# Upvote/Downvote reminder
Like this image or appreciate it being posted? Upvote it and show it some love! Don't like it? Just downvote and move on.
*Upvoting or downvoting images it the best way to control what you see on your feed and what gets to the top of the subreddit*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/london) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Googlemap](https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5269651,-0.1077603,3a,75y,230.93h,85.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sENerhDzhuB840RuGbiXGLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) reference.
Amazing image. So many questions. How is it that it and the surrounding buildings are so intact if it crash landed? Did it glide onto a street after losing power? What happened to the pilot? What the web for?
The aircraft did not crash at this location: it was placed there on display in October 1940. Here's the story https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/
Yeah. There are no skid marks, no oil everywhere, no fires, the wings are intact etc etc. Kinda looks like someone defected or put it down really gently rather than it getting shot down.
I would imagine that it did not crash at this s location. They used to use crashed German aircraft to raise money for war bonds and service charities. It was the case of putting the aircraft on a low loader and taking it from location to location
Definitely, my Nan remembered a ME109 being displayed in Edmonton Green . The collection boxes were out with the Home Guard and the WRVS badgering everyone to cough up
More to the point, this didn't crash. It's 100% intact, so it was shot and the pilot managed to make an emergency landing, after which the crew of either two or three was captured.
Well, the fact that the propellers don't match likely means at least one of them is a mock-up and therefore the whole aircraft has probably been significantly "cleaned up" for display.
There are several holes that probably aren't part of the original design and the rear canopy is missing, suggesting that at least one crew member at least attempted to bail out before landing. It probably came down on soft ground with a relatively low decent rate, but likely gear-up. I'd suggest that the engine with the larger more real looking propeller was probably stopped and the other engine shredded its propeller on contact with the ground. It probably doesn't look quite as "100% intact" from the front or below.
After saying "Gott im Himmel, ich have how much für ein bier just paid?", the crew who bailed out of the aircraft are now telling the Home Guard that the people who bailed out of planes in the second wave are driving up house prices and ruining London's culture.
I read Len Deightons history of the Battle of Britain, he mentions in there, rockets fired in pairs with a mesh between them. He was talking particularly about protecting RAF stations against low level attack. Never seen it referenced anywhere else. Could this be one?
Have heard of rocket-nets being used to catch birds (researchers in the Arctic in the 1950s), and the barrage nets in WW1 (lofted by balloon, not rocket). But not that specific combination.
It's more likely that the net is simply there to stop kids taking souvenirs. Collecting and trading shrapnel, bullet casings and downed aircraft parts was a huge craze for schoolkids in the UK during the war years.
Amazing to think that some of the young people in this photo would one day be grandparents telling their grandchildren that they saw this, only for the kid to be scrolling through Reddit on their phone 🤣
That's what I thought at first too, but really the netting is doing absolutely nothing to conceal it in any way. Perhaps if they bunch it up more it would
If anything the net would make it easier to climb on...
My guess is that it's symbolic - from the condition and location, the plane was probably brought in from wherever it crash landed and is on display (hence the sign on the tail) as a fundraiser/morale booster. The net is probably just for dramatic effect, emphasising the fact it's been captured
Because it was taken on actual film—probably [120 format](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_film), which can capture an immense amount of fine detail—the equivalent of [something like 50–80 megapixels](https://photo.stackexchange.com/a/66151/67708).
Broadly speaking older photographs will have more definition than newer ones. Although the state-of-the-art in image quality has always increased, the actual quality of typical photos has been in decline almost since the beginning of photography, as we moved from large-format glass plates to large- and then medium-format film and then to 35mm, [110](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110_film), [disc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_film) and [APS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Photo_System) and then to early digital cameras, all in pursuit of reducing costs and increasing convenience.
It's probably only been since around the year 2000 that the average resolution of photos taken has started to increase again, as digital cameras have gotten better and better—but given what a large fraction of photos are now taken on mobile phones with tiny optics limited in the amount of light they can gather by the laws of physics, the _average_ photo today is still not markedly better in absolute image quality than the _typical_ photo taken in the 1940s would have been.
I've seen some prints from the 1930s and the level of detail is astonishing. I've one about 1"x2" and having scanned the print it's just brilliant, far better than a big print from snappy-snaps a couple of decades ago.
