Faked / imaginary projects

overscan (PaulMM)

Staff member
27 December 2005
Reaction score
The site moderators have noticed an increase in posts about not real projects.

Please note that this site is supposed to be about real unbuilt projects, not your own fantasy creations. There are other forums better suited to such posts, like the What-If Modelers forum (http://www.whatifmodelers.com) for example.

The purpose of the Scale Modelling, Fan Art & Profiles section is to post unofficial images of real unbuilt projects. If you created a model or drew a picture intended to represent an unbuilt project, this would be the best place for it. Its not "official", but it does still attempt to represent a real project.

Once we get into the realm of pure fiction, we run the risk of becoming a source of confusion. People might download a picture and post it elsewhere, citing the forum as a source for its authenticity.

Therefore I think we should clearly tag topics about fake / fantasy projects. I suggest amending the topic name with a tag at the start of the title, like so:

[Fantasy] Luftwaffe intercontinental bomber fan art


[Fake] Luftwaffe intercontinental bomber fan art

What do you think?
Seems very sensible to me.
Marking off some topics / postings as 'Fake' or 'Fantasy' might help halt a drift on some threads towards the sort of circular citations that a) bedevil less well-monitored forums than this one and b) merely help to fuel nonsense of the 'Projekt Saucer' / 'Nazi A-Bomb' persuasions.
This next might not be easy to enforce but I might also like to see the odd warning-note sounded about web-sources in the titles of new threads. For example, if the only source for a given project is an announcement of a forthcoming Unicraft kit or a posting on 'Greyfalcon', it would be helpful if the thread might somehow alert the causal reader to this. (Certainly I feel entitled to ignore anything which is sourced solely from those two sites.)
All best,

I just think that amount of intentionally posted fake projects - even with mention that it's fake, let apart these that has unknown nature - will rise as forum popularity rises. Don't want percentage of what-ifs and fakes to rise. We then cam become a place full of chinese fan-art.
me too

i cant see anymore those "those German Luftwaffe stuff is real ?" threads in Early secret Projects...
I fully agree with this.

Nazi UFO/Wunderwaffen mythology has been gaining popularity during the past few years and at startling rate. No wonder that its tentacles are now spreading here too with all these youtubes and greyfalcons. Informative thread about this subject wouldn't be useless...

As one of the guilty parties, first an apology.

I couldn't imagine that anyone could take such silliness seriously. They can and do. So, I have deleted my artwork. In future I shall avoid such self-indulgences.
"Nazi UFO/Wunderwaffen mythology has been gaining popularity during the past few years"

I think, it WAS popular since the end of the war, at first in germany only. What's new, is the
popularity in other countries, I think. And what's often astonishingly for me, is the faith, that
is laid in capability of the wartime german industry. It was low on resources and as we know
very well, there were several types of aircraft, that were commissioned, without the proper
development, just because there was an urgent need or them. And the same industry is credited
with achievements and developments, that would still be fantastic today.
I think, model makers or authors producing such stuff about totally unreal "Wunderwaffen" aren't
to blame. There's a market and they are just producing what many consumers want.
But the market place should be elsewhere, not here !
Maybe a section "Fake projects" could help ? Posts with such themes could be moved by the
moderators into this section, as a kind of quarantine. Nobody would have to be worried or
afraid to ask for infos about something, he thinks is real and with time we even would get a
kind of a black list. Looking through this section could answer many questions in advance.
Jemiba said:
Maybe a section "Fake projects" could help ?

I would agree with that *ONLY* if it was a section devoted to the question:
"I've found this design. Is it real?"
With evidence for/against to follow.

A section that was "I found this really KEWL design for a MesserWulfe MW 666 Uber-Bomber!" would irritate the hell out of me.

Hell, the use of the word"kewl" makes me throw up a little...
I agree that any faked creation should be labelled as such, preferably on the image its self. I did this with the W-class (a real paper project) impression I did.

