(Non) Flight of the Phoenix.

Laugh if you want to !!!

But that desert also held a B-17 the Lady Be Good . Can't help but wonder what other artifacts that desert still holds ????? It could turn out to be a treasure trove of stuff .

bob

"Lady Be Good" was actually a B-24D Liberator, but, yeah, who knows what else might be out there just awaiting discovery.

I remember that one...good comparison!

Still, it's pretty amazing that black-and-white photographs of a war nearly 70 years over don't hit the same chord as physical reminders popping up unexpectedly in our time.

I suppose this is why physical relics from the Holocaust still reverberate far more than stories or film of the atrocities.

It's as if a time portal opened up and gave us a piece of one American soldier's struggle...a snapshot we can reach out and touch.

Go here to see photo's in Yesterdays, May 10th UK Daily Mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142300/Crashed-plane-Second-World-War-pilot-Dennis-Copping-discovered-Sahara-desert.html

09:15 NOW they add photo's

Inaccuracies at MSNBC has lead me to all ways ask this questions when reading one of its reports;

"What if this is true?"

Same goes for the Old Gray Lady the NYT's.

It's as if a time portal opened up and gave us a piece of one American soldier's struggle...a snapshot we can reach out and touch.

Not an American - a Brit. Didn't you read the article?

Have they checked with the English Patient?

Tower this is Ghost Rider requesting flyby.

Negative Ghost Rider the pattern is full.

Think it's a leftover prop from Bob Hope/Bing Crosby movie,"On The Road to Morrocco."

Well it sure wasn't a jet fighter at any time in it's career.

Heres a link to a great video of two P-40'a. At the end you have a real clear view of the Flying Tiger American Volunteer Goup wing markings. I remember a John Wayne movie about the "Flying Tigers".

The link was dropped. This is for a video on you tube.

youtube.com/watch? feature=fvwp&NR=1&v= E1cKPUWHa8I

+++++++++

+++++++++

I feel terrible for the pilot. Dying of thirst is a horrible way to go. Your eyes start to feel as if you have sand in them. You suffer terrible headaches. This poor sole tried to get help, he tried to survive. It's gut wrenching to know someone fought to live and failed. He suffered the same fate as Lady Be Good, but at least those men had each other. This man was all alone.

The scale of WWII is so vast that we can expect to get stories like this to come up again.

I hope there is a family that will get to learn of his fate and I'm sure that there will be a concerted effort to find his remains and bring him home.

Notanidiotlikeolegunny,

I actually came back here to correct my mistake, and then saw your enlightening response.

Yes, I read the article. I made a mistake. Hopefully when *you* make one, people are more understanding, more forgiving, more respectful and a lot less snarky.

To all others: The brave pilot was indeed English. The plane was American. My mistake.

Most of the bodies of the crew of Lady B Good were found by oil field. When they discovered the bomber in the 60s the radio still worked and tire tracks from the Italian army were still visible in the sand. I wonder where this pilots base was at?

It must be like the moon out there. It must have been a horrible death.

The propeller in the picture is bent in a direction that indicates the aircraft was still making power when it landed. He may have been running out of fuel and just looked for the best place to put it down. Too bad he didn't make it out of that desert.

Engine hacked out of the plane for about $200,000.00.

Very nice,Bill in Mill Creek. That was my first thought. Anyone dying in a war is a tragedy,IMO- at least the grunts who are just pawns to all but their families. It isn't in me to make light of this story. Someone gave thier all fighting against Hitler in a war that I think we can all agree was justified and necesary. RIP. I hope they find his body and it brings some comfort to his family.

So the pilot couldn't have ejected far from that spot and been picked up?

I agree, jkatze, the first thing I thought of was 'The English Patient'. Maybe Michael Ondaantje (or however you spell his name) knows where the pilot wound up. Perhaps he ended up taking a lethal dose of morphine at a remote French farmhouse while under the care of a beatiful and compassionate nurse.

I retract my question. I see it says "with a makeshift camp" under the picture. I either missed that or it was added later.

The Vintage Wings of Canada website speculated that the plane had a mechanical problem, ran out of fuel or that the pilot simply got lost.

This is not a very specific answer to what might have happened to the plane. Doesn't this encompass just about every possibility of what brings down an aircraft of this type? Surely he didn't land just to enjoy the scenery.

TFNJ - no ejection seats back then, good old fashion stick and rudder and if you had to bail out you needed to slide canopy back and jump out under your own power...besides if he did have bailed out the plane would not have been in that condition..from the looks of thing and terry made a great observation about the prop..more than likly he was bingo on fuel and being the plane was found in such a remote area he just either ran out of gas or was so low he opted to feather the props and take his chance on a belly landing and walk it out..all in all if is a physical reminder to the risks all service members took and hopefully we never forget

wow, an incredible story. I wonder if we will ever know if he made it and was rescued, or if he walked away and died somewhere in the desert. How far from civilization was this, and was there a chance he could have walked to safety?

bob1/28

I am willing to bet there is a lot still out there. Also in the South Pacific and Burma, seems like every few years someone finds a Hellcat or Zero buried in the jungle out there.