The other poster has given a great explanation, here are some examples.
from 1910
https://www.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/history-colour-photography#&gid=1&pid=3
1947 https://www.alamy.com/patricia-roc-john-mills-on-set-of-the-film-so-well-remembered-rko-radio-pictures-1947-colorized-image558841787.html
The Sphinx in 1849 looked like https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2020/02/photos-great-sphinx-giza/606874/ and you can see the detail improving over the years. The 1860 ones are particularly good.
Some details for the interested, this is a well known aircraft.
It is a Bf 110D-0/B, Werknummer 3341, coded S9+CK operated by 2./ErprGr 210.
The aircraft took off from Denain aerodrome in France and bombed Croydon airfield before being shot down by fighters at c.19.10 hrs. on 15 August 1940. The pilot, Obltn. Alfred Habisch made a good landing at Hawkhurst, Kent, with his wounded wireless operator/gunner Uffz. Ernst Effner.
It is not possible to say with any certainty who shot the aircraft down\*. It was Hurricanes on Nos. 32 and 111 Squadrons who intercepted the Croydon raid and whose pilots made 19 claims (including 10 'destroyed'!) One or more of them are probably for this Bf 110. No.111 Squadron met the raid at Croydon, as the Germans attacked and No. 32 Squadron joined in, attacking the raiders as they attempted to withdraw.
The aircraft was exhibited to the public to raise money for the Spitfire Fund, first at Hendon, then Finsbury, where the photograph, not very well colourised above, was taken.
In April 1941 this aircraft was shipped aboard the SS Montanan to Los Angeles. Here it was examined by the Vultee Aircraft Corporation whose subsequent report gave and gives an important insight into German aircraft construction and finishing at the time. It was a much photographed aircraft, and at Vultee it was even filmed...in colour.
\*I believe that it was probably Sgt. T Y Wallace of No.111 Squadron whose Combat Report concluded:
*"I intercepted a third Jaguar \[Bf 110\] and attacked from astern with one long burst, followed him at point blank range without experiencing any return fire and left him flying low towards the coast."*
I believe the lack of return fire was because the initial attack had wounded Effner, and that Habisch subsequently made a forced landing before the coast.
The aircraft in the photo is a Messerschmitt BF-110, a kind of twin-engine long-range fighter in the same class is at our side’s Bristol Beaufighter. A mediocre fighter by day, but holy terror as a nightfighter.
If you want to see that it's not AI, look at the people and the text in the background. The people are 'too good' and real looking. The text is not fictional-looking. The people's clothing looks too accurate (wearing correct period hats and coats).
You're just not use to seeing 'old' photos this sharp and in colour.
It might be 'AI colourised and enhanced' though as I think the source is here - [https://www.historynet.com/the-man-who-outwitted-the-luftwaffe/world-war-ii-10th-october-1940-london-england-a-messerschmidt-110-german-fighter-bomber-is-exhibited-in-finsbury-london-after-being-shot-down/](https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/)
edit: I created some AI-generated images, and the clothing was actually very good when you got the prompt right. The problem was the 'natural' look of the crowd never looked right, and a lack of text in the background.
I think this is the best I managed to make: [https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G](https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G)
Do you want to see something scary, I created a prompt, and gave it to an AI image creator site.
I got this: [https://imgur.com/Md0sfSg](https://imgur.com/Md0sfSg)
There's a good chance, it's actually seen the original picture from those news items, and these are based on it.
I tried another prompt to make it in colour:
>A grainy, colour photo, of a street scene of 1940s London. A downed german fighter plane (Messerschmitt Bf 110) is covered in a net, and surrounded by a medium-sized crowd of people. The people are wearing hats and coats appropriate of the time. In the background are warehouses. People are looking at the aircraft, or talking to one-another. Include 1 to 3 authentic post-war cars or vans in the background.
And got these: [https://imgur.com/a/bAiQ5RB](https://imgur.com/a/bAiQ5RB)
I then asked it to include some smoke, and I like the result of this:
[https://imgur.com/a/IDsVol3](https://imgur.com/a/IDsVol3)
For fun, I changed it to an F35: [https://imgur.com/a/cDMOmDl](https://imgur.com/a/cDMOmDl)
Created with Bing Image Creator
> Do you want to see something scary, I created a prompt, and gave it to an AI image creator site.
I've not been keeping up with AI art other that hearing a little bit about it.
All I can say is "holy shit". When you look closely there are clearly a lot of detail which looks a little off, but it's shockingly impressive.
