The Irish Air Corps, An Illustrated Guide.

[Blue Monday]

Joe Maxwell and P.J. Cummins released their new book yesterday, 27th of May 2009, at Baldonnel. The Minister for Defense and G.O.C. Ralph James lead proceedings.

The book is an incredible piece of research and sheds new light on the aircraft (and history) of the IAC, especially the earlier types flown. It includes many new photos not previously published. I've only had a chance to flick through the book briefly but it is highly recommended to anyone with even a small interest in the Air Corps. It also includes many colour side profiles that will be of huge interest to the modeller. I don't know how many books are being printed in the first batch but this is one you won't want to miss out on. It's great to see so much being published on the Air Corps in the last 15 years or so.

 BM.

[Tempest]

Can you post the publisher information and ISBN number so I can get my local bookshop to try to get me a copy, or does anyone know how to buy it mail order?

[Irish251]

See preview at

http://www.maxdecals.com/index.html

and from Amazon the following details:

Paperback: 240 pages
Publisher: Max Decals Publications Ltd (May 28, 2009)
ISBN-10: 0956262406
ISBN-13: 978-0956262400

[Tony Kearns]

The book is an incredible piece of research and sheds new light on the aircraft (and history) of the IAC,
[/quote]

Wouldnt go quite that far BM. Paddy Cummins usual diligent research is evident on his part, however the illustrations are somewhat disappointing Hawker Hind, Hector and Hurricanes are not correct also Gladiators and the Seafire colour is definately off ( may have happened in the process ?) even though the Spitfire Tr9 show the colour green in the photographs. Forget about folding wings on the Seafires, another one of Wings Over Ireland myths. Not happy about the Appendix 2, Air Corps fatalities....Capt Jim Liddy was not killed in the crash of Dove 188 (not 189) and the Marchetti 223 pilot killed was Lt Gavin Foynes not Foyne but this could be attributed to finger trouble or bad proof reading. Pity
Tony K

[Irish251]

Tony

I must say that when the book has barely been published, is clearly the result of a lot of effort on the part of the authors and is probably the most comprehensive work on the Air Corps yet published, in my opinion it's regrettable that you should open the bidding, so to speak, with a series of criticisms like this.  I bow to your expertise on matters Air Corps and I'm sure the authors are open to learning of and correcting any errors but I think that some acknowledgment of the research and overall quality of the production would not go amiss.  I have had only a very quick opportunity to peruse a pre-publication copy but it certainly looks like a very creditable effort overall.  Maybe the only way to be certain of perfection is never to go into print. Even works by the most respected authors tend to contain some inaccuracies but that should not and does not render them unworthy. Above all, I think that any critique needs to be balanced and to cite the positive as well as any negative points.  That is the best way to give people a genuine flavour of the book.

[Tony Kearns]

Fergal,
My initial posting was a reaction to BM's use of the word incredible. I do believe that in praising Paddy Cummins diligent research I balanced it with reference to the artwork. Apparently it is acceptable, in your opinion to offer praise but one is to be constrained to await the introduction of other "bidders" to use your ridiculous term. This surprises me somewhat coming from someone who is no shrinking violet when it comes to offering the occasional barb to others, shades of pots, kettles and distinctive common colours.
Your rush to condemn is only matched by your admission that you only had a very quick opportunity to peruse a pre-publication copy. When you decide to obtain your copy you will no doubt be as impressed as I am of the quality of Paddy Cummins input, a well established author/historian with a proven track record. I have no doubt that you will be equally impressed by the quality and quantity of the photographic content. The artwork , it must be stated that despite suggestions proffered as to the accuracy of previous profiles (some of which are used) these suggestions were not taken up. There was no obligation to so do.This however,belies your statement that the author(singular) was /is open to learning of and correcting any errors, is not borne out.

[Irish251]

Tony

It’s not really about being a shrinking violet or not.  People who post on the various Internet forums are used to a bit of cut and thrust and I think most of us are able to cope with that – both as authors and recipients.

