| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/07/2010 06:01:15 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
I do appreciate the post as a message of hope and determination, but this thread is about the Spitfire and the part it played in WWII. |
Okey-doke. I'm aware of the history. I wasn't thinking "Spitfire" as much as "Slippy" when I quotes ol' Winston. So let's split the difference; you concede it's not a "misquote" (something that's anathema to us scholarly types), and I'll concede it's a misapplied quote, given the Spitfire-specificity of the thread :-) I just wanted to bring some of Sir Winston's brio to Slippy's plea to never give up...
R. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:54:12 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Steve,
I did say "more contemporaneous", not "precisely contemporaneous"... It was a response to Slippy's "DON'T GIVE UP!" Seems a little more apt ("We shall never surrender") than the other, for all that that one's directed specifically at the Spitfire-and-Hurricane flyers of the time.
But tell me, how's it a "misquote"?
R. |
This was a quote referring to the D-Day landings and the fighting spirit Churchill engendered in the Allied forces, British, French, Polish, American and Candaians after Dunkirk(have to revise the date of the speech from 1944 to 1940). It does capture the way Churchill could generate a 'spirite de corp' amongst the athoughwise dejected armies after the humiliation of Dunkirk. The speech that was given as a direct referral to the pilots/Spitfire connotation is the 'never in the field...' speech.
I do appreciate the post as a message of hope and determination, but this thread is about the Spitfire and the part it played in WWII. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:41:32 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:39:31 PM · #4 |
Steve,
I did say "more contemporaneous", not "precisely contemporaneous"... It was a response to Slippy's "DON'T GIVE UP!" Seems a little more apt ("We shall never surrender") than the other, for all that that one's directed specifically at the Spitfire-and-Hurricane flyers of the time.
But tell me, how's it a "misquote"?
R. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:33:13 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
The win will eventually be given to the deserving. KEEP TRYING! DON'T GIVE UP! |
Or, in more contemporaneous (to the Spitfire) words:
We shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air,
we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender!
:-) |
This is a misquote as it was given 4th June 1940 by Churchill.
The correct quote which referred to the RAF, in particular the Spitfire and Hurricane pilots during the Battle of Britain, August 20th 1940:
'Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few'
Message edited by author 2010-11-07 17:54:33. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:16:46 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
The win will eventually be given to the deserving. KEEP TRYING! DON'T GIVE UP! |
Or, in more contemporaneous (to the Spitfire) words:
We shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air,
we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender!
:-) |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 05:08:49 PM · #7 |
| The win will eventually be given to the deserving. KEEP TRYING! DON'T GIVE UP! |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 03:51:29 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
When they had a regatta where the new designs competed against each other, the E22 won hands down, by a mile. The surprise runnerup was a smaller, much more athletic keelboat, designed by a Scandinavian, called the Soling. IOC decided to have a second set of trials, and the E22 won that set handily as well. After which, they awarded the new Olympic berth to the Soling, stiffing Etchells and leave a sour taste in the mouths of many yachtsmen all over the world. The Soling, an overtly athletic, even brutal, boat is now basically only raced actively by a very few sailors who are pursuing Olympic berths, whist the E22, a fabulous, high-performance keelboat, is the most popular large one=design class in the world. |
I remember that - it was quite the scandal. LOL - j/k - I never heard anything about it which adds to my suspicions about intentional cover-ups by the mainstream media. :P
Originally posted by Daily Echo article:
Mr Hancock’s design team includes a leading structural engineer behind projects such as the London Eye, the City of Manchester Stadium and the 2012 Olympic Stadium. |
I wonder if this structural engineer was "connected". Call me a nationalist, but seems like they should have limited it to UK designers. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 02:25:37 PM · #9 |
Well, that's a bummer. Not that unusual a situation, unfortunately. As an architectural photographer, I was involved with all sorts of submissions for various competitions, and it always amazed me how often something that didn't make the short list "won" the competition; sometimes something that didn't even meet the original design criteria. Makes you wonder who's greasing whom.
I remember, also, when IOC sponsored a design competition to replace the outdated Dragon sloop, a venerable design, with a more modern 3-man keelboat. They published very specific criteria for size, displacement, trailerability, and so forth, and opened the competition to designers worldwide. A prominent American designer, boatbuilder, and champion sailor, Skip Etchells, created what became the Etchells 22, a 30-foot sloop on a 22-foot waterline designed as a responsive, high-performance keelboat that could be raced by older yachtsmen who were no longer able to compete in the more overtly athletic Star class. This was the niche the Dragon filled, and was part of the brief for the new design.
When they had a regatta where the new designs competed against each other, the E22 won hands down, by a mile. The surprise runnerup was a smaller, much more athletic keelboat, designed by a Scandinavian, called the Soling. IOC decided to have a second set of trials, and the E22 won that set handily as well. After which, they awarded the new Olympic berth to the Soling, stiffing Etchells and leave a sour taste in the mouths of many yachtsmen all over the world. The Soling, an overtly athletic, even brutal, boat is now basically only raced actively by a very few sailors who are pursuing Olympic berths, whist the E22, a fabulous, high-performance keelboat, is the most popular large one=design class in the world.
