PDA

View Full Version : IL-2 in US magazine



Rammjaeger
01-16-2007, 08:24 PM
I've found this recently in the online archives of 'Popular Mechanics' magazine: the Il-2 mentioned in the April 1944 issue:

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/4632/secretweapons3vk8.th.jpg (http://img114.imageshack.us/my.php?image=secretweapons3vk8.jpg)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"At last we are eye to eye with death. We must renounce all hopes of freaks and fortunes. Sacrifice to the last drop of blood is demanded of us. Surrender would paralyse and sap our race for generations." - Wehrmacht radio broadcast to German troops in Hungary, October 1944

WB_Outlaw
01-16-2007, 08:57 PM
OMG they mentioned the PIAT! What a joke that thing was. More dangerous to the shooter than the target.

--Outlaw.

Zeus-cat
01-16-2007, 09:22 PM
The article also states that the Germans don't have anything that compares to the bazooka. That's true, you can't compare a panzerfaust to a bazooka - the panzerfaust actually worked!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Zeus-cat

My Campaigns:
Straight Shot (9 missions in the Japanese Seaplane - A6M2-N "Rufe")
Straight Into an Icy Hell (14 missions for the Rufe in the Aleutians)
Straight Down (26 dive-bombing missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight Down Some More (19 more missions in a carrier-based SBD-3)
Straight and True (30 torpedo bomber missions in an IL-2T)

My campaign page at Miision4Today
http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&c=22

berg417448
01-16-2007, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Zeus-cat:
The article also states that the Germans don't have anything that compares to the bazooka. That's true, you can't compare a panzerfaust to a bazooka - the panzerfaust actually worked!


The Germans thought enough of the bazooka as a weapon to send some back to Germany for analysis and improvement. The result was the Panzerschreck, which was more powerful than the bazooka.

Rammjaeger
01-16-2007, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by Zeus-cat:
The article also states that the Germans don't have anything that compares to the bazooka. That's true, you can't compare a panzerfaust to a bazooka - the panzerfaust actually worked!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I will post the entire article if people hear want to read more funny Allied propaganda...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"At last we are eye to eye with death. We must renounce all hopes of freaks and fortunes. Sacrifice to the last drop of blood is demanded of us. Surrender would paralyse and sap our race for generations." - Wehrmacht radio broadcast to German troops in Hungary, October 1944

Tully__
01-17-2007, 01:54 AM
I will post the entire article...

Don't do it or link to it here. Post a link to the Popular Mechanics archives but don't reproduce the stuff here unless you're prepared to show you have permission to reproduce/redistribute. Ubisoft are a publisher and rather frown upon breeches of copyright/intellectual property rights.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

Rammjaeger
01-17-2007, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by Tully__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I will post the entire article...

Don't do it or link to it here. Post a link to the Popular Mechanics archives </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/03/29/secret-weapons/


but don't reproduce the stuff here unless you're prepared to show you have permission to reproduce/redistribute. Ubisoft are a publisher and rather frown upon breeches of copyright/intellectual property rights.

Interesting. Doesn't copyright expire after a certain number of years? After all, this article is more than 60 years old.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"At last we are eye to eye with death. We must renounce all hopes of freaks and fortunes. Sacrifice to the last drop of blood is demanded of us. Surrender would paralyse and sap our race for generations." - Wehrmacht radio broadcast to German troops in Hungary, October 1944

LEXX_Luthor
01-17-2007, 10:40 AM
Its like 70+ years now. Every 20 years, it gets voted up another 20 years by Congress/Parliment -- the Mickey Mouse effect -- an upward creeping of time limits which violates the original intent of limited copyright lifetime, essentially making copyright infinite as long as an unlimited number of finite increases are voted by Congress and Parliment over time, under the lobbying of large corporate copyright holders. The original intent of copyright was to protect the individual author for a portion of his/her own lifetime.

I learned this from reading military aviation author Joe Baugher who has a very long read on copyright, patents, trademark, DRM, at his website...