@TFNJ

The article said the wreck is about 200 miles from the nearest town. Not sure if that town was there when he crashed, but in any case it sounds like he didn't have much of a chance at walking out of there.

You'd think our military would have records of that plane AND the pilot.

VH Navy - Not necessarily true. The entire crew of the Lady Be Good bailed out of their B-24D Liberator bomber. It later glided to an almost perfect landing even with the landing gear up. A lot depends on how the flaps were set, the weather, and the terrain involved. Looks like this P-40 may have done the same.

As the French Foreign Legion learned once upon a time, "The Desert Sands Cover and the Desert Winds sweep clean the Sands each Day."

American Girl

They do, that's why they know it was a Brit and that it was flown at one time by a Canadian Ace.

Amazing how the right wingers have to unjustafiably trash the media even when it's completely irrelevant. (not directed at American girl)

As for bailing out, it was a dangerous thing to do. You had to clear your own tail feathers and often pilots would break a leg or not make it at all. It was (and is in any small plane) often safer to try to land than to jump out. With a desert, it's much safer to land. Just don't lower your gear and if you keep the wings level you won't flip over or cartwheel.

It does look like the engine is missing. Wonder why?

Please help find my Great Uncle Lt. Mike Tisik. We need 25,000 signatures by June 1st to ask the government to reopen the search. Contact me if you can help spread the word in greater capacity:

Facebook Page:
www.facebook.com/operationmike

Petition Page:

American Girl-724855

You'd think our military would have records of that plane AND the pilot.

That was an American built airplane operated by the RAF. The pilot was not in the US military. The US supplied thousands of aircraft to our allies in WWII, the British and Soviets got most of them.

Please help fing my Grand Uncle Lt. Mike Tisik. We have until June 1st to collect 25,000 signatures to ask the government to reopen the search. Please contact me if you can spread the word in a higher capacity:

Facebook Page:
www.facebook.com/operationmike

Petition Page:

Thanks,

Paul Vilga

American Girl, this particular aircraft was manufactured by the Curtis Aircraft Company but was owned, maintained, and flown by the British Royal Air Force. They most likely received the aircraft under the U.S. Lend Lease Act whereby a lot of American military hardware was sent to countries fighting the European Axis countries such as Germany or Italy or the Japanese in the Pacific before we entered the war. As such, any info on the plane and pilot would have to come from the British.

That plane was called a Warhawk not a Kittyhawk. Maybe thats what the Brits called it, but the Flying Tigers and the rest of the world knew it as a Warhawk.

I have a 24 year old son. I think about him in a situation lie that and it is tough to swallow. I see him as a child. Many many young men and women lose their promising young lives to wars. My heart goes out to all the parents of children lost in wars past and future. That plane is just a hunk of metal made for a purpose. And a sad reminder of the reason it had to be made.

Ferrosynthesis - Intact warbird engines are worth almost as much as the airframes themselves nowadays. The Allison engine, the most likely power plant to this P-40 was probably scavenged and sold on the world warbird market. It would have been easier to salvage and transport than the entire airframe. There would have been less questiones asked as well.

I remember when they found the" Lady be good". Coffee aboard her was still drinkable. Remember they made a movie slightly based on the story" Sole Survivor"(1970 version)

Comparison to King Tut discovery seems waaaay overblown, but it is a great find.

I am willing to bet there is a lot still out there. Also in the South Pacific and Burma, seems like every few years someone finds a Hellcat or Zero buried in the jungle out there.

That's for sure.

Europe is still littered with UXO - UneXploded Ordnance, from both world wars. American Civil War battlefields still contain many artifacts. Young people today generally have not the slightest clue just how big a deal WWII was, how vast the resources it consumed were and the nearly infinite extent to which it involved practically everyone in the civilized world.

As for bailing out, it was a dangerous thing to do.

It still is, though nowadays the actual process isn't the ordeal it once was. The odds of a pilot or crew member reaching the ground without anything more but the most superficial injuries are really quite good today. Unfortunately, what happens afterwards hasn't generally changed, and the survival training that pilots and other aircrew members opens their eyes to what a struggle it can be very quickly.

With a desert, it's much safer to land.

The desert is probably the best place there is for the actual landing, just not surviving. At night, you can't easily tell if you're over the desert or the ocean, and that is precisely what happened to the crew of the Lady Be Good. They had already overflown their base when they radioed for a directional fix, unaware that they were not still over the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, the directional fix works two ways, 180 degrees apart. What they couldn't be told was if they were coming in or flying away. That would have required radar, which they didn't have there. They kept flying over what they thought was the ocean, long after nightfall, until their fuel was exhausted. The wreck of the plane lay several hundred miles south of base until the Libyan government finally collected it in the early 1990's. When you have a crew of young men who are just barely past being teenage boys and put them in control of what was, at the time, perhaps one of the most sophisticated pieces of equipment in the world, occasionally things like this happened.

It does look like the engine is missing. Wonder why?

