybody understood that it was a game of which every party knew the rules. Mentioning USS VIncennes makes no sense here, the two acts are totally different in the way they occurred. Anyone who thinks so either does not know History or is just looking for a justification for the cold blood murder of the passengers of KAL007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerolinee_Itavia_Flight_870 I mostly agree with you Giorgio, but Italian airspace has been a source of considerable controversy... An Italian airliner and Libyan MiG-23 were both lost to an excited bunch of French/NATO pilots in 1980. IIRC an RAF Phantom crew shot down down a Jaguar around that time, and a USN Tomcat pilot shot down an RF-4C in 1987 - fortunately, the three occupants of these two jets ejected successfully. Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 An Italian airliner and Libyan MiG-23 were both lost to an excited bunch of French/NATO pilots in 1980. That's a matter of more than a little dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony.t Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 That's a matter of more than a little dispute. I should have added 'allegedly'. The fact it's a matter of dispute is hardly surprising. The underlying comment, which embraces two well known friendly shoot-downs, is that it's not only the politically leaned upon Soviets who could be trigger happy on occasion. The 1978 incursion by the 707 was sufficiently embarrassing that a shoot sooner policy ensued, resulting in an airliner being confused with a Rivet Joint. And airliners have been used to spy - allegedly, so we don't get sidetracked again. "Boeing killer" is, however, a rather bellicose and insensitive sobriquet for an air defence fighter that claimed so many innocent lives. Great machine though - some 1,200 Su-15s were built for the PVO and served for twenty years, before getting the chop following the CFE treaty. Really need some nice models of the beast, preferably in 1/32! Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAVY870 Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 The Italian airliner was the subject of a recent episode of "Air crash investigators" The original investigation was a classic case of making the facts fit the story, in this case of accidental shoot down. Later investigations showed the so called missle impact hole didn't exist and the parts of the aircraft that made up the hole were in fact from the rear of the aircraft. The current thinking is a possible bomb blast but the Italian authorities show no interest in reopening the file. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC1966 Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 tony t, maybe being thick here, but what has the RAF Phantom shooting the Jag got to do with any of this ? Be gentle with me, it is late and I have had a couple of pints watching the football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now