Joe Baugher, Issues in Copyright ~> http://home.att.net/~jbaugher5/copyright.htm (http://home.att.net/%7Ejbaugher5/copyright.htm)

Read it and weep.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Tully__
01-17-2007, 10:49 AM
Doesn't copyright expire after a certain number of years?
Copyright law varies. Patents have a fairly limited life.

Where I come from copyright seems to last as long as there's a continually active estate or benificiary to an estate (chain of custody, so to speak) holding the copyright paperwork. I'm not a copyright lawyer though so I could be wrong.

Regardless, it's an international forum and the bosses take dim view of people posting slabs of material that they don't own and can't show permission for it's use.

If you do have permission I'd suggest contacting Ubisoft/forum admin well in advance of posting, things will go much smoother that way.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

LEXX_Luthor
01-17-2007, 10:54 AM
Here...but Joe's whole article is worth reading if you have the time.



Issues in Copyright Law and Practice
by Joseph F. Baugher

:
:
Several large media corporations also lobbed for the law. Under the copyright expiration terms set by the 1976 Copyright Act, in the late 1990s several large publishers and movie studios were faced with the imminent expiration of some of their copyrights on works that originated back in the 1920s and 1930s. Some of these copyrighted works still remained quite profitable for their owners. Prominent among these was the Disney Corporation, which was faced with the imminent expiration on some of its early copyrights on Mickey Mouse. If this were allowed to happen, Mickey Mouse would gradually move into the public domain and anyone would be free to sell Mickey Mouse T-shirts, mugs, cartoons, books, and other paraphernalia without having to pay the Disney organization a single dime, and the Disney organization would lose access to a revenue stream worth millions of dollars.


The law?s chief sponsor was Sonny Bono, who was formerly a member of a husband-and-wife singing duet known as Sonny and Cher. The two had a popular TV show back in the 1960s, and were the singers on several Top-40 hit records. After the two split up, Cher went on to become an internationally famous movie star, and Sonny went on to become mayor of Pasadena and in 1995 he became a Republican congressman from California. As a songwriter and filmmaker, he had favored increasing the copyright term even before his entry into politics. Sonny Bono was killed in a skiing accident 9 months before the law was passed, and the law was named in his honor. Mary Bono, Sonny Bono?s widow and successor in his House seat, was an enthusiastic supporter of the act, and noted that Sonny had actually wanted copyright terms to last forever, but was informed by his staff that this would be unconstitutional.

The Disney organization lobbied extensively for the copyright extension law, inspiring the derisive nickname The Mickey Mouse Protection Act. The estate of the late composer George Gershwin also supported the act. Another powerful supporter was Jack Valenti of the Motion Picture Association of America, the lobbying arm of the motion picture industry. At the time, the entire country was distracted by the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky matter, and there was little public debate or discussion of the legislation, and the bill was passed by both houses of Congress by a voice vote.
:
:

~ http://home.att.net/%7Ejbaugher5/copyright.htm

Thus, copyright now extends beyond protecting the original author during a portion of his/her lifetime. Corporations and Estates could have lifetimes of hundreds of years. Although, some say that all US citizens are now defined as corporations under current legalese. mm http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Joe's homepage ~> http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/ (http://home.att.net/%7Ejbaugher/) a great resource on Ussian military aircraft.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

p-11.cAce
01-17-2007, 02:23 PM
Its funny that despite "allied scientists are superior to their German counterparts" it took the Germans to get us to the moon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Gibbage1
01-17-2007, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
Its funny that despite "allied scientists are superior to their German counterparts" it took the Germans to get us to the moon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Im sure Dr Goddard would disagree with that.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/gibbage/xb35.jpg

Vo101_Isegrim AkA Kurfurst__ "though the Northrop fantasy (B-35)
bomber you want to add to Il-2 never even got to the
prototype stage, while the Gotha did."