Engine mounts are not 'solid'. To isolate the airframe from engine vibration, a significant quantity of rubber isolation material is used, just like the engine mounts that support the engine in an automobile. Unfortunately, those engine mounts are NOT overly strong, given what their intended purpose is. Taxiing over rough ground will usually destroy engine mounts, and they would need to be replaced before the plane could be flown again. You can imagine how they'd respond to a forced landing with the undercarriage retracted! Props certainly don't take that too well, do they?

This is not a very specific answer to what might have happened to the plane. Doesn't this encompass just about every possibility of what brings down an aircraft of this type?

It's entirely possible that a mechanical failure could have been brought about by the abrasive characteristics of the Sahara sand, which is very fine and when it blows around, it gets into absolutely EVERYTHING. The Sahara is probably one of the worst possible environments for any type of vehicle to be in, but especially something as intricate and sensitive as an aircraft. In a way, it's something like the 'rusticles' on the Titanic. One the one hand, they're eating the iron of the ship, but on the other, they're also preserving parts of it through encapsulation. In a few short years, most of the ship will hardly be recognizable as such, yet parts of it will be there long after all of us, and our distant descendants, are gone. The desert does not allow aircraft aluminum to corrode. However, sun and sand plug up or wear out anything mechanical and fade or strip the finishes on that aluminum something fierce!

I'm sure that there will be a concerted effort to find his remains and bring him home.

It'd be nice, but I believe it's quite unlikely at this late date. It would be a very ambitious, expensive undertaking that is bound to be fruitless...needle in the old haystack would be a more certain bet... there are hundreds, if not thousands, of square miles that would need to be canvassed, and any remaining bones or bone fragments would most likely be scattered abroad or very well buried by now.

This does remind me very much of some lectures I received during the course of my basic military training about the things that war does to the human body. If I recall correctly, one of the most pointed lectures came from a technician who was involved with coordinating the collection of our dental records, DNA, and other such things with which human remains could be identified, if need be. It was made very clear to most of us that the things that at least some of us had signed on for could lead to situations like this, where anything left that could be recovered may only be a trace.

The plane was found in the Saharan desert in Egypt. Which side was Egypt on in WWII?

I do believe the Germans invaded North Africa, and the British defended it along with the North African counties. Some of the are was still under British rule.

The Engine isn't missing... They weren't powered by a radial. It was a liquid-cooled, supercharged Allison V-1710 V-12 engine. You can still see it sitting right under the front cowl along with the six exhaust risers down the right side.

The British military occupied Egypt, or at least parts of it, from 1882 to the mid-1950's, just before the Suez Canal crisis in 1956, I believe.

hopefully the can get it to a museum ... another piece of history

For anyone interested in seeing the "Lady Be Good", she currently resides on display in the United States Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio, replete in "as found" state with all of the surrounding artifacts and lots of sand.

the TiGor,

"The British military occupied Egypt, or at least parts of it, from 1882 to the mid-1950's, just before the Suez Canal crisis in 1956, I believe."

Thanks, the TiGor! I figured someone would know. So that plane could possibly have been based in Egypt to begin with. He may have crashed not too long after take-off.

AKguy, I looked at the photo a lot more closely and you are correct. Also, if one looks very carefully off to the center right of the engine housing, it looks like the light spot may be the sun glinting off the sheared off propeller shaft. My thanks for the correction.

The Brits would have called the plane a P-40 Tomahawk.

Where is the pilot? He probably left by now.

navdoc - you bring up a good point out flaps which is why I had to look at pic of inside the cockpit to see if i could find the indicator and what was the last position was (sorry still and airframer..lol)....there is a another bit of mystery though..in the first pic in the article the canopy was closed...did he close it post crash or like you might suggest he bailed out and plane under own glide slope belly landed causing canopy to slide to the flight position...although we do have to look at the flight profile and over all wingspan if the B-24D to the P-40...I still think he put it down and took his chance on foot..still an amazing mystery none the less

Plantagenet, the Brit version would have been the Kittyhawk as stated in the article. The Tomahawk was an earlier version flown by the American Volunteer force in China AKA the Flying Tigers as well as the USAAF in the early days of U.S. involvement in the war. The Warhawk version came later. There may have been more name versions that those three for all I know. There were many variations.

Despite technology, despite intelligence networks, satellites that can take pictures of your backyard....this lost plane went undiscovered for 70 years in the North African desert......So may I please ask why everyone is so quick to dismiss the WOMD that precipitated our conflicts in Iraq and our concern regarding Sadam Hussein.....70 years....Pharoh's tombs, literally thousands of years hidden away.....Perhaps the WOMD were not the immediate and direct threat that compromised intelligence networks believed, but I tend to think it if foolish for us to just pretend that it didn't exist, still doesn't exist, or never will exist....until one day, the darn things explode in our backyard because some radical sect, hiding in the desert, worked out the glitches. Doesn't it also give a bit of understanding of how it was possible to move key terrorists around without being caught immediately.

Perhaps this plane had been covered then uncovered with sand many imes with the shifting winds. Someone just happened to be in the vicinity this time.

