Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message


String -> Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 8:34:54 AM)



*clickety click*

I also took the liberty of copying the article from there before it gets changed.

quote:

The Aichi D1A was a dive bomber produced by the Aichi company in Japan. The Imperial Japanese Navy issued a design specification for a biplane divebomber to support naval and land operations via carrier soon after the infamous Manchurian Incident, a Japanese set-up, in 1931. The Aichi D1A, as it was called, was not an authentic Japanese product, but like all Japanese goods, was copied and changed marginally from superior foreign models, in this case, the Aichi company arranged for a Heinkel 70 to be imported from Germany, and after a careless study, simply replaced the Benz engine with a Nakajima Hikari system and called the plane their own creation. The Navy, in any case, eagerly accepted the design for mass production as it needed desperately a carrier borne aircraft to support their imperialistic designs on innocent Nationalist China. These designs were realised in the Tanaka Memorial, an authentic document for Japanese domination in the Pacific, including the planned Japanese invasion of China, Russia, the United States, and South East Asia, including Australia. The Japanese, predictably, called the document a forgery, but there are those that know far better. In any case, after the first step of the Tanaka Memorial had been undertaken in 1931(see Manchurian Incident), in 1932, the Imperial Japanese government approved further 'expeditions' into China, this included the use of the D1A. So in 1932, a Japanese naval taskforce steamed to the shores of Shanghai, a city of Chinese millions, and let loose a naval bombardment. While Japanese battleships aimed to pulverise the docksides, a sprawling civilian area bustling with crowded markets, hotels, fishing villages, and apartments, the Japanese carriers, Kaga, Akagi and Hosho launched swarms of D1As to assault the then inland Weiping civilian area that was beyond the range of the murderous Japanese battleships. The D1As wrought havoc, relentlessly bombing the crowded streets, strafing inumerous packs of humanity in downtown Shanghai,in one case, an elementary school overflowing with panicking children and teachers, as well as refugees fleeing from the docksides, was especially eyed out and aimed at by the Japanese planes which were believed to be encouraged by supposed flight commander Yatari Naguchi,to aim specifically for crowded civilian targets. The D1As, in accordance,dived down several 250 kg bombs, all of which were either direct hits on the large school, or were near misses, causing bloody shrapnel fatalities. Along the docksides, there was almost nothing left from the bombardment of the Japanese battleships, the entire waterfront area of Shanghai had been flattened, leaving only bloody debris and mounds of incinerated bodies. The D1As, en route to their carriers, after their savage work had been completed in inland and downtown Shanghai, gunned down anything that moved along these flattened docksides, including numbers of dazed children, having miraculously survived the naval bombardment after originally going down to the docksides to play. This orgy, arrogantly called by the Japanese as the Shanghai Incident( also see Shantung Incident,a similar prequel to the Manchurian and Shanghai Incidents, and evidence of long-standing Japanese Expansionism), was ignored by the West. A similar and far more intense form of obliteration, was to be repeated by the Japanese, on the same city, on the same people, the innocent Chinese, in 1937, when hordes of Japanese Mitsubishi G3M 'Nell' bombers flew from Japanese invaded Taiwan, in conjunction with the D1As successor, the Aichi D3A 'Val' to again bring fiery terror on the defenceless city of Shanghai. After this time however, the D1A( codenamed 'Susie') having been replaced by the Val on carriers, was still in land based service, and after the Japanese armies spread into China, leaving behind a trail of innocent blood and destruction, the D1As,would provide 'air cover', a term in the Susie's case as indiscriminate and unchallenged bombardment of peaceful villages, and strafing of farmers at work in the fields when the planes were flying on patrol. During the siege of Nanking, (today's Nanjing) Susies again, gave the city similar treatment as Shanghai,murderous air raids on the city that were to prelude the ghastly and utterly inhumane Rape of Nanking, a massacre carried out by inhuman, barbaric Japanese soldiers. D1As, also without warning, bombed and sank the U.S. gunboat, the Panay, which was evacuating innocent American Nationals down the Yan. Causing casualties and deaths among the crew and passengers. The Panay was the first U.S. warship to go down in the Pacific War at the hands of the common, Japanese enemy, even before the Arizona and her sisters that were criminally struck by the Japanese Navy at the foul raid on Pearl Harbour. After Pearl Harbour, the Susies saw limited action, as it was increasingly becoming obsolete, and was used mainly as a divebombing trainer, and a support craft. In one forgotten case, a squadron of training Susies, practiced divebombing accuracy with live and explosive bombs using a small internment camp for European (British and Dutch) and ethnic Chinese women as a target, in the Indies (Indonesia). This had unknown results, although it is believed most were direct hits. The D1A was finally declared obsolescent supposedly in 1944.


