Post by andy on Sept 8, 2010 5:15:27 GMT -5
These words were originally meant for Gian directly, via his FaceBook page. Unfortunately, FB only allows a miniscule 1,000-character limit (including spaces!) per post, hence their appearance here. I’ve left a review of the book at www.Lulu.com for anyone who’s interested, so what follows are general comments, as I’ve said, really only meant for Gian.
As a physical object, I thought the book was very well produced, with excellent bindings (not like some 'new' books which tend to shed pages as you read). The dust-jacket was very eye-catching and professional looking, too. I think it a small pity they didn't continue the colour and layout on the reverse of the jacket, but oh well ... maybe a cost issue (?).
As to the content and writing style: I think you did a very good job of presenting a complex story in a very accessible way. To use the cliché - 'it reads like a novel in places'. I was initially concerned about flitting back and forth between the incident and chapters of biography, but it proved easy enough to keep track of things, and it's always a good idea to start with some 'action'. You included a fine selection of photographs, most of which I'd never seen before, plus several informative maps.
Downsides? Just a few misspellings (US-English accepted) and places where you used the identical expression within a sentence or three. There were a couple of publishing gaffs where a sentence would be repeated at the start of a new page, and these really should have been picked-up by your proof-reader (I'd ask for the fee back, ha!). The only thing I missed was the inclusion of a good index. This would have made it so much easier to refer back to individuals and specific facts, instead of having to search through the book looking for the relevant paragraph. Perhaps in the second printing, eh?
Overall, though, these are minor points that didn't distract in any way from my enjoyment of the book.
What did I make of your theories and conclusions? Well, you obviously did your 'homework', and it shows. No one can accuse you of rehashing stale old information to make a quick buck. Unless someone proves otherwise, I think you've pretty much solved the mystery of Flight 19. The clincher for me was the radar contacts by the USS Solomons and from both Jacksonville and Brunswick. As you so rightly asked, if these contacts weren't Flight 19, who the hell were they? Commercial airliners don't fly around in formation, and it would need some highly qualified private flyers to do that at night. If Air Traffic Control have no record of a 4-5 aircraft flight that would have been in those areas, at those times, ... well, it kind of narrows the options.
What seems doubly tragic to me is if Flight 19 did go down in the Okeefenokee, it ought to be relatively easy, using modern sensor systems, to verify that fact and at least give some closure to the surviving relatives. Don't tell anyone, but I have a university degree in archaeology - I also worked for over 15-years as a defence journalist. What that experience tells me is that there is a sophisticated range of ground-penetrating radars, infra-red and thermal side-scan devices which ought to be able to detect five huge piston engines, even if buried under 15-feet of water and several feet of peat.
Of course, the best of these devices are owned and operated by the military and CIA, NSA, etc, etc. - and that's the route I feel you should be going down if you are ever to find conclusive proof of your theory. In all seriousness, Gian, have you considered writing to President Obama, calling for a Federally-organised and comprehensive sensor-sweep of the Okeefenokee? Just one plane could cover that entire area in a day; the 'spooks' can change the orbits of their spy satellites within minutes, when necessary. The Fed's are never going to allow a civillian team to do this, even if they could afford the equipment.
I'm not an American. I wasn't even born when Flight 19 disappeared. But you know, your book left me with a real sense of shame that nothing more was done to help these airmen, or to bring comfort to their relatives. I'd like to think the average American would be outraged to learn what you've revealed in 'Oblivion'. Let's not forget, these were Navy flyers, all of whom had served their nation well in time of war. Doesn't today's Navy owe it to them to at least TRY to find their last resting place?
Gian, I have several more questions and comments to make about the book, but there's not enough time right now to go into it all. I'll try and put my thoughts together and get back on here in a few days. Meanwhile - thank you so much for this book and the time and effort you've put into it. It remains my hope that if more people get to read it, it may yet act as a catalyst to achieving the kind of search we would all like to see in the Okeefenokee.
As a physical object, I thought the book was very well produced, with excellent bindings (not like some 'new' books which tend to shed pages as you read). The dust-jacket was very eye-catching and professional looking, too. I think it a small pity they didn't continue the colour and layout on the reverse of the jacket, but oh well ... maybe a cost issue (?).
As to the content and writing style: I think you did a very good job of presenting a complex story in a very accessible way. To use the cliché - 'it reads like a novel in places'. I was initially concerned about flitting back and forth between the incident and chapters of biography, but it proved easy enough to keep track of things, and it's always a good idea to start with some 'action'. You included a fine selection of photographs, most of which I'd never seen before, plus several informative maps.
Downsides? Just a few misspellings (US-English accepted) and places where you used the identical expression within a sentence or three. There were a couple of publishing gaffs where a sentence would be repeated at the start of a new page, and these really should have been picked-up by your proof-reader (I'd ask for the fee back, ha!). The only thing I missed was the inclusion of a good index. This would have made it so much easier to refer back to individuals and specific facts, instead of having to search through the book looking for the relevant paragraph. Perhaps in the second printing, eh?
Overall, though, these are minor points that didn't distract in any way from my enjoyment of the book.What did I make of your theories and conclusions? Well, you obviously did your 'homework', and it shows. No one can accuse you of rehashing stale old information to make a quick buck. Unless someone proves otherwise, I think you've pretty much solved the mystery of Flight 19. The clincher for me was the radar contacts by the USS Solomons and from both Jacksonville and Brunswick. As you so rightly asked, if these contacts weren't Flight 19, who the hell were they? Commercial airliners don't fly around in formation, and it would need some highly qualified private flyers to do that at night. If Air Traffic Control have no record of a 4-5 aircraft flight that would have been in those areas, at those times, ... well, it kind of narrows the options.
What seems doubly tragic to me is if Flight 19 did go down in the Okeefenokee, it ought to be relatively easy, using modern sensor systems, to verify that fact and at least give some closure to the surviving relatives. Don't tell anyone, but I have a university degree in archaeology - I also worked for over 15-years as a defence journalist. What that experience tells me is that there is a sophisticated range of ground-penetrating radars, infra-red and thermal side-scan devices which ought to be able to detect five huge piston engines, even if buried under 15-feet of water and several feet of peat.
Of course, the best of these devices are owned and operated by the military and CIA, NSA, etc, etc. - and that's the route I feel you should be going down if you are ever to find conclusive proof of your theory. In all seriousness, Gian, have you considered writing to President Obama, calling for a Federally-organised and comprehensive sensor-sweep of the Okeefenokee? Just one plane could cover that entire area in a day; the 'spooks' can change the orbits of their spy satellites within minutes, when necessary. The Fed's are never going to allow a civillian team to do this, even if they could afford the equipment.
I'm not an American. I wasn't even born when Flight 19 disappeared. But you know, your book left me with a real sense of shame that nothing more was done to help these airmen, or to bring comfort to their relatives. I'd like to think the average American would be outraged to learn what you've revealed in 'Oblivion'. Let's not forget, these were Navy flyers, all of whom had served their nation well in time of war. Doesn't today's Navy owe it to them to at least TRY to find their last resting place?
Gian, I have several more questions and comments to make about the book, but there's not enough time right now to go into it all. I'll try and put my thoughts together and get back on here in a few days. Meanwhile - thank you so much for this book and the time and effort you've put into it. It remains my hope that if more people get to read it, it may yet act as a catalyst to achieving the kind of search we would all like to see in the Okeefenokee.