Imaginary I would rather see on the What-if forum. However, the only exception to that: is where design concepts are being illustrated that relate to current trends and thinking - often this is a series of wing/engine layout stuff (for aircraft), ship concepts (like mothership ideas) and for IFV's conceptual turret layouts.

The important qualification is - that they should be referenced to a journel etc. to show that there is some real discussion taking place in the industry and it is or has been a topic of industry interest.
To avoid confusion I think we must ban every 'what if & co' stuff from
this forum. There's more than enough 'room' on the web for these activities...
Rather fuzzy logic

"we must ban every 'what if & co' stuff from this forum." IMHO this is much like thowing out the baby with the bathwater. The problem is that if one finds a hitherto unseen drawing or image, unless one has somewhat supernatural. instincts, at that point it is very often not possible to determine whether or not a design is simply a fantasy or an actual project. I, many years ago, did the preliminary designs for a "Goodyear" racer which never came to the hardware stage. Was it a fantasy or a project? Possibly a little of both. I use this example to illustrate there is a "gray area" concerning this subject.

It would seem to me a valuble service by this forum to discuss and evaluate the status of such designs, because the level of experience here may result in more accurate determinations. If it appears that designs are "comic book" or other non-aviation sources, then label them as such and put them in their own box. If this is done, the debunking of "insincere" designs will be documented and not have to be repeated over and over.

Best regards,

Artie Bob
I think you have a point about the 'grey area' Arti Bob.

Maybe the creation of a chapter with that name can solve the question.

My concern was that the mixing up of fake design (often made highly believable)
with subjects who have a real,non phantasy, background is confusing for
starting enthusiast .(and sometimes even for 'old buffs')
mixing up of fake design (often made highly believable)
with subjects who have a real,non phantasy, background is confusing for
starting enthusiast

I agree with Lark. The idea in that forum is just real projects. That's the "personality" of that forum. For those who want fantasy of whatif you have excellent dedicated fora.
Keeping the forum free of confussion is ideal for people who want to learn. Secretprojects is ruled as a sort of "university", we take it seriously. In that way, we are open minded in the contents but we don't want to mix reality with "para-reality". Fantasy is healthy and fun. "Wunderwaffe" is not fantasy, it is toxic "para-reality".
I wonder how we are going to look into popular topics such as the design of PAKFA. It is "Secret" and its "Project", yet practically most of what we have in the forum is fan made.
How do you justify whether a picture related to that aircraft is worthy of this forum? Was it not the designers of the Russian MFI that got mislead by the false artist conceptions of the ATF from the 80's? Yet, we do our best to collect those, however inaccurate they were.

What I am getting is that it will be wrong to make an educated guess in this forum, however educated, if it is not official allready. This sounds kind of counterproductive.

Granted, discusing past projects is easy. Whoever information is going to be available is already there. We just have to gig it up. Maybe, restore it a little (to the best of our knowledge)

But how about present future projects and trends that we know little about. Do we simply ignore them, or just quote official sources and refuse to read between the lines.

Unbuilt Projects....hmmm. F-19 Stealth Fighter..... ??? very Popular tread. Does it belong to the "What If "forum? Hell, NO!

How do you define unbuilt? Not entered service, perhaps? Or, not passed the drawing stage? Or, officially endorsed/denied misleading artist concept or rumor?

Secret projects by definition are things that have not been acknowledged publicly. Like the Aurora spy plane. However if we try putting up more pictures of that we risk doing exactly what more people imply we should not do.

I personally look at this site whenever I need an information and opinion by other aviation gurus like me. Not people looking to prove they are right and everyone else is wrong( like in some other popular aviation forums). Its not so much about the pictures or the information, its about people that know what they are talking about. People that just like to know more and are not afraid to be corrected.

I am not against "the what if" projects. Hell, I have a couple. On the other hand I fully support the notion that every forum member has personal responsibility to do several things:

1. Create meaningful and insightful topics in their relevant section only after first searching the site for similarly information.
2. Add material, question and comments to existing topics that is to ones best understanding, relevant to those topics.

