ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Mar 11, 2006
- Reaction score
hesham said:Why,why we are always so harry to judge,and get a decisions,who said it was a imaginary story,
Well, if you have a look at our "Fake aircraft and aircraft projects" thread, you have the reason.This forum
is read by quite a lot of people and I think, it is often admitted as a kind of reference. So we should be
rather careful with declaring something as a "real" project, as long, as we don't have reliable sources.
I wouldn't count Wikipediaas such and if someone claims something to be a real project on another site
or elsewhere neither. Please remember that inglorious story about the "He X/He 536" or whatever it was
I had a look at the Messier site quite often, too. You're right, it's a great source, but please be careful with
it! I'm sure, that not every designation there can be regarded as a project in its own right. Sometimes
it may be internal designations of the designing company and maybe internal designations from Messier itself.
You know, I would love to find a Morane Saulnier "MS.080", but still yet, I have to say, that there's no evidence
that there was an aircraft project with that designation. Just as an explanation: It is dated 1943, the time of the
French occupation. So, maybe it was a development of a ski landing gear for the MS.406 of the Finnish airforce ?
To make it clear, the latter is just pure speculation, written here as an example !
But I think, it's necessary to be prudent with claiming the discovery of "unknown projects". That doesn't mean,
that we shouldn't search, as there still are masses of them undiscovered. But if you have a look a this very forum,
you'll notice, that the times of bonteous harvests have more or less gone and really new discoveries are in most cases
the result of really deep digging, as thankfully often demonstrated by certain members. And there actually are lots of
fakes or misleading things around, so a good deal of scepticism is advisable, I think. And yes, I did go wrong just
recently with it in the case of that very weird tri-plane, which Stargazer identified. So, I will try to take it as a lesson
and if I don't believe in the authenticity of a type/project, I'll say, why, to my opinion it doesn't seem right or unplausible.
That isn't a refusal, just an instigation for further research by those, who believe in it.