4:45 AM, 1 September 1939.

When Poland stood alone.

To all those who gave their all to right the wrong.



There is no such thing as an unbuildable kit, just some kits one may consider not worth building.

to be made. As yet, there is NO movie of a Polish pilot who escaped Poland to fight with the French, then escaped France to fight from England. That is an escape route across almost the whole of Europe. Adn how many of them made that journey? HUNDREDS!
George, out..............

I served with a Warrant Officer in 1967 - 68 who left Poland as a teenager to fight, IIRC, with the French, later served in England, and after WW II in the Canadian Armed Forces, before getting in the U.S. Army. Quite a soldier.

An old soldier, but not faded away. Yet.

captured by the Soviets and came (After July 1941)to the British Army and fought at Casina, Normady, Market Garden and who knows where...........

to boot, Munich makes a helluva point!

interview some twenty years ago plus, Munich laid the groundwork for everything that came after, was a complete embarrassment, a gross injustice to a democracy not even allowed to represent itself there, and was, in fact, the beginning of what became the Second World War. If September 1st was the lowest, than what was Munich??? I also can't forget that the first non-aggression pact with the Nazi regime was signed by Poland. Certainly, Poland fought valiantly on and after September 1st, 1939, but I can't ponder those years without taking these things into account. I don't agree that it Sept 1st was the 'lowest point in history'. 'One of', but not 'THE'. John Bubak

Nazi regime was signed by Poland. It was a treaty by Ribbentrop (Nazie) and Molotov (Soviet). And the then secret protocols devided Poland. The Soviets invaded Poland too. That's how it became devided. Those protocols alI donot think that the first non-aggression pact with the so allowed the Soviets to enter Estland, Letland, Litouwen and parts of Romania.
BTW in history I never try to think in those "definitif"
terms. There were many low points in histry.

signing of a 10 year non-aggression pact with Poland. At the time, Marshal Pilsudski was himself having some problems with democracy, and was thus isolating Poland from its ally, France. This turned out to be a fateful move, although the French were hardly willing to aid Czechoslovakia at and after Munich later on, and Czechoslovakia was at least one of the most stable and progressive democracies in Europe.

I certainly agree with you that it is not possible to be definitive in terms of the lowest point in the 20th century, and I am not the one that did that. However, in relative terms, Munich was far lower than the invasion of Poland, especially with respect to the mechanics of Munich.In relative terms, where on earth would you place the gassing of human beings in extermination camps? People have done some stupid and nasty things to one another....period.
JB

On the other hand, what was agreed at Munich possibly set back the start of WW2 by twelve months. In that time Britain was able to bring modern monoplane fighters to front line units. Had war started 12 months earlier, the RAF would have gone to war with biplanes and been quickly annihilated. So Chambelain, in a peculiar way, may have been the architect of Britain's survival by buying valuable time for the RAF to match the Luftwaffe in quality, if not overall quantity.

Food for thought...

armaments industry that had developed in Czechoslovakia. Its probably true that time was bought for the RAF, but if so, it was an unintended bonus that I seriously doubt Chamberlain thought he needed. His 'peace in our lifetime' and 'if at first you don't succeed' rubbish testify. I also think that Munich spared Prague major destruction that allowed it to be preserved and, to a large extent, unique today. Still, Munich stands alone when it comes to complete betrayal and abandonment, at least in my mind. That's my point. Still, I do love history! Cheers!

By the way, I have been browsing through your -110 book, and I love it. very nice work.
John Bubak

John,

You are right in all that you say, I agree with you. Chamberlain was completely naive regarding his ability to achieve peace. The Western powers got it completely wrong. But inadvertently, and quite accidentally, Chamberlain 'bought time' for the RAF. And the nation began to realise that Churchill, who was considered a fool crying wolf in the wilderness in the mid-1930s, was right when he claimed Hitler was on the road to war and conquering vast tracts of Europe. Had war started in 1938, there may well have been a difficult conclusion altogether...

Thank you for the kind words about my book.

and I think that if you take Munich as a whole, there were bonuses for all involved, even in Prague as far as the integrity (I mean physically - architecture, historical originality and the like) of the city is concerned. I admittedly tend to analyze Munich almost exclusively from the point of view of the intent of those there, and what was done to Czechoslovakia and the way that it was done.

Off topic, but speaking of your work with the -110, I would like to ask you a question that I have not been able to find a satisfactory answer to. I am working on a conversion from Revell's 1:48th scale Me410 into an Me210. I have all of the masters done for the fuselage (short version) and wings, including the nacelles. In all of your work on the -110, perhaps you came across references on the -210 that might define when engine instruments were placed inside the nacelles facing the pilot? I am guessing that the engine mounted instruments left the nacelles and entered the cockpit floor when the fuselage was stretched on the 'corrected' -210. If you could comment, that would be great. I do have the Petrick/Stocker book, but it too is a little vague.

Anyway, thanks for your comments - as always, a pleasure!
John Bubak

John,

Sorry, my knowledge of the 210 & 410 is almost nil. That's why I did not cover those two aircraft when Chevron asked me to do the 'Zerstörer' in the Classic series. I stuck to the 110, but they did not reflect this in the title, and so some people expected the 210/410/Ju 88 to be covered as well. I did tell them...

thanks anyway. I will go with my original assumption. Its a minor detail because it can be easily fixed at the end-user stage. JB

....and let's hope it does not ever happen again, not just to Poland, its other neighbors who were under the yoke of totalitarianism for far too long, but others recently in the news who got a whiff of independence that can be measured in a few years, not decades (yet). Not my intention to be political, just glad someone remembered, and hope history doesn't have to repeat itself. Regards, MK

well said

It's good to have a friend here at my shoulder with a little time to spend, til I find love again -F. C. Collins W. C. Bickhardt

thanks for sharing it here...

(raises a glass to Poland's honour tonight)

Wookie - partly German, Scot, Irish, AND Polish... (Grandfather's on birth mother's side was Janisewski)

I had to be reminded by Mr. Google, and my next review project, an autobiography of a Polish fighter pilot.




There is no such thing as an unbuildable kit, just some kits one may consider not worth building.

It's very easy for us to criticize those who made mistakes in the past.
Remember that Chamberlain and his generation ( and especially the French) had been traumatized by a horrific war and were anxious to do almost anything to avoid it happening again.

Of course history does repeat itself.