For whatever that story's worth :-( Dumb decisions get made all the time...
R. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 02:10:43 PM · #10 |
Wow, do I feel stupid. This is not over, but it's making me never want to see a Spitfire again – and that's sad.
//www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/8621985.Unveiled__Spitfire_tribute_winner
I'll post some interesting stuff in due course but for now I have to calm down and get on with things in the real world. Thanks once again for such amazing support - very rewarding, even if the competition itself has not been.
Cheers
Jon |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 09:45:11 AM · #11 |
| Cold comfort, I suppose, but I feel sure that Mitchell would have chosen yours Jon. Me too. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 09:18:20 AM · #12 |
I agree with the rest of the sentiments here, and especially second MelonMusketeer's words regarding the history of the aircraft. You actually tied some of it in, while the "winning" design has a plane in the air. It's not so much that that design won, more like it was just selected due to many reasons, not the least of which is cost of construction.
No negativity, though, as you're to be commended on one hell of a design and an outstanding presentation. Excellent work. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 08:59:32 AM · #13 |
The short list must have been made up after the final choice. I noticed that the winner is with a high profile design firm, probably with aggressive marketing, so I would suspect that had something to do with the outcome of the affair.
The design you had was more daring, and much more expressive of the aircraft's history. Thanks for sharing the adventure with us, even though it didn't end as well as we all would have liked.
If you are not already happily employed, you might think about leveraging this event into a "door opener" to get connected with the winning design firm, or perhaps do some consulting work with them.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2010 08:57:16 AM · #14 |
well that is fairly boring.
I still think yours was ten times better, to look at to marvel at. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 07:51:03 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
That's quite a unique finalist they chose, six on shortlist and the seventh one won it!! Perhaps it's a bit of backscratching going on, I would never venture to suggest brown-nosing:)
Anyway, are you going to stick around a while, Charles?? If so, welcome on board. |
How incredibly bizarre! Why didn't they add it to the list? It would have cut down on some hard feelings, I would think...
|
|
|
|
11/07/2010 06:20:18 AM · #16 |
That's quite a unique finalist they chose, six on shortlist and the seventh one won it!! Perhaps it's a bit of backscratching going on, I would never venture to suggest brown-nosing:)
Anyway, are you going to stick around a while, Charles?? If so, welcome on board. |
|
|
|
11/07/2010 06:09:42 AM · #17 |
Can't post links. Check the Telegraph's online article today.
It appears the winner was not in the shortlist.
Message edited by Manic - added link. |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 09:34:25 PM · #18 |
See if the imperial war museum would be interested.
|
|
|
|
11/03/2010 09:06:04 PM · #19 |
| Well, crap. It remains an incredibly wonderful and amazingly conceived design - clearly remarkable. They can't take that away. |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 08:01:40 PM · #20 |
| next pint's on me, mate. onward and upward... |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 05:06:22 PM · #21 |
Cant believe it was down to feasability - they could of got Fosters onto it and their engineers would of sussed it out with no problem. I have no doubt yours would of become an iconic British image/landmark and one hell of a legacy.
Gutted for you mate, I really am. |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 03:42:59 PM · #22 |
If Mr.Draper's design did win it is a sad thing, not just for you, but for good design.
It will mean that the judges went for what they saw as a "practical" if stolid design, fearing that your's, as well as Mr Wittt's similar if less elegant designs were not feasible. Of course yours is tricky, but so is the work of such architects as F. Gherry and S.Calatrava, spiral compression-tension elements have only become normal with the advent of computerized modeling. Some people still think of doing anything structural the Romans couldn't do as being rather sketchy. The Draper design's structure was first carried off for the Colossus of Rhodes. How very daring.
Your's was clearly the best option.
Message edited by author 2010-11-03 15:47:27. |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 03:42:42 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Ordinata:
Jon,
I've been following your updates on here. (Naughty!)
I'm Charles Rist, one of the other finalists.
I found out that I also did not win, but I do not know who did either.
I believe out of the final 4 that Draper's was the most achievable. (I don't know for sure)
He used a cranked construction method much like the London Eye, which I think may have swung it. (No pun intended)
Anyway, commiserations and chin up! We're British!?
C |
I think you've nailed the reason here... It likely did not boil down to aesthetics, but rather to feasibility, they don't want a fantastic structure, they want a cheap structure.. |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 03:28:56 PM · #24 |
| Wow, that's too bad. It was the most eye catching for sure. Sorry it didn't work out, you have a lot of talent though, and that should take you far! :-) |
|
|
|
11/03/2010 03:25:45 PM · #25 |
R U KIDDING ME!!! That's a shame. Sorry to hear, but what are they thinking? By far the most attractive monument. I am still amazed at your skill.
I mentioned it before, but I would like a print of your designs.
Oh what could've been a truly spectacular tribute!
Leo |
|