Doolittle81
01-17-2007, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
Its funny that despite "allied scientists are superior to their German counterparts" it took the Germans to get us to the moon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Im sure Dr Goddard would disagree with that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Goddard got us to the moon?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_Red">Wingmen Productions</span><span class="ev_code_grey">....................</span>View the best FB-PF Movies here (http://www.flightsimmachinima.com/)
http://members.cox.net/doolittle80/SigBlockToughVictor.gif
<span class="ev_code_grey">...........</span><span class="ev_code_Red">"To the Victor"</span><span class="ev_code_grey">..</span>Artwork by James Dietz (http://www.jamesdietz.com/)<span class="ev_code_grey">..</span><span class="ev_code_Red">"Tough Day"</span>

p-11.cAce
01-17-2007, 07:26 PM
While it is true that Dr. Goddard was a significant figure in early rocketry his contribution to practical spaceflight are limited in much the same way as the Wright's contribution to practical aeronautics. Dr. Goddard had forseen the rockets potential, but he had no more to do with creating the us space program than the Wrights did in bringing about the 747. In fact the most direct lineage of a modern rocket device to Dr. Goddard is not the modern launch vehicle but RATO systems.

Tully__
01-17-2007, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by Doolittle81:
....
Goddard got us to the moon?
Goddard's work formed the basis of a lot of the later German work, so yes, he had a part in it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

LStarosta
01-17-2007, 07:52 PM
I disagree with Doolittle<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1872/fe4ae1e074f2ea8e1878fa1kn2.gif (http://irwinnotguaranteed.ytmnd.com/)

Nimits
01-17-2007, 08:57 PM
The article also states that the Germans don't have anything that compares to the bazooka.

Well, the article seems to be mainly talking about the North African campaigns of 1942-1943, in which case the statement would be true. The Panzerfaust 30 and Panzerschreck 43 did not enter production until mid to late 1943.
The American definately had the edge in man-portable anti-tank weapons at the time.

The main problem with the Bazooka (and with most American made anti-tank weapons of the time) was that they had been designed and evaluated against the Panzer III and Panzer IV, which in fact made up the backbone of the German Panzer corps into 1943, when the Pazner VIa and later Panzer V began appearing more frequently. The Bazooka, along with the M3A, M4A, and 57mm AT gun were very capable against a Panzer III, and at least adaquate against Panzer IVs.

Besides, it was a wartime article, so one should remember that the Allies were not likely to publicly advertise known weakness (for both morale and security reasons) and the Germans were not conducting many of interviews with American correspondents.

Ratsack
01-17-2007, 09:39 PM
Interesting read and thanks for sharing. Unfortunately there are some people around ? even in this forum ? who still believe some of the tripe in that propaganda article.

Rommel pushed Montgomery back to Alamein, did he? Monty was saved by the mighty 90 mm was he? I?ll bet any of the Brits who read that at the time probably spat their beer.

I?m glad they didn?t have the internet back then, or the Grand Alliance might not have survived the impact of its own propaganda.

cheers,
Ratsack<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

JG14_Josf: 'Gravity, among may other things, is not known...' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Ratsack
01-17-2007, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by Nimits:
...
The main problem with the Bazooka (and with most American made anti-tank weapons of the time) was that they had been designed and evaluated against the Panzer III and Panzer IV, which in fact made up the backbone of the German Panzer corps into 1943, when the Pazner VIa and later Panzer V began appearing more frequently. The Bazooka, along with the M3A, M4A, and 57mm AT gun were very capable against a Panzer III, and at least adaquate against Panzer IVs.

...

We have to remember, too, that the Panzer IV went through a lot of upgrades. Its armour basis started at 30 mm in 1936, and was almost immediately increased by adding 20 mm of applique armour to the bow, driver front and the sides of the superstructure. This arrangement continued up to and including the ausf E. The F series introduced 50 mm homogenous armour for the front, upper sides and turret, and formed the basis of all subsequent variants.