Sue,

"Despite technology, despite intelligence networks, satellites that can take pictures of your backyard....this lost plane went undiscovered for 70 years in the North African desert"

Intelligence satellites can not only take pictures of your backyard; they can take pictures of the fleas on the dog in your backyard. But the thing is that they can't cover every inch of the earth at once. They have to be tasked to cover specific targets, and with all the mess going on in the world these days, I doubt they would have been busy scouring the Sahara desert in Egypt. Looking for what?

Are there people living in that part of the desert or, more likely, traveling through it? Might the flight sergeant not have met up with nomadic inhabitants?

VH Navy, the canopy could very well have slid shut on impact/landing after the pilot "stepped out" as they say. I have heard of it happening with other aircraft in WWII. It was a common practice for prop driven fighters to have the canopy slid back and open upon emergency landings to facilitate a quick exit in case of fire. I have read reports of some pilots almost being decapitated by their cockpits sliding shut while their seat harnesses gave way upon impact. The North American P-51D and the German Focke Wulf FW-190 both had this particular bad habit with their rearward sliding bubble canopies. Some were even killed by skull fractures. This pilot could very well have stepped out and left the canopy open. Looks like we will probably know either way.

It is also interesting to note that the camoflage paint scheme on the P-40 seems remarkably intact as well. You would think there would be more weathering from the sand and wind after close to 70 years. Looks like the fabric covered control surfaces have dry rotted out though.

The P-40 was called the Tomahawk, not Kittyhawk. I guess MSN has no one to check historical facts.

Ernest,

"The P-40 was called the Tomahawk, not Kittyhawk. I guess MSN has no one to check historical facts."

The editors must have had the Wright brothers on their mind.

The official name for all Curtiss P-40 variants in American service was Warhawk. P-40 models B and C used by the RAF were designated as Tomahawks by the British. P-40 models D through N were were designated Kittyhawks by the RAF. I believe the Russians followed the same practice as the British, as most of the P-40's they received were from British stocks via lend lease.

Ed-NavDoc

I was about to post the same reply, but yours is much more specific, thanks, I knew about the P-40 variants from being a fan of the Flying Tigers who flew these Curtis P-40's. These planes were actually a bit behind the times for fighter aircraft, but expert tactical flight plans by the leader of the Flying Tigers made these planes the scourge of the Japanese air forces.

Having been originally a re-engined P-36, yes the P-40 was an earlier design than most WWII planes, but it served well where needed and was quite rugged. It's contemporary in England would have probably been the Hurricane, essentially a transitional design that was not the best performer but a good rugge airplane. As long as you didn't try to dogfight with the Japanese you could be successful and that's how the P-40s were used, as well as the P-38s. The best tactic was slash and get the hell outa there.

Ditto.  Typical msnbc misinformation.

@Skiddy

You beat me to the punch.

P-40s were used at the beginning of the war circa 1940-42. By the time any of the sides were developing jets these had been phased out as a frontline fighter.

MSNBC IS A JOKE...Who the hell screens and edits the writers?

The reporter is probably very young and had no idea that prop planes even existed. No joke, I once met a young person about 18 years-old who wanted to know why there were no Civil War videos or newscasts to research for his project at school. Wtf?

Thats not true, the British had a jet fighter towards the late war. The best jet fighters were German.

Yea I clicked this link because I thought it was odd that a WWII Fighter Jet would be found in the sahara. That didn't make any sense because by the time the jet planes were out in WWII, fighting was essentially over in Africa.

Some idiot journalist obviously doesn't know the difference between prop planes and jet planes, they are like comparing apples to pears. They should fire that journalist and hire me, I could make a much better title that isn't incredibly misleading as whoever titled this article has done.

To MSNBC here is a link of what a curtis p40 is "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ejCa_HNmR8". The Germans were the only one to have a jet fighter in WWII. Whoever wrote this article needs to go back to school.

I clicked on this link to see a US fighter jet that I have never heard of before. No pictures as it is a made up imaginary figment of a texting generation. Dumbed down they are.

They should invite the MSNBC staff to an episode of "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader?" I would put my money on the young ones........

@Ted Patrick - Brits had the Gloster Meteor, they used it to chase down V-1 flying bombs. Two US P-80s were deployed to Italy during the war, too, but those never saw combat.

A 4th grader could write better stories then some of these reporters. I think story writing is a lost art. These reporters seem to forget that facts and accuracy are the most important part of reporting.

British Meteor was also a jet that saw service in WW 2. First combat action in July of 1944, it was used to counter the unmanned V1 - "Buzzbombs".

Way to foul up a story, MSNBC, LOL

p-40's were flying in Indochina since the 30's and were NEVER jets.

I clicked on that link expecting to see a German Me-262 jet fighter with desert markings because I had never heard of the Germans using jets in North Africa. The Africa Corp didn't have Me-262s because they came out after they were defeated in North Africa.

The U.S. had jets during WWII. The P-59 Aerocomet and the P-80 Shooting Star. The Aerocomet never saw action as it was under-powered (typical U.S. endeavour) and the P-80 went into service too late to be deployed overseas before the fighting stopped.