Can someone more knowledgeable rewrite that article so it would be more about the plane and less about the horrors of sino-japanese war. There's a place for everything and that article isn't one for it.




wild_Willie2 -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 8:56:31 AM)

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D] Replace "Japanese" with " American" and Lt calley could have written this [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]




Ideologue -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 10:11:53 AM)

Nothing says "accuracy" like "single deranged block paragraph."




Terminus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 10:25:19 AM)

Who wrote this drivel? Well, just goes to show the problem with the Wiki concept; anyone can write anything...




Alikchi2 -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 10:53:24 AM)

Ah, but anyone can fix it. [:)]

*click*




el cid again -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 11:13:49 AM)

Note the part about "all Japanese products" are just copies of "superior foreign models." There were Japanese planes in the 1930s so secret everything was destroyed - even the plans - so the concepts they worked on would not be leakable. There were Japanese planes in the same era that set world records. For a rather comprehensive picture of the aviation industry in that period, see Japanese Aircraft, 1910-1941. It deliberately omits anything covered by Francillon - so the two books compliment rather than duplicate.




Speedysteve -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 3:35:24 PM)

[:D]




Brady -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 5:12:17 PM)


WoW! thats insane, If I had time I could write a decent, though porly spelled[:)] History on the D1A, but do another search and I am shure you will find a good referance for it.




Iridium -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 8:32:23 PM)

Just looks like the PRC started rewriting history to fit their POV in Wiki earlier than we did. Quick, start making articles filled with our biased information in Wiki to even out the playing field!




mdiehl -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 9:08:02 PM)

That Wiki entry is... stunningly... breathtakingly... nuts![sm=00000116.gif]




aletoledo -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 9:55:01 PM)

I assume someone edited it out, I don't see that commentary on it, just the stats are there.




Alikchi2 -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 10:45:40 PM)

I removed the vandalism. [:)]




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 11:05:35 PM)

this Wiki site....i take it anyone can post anything to this encyclopedia?




Speedysteve -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 11:16:54 PM)

Yup......even the likes of you




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/21/2006 11:42:59 PM)

lol.....i've seen a number of threads posting links to this "Wiki" along with terms such as "See? this proves it!!!"

Now i know not to bother clicking on them. [;)]




String -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/22/2006 12:34:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

lol.....i've seen a number of threads posting links to this "Wiki" along with terms such as "See? this proves it!!!"

Now i know not to bother clicking on them. [;)]

well, the information is correct 99% of the time, especially on more frequented subjects.




Demosthenes -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/22/2006 12:34:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: String



*clickety click*


Can someone more knowledgeable rewrite that article so it would be more about the plane and less about the horrors of sino-japanese war. There's a place for everything and that article isn't one for it.


Yah, it did go straight from The D1A to the Japanese atrocities (opening round) in China...




BaitBoy -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 1:51:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

lol.....i've seen a number of threads posting links to this "Wiki" along with terms such as "See? this proves it!!!"

Now i know not to bother clicking on them. [;)]


A study was done comparing Wiki to Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica won but not by much.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051218/NEWS06/512180410/1012




Mike Scholl -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 7:49:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bait Boy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

lol.....i've seen a number of threads posting links to this "Wiki" along with terms such as "See? this proves it!!!"

Now i know not to bother clicking on them. [;)]


A study was done comparing Wiki to Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica won but not by much.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051218/NEWS06/512180410/1012


Believe you are in error. The "study" said that Wiki held it's own in "Science" issues. Which makes sense, as ongoing discoveries and developments can make their way into Wikpedia overnight rather than in a couple of years. On History subjects, the overnight "latest word" can just as often be a crock of BS qabout how the Holocaust didn't happen. Anybody with an axe to grind can jump in with an opinion---one that doesn't have to undergo peer review or learned scrutiny.




m10bob -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 8:29:09 AM)

It was written by a news writer for ABC, PMSNBC, or CBS..
(Weekend writer for the New York Times)..
Agendas.........................




