1CGS LukeFF Posted August 12, 2022 1CGS Posted August 12, 2022 Lies, myths, controversies! Come on, really? It's not as if it's new knowledge that the Norden sight was not as amazingly accurate as it was publicly advertised. This guy put a hyperbolic click-bait title on his video so he'd more clicks and likes from people. Aka, it's video click-bait.
Jaws2002 Posted August 12, 2022 Author Posted August 12, 2022 So what's false about his statements? Why do you get so worked up, that someone dares to expose the monumental BS mountain built around that piece of hardware?
AndyJWest Posted August 12, 2022 Posted August 12, 2022 I don't think Luke was saying it was false. Just nothing new, so not justifying the title. 1 1
Jaws2002 Posted August 12, 2022 Author Posted August 12, 2022 (edited) A lot of that was news to me. I didn't know the competing sight was superior, I never knew marketing BS and dishonest tricks were so influential in the selection process. I also didn't know the Brits rejected the sight. These are very surprising news to me, specially knowing how expensive the project was. Edited August 12, 2022 by Jaws2002
1CGS LukeFF Posted August 12, 2022 1CGS Posted August 12, 2022 47 minutes ago, AndyJWest said: I don't think Luke was saying it was false. Just nothing new, so not justifying the title. Exactly. None of what is talked about in the video is exactly new and exciting information. Back when I was getting into WWII aviation in the early 2000s, all of this was known about the Norden (and I'm sure was known publicly long before that). It's just that in 2022 someone on YouTube someone decided they'd create a video about the topic with a sensational, hyperbolic headline, as if historians and fans of aviation have been hoodwinked the whole time. 1
AndyJWest Posted August 12, 2022 Posted August 12, 2022 Anyone surprised by 'marketing BS and dishonest tricks' being involved in military procurement should do a little more research. Been like that as long as procurement has been a thing. 2
1CGS LukeFF Posted August 12, 2022 1CGS Posted August 12, 2022 40 minutes ago, AndyJWest said: Anyone surprised by 'marketing BS and dishonest tricks' being involved in military procurement should do a little more research. Been like that as long as procurement has been a thing. A good WWII example of that is the RAF's experience with the P-39.
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