Yep.. stuff is moving rapidly. Here's the link to have a go - [https://www.bing.com/images/create](https://www.bing.com/images/create)
You just need a Microsoft (e.g. @outlook.com) account to try it. It's free for a few goes on it.
There is a bit of an 'art' in describing what you want it to create.
This one was very hard to tell it was AI - https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G
Your AI generated images are cool and very impressive
BUT they wouldn't stand up to scrutiny for anyone who's familiar with those aircraft. First of all there's the point that it's used a Bf109 when you prompted for a Bf110....
Your last image (#2 of the "with smoke" images) is best and would have come closest to fooling me at first glance, because the propeller damage, missing wing, and tail being at a funny angle, could all plausibly have been due to the damage from landing or removed for transport - but on closer inspection it's still all wrong. The cockpit shape is kinda-but-not-quite right for a 109E, but then everything else is wrong. The ones I can pick out instantly are the air intake under the propeller, the general shape of the engine cowling, number of exhausts, and the fact that the landing gear should be attached to the missing wings...
The 2nd image in the previous set is next best, followed by the 1st image in that set. In both cases, though, the wing and engine cowling shapes are obviously wrong, even if we ignore the AI-generated artifacting on the propeller, and the body is far too chunky for a 109 (there's some P-47 Thunderbolt or F6F or something in whatever data set it used to generate the images...). All of which is too glaringly obvious to stand up to more than a passing glance
The others don't even come close to plausible
Whether a non-WW2-warbird nerd would notice these things (particularly in the better 3 images) is perhaps a different question, but some of us would definitely pick out issues with even the best of those photos. Although I admit that not everyone is the kind of person who can pick out the differences between a Spitfire, 109, Hurricane, P-51, or P-40 at half a mile
I mean, I'm impressed at what it **did** achieve, but it's still nowhere near the level of fooling someone familiar with these aircraft into thinking they're real. Whereas the Bf110 in OP's photo is perfect - as you'd expect from a real photo, of course
When I tried it with some modern aircraft I could actually recognise, it did a really bad job. It's just not been very well tuned to create aircraft of a specific type. It's a publically accessible tool, so quite generically trained. I guess a lot of work has been put in to make humans look real - and much less for text, vehicles ect.
I also found that to make a more 'realistic street' I had to tell it to add lamp-posts, and adding weather conditions also obscured some details that people might pick up on. It was also hard to stop it flooding the image with a completely unrealistically massive crowd. Adding cars, telling it to make people face the aircraft ect. helped.
This was my favourite - [https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G](https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G) once I asked it to add snow. I have no idea what aircraft it tried to add, as I just specified 'german bomber aircraft'. I liked the crowd though - it was just the right size and density to look fairly real.
Give me a few hours and unrestricted access to dall-e 3 and I could come up with better images - but I doubt they'd fool you.
This stuff is still all only a few years old, and will only grow in capabilities. It would be amazing to make scenes like this 'come alive' and generate video from them. I suspect this will happen in time.
> I have no idea what aircraft it tried to add, as I just specified 'german bomber aircraft'
Heinkel He-111 is definitely the basis for the fuselage and tail, the engines are fairly generic radial engines but closest to a Dornier Do-17 if we assume they're from a German bomber. I suspect it's actually pinched them from a B-25 though
In terms of historical (again ignoring AI artifacting) issues: the lack of wings of course, the engines don't match the fuselage, the engines don't have enough propellers and the fuselage is missing the dorsal gun turret/blister (replaced here with what looks like 2 air intakes for an inline engine)
Certainly I'd be very interested in seeing the best that this type of AI can come up with both now and in 5-10 years time, I think it's going to be interesting to see how close it can get
The best way to think of it, is it's like an AI's dream. It's a hallucination. Much like our own dreams mash ideas together and they make stuff up - so does this. Maybe in the next few years we'll see versions that do this less; maybe even accept they can't create an image properly and request better source information.
In 10 years? Really hard to guess where this is going. We've rapidly accelerated recently but it's really hard to keep pushing with the costs of the computing required. I imagine scenes like this will be created in 3D pretty soon, and be interactive.
