Which side would you fly for?.......

[Lightning Guy]

That's actually a Breda Ba. 88 MP-Willow.

[bader]

The allies no doubt

[cheddar cheese]

bader, if you want that photo as your signature, just type:

[img] URL [/img]

minus the spaces

[MP-Willow]

Thanks for the help. It looked a little like the Pe-2, but I made a few compairisions and well now I know better.

C.C. you seem to like the Italian aircraft that did not do that well. Save the SM.79 and 81 two nice transport/bomber I also like!

[cheddar cheese]

breda 88 is easier to remember cos of the huge engines yup, i dont really care how good or bad a plane is, it doesnt affect how much i like it or not

[plan_D]

Well in Britain we don't reward people for doing their job. If you keep an aircraft flying for 76 missions, that's your job. That's what you're supposed to do, you're doing it well, and that's what is expected.
If an aircraft technician was working on an aircraft and the base came under attack then the person got on a MG and defended the place, he would be rewarded because defending the base isn't his job but he did it. That deserves a medal. Even then he might get in trouble for leaving his post because getting that aircraft in the air is his priority.

[Lightning Guy]

So if a fighter pilot served a meal did he get a medal?
And why were any British pilots decorated at all? Wasn't shooting down planes or bombing targets simply doing their job?

[plan_D]

Now you're just being silly, and I doubt a RAF pilot ever served a meal anyway.
No, you can still be brave in a plane. For example they could get jumped by 10 enemy planes while their was only 3 of them and shoot down all their enemy even though they had a perfect oppurtunity to escape. Or doing daring raids, like Amiens.
Pilots are expected to bomb and shoot down planes, doing this is not rewarded. Doing this in extreme conditions, or with all the odds against you, is rewarded.

Just face it, Americans get handed medals for nothing. Not all the time, but a lot of the time.

[Lightning Guy]

So the pilot that does his job well (another way of saying "in extreme circumstances" gets a medal and the ground chief who does his job well gets a "Jolly good show ol' chap!"? People who do their job exceptionally well (regardless of what it is) deserve some form of recognition. And without the crew chief the planes don't fly or take off and then turn back because of mechanical trouble without accomplishing anything.

[MP-Willow]

Interesting point. But with that should the crews who preped the B-25s to fly off the USS Hornet get credit? It was a first of its kind?

[plan_D]

No, doing your job well is different from in extreme circumstances. If that chief mechanic got a bunch of planes up while under fire, he'd get rewarded.
Getting planes up is their job, doing that in extreme conditions would be rewarded, doing it 76 times would not.

[MP-Willow]

so if that 76 times was done with only marginal spare parts and resuplies then you still would say it is just his job?

I can see your point, but even just a citation saying good job should be given. I understand not handing out a lot of Silver stars or DSC or such, but a reward I think should be given.

So now that is me thought. As an American you see we like rewards.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Guy Gibson got his VC for his actions during the dam busters raid, he selflessly flew along side the attacking bomber after he'd dropped his upkeep to draw away the flak, he could have been killed, that deserves a medal..................

[plan_D]

Yes, that would deserve a reward. The Dambusters thing I mean.

With minimal supplies, still no reward. If he made equipment, or improvised to get the planes flying then that's a medal. They do get pats on the back, but medals aren't handed out willy-nilly here, like they are in America.

[MP-Willow]

I would not say it is Willy-nilly