From the G series on, the 50 mm basis was increased by the addition of 30 mm of applique armour. This continued through to the end of production.

Most of the Pz IVs in North Africa were the early 'short' type (mostly Ds and Es), leavened after the fall of Tobruk with the first Pz IV F-2s with the long barrel (L43) 75 mm gun.

It would've been these types the bazooka was tested against. I don't know how well it would've performed against the 80 mm front of a Pz IV ausf G/H/J. The spaced skirts added to the turret and hull sides from the G series onward would've rendered the bazooka almost completely ineffective.

cheers,
Ratsack<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

JG14_Josf: 'Gravity, among may other things, is not known...' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Tab_Flettner
01-17-2007, 10:51 PM
So it would seem WWII was a lot more like Hogans Heros than a lot of us young people realize. Reading the article makes you wonder how, with the Germans being such incompetent bumblers, it could have taken six (yes, six) war years to defeat them. (Special thanks to Barry Broadfoot for that last part)

StellarRat
01-18-2007, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:
We have to remember, too, that the Panzer IV went through a lot of upgrades. Its armour basis started at 30 mm in 1936, and was almost immediately increased by adding 20 mm of applique armour to the bow, driver front and the sides of the superstructure. This arrangement continued up to and including the ausf E. The F series introduced 50 mm homogenous armour for the front, upper sides and turret, and formed the basis of all subsequent variants.

From the G series on, the 50 mm basis was increased by the addition of 30 mm of applique armour. This continued through to the end of production.

Most of the Pz IVs in North Africa were the early 'short' type (mostly Ds and Es), leavened after the fall of Tobruk with the first Pz IV F-2s with the long barrel (L43) 75 mm gun.

It would've been these types the bazooka was tested against. I don't know how well it would've performed against the 80 mm front of a Pz IV ausf G/H/J. The spaced skirts added to the turret and hull sides from the G series onward would've rendered the bazooka almost completely ineffective.

cheers,
Ratsack The PZ IIIj with the long 50mm was a very good tank for it's time and capable of fighting with anything the Brits could field in North Africa for quite a while. I don't believe they had many of them though.

StellarRat
01-18-2007, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by Tab_Flettner:
So it would seem WWII was a lot more like Hogans Heros than a lot of us young people realize. Reading the article makes you wonder how, with the Germans being such incompetent bumblers, it could have taken six (yes, six) war years to defeat them. (Special thanks to Barry Broadfoot for that last part) Attacking is far more resource intensive than defending specially when you are pushing the enemy back onto their home base (own country in this case.) The Axis took so much territory at the beginning of the war that they could fall back for a LONG time before being defeated. My opinion is that the Allies were dumber and less prepared at the beginning of the war then the Axis was at the end http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, so six years isn't surprising.

Tab_Flettner
01-18-2007, 05:16 AM
Good points Ratty. Of course my first reply was written tounge in cheek. One of the things to remember is that articles like this were written precisely because there was so much fear of German technology and that they must have something else big up their sleeves. I have similar articles at home here, and they are all in the same vein. German propaganda makes full use of this fear of course, also.

One of the brighter "research" type lights here can probably find reference to an Allied film regarding a particular German machine gun. The film was made, because just the sound of this weapon was causing severe morale problems. Sorry but the type escapes me.

The "Six War Years" thing was just a nod to the US vs. Commonwealth view of the actual length of the war.

Ratsack
01-18-2007, 06:20 AM
That was the MG42. It had a very high rate of fire that gave it a particular 'roar'.

cheers,
Ratsack<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

JG14_Josf: 'Gravity, among may other things, is not known...' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

fighter_966
01-19-2007, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
OMG they mentioned the PIAT! What a joke that thing was. More dangerous to the shooter than the target.

--Outlaw.

Only danger was when you loaded the thing.. it could brake your back... so that afterwards you needed walking stick.It was quite capable antitank weapon ..for example in Arnhem source:
Tank killers by Ian Hogg