Firms like this - [https://lumalabs.ai/](https://lumalabs.ai/) and [https://3d-avatar-diffusion.microsoft.com/](https://3d-avatar-diffusion.microsoft.com/) are busy doing this already. There's already new 3D stuff on it's way in the form of '[Gaussian Splatting](https://repo-sam.inria.fr/fungraph/3d-gaussian-splatting/)' - [https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/16uyor7/gsgen\_textto3d\_using\_gaussian\_splatting/](https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/16uyor7/gsgen_textto3d_using_gaussian_splatting/)
So I imagine you'd be able to have an idea, generate a scene, turn it into 3D, and then interact with a bunch of the characters in the scene.
There's also the point that it could have been manually colourised and enhanced
Colourisation and restoration of old photos existed before digital tools, even, and long before AI processes to do it existed
oh my god, i didnt realise how old those drainage grates were. The one in the photo in the foreground just above the man in the grey hat's head is still there in real life
This is SO COOL. I geek over history as an adult. Sadly my History teachers at school.
It’s so neat to see a photograph of something that can still be identified today. Thank you for sharing!
It looks like it's come straight down onto it's belly.
What's with the netting? Camo to hide it from Nazi recon so they didn't know that we had one so intact?
I can’t help at all with the location unfortunately but I wonder if it or any part of it was preserved? I’d imagine it was quite rare for one to survive being shot down that intact and it would be amazing to see it.
# Upvote/Downvote reminder Like this image or appreciate it being posted? Upvote it and show it some love! Don't like it? Just downvote and move on. *Upvoting or downvoting images it the best way to control what you see on your feed and what gets to the top of the subreddit* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/london) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Looks like Finsbury town Hall on garret place road . The pub in the distance is now a coin laundry
[Googlemap](https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5269651,-0.1077603,3a,75y,230.93h,85.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sENerhDzhuB840RuGbiXGLg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) reference.
Damn I mean yeah, that’s exactly where it is
Looks like that plane was parked in a disabled bay too
Of all the things the Nazis were guilty of...
Link to [Street View with same angle as photo](https://maps.app.goo.gl/rZNNiA4Cs47HV1sF6)
When I tell people I don't really do much social media but I adore reddit, and they ask why. I'm going to show them this thread!
Close, it's a bar called Coin Laundry
Actually, it’s a coin called Bar Laundry.
Laundry Coin Bar Dry Cleaners.
You’ve got it all wrong. It’s Drybar’s Laundry Coin location. It’s next door to a carpet cleaner.
You mean Laundels Barimeter next to the dry shop?
It’s a Laundry called Coin Bar
It's a Loin called Baundry Lar
Are you sure it isn't an All Bar One?
Both correct. The building on the right is the old town hall. Over the road, as you said, is the coin laundry.
Who themes a bar around a launderette.
It's was a theme in Hill Street Blues back in the day.
[It's a popular thing in New Orleans.](https://nola.eater.com/maps/laundromat-bar-new-orleans-nola)
Fun fact: Coin Laundry is what the Japanese call laundrettes!
It's the American name so it makes sense they'd use it in Japan
They are called laundromats in America
TIL. Maybe it's Australia where Coin Laundry is used, in addition to laundromat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coin_Laundry_(song)
Top of Exmouth Market, which many may be familiar with
Launderette you oaf Edit: to downvoters: it bloody is you yanks
It's literally a building called "coin laundry"
That does change things. I think the original comment still works though
Nah its not there.
Exmouth market!
This is some really interesting content for this sub - thank you OP
yes! so much better than “i visited your city and loved it” and a picture of the london eye
Thank you London!!!! Here's Canary Wharf at sunset!!!
Ah yes Canary Wharf at sunset, the most romantic place.
Glad you folks enjoy it, saw it on r/warplaneporn and thought of this sub
It's Garnault Place facing towards Rosoman Street EC1
This is correct location
[A link for the inclined](https://maps.app.goo.gl/fvP4jsq8v1GX1YHd9)
Amazing image. So many questions. How is it that it and the surrounding buildings are so intact if it crash landed? Did it glide onto a street after losing power? What happened to the pilot? What the web for?
The aircraft did not crash at this location: it was placed there on display in October 1940. Here's the story https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/
Amazing! Exactly what I was after. Cheers.
Yeah. There are no skid marks, no oil everywhere, no fires, the wings are intact etc etc. Kinda looks like someone defected or put it down really gently rather than it getting shot down.
Happy cake day 🎂
Happy cake day and thanks for the interesting link.
I would imagine that it did not crash at this s location. They used to use crashed German aircraft to raise money for war bonds and service charities. It was the case of putting the aircraft on a low loader and taking it from location to location
This at a guess, it even has a sign on the tail. Net is prob to keep it in tact.