If everybody abides by those kind of rules, I things that we will early find what we need, being a fantasy concept or a unknown secret project without getting in each other ways.
I get really frustrated when I see people with asking questions and posting information that has nothing to do with the that topic. Yet, no one has complained about the just material in every topic. So as long as its not a fantasy picture but talk its OK to be posted?

At the end of the day, we all try to put the pieces together. Whether it sketches from old books, or rumors on the internet. I believe we are all interested in coming up with the truth about the matter first and sharing it with everyone else. Whether its the Awesome secret projects - bombers book or is the amazing variety of Pakfa concepts by Paraley, its all exiting and equally not going to get into service ;)

Or Maybe it has or it will be.
The details are somewhere in the forum.

It was this particular discussion that encourage me to join this forum. I am impressed with the desire of so many of the contributors to keep the forum within the bounds of reality. The internet unfortunatelly allows any-ones fantasies to take on it's own life, an example being the German H44 battleship design study. This design study was only engenering calulation and related dcoumentation - there were never any drawing made relating to the H44. There was a drawing made of the H39 design scaled up to the dimentions considered for the H44 to give a visual perspective of the expected size required and this has now become THE H44 design which, in same other forums, Germany fully intended to build (even though it was too big for any German harbour and could not have sailed in the shallows sea's around the German coast). Fantasy become possibility then probability, moves to could have been then to should have been and in a few cases takes on a reality of it's own.

Too few people understand the whole design develpement process with any complex piece of equipment and that a design study is an answer to a question and more often than not the answer will be " It wont work/do the task required". Many people cannot understand that the vast majority of deign studies that relate to military equipment whether ships, tanks, aircraft or missiles are simply considering the various factor that will contribute to a design process.

Also too few can accept that many design studies, espescilally in the pre-computer days did not include plans but were often a written submission consititing mainly of enginererring calculations relating to performance, size and expected costs. They search for drawingand/or plans so when a fantasy design appears on the net claiming to be the wanted item it is too often taken as the truth.

Here's another experience with lack of understanding of the design development process, In a discussion forum that is not open to the general populace I got into a debate with a person who had the idea tha Germany could have defeated the USSR in 1941 if only they had enough Tigers and Panther available at the start of Barbarossa. I pointed out that these two tanks where the result of experience gained after the attack on the USSR (notably the Panther) where apon several people jumped in to augue that even if Germany had not invaded the USSR they still would have built the Tiger and Panther tanks. The pont that Germany has not considered anything like the Panther until the T-34 was confronted could not be accepted by this group, to them the Panther and tiger were inevitable regardless of the experience of the German forces before Barbarossa and should have been built earlier.

But back to the main topic I feel this forum will better served by minimising fake, fantasy and own designs as far as possible.There is more than enough guenuine unbuilt project to fill this forum for decades to come.
As a trained draughstman and self-taught artist with a background in model-making - and extensive experience with Photoshop (as well as few other image editing programmes) - i would suggest that any "Fake" or "Fantasy" Projects should be relegated to clearly defined Threads [Such as the What If Forum]. In my youth, i found it deeply frustrating to be unable to find accurate and reliable information for my model-making. Equally i could, presently, quite easily generate a "real" photograph of a "Wunderwaffen" using Photoshop within a few hours [make that minutes...]. i realise that most of the plans laid down on Drawing-Boards NEVER come to physical fruition.This is exemplified by the life of my favourite Artist, Leonardo Da Vinci - who barely finished anything; and yet was "well ahead of his time"
"Caveat Emptor", as the Law says; and it would seem to me that that is what most of the contributors to this Forum desire to stick to
Bogus F-19 wiki page:

Yeah. I know the one... Brilliant stuff, though extremely deceitful to anyone who doesn't know better...

Similar threads

Top Bottom