I have long ago grown tired of the inaccuracies. It is truly pathetic.

they got me to, I was wondering if they found a me262 out there highly unlikely since the africa campaign was over before they were flying, msn screws up again just like their fawning over obama, they have become the defacto propaganda arm for him

Now calm down everyone. ROY WILSON in his post #2.1 is upset because, you see, ROY WILSON never made a mistake, or a any kind of error, in any of his posts. He is just perfect! If you don't believe me just ask ROY WILSON! Talk about blinded by ideology...

MSNBC...another truly screwed up story...why do we continue to read the junk you put out there? I quit getting the daily paper because it was yesterdays news...you can't even get that news right...wonder what you'll come up with next...you don't have my trust

They fixed the tag line.

Here's a good series of photos of the plane.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/worldnews/9258110/World-War-II-RAF-Kittyhawk-fighter-plane-found-in-the-Sahara-Desert-in-Egypt.html#?frame=2215708

Ihave to wonder, at all of you complaining...why do you come back? You state that NBC, MSNBC, et all "suck", but yet you keep coming back and take the time to write your opinions. Must not suck that bad, or you are just masochists who like annoying yourselves.

Plus, for all of you who seem to think you could do better...you don't seem to understand a simple industry fact: headline writers are not the ones writing the stories, and the story writers are not the ones writing the headlines.

To those of you whose main gripe is that the article is poorly written...please explin your argument on that one in detail. We can all sit there and state that we could do it better, or harp on about how this or that would have been better written this way. But until you prove it, it is just you blowing your own horns.

The fact is, no "mis-information" was given in the article. And if you get that hung up on a headline (which have been exaggerated throughout journalistic history, you need to calm it down a bit and get some perspective.

Eric is right, if you buffoons hate MSNBC so much then why do you constantly come back over and over to read it and then comment on it?

I read through the article three times and (Maybe I am missing something) but the word "jet' does not appear in it.

Aaaand Franklytrue comes to the table AFTER all the George Orwellian Newspeak cleans up its act...

When the article first posted it was riddled with errors and it did not have a pic on the page when I looked at it around 0700hrs...

And yes, it was posted on the front page of msnbc.com as "WWII Jet"
Big difference in the world of aviation...

southernpride-3042675-...as it was under-powered (typical U.S. endeavour)

I hear China has a booming military program. Maybe you could find employment there. Or just go.

o.o Oh you mean that breaking news was revised as more information came in?

Shocking, that never happens.

MSNBC IS A JOKE...Who the hell screens and edits the writers?

I believe their names are Johnny Walker, Jack Daniels and Jim Beam.

I wonder what people like Roy Wilson have to say about how inaccurate Fox is when reporting the news. It also makes me wonder why they continually "grind the axe" about the President when the article has no bearing on the present political situation in the United States.

msnbc fixed the 'jet fighter' thing, wish they could fix their left wing politics. Or better yet fix the economic situation their left wing President got the country in................!

@ marklepew

ROY WILSON-336103

Ditto. Typical msnbc misinformation.

And they claim to be journalists - pretty sad.

Did you read Roy's comment? So is your post just a dig at Roy?

Or better yet fix the economic situation their left wing President got the country in................!

Bwaaa-haa-haa-ha-ha-ha-haah! That's a good one Bill!! Way to derail into politics on a thread that has nothing whatsoever to do with that.

@jimreaper, most U.S. aircraft developed in the 30's & 40's were underpowered during development stages. Usually because the engine intended to be used was not available. The P-51A was a middle of the pack performer with the Allison engine it was 1st equiped with. It wasn't until the mating of the Rolls Royce Merlin engine (British built) that the Mustang aquired it's blinding performance. The same was true of the P-59. The P-80 was equiped with the British built Rolls Royce Derwent later built by Allison as the J33. So, you, sir, can bite my shiney metal ass.

@gtouch

Good one. I always enjoy your comments. You are probably right since they probably get entry-level, suicidal, life-haters to throw articles together. However, I think Johnny, Jack, and Jim would have probably helped him to write a better article

I need your support to find my Grand Uncle Lt. Mike Tisik. We need 25,000 signatures by June 1st:
Reopen the search for a C-54 military aircraft that went missing over Yukon Territory with 44 people on board, 26 Jan 50

Petition:

Facebook: OperationMike

The P-59 ws never meant to be a front line fighter. They made a few (about 50 total I think) and they were used almost entirely to just get used to the idea of a jet. The Americans had not yet developed a jet, the British had Whittle and the Germans had Ohain, so they were a bit ahead. The P-80 was deployed to Italy at the end of the war, but didn't see any action.

Being underpowered was not always an American phenomenon. The V-1710 had good power, but true it wasn't a Merlin. It was not that good at altitude until they improved the blower. It was used to great effect in the P-38. America did have the best radial engines, the R-2800 being the star.

Anyway, the P-51 was the best piston engined fighter of WW II. Even with the Allison, it was a good low level performer and was used effectively for ground attack as the A-36. The Merlin's 2 stage mechanical supercharger was better than the Allison's turbocharger when the P-51 was first made. Remember the Mustang (actually called the Apache at that time) was built in 1941 and in less than a year after ordered.

southernpride-3042675-So, you, sir, can bite my shiney metal ass.

C3PO? Is that you?