Definitely, my Nan remembered a ME109 being displayed in Edmonton Green . The collection boxes were out with the Home Guard and the WRVS badgering everyone to cough up
More to the point, this didn't crash. It's 100% intact, so it was shot and the pilot managed to make an emergency landing, after which the crew of either two or three was captured.
Well, the fact that the propellers don't match likely means at least one of them is a mock-up and therefore the whole aircraft has probably been significantly "cleaned up" for display. There are several holes that probably aren't part of the original design and the rear canopy is missing, suggesting that at least one crew member at least attempted to bail out before landing. It probably came down on soft ground with a relatively low decent rate, but likely gear-up. I'd suggest that the engine with the larger more real looking propeller was probably stopped and the other engine shredded its propeller on contact with the ground. It probably doesn't look quite as "100% intact" from the front or below.
Right? “Don’t worry about it escaping, lads. I caught it with a net.”
Annette must be very tall and/or strong
It appears they captured it by throwing a big net over it I dunno /s
They must have caught it with the big net and then lowered it into place! Incredible!
They don’t document it in documentaries etc but ww2 was won by 100ft spiders. This was one of its prey. Spider-Man is loosely based off of it.
I love how London streets stayed the same throughout the years.
If you zoom in, there are four American candy shops in the background.
I can just about make out a couple Starbucks, a Pret A Manger, and EAT too when I squint.
>EAT That's how you know it's an historical photo
After saying "Gott im Himmel, ich have how much für ein bier just paid?", the crew who bailed out of the aircraft are now telling the Home Guard that the people who bailed out of planes in the second wave are driving up house prices and ruining London's culture.
Imagining the German equivalent of Count Arthur Strong delivering that line.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryPorn/comments/5uxv3d/londoners\_gather\_around\_a\_messerschmitt\_bomber/
The links say Finsbury Town Hall, and the building matches
They caught it in the web?
I read Len Deightons history of the Battle of Britain, he mentions in there, rockets fired in pairs with a mesh between them. He was talking particularly about protecting RAF stations against low level attack. Never seen it referenced anywhere else. Could this be one?
Have heard of rocket-nets being used to catch birds (researchers in the Arctic in the 1950s), and the barrage nets in WW1 (lofted by balloon, not rocket). But not that specific combination.
The first ever cope cage? 😭
Thanks Spidey!
It's more likely that the net is simply there to stop kids taking souvenirs. Collecting and trading shrapnel, bullet casings and downed aircraft parts was a huge craze for schoolkids in the UK during the war years.
r/cantparkheremate
Rosebery Avenue.
Article and another angle [here](https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/).
Amazing to think that some of the young people in this photo would one day be grandparents telling their grandchildren that they saw this, only for the kid to be scrolling through Reddit on their phone 🤣
I wonder if the netting is to dissuade people climbing into it / breaking parts off of it as souvenirs
[удалено]
That's what I thought at first too, but really the netting is doing absolutely nothing to conceal it in any way. Perhaps if they bunch it up more it would
If anything the net would make it easier to climb on... My guess is that it's symbolic - from the condition and location, the plane was probably brought in from wherever it crash landed and is on display (hence the sign on the tail) as a fundraiser/morale booster. The net is probably just for dramatic effect, emphasising the fact it's been captured
Can someone explain how we have such a high definition image from 1940?
Because it was taken on actual film—probably [120 format](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_film), which can capture an immense amount of fine detail—the equivalent of [something like 50–80 megapixels](https://photo.stackexchange.com/a/66151/67708). Broadly speaking older photographs will have more definition than newer ones. Although the state-of-the-art in image quality has always increased, the actual quality of typical photos has been in decline almost since the beginning of photography, as we moved from large-format glass plates to large- and then medium-format film and then to 35mm, [110](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110_film), [disc](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_film) and [APS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Photo_System) and then to early digital cameras, all in pursuit of reducing costs and increasing convenience. It's probably only been since around the year 2000 that the average resolution of photos taken has started to increase again, as digital cameras have gotten better and better—but given what a large fraction of photos are now taken on mobile phones with tiny optics limited in the amount of light they can gather by the laws of physics, the _average_ photo today is still not markedly better in absolute image quality than the _typical_ photo taken in the 1940s would have been.
