Noyade has picked up on a point that illustrates one of the (several) reasons why I ditched all of my aircraft magazine subscriptions last year.
Many authors these days just regurgitate previously published work, sometimes verbatim and usually without acknowledgement. After a few years of taking 'historical" magazines the same circular reporting, including errors, becomes firstly evident, then increasingly tiresome. Style, often nearly indecipherable, replaces substance.
The case in point illustrated the impact of original work by Karl Kössler. What leads me to believe that he was correct in his analysis is that at the time of publication "Air Enthusiast" was co-edited by Bill Green. Bill had earlier written up the "Lufthansa " version of the Do17's early development in his "Warplanes of the Third Reich", first published in 1970. That the "Kössler" version was later published under his editorship seems to indicate that he accepted it.
Nevertheless the "old" story continues to be regurgitated and not only by the spin-offs of Aeroplane. Wikipedia is, however, somewhat circumspect in its handling of the "Lufthansa" version and includes it as being a suggestion. A more reasoned approach by the author, I would suggest.
Last edited by Haraka; 15th May 2015 at 10:07.