Not sure if I'm more impressed with your aircraft knowledge or your witty comeback. Good job.

Actually, the "bite my shiny metal ass" comes from Bender on Futurama. My comment wasn't intended as a slam against American ingenuity, it was mearly a statement of fact. 1930's & 40's engine tech didn't necessarily keep up with airframe design. We had a lot of good airframes that would have made great aircraft if they had the right powerplant. The navy preferred radial engines, which the U.S. excelled at, whereas the Army Air Force preferred inline engines in their fighters, which we still needed help with. The P-47 Thunderbolt being the exception to the inline rule.

skiddy

You mean "1st operational jet fighter". Both the British and Americans had jets during WWII. Gloster meteor (British Jet) 1st flew in 1943. The XP-59A was the 1st of two jets the Americans had during WWII.

Markle - Since you want to dig on Fox News. Please give an one example of what was incorrect, if you can. I suspect you are just bloviating because you can handle the Real Fair and Balance News.

southernpride-3042675 -Actually, the "bite my shiny metal ass" comes from Bender on Futurama. My comment wasn't intended as a slam against American ingenuity, it was mearly a statement of fact.

Sorry, not all that familiar with Futerama, I'm sure my son is. Points well taken. You are absolutely correct. Thanks.

Msnbc gets there stories from other sites. Simple copy and pasting that's all. And germany wasn't the only one with fighter jets planes whatever you want to call them. Their flying death machines nothing more.

Skiddy, the Germans were not the only country to feild operational jet fighters in WWII. The British Gloster Meteor twin jet fighter became operational in the last year of the war but only saw service over the British Isles. It was primarily used to pursue and shoot down German V-1 pulse jet powered flying bombs.

Ferrosynthesis, the best piston engined fighter debate will continue for many years to come. My personal view is that the Focke Wulf TA-152H was easily at least the equal of the P-51D or the Hawker Tempest in certain performance areas. As was typical of Germany in WWII, everything they made was over engineered and too few in numbers to have any significant impact in the second half of the war.

The name Apache was indded given to the early Allison engined P-51's and were designated as the A-26 with dive breaks added. It turned out to be a very stable and excellent dive bombing platform and was used primarily in Italy and the CBI theatre in the Far East.

Correction to the above typo. I meant A-36 Apache, not A-26. Sorry, my bad!

Ed

I see another airplane freak here, fun eh? Yeah, we can argue the "best" fighter fight for years and will be done. The Ta-152 was fast etc, but it ws primarily a high altitude fighter with poor low level performance. The P-51 excelled everywhere. The laminar flow wing (although with dirt the flow wasn't all that laminar) and the radiator design were strokes of genius. I think that survival in a P-51 was probably easier than in any first line fighter, although I don't have the numbers in front of me.

But we can continue with the best fighter discussion anytime.

"Keep-em Flyin'"

No Scratchgolfr...the story itself never claimed it was a jet. The writers of these stories do not write the headlines that appear on the homepages. So you are being a hypocrit. You should check out the facts. And you state that this is "new media"...that has been going on all along.

#1 learn to spell hypocrite.

#2 learn what it means.

eric6owatts-

Have you figured it out yet? On initial, msnbc posted a link that stated a World War II jet fighter. It wasn't until AFTER we ratted them out for misinforming the consumers of their 'news' did they change what they originally posted, to include finally posting pictures. You coming in late and after the fact and not seeing the original integrity of the 'news' article makes you look like a fool- and it was msnbc that fooled you. You are playing right into their ploy. There is a reason why everyone harped on the fact that we are saying the P-40 is not a jet aircraft...msnbc didn't do their homework before posting what they posted- regardless of WHO at msnbc posted it- they still posted it loaded with errors and the editors didn't bother to scruitinize it...

Granted, MSNBC is a poor news source and I rarely follow them, but really vilmos? MaSturbatioNalism? Sadly, you loose all credibility with this pathetic attempt at wit. You come across as nothing more than another sad amadan, worthy only of disdain and ridicule.

" you loose all credibility"

Really? Then you"loose" all credibilty with your comment.

ANY CONSERVATIVE who posts here is a RINO by the GOP/NRC definition .

Karl Rove says that people who call themselves CONSERVATIVES & who also frequent MSM or LIBERAL news sites are RINO's .

YOU KNOW you cannot change a single mind by posting your trivial whining...

but yet YOU LIVE HERE 24/7...

what is it about not being welcomed & always being combative that addicts you people so ?

Why the core need to be adversarial & offensive ALL THE TIME

learn the only differnce between the two is name and color.

This aircraft would be a good project for the folks from THIGAR. They are a international group that specializes in the location, identification, retrieval, and possible restoration of crashed warbirds. These are also the folks that are currently working with the U.S. Navy to try to find the location of Amelia Earhart's crash site in the South Pacific. They have contributed to the retrieval of several crashed and/or derelict warbirds worldwide. Most have gone to museums and some have even been restored to flying status.

I love old warbirds and yes, I hoped to see a photo of it too since I am a visual person by nature.

Al, can you not understand a story without a picture?

Dunno I see a photo of it...

Maybe youo cannot because you are so blinded by your hatred of anything that you don't think follows that party line you ascribe to.

And if that is the case, why do you read MSNBC to begin with?

eric6owatts and franklytrue must be on the payroll as trolls to defend the work of msnbc.com's editorial staff and it's writers...The only msnbc writers that have any credibility with me is Mr. Alan Boyle and Mr. Jay Barbree.

o.o NO I just find obsessive people who would rather talk about a simple error instead of the actual subject matter to be petty, silly and pointless.

By the way it would be

The only msnbc writers that have any credibility with me ARE Mr. Alan Boyle and Mr. Jay Barbree.

OH MY GOD! You made an error!

How will we survive this earth shattering mistake?

Well franklytrue, what you seem to be obvlivious to is that when MSN first posted this story, the link said that a "WWII jet" had been found in the Sahara, and the story did not include any picture. And this is not exactly breaking news that called for a rush to publish. British newspapers reported on this story yesterday, and included multiple photos. So when you come on here and criticize someone for not seeing a photo (which wasn't there at the time Al and IAMPGA viewed the story), you just look stupid -- like you're not aware of time, and how stories posted here sometimes change over time. Ideally, good journalists get the story right (and complete as possible) the first time. The Daily Mail has a much better account of the whole discovery.

You got me, franklytrue-

But then again I am not a journalist; I am a consumer. I expect more out of journalists because that is what they do. I am not an editor; I am a consumer. I expect more out of editors because that is what they do.

But please continue to scrutinize the consumers and not the journalists and editors; certainly we are the ones that should be held accountable for the drivel that is posted as journalism on this website.

But you are correct: The only msnbc writers that have any credibility with me ARE Mr. Alan Boyle and Mr. Jay Barbree.

Maybe youo cannot because you are so blinded by your hatred of anything that you don't think follows that party line you ascribe to.

Wow, franklytrue, do you actually believe the drivel you post, or are you just here to criticize those who don't drink your koolaid?

O.o - Boy, did you nail today's "journalism" to a T. Of course, the problem is that writers and editors no longer do what they (used to) do. My high school and college journalism teachers would have worn out hundreds of blue pencils trying to fix the mistakes I find here daily from so-called professionals.

AJ, there were various versions, depending on who flew them. Kittyhawk, Warhawk, Tomahawk, etc.... All were versions of the Curtiss P-40.

Too funny, bad enough no fighter jet, the writer actually thought the Wright Brothers were doing bombing runs over the pyramids :) Scary, I don't expect much SS funding when I retire.

the variants were upgrades to the planes armaments, fortified cockpit, better engine, etc., they changed the name as it went along, but essentially it was the same design

Too young or not...they need to do a thing called research before writing a supposed informed article open to the eyes of the entire world! Youth is absolutely no excuse for having zero understanding of history! If it were we would have no historical accuracies at all...since most of the ancient texts were written when people rarely lived passed 40.LOL. I'm sorry but this is just sad! And where the hell are the proof readers these days? You know...those people in the journalistic business who's sole job is to make sure these articles don't hit the press with rampant misinformation and inaccuracy? I don't think they exist anymore...this race to be first with every tid bit of news (worthy or not) has completely ruined journalism!

Who has time to get it right? Screw it just print it! seems to be the motto now. It's a damn shame and its more than a little dangerous. Most people these day's rely solely on internet news to inform themselves and this is what they get? These internet writers(because of the sheer volume of readership) have a far greater responsibilty to the world to get their story straight than print writers ever did...yet they treat it like childs play!

Hunt and Bob...please point out what is historically inaccurate within the story? If you are referring to the headline a) headlines are written by staff other than the article writers and b) it has been fixed.

And sorry, while I agree that media jumps on things quickly, it is the public's fault for that. If one source gets a story and that same story is not reported by another source, the lagging source gets pummeled by the public. It is OUR supposed need for immidiate information that has fueled this.

But that being said...it is NOT new! Don't blame the youth of today for that. Newspapers would run stories and print headlines....in advance of having any hard facts. The history of journalism is ripe with that problem. For people who are crying that the young journalists of today are not adequately aware of history, you seem to forget THAT history!

@ Hunt:

Where is your proofreader? "these day's rely" indicates possession. Did you mean these days rely?

I was wondering how long it would take for a ultra dim dull normal ideologue to make the jet assisted leap to tie this into President Obama. Thanks for ending the wait. I wold have loooked at the article whether it said jet or not.

Yeah...MSN purposefully used the term JET since they knew that the only people who would click on the article are those who were expecting to read about a JET. I can honestly say I don't have a clue about the history of those aircraft, but I clicked on the article because of the general subject matter. I honestly believe if the HEADLINE WRITERS (not the stories journalist) had substituted the word PLANE for JET, the same people would have clicked the article.

Actually there are many of us who would just read it and could care less if it said Jet on some link. Only obsessive people who live to see "The MIlitary Channel" would give a rats, huh...mouse....uh...vermins arse.

Then I would argue that the journalists that wrote this story should have taken the time to look at the headline/mainpage link on the front page so as to NOT mislead their worthy readers. Their worthy readers fall along a bell curve of those that would look for the interest in a World War II jet fighter lost in a desert and on the other end would be eric6owatts and franklytrue who have no clue about what they are reading and would rather defend 6th grade-level reporters.

Had these superior journalists in their own mind had mitigated this, 3/4 of these responses would not even get posted because these 'journalists' that wrote this story know thier audience and would NEVER allow such gross buffoonery to be posted in their name.

meh.

:-/

Hey you libbies - widgit-man is only illustrating msnbc's (and the old liberal media's) penchant for ignoring all of Obama's gaffs and expensive errors all to the detriment of the country! Why don't they make him accountable for the mess and instead focus on silly issues like Romney's high school bullying story?

Why don't they focus on the abysmal record of the administration for the last 4 years? eh?

Memphis - Just for your info - THe Liberal Media is a myth which owes its persistence to two factors:

1.) The paranoia which afflicts many on the RIght

2.) AMong the more mentally agile RIght WIngers it's a form of gamesmanship - similar to how Phil Jackson used to work the referees before a playofff series. Aftrer alll, the reasoning goes - it doesn't hurt and it doesn't cost a thing.

Those who are incessantly critical of others simply show the world their own ignorance and short comings. So MSNBC fubarred on the title of the article! Big deal. That does not change the fact that it is an interesting article (to some of us anyway) nor the historical significance of the find. Right wingers or libs? Who cares! This is not about politics and the rest of us don't care, so deal with it! As the saying goes, if you can't say anything usefull don't say anything at all.

I hear you Rebel. Good one!

This article was written horribly. If you google for it, you find the Canadian website that says it wasn't vandalized until after the discovery.

And a great find compared to another thousands of years old find? No one saw a P-40 before? Talk about hype.

Nice to see they photo-shopped out the gang graffiti on the fuselage before they printed the the pictures.

Oh Ya very possible and most likely what happened and then sat there for 70 years. A continuous sand blasting[very light and yet at times more heavier due to the weathered . A nice dry and cool at night setting. oh Yes I would bet my next paycheck on that IS the true story. Thank you. Cool isn't it,and strange about the pilot. Did they eaver find him or any bones.

50_Pascals, when you refer to vandalism I am assuming you mean the damage to the tail section. FYI the tail/control surfaces on early model P-40's was actually fabric covered not metal, and after 70 years exposed to the elements would have dry rotted out long ago.

Another item that was not mentioned in the article was if the machine guns in the wings and nose were still intact and the 50 and 30 cal ammo still in place. If the plane were to have been vandalized in the past, it seems that this would be the first things that would have been removed.

We readers need to develop our skills. Reminds me of the soviet citizens in the 60's and 70's. The ONLY news print was Pravda produced by the gubmint touted as a newspaper but a propaganda rag. Somehow the soviets could dope out over months a true story by detecting the errors and comparing new stories to old stories they understood what "WAS NOT" in the story. Modern US journalism gives us all the opportunity to recreate the experience. Soviets love complicated novels, chess, and esoteric poetry. Doping out the truth from Pravda lies was possible. Now we can try with our modern journalists. Enjoy !

Okeeboy...you scare me. You should "stop and evaluate every word for its true meaning" no matter where you are getting your news.

CaptainMoosie-

I don't see any prop because msnbc never bothered to post a pic...This was a half-hearted attempt to pull an obscure article off of someone elses website and run with it without putting any effort into it...STANDARD.

Actually, the Curtis P-40 Warhawk (AKA: Kittyhawk, Tomahawk, etc.) became operational with the Army Air Corp in 1939 or late 1938.

"P" stands for "pursuit," a term that was used until 1948 when it was changed to "F" for "fighter." Our first production jet fighter appeared in the last days of WWII, and was the Lockheed P-80. In 1948 it became the F-80. Since the P-40 was no longer in the inventory after the war, it will always be the P-40.

Sorry, typo above, should read "plane", not "plan"...

I am surprised at how badly reported this was, but before we rip MSNBC too badly, remember that a wrecked WWII P-40 in the desert is a pretty esoteric subject.

We could have gotten another article about Brad Pitt, and this never would have seen the main page on MSNBC.

So thanks to MSNBC for that, at least.

You people rant like a bunch of "trekkies' at some pathetic Comic Book Convention. Debating the thrust of some particular spacecraft, starship, intergalactic cruiser, ....LOL

As William Shatner famously said "Get a life"

Nobody but the obsessive would give a sh-- whether they said plane, jet or anything else. Most would find it interesting that they found it, possibly solving a mystery for the descendants of the pilot. We honor his sacrifice.

yup...the lost of a great jet fighter pilot...he was missed...

The "writer" of this article is merely an example of today's (un)educational system.

Can not read? pass them anyway so that we don't ruin their self-esteem.

Your, you're or yore or there, their or they're. Don't know the difference? Pass them, Who cares?

Ad nauseam.

Robert this is MSNBC not CNN

There is a word for your F/up

So glad you never make mistakes and so quickly attack others. <Facetiously

6 of one, half-a-dozen of the other. Neither of them could cover a one car funeral motorcade.