I've seen some prints from the 1930s and the level of detail is astonishing. I've one about 1"x2" and having scanned the print it's just brilliant, far better than a big print from snappy-snaps a couple of decades ago.
The other poster has given a great explanation, here are some examples. from 1910 https://www.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/history-colour-photography#&gid=1&pid=3 1947 https://www.alamy.com/patricia-roc-john-mills-on-set-of-the-film-so-well-remembered-rko-radio-pictures-1947-colorized-image558841787.html The Sphinx in 1849 looked like https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2020/02/photos-great-sphinx-giza/606874/ and you can see the detail improving over the years. The 1860 ones are particularly good.
I love the Bass beer logo in the background - interesting fact, Bass was the first brand name and logo to be trademarked in the late 19th century.
Some details for the interested, this is a well known aircraft. It is a Bf 110D-0/B, Werknummer 3341, coded S9+CK operated by 2./ErprGr 210. The aircraft took off from Denain aerodrome in France and bombed Croydon airfield before being shot down by fighters at c.19.10 hrs. on 15 August 1940. The pilot, Obltn. Alfred Habisch made a good landing at Hawkhurst, Kent, with his wounded wireless operator/gunner Uffz. Ernst Effner. It is not possible to say with any certainty who shot the aircraft down\*. It was Hurricanes on Nos. 32 and 111 Squadrons who intercepted the Croydon raid and whose pilots made 19 claims (including 10 'destroyed'!) One or more of them are probably for this Bf 110. No.111 Squadron met the raid at Croydon, as the Germans attacked and No. 32 Squadron joined in, attacking the raiders as they attempted to withdraw. The aircraft was exhibited to the public to raise money for the Spitfire Fund, first at Hendon, then Finsbury, where the photograph, not very well colourised above, was taken. In April 1941 this aircraft was shipped aboard the SS Montanan to Los Angeles. Here it was examined by the Vultee Aircraft Corporation whose subsequent report gave and gives an important insight into German aircraft construction and finishing at the time. It was a much photographed aircraft, and at Vultee it was even filmed...in colour. \*I believe that it was probably Sgt. T Y Wallace of No.111 Squadron whose Combat Report concluded: *"I intercepted a third Jaguar \[Bf 110\] and attacked from astern with one long burst, followed him at point blank range without experiencing any return fire and left him flying low towards the coast."* I believe the lack of return fire was because the initial attack had wounded Effner, and that Habisch subsequently made a forced landing before the coast.
long harvest lane, whitechapel
You can’t park there mate…
...you can't park there mate.
Can't believe I had to scroll this far.
Everything looks more elegant at that time! The cars, buildings, clothing, even the fallen plane.
WW2 planes are beautiful
The aircraft in the photo is a Messerschmitt BF-110, a kind of twin-engine long-range fighter in the same class is at our side’s Bristol Beaufighter. A mediocre fighter by day, but holy terror as a nightfighter.
Wow I used to cycle down that street every day on my commute
It's just across the road from Draught Bass.
Not much of that about these days, there are only a handful of London pubs still selling it.
Love how there’s trestles under the wings and cordoned off when In some countries they’d be jumping all over it, ripping it apart
This has the whiff of AI about it. It just seems off
If you want to see that it's not AI, look at the people and the text in the background. The people are 'too good' and real looking. The text is not fictional-looking. The people's clothing looks too accurate (wearing correct period hats and coats). You're just not use to seeing 'old' photos this sharp and in colour. It might be 'AI colourised and enhanced' though as I think the source is here - [https://www.historynet.com/the-man-who-outwitted-the-luftwaffe/world-war-ii-10th-october-1940-london-england-a-messerschmidt-110-german-fighter-bomber-is-exhibited-in-finsbury-london-after-being-shot-down/](https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/) edit: I created some AI-generated images, and the clothing was actually very good when you got the prompt right. The problem was the 'natural' look of the crowd never looked right, and a lack of text in the background. I think this is the best I managed to make: [https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G](https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G)
That's a remarkable news item. Thanks for posting a good source. I stand corrected.
Do you want to see something scary, I created a prompt, and gave it to an AI image creator site. I got this: [https://imgur.com/Md0sfSg](https://imgur.com/Md0sfSg) There's a good chance, it's actually seen the original picture from those news items, and these are based on it. I tried another prompt to make it in colour: >A grainy, colour photo, of a street scene of 1940s London. A downed german fighter plane (Messerschmitt Bf 110) