Another Airplane misidentified this time by a noted author

I suspect the 24/29 thing was a typo, that's just one character, it's not like they missed on the name too.  I saw a magazine article once that mentioned those "B-52s" that launched from the deck of the Hornet during the Doolittle raid.

Come to think of it, a few months back, World of Warships ran an article about the Essex-class USS Lexington that used a picture of the original Lexington, now that's a major error.

Bish

I have lost track of how manny books mis-identify German tanks, the most favorite of course being Pz IV labelle as Tigers.

If these individuals do not know the difference between a Pz and a Tiger they shouldn't be writing books.

murph

 

Sprue-ce Goose

waynec

................

I thought they were open cockpit B-17s.

 

I seem to recall an Air Classic magazine from 20 plus years ago mentioning open cockpit B-17s............

 

 

 

 

Not to hijack the thread, but Operation Aprodite had well used B-17's with the rear cockpit deck cut down and faired over and an open cockpit

Click this hyperlink.  It's a legit link.  It'll even show a few photos from the Google photo archive.  Some of the photos displayed are the same as those in Roger Freeman's The Mighty Eighth

https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=b-17+project+aphrodite

Mike

 

Aphrodite used both B-17's and B-24's. Kennedy was in a B-24 when he was killed.

I have lost track of how manny books mis-identify German tanks, the most favorite of course being Pz IV labelle as Tigers.

In fact :

    During discussion about a cover for a defunct book , I got in a verbal fight with the designer . He was of the opinion that what difference did it make if the cover ship was ours or theirs . I mean shoot , I wanted a Fletcher Not a " Z " class from Germany !  T.B.

Same thing happens to ships. I remember the dust jacket of Gordon Prang's At Dawn We Slept, which is about Pearl Harbor. The jacket featured a red rising sun superimposed on the black silhouette of a battleship. I couldn't identify the specific ship, but one thing was obvious: it was British.

I know from personal experience that the process of publication can produce  foul relations between author and book designer. By the time the publisher got through with my book on the Revolutionary War I was ready to kill the designer - right after I killed the copy editor.

Maybe they didn't  notice that auto - correct  was on, lol. Happens to me all the time. 

Hmmm;

     It is kind of funny in a way .How much vision does one need to spot the ugly nose of a fully armed B-24 ? The 29 is as smooth as my late daddy's cigars ( before he lit them of course ) . Then there's the cross section and wing placement . Oiy Vay ! !   Tanker - Builder P.S. Don't forget the engine nacelle shape either !

Don Stauffer

I don't consider 24 and 29 similar in shape at all- one almost a high-wing, one a mid-wing, one single tail, one double tail, 24 has almost flat sides, 29 has circular cross section.  But, I suspect no one was looking at pictures anyway.  More likely to me it could be a typo and just not caught.  That might be easy to miss for an English major proof reader.

In fact, it seems more and more publishers are cutting back on proof reading, depending on author to proof his own work, a big mistake.  This is really evident in the spelling and grammar in magazines.

 

Sprue-ce Goose

waynec

................

I thought they were open cockpit B-17s.

 

I seem to recall an Air Classic magazine from 20 plus years ago mentioning open cockpit B-17s............

Not to hijack the thread, but Operation Aprodite had well used B-17's with the rear cockpit deck cut down and faired over and an open cockpit

Click this hyperlink.  It's a legit link.  It'll even show a few photos from the Google photo archive.  Some of the photos displayed are the same as those in Roger Freeman's The Mighty Eighth

https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=b-17+project+aphrodite

Mike

Sprue-ce Goose

waynec

................

I thought they were open cockpit B-17s.

 

I seem to recall an Air Classic magazine from 20 plus years ago mentioning open cockpit B-17s.............

Not to hijacjk the thread but, Project Aphrodite

https://www.google.ca/search?q=b-17+project+aphrodite&biw=1472&bih=743&tbm=isch&imgil=Rx1GCPbc5NsSEM%253A%253BM25dL2L291366M%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Ffly.historicwings.com%25252F2012%25252F08%25252Foperation-aphrodite%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=Rx1GCPbc5NsSEM%253A%252CM25dL2L291366M%252C_&dpr=1.3&usg=__jgqfAABNoguSucnhuUfIrVRJFmE%3D&ved=0ahUKEwid0LuOhuvKAhWlsIMKHe5WCnEQyjcIKg&ei=iQy6Vt3nJaXhjgTuramIBw#imgrc=Rx1GCPbc5NsSEM%3A&usg=__jgqfAABNoguSucnhuUfIrVRJFmE%3D

waynec

................

I thought they were open cockpit B-17s.

 

I seem to recall an Air Classic magazine from 20 plus years ago mentioning open cockpit B-17s.............

And newspapers - especially local newspapers.

I don't consider 24 and 29 similar in shape at all- one almost a high-wing, one a mid-wing, one single tail, one double tail, 24 has almost flat sides, 29 has circular cross section.  But, I suspect no one was looking at pictures anyway.  More likely to me it could be a typo and just not caught.  That might be easy to miss for an English major proof reader.

In fact, it seems more and more publishers are cutting back on proof reading, depending on author to proof his own work, a big mistake.  This is really evident in the spelling and grammar in magazines.

It's Bill O'Reilly.

Well it seems these guys attend a couple of meetings with the writing staff, explain their direction, and leave.

it's closer than the M-38 crossing the Meuse in '44 and the M-578 ARV in the desert in '42. Both are in PATTON'S BEST.

I thought they were open cockpit B-17s.

B-24, B-29, very similar shape final number, only 5 off, close enough for government work, right?  ;-)

John