Alikchi2 -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 8:48:40 AM)

People seem to forget that the converse is true. Errors that appear in a written encyclopedia stay errors forever (at least until another edition is released). And written encyclopedias aren't put under peer review by the entire world.




WhoCares -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 11:03:03 AM)

Let me quote myself, as I posted in another forum on the same topic[:D]
quote:

...
I don't think Wikipedia is any more or less reliable then other sources of similar scope, on the web or outside. Neither are well-respected and qualified authors with their sources safe of error: Link: Example
And as few of us have access to the Operational Archives of the Naval Historical Center in the Washington D.C. Navy Yard or some japanese sources, whom would you trust in this case, two accounts explicitly and in deep detail writing only about this battle or a book where the battle is just a small part and the collision a minor detail?! Do you actually trust the author of the linked article?! Or will you not cease before reading the quoted books and dig through the various archives on your own - probably better board a time maschine and check it out all on your own [:'(]

I don't know how you see it, but I'd always prefer a Wikipedia entry over a random Google hit. With a Google hit I would have to go on and verify author and sources, while with Wikipedia chances are high that somebody has done that already.

Just out of curiosity the errors you have seen, of which nature are they: false statements (not from vandalization!), generalizations and/or omissions? I'd expect the first one to be rare, while the latter two are just common nature for the scope of an encyclopedia...

I guess in an estimation of 'quality of information'/'effort to get the information' Wikipedia can't be bet.




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 3:56:23 PM)

Mike seems to have gleaned the true meaning behind my statement. I probably should have been more clear. I was not intending to imply that everything posted to this "Wiki" was crap by default but I was amazed that there was no proof-reading/peer review process in place allowing virtually anything outside of something blatent like pornographic material, to be posted on a subject. Its one reason why i prefer accredited book sources that have been peer reviewed vs. google.com which is not to say that there isn't alot of good info out there on the net but you have to be careful. Wiki sounds like an interesting experiment but given the Suzi "incident" i'd always approach it with a grain of salt, at least where "history," that most manipulable of subjects, is concerned.






Terminus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 4:04:06 PM)

Salt is always a good addition to your diet, regardless of what you're looking at online, Wiki or not...




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 4:13:46 PM)

GASP! its da SPAMer for Denmark!

[img]http://bestsmileys.com/spam/1.gif[/img]




Terminus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 4:17:58 PM)

Oh no... Run! Hide the kids! Lock up the livestock!




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 4:25:41 PM)

Obviously we have not acheived world domination through the franchising of McDonalds worldwide. The SPAMers still thrive.....in Denmark.





Big B -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 4:54:46 PM)

On Wikipedia and the Aichi DiA:


Without offending anyone's sensibilities, I have a question regarding the article.
Though framed in controversial terms - was the information on the Susie substantially incorrect?

Just curious.

B





WhoCares -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 5:04:38 PM)

Just for a little heads-up with respect to the original topic, the article has been changed a couple of times since Alikchis changes (colored notes by me): Link: History
quote:

(cur) (last) 05:28, 23 March 2006 Emt147 (rv - unacceptable, offensive text, please do not reinstate)
(cur) (last) 05:17, 23 March 2006 66.251.105.47 ('Re-vandalized')
(cur) (last) 19:38, 22 March 2006 Emt147 (rv -- the text is absolutely unacceptable. Start over and write something encyclopedic and NPOV) (Link: User Emt147)
(cur) (last) 12:53, 22 March 2006 66.251.105.47 ('Re-vandalized')
(cur) (last) 08:53, 21 March 2006 70.189.89.95
(cur) (last) 08:53, 21 March 2006 70.189.89.95 (Removed huge vandalized text) (Alikchi)

So you see that the article has gotten the attention of someone who monitors articles in his field of interest and it took him only 11 minutes to revert the last manipulation. Close enough to a peer-review, I'd say.
Regarding sources and references, many Wikipedia articles are backed up or extended by external links and book references, so if you are looking for further, more in-depth information, Wikipedia articles can also offer a good start.


PS: While writing this post, the D1A article got 're-vandalized' again; the IP indicates the same user [8|]




Nikademus -> RE: Aichi D1A Susie in Wikipedia (3/23/2006 5:11:40 PM)

oh my......

too funny. [8|]




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.484375