As you know, much aviation publishing is the fruit of the work of amateur authors (and is usually the better for that, since the work is a labour of love rather than being commercially-driven).  The benefit to the public is that information is placed on the record and made available for the enjoyment of an audience. I don’t disagree that maximum accuracy should be the aim in any such work.  At the same time, my bookshelves are not exactly groaning under the weight of what has been published on Irish aviation and in particular the Air Corps.  It is with those considerations in mind that I welcome the publication of a new work and just feel that it should be viewed in the round rather than by reference to deficiencies, the listing of which occupied most of your initial posting.  I also hope that in time we will see other material published which would add to or improve on what has gone before.


P.S.  I think one just has to accept that terms such as “incredible”, “unique” and “fantastic” are used so freely nowadays that for many people they just mean “very good”!

[FiSe]

OK, so I've got a copy and here are my 2c /sorry about the novel, I typed as I went through the book :

1st impression,
Wow, this is a big book with lots of photographs. I haven’t got a chance to read it yet, so will not comment on this one - and I don’t feel like I am the one to comment on the written history anyway.
2nd impression,
Those colour profiles are a big let down. They are too small, inaccurate /Hector, Hurricane, Hind I still don't know if the top and bottom view of the Lysander belongs to the side profiles as they don't match/ and generally oversimplified and scattered all over the place and simply not up to today’s standards.
3rd impression,
Nice general interest publication which left me with very mixed feelings.

It reminds me of an episode which happened to me a while ago. I’ve been invited for a dinner, I’ve been promised a big plates full of tasty food. I can eat a lot and I do enjoy my food, so I was getting ready for at least five course meal and I was really looking forward to it.
The dinner itself wasn’t five course, in fact the dinner ended with, what I thought, is a second starter. The food wasn’t bad, it just wasn’t what I expected to be after all those promises and anticipation.
Basically, with this book we’ve been promised steak and we’ve got sausage. It fills me alrite, but leaves me with certain feeling of starvation. I need something more than this…


There are some nice pictures, which I have never seen before, but they are tooooo small, so for me, as a modeller, not so useful and even though I wouldn’t be too impressed with Donal McCaron’s storytelling, I thing that Wings over Ireland or IAC Celebrates 100yrs of Flight give me more inspiration.
Surprisingly quality of photographs of the newer aircraft is not good at all and I am disappointed here. For example rear cockpit of the PC9 is missing, but fair enough, there’s a picture of the front one.

History of IAC, in my opinion, is traceable, researchable and interesting, but not so easy to squeeze into book of 270 pages and priced at 35 Euro, thought it'll be twice as much.
From the other hand this book has 270 pages and some of them are just empty 22, 23, 88 or repeating the same information, profiles on115 and117 or just filling the book, 93, 97… Although I am glad to see a Donald Duck nose art on the Battle.
I know that it’s very hard to compare this book with some other publications, but I have to do it. Classic Publications have a line dealing with WWII Luftwaffe colours and units. For example, LW bomber units are spread into 4 books of around 180 pages each. Nice photographs, nice 3D colour profiles. Not many, but quality of those is incomparable to those I have found in IAC Illustrated Guide

In relation to published books about IAC some people would say that anything is better than nothing, some people would say that better nothing than anything. I would say, that thanks for this book and hopefully there will be another book or books which would finally satisfy my hunger to know more about the aircrafts and markings of the Irish Air Corps.

[pilatus]

Where did you buy it?I was in Easons on O'Connell street and they dont have it in yet and the lady said there is no trace of it on their system yet!?

[Tony Kearns]

Tony

P.S.  I think one just has to accept that terms such as “incredible”, “unique” and “fantastic” are used so freely nowadays that for many people they just mean “very good”!

Fergal,
Your lecture on the undestanding of word play and on the desireability of incorrect and misleading historical information would be understandable but hardly acceptable when potential inaccuracies are flagged in advance
Tony K

[Irish251]

Tony

My final comment was a light-hearted one so I don't think it merits being classed as a lecture - nor was it intended as such.  Nor, of course, do I advocate the publication of inaccurate information.

