I don't think the incorrect markings take away the general message of the file though, or take away from the story...

The fact is that they were there on the front lines trying their best... that's all that can be asked of any soldier.
Others can dispute kill claims or how good they were but were those armchair generals up there chasing fighters and dodging bullets?

BTW - the film looks great. Can't wait to see it.

'Amen' to that.

It makes sense that the Tuskegee Airmen would be superior to many of their Caucasian-based squadron counterparts, due primarily to their selection process. Since there was only one African American Squadron at the time, it stands to reason that the selection process resulted in only the top tier candidates making the cut for a pilot slot. In other words, you have a single squadron that is the distillation of the best piloting talent in the African American community. Conversely, the best Caucasian piloting talent was distributed among other squadrons.

That this was based on race is statistically arbitrary. It could have been Eye color, hair color, being born during an odd or an even numbered month, it doesn't matter. Race was simply the discrimination De-jour in the 1940's.

That said, I personally doubt claims of a perfect escort record. The nature of fighter escort often comes down to luck; simply being in the right place at the right time-or not. While the aforementioned logic explains why they would be a particularly skilled fighter squadron, it would not explain a miraculous lack of losses. Remember, it's also possible that an aircraft that was thought to be lost to flack later in the mission (and there for wouldn't be counted as a TA loss) was actually lost to enemy fighters.

None of this should diminish the accomplishments of the Tuskegee Airmen though. They are an amazing group: They fought to earn their wings, they fought with their wings, and have left a legacy that can be celebrated by people of all race, sex, and age.

Everyone seems to be missing the BIGGEST of the pictures here.
When the Tuskegee airmen started escorting bombers, there was a major
change in tactics. Staying close to the bombers. Instead of chasing a bandit to a kill,
you made them turn off of the bombers and then returned to high cover.
This most certainly lessened bomber losses to enemy fighters and probably bolstered
the 'story' whether you believe it or not, of them not losing any bombers.

I too look forward to seeing the movie......not only for the history, but mostly for
the movie-makers finally being able to make the fighter scenes look so realistic.

AO

The google is your friend: http://www.tuskegee.edu/about_us/legacy_of_fame/tuskegee_airmen/tuskegee_airmen_facts.aspx

Why not ask the people who, got their information from the people from the period of history in question?
There are lies, damned lies and, statistics. It cracks me up reading the "hog swill" being generated
on you tube in response to this movie.

It did not matter who was out there with me, he just HAD TO BE a soldier: yes, I've been there.
It's not a freaking video game.

Jaeger

Hi Jaeger,
that is my favorite link. Good info.....
Lt. Col. Samuel L. Curtis, who lived in Yeadon PA.,
where I live, gave many talks about his service in WWII,
and I spoke to him many times at air-shows and universities,
and a few times at some neighborhood picnics here in Yeadon,
before his passing in 1989.
All of these men were excellent human beings first who fought for
their country.....and showed the world that they were excellent pilots.
AO

Hi AngleOff,

I've never had the pleasure of a direct face-to-face with any of these warriors, but I come from a different time:
what are people reading today? where do they get "actual FACTUAL information? Is anyone aware of history?
Does it matter? I grew up with books: we had an actual in home library: my dad subscribed to Ridear's Digest,
and National Geographic: we had a library of Encyclopedia Britannica. Informaton was everywhere.

What the hell happened? I was stationed in Germany - West Germany- for many years. I can still hold a conversation in German
I have half German daughter: I love the country: the people are great. Where are the non-fiction books?
Meh. I've got 5-15years left then I'm out of here.

Jaeger

P.S One more thing.There seems to be an inability by many today to think criticaly from 0000hrs. to 0001hrs:
Is the information presented on page one(1) consistent with that which is presented on page two(2)?
I don't believe that some are being gullible: maybe they're just plain don't "have it"?

People in general, not just "authorities" lie quite a bit. If anything, I would say I see alot more lying or shading of the truth by the "little guy" (whoever that may be) than by those in positions of responsibility. You also have to remember, that, while the Tuskegee pilots were definately the victims more often than not, they had their advocates and partisans even among the white "establishment" even in the 1940s, and certainly in more modern years it is much more acceptable to say positve things about them (true or not) than something that might be construed as negative. That said, just because something like Tuskegee's "no bomber lost claim" is challenged does not mean there was any outright dishonesty by either side. War is confusing, and reports of events in war suffer from that same confustion. Nor are are memories accurate, and anyone who has ever done any historical research will attest that first person narratives after the fact often do not jive with each other or with physical evidence. I'd wager, if Luftwaffe and IR claims are compared to 15th AF losses, it would turn out that some bombers were lost to enemy interceptor. Many aviation claims and records from the WWII and Korean War era have been re-examined in recent years and the historical results adjusted, but seldom, if ever, due to any attempt at deception. The Flying Tigers' incredible kill claims, or Butch O'Hare's "Ace-in-a-Day" fight are among some of the most well-known. The elephant in the room with Tuskegee, of course, is that the politically correct shoe is on the opposite foot from the 1940s, and it is a doubtful that there is a historian willing to deal all the "you're a racist/Uncle Tom" flak he would take re-openning that chapter, especially considering how much heat Daniel Ford took doing similar research on the much less politically-charged AVG.

Oh, and I am looking forward to this movie so far . . . at least it looks better than Flyboys or Pearl Harbor.

Looks really bad. "Take that Mr. Hitler" geez c'mon, how silly. ww2 star wars.