Regards

F

[FiSe]

Where did you buy it?I was in Easons on O'Connell street and they dont have it in yet and the lady said there is no trace of it on their system yet!?

You can get it here: http://www.maxdecals.com/

[Blue Monday]

I have a reasonable grasp of the english language. I understand what the word "incredible" means. Incredible is what I said and incredible is what I meant.

All this debate begs the question; Is the new book 100% accurate? I don't know. I am an Irish aviation enthusiast, not an aviation expert, so I can't pass judgement on everthing in the book. Perhaps there are some small errors and inaccuracies in this book but I do know we are all much the richer for having such a volume available to us. There is plenty of new information in this book that is very interesting, things like the story of gliding at Baldonnel, the information on early RAF helicopters in Ireland and the rare photo of the recon pod on the SF260. I doubt that the authors knowingly included information that they knew was incorrect but they do accept that new information is coming to light all the time. The last paragraph in the "Author's Notes" appeals for any new information or photographs that may correct any inaccuracies, so there is your chance to set the record straight.

While I'm sure any author welcomes constructive criticism, perhaps we take things a little too far here in Ireland. It seems that any article or book published on the Irish Air Corps comes in for very close scrutiny and harsh criticism. A few years back, well known British modeller Tony O'Toole wrote a pair of articles on the IAC Seafire and two-seat Spitfire in Scale Aircraft Modelling. Such was the criticism levelled at him that he vowed never to build an IAC model again! Sometimes we shoot ourselves in the foot.

 BM.
 

[FiSe]

I think that it depends how you are looking at it... It's a nice general interest book with very good accounts of the types which served in the IAC. I've read a bit, finally. So if this book is aimed at general public, then is acceptable.
If this book has higher ambitions and I got the impression that it has, then it's somehow disappointing. Perhaps more time and thought should go into graphic and layout of the publication? It really looks too scattered and inconsistent.
I am not quite sure if the interior photographs of preserved non IAC aircraft are a good idea. If this is aimed to the modelers, then it's not good enough as those pictures are bit on the small-ish side and you will need another specific reference book anyway, which are plenty of them out there, if you want to detail your model. And, unfortunately, those colour profiles can't be taken seriously as I am discovering more and more faults and mistakes in them.
I would welcome more and larger original photographs in the book. And I don't mind if these would be the same like in a couple of previously published books.

But, having said what I've said, everybody should have a copy at home, after all it's the most comprehensive book about IAC up to date.


The modelling saga  I'am blessed to have a couple of friends who are a top class scale modellers, bringing awards from the biggest EU shows on regular basis. A while ago they've gave up on the 'big' modelling scene as it got 'too serious' for them. One of them said that when you are building the kit, you are trying to replicate the original. But you do not re-creating the original as you don't have the original paints, the original manuals, the original tools, the original materials.... and after all, it's only child's play.
Some modellers are taking their hobby too seriously and boasting about their building abilities and accuracy of their kit, forgetting that there isn't too much of difference between building sand castles and gluing bits of plastic...

Anyway enjoy the book and enough of it from me

[Gnat]

While I'm sure any author welcomes constructive criticism, perhaps we take things a little too far here in Ireland. It seems that any article or book published on the Irish Air Corps comes in for very close scrutiny and harsh criticism. A few years back, well known British modeller Tony O'Toole wrote a pair of articles on the IAC Seafire and two-seat Spitfire in Scale Aircraft Modelling. Such was the criticism levelled at him that he vowed never to build an IAC model again! Sometimes we shoot ourselves in the foot.
 BM.
 

Hey Blue Monday,
I am a modeller and I take part in competitions in UK, if I have an entry with errors I expect criticism and get it.
If a UK modeller decides to build an Irish Seafire and Spitfire and it has errors and then has an article published what can he expect? If the same person built a RN Seafire and a RAF Spitfire do you not thinhk that he would get the same flack and would he still throw his teddy out of the pram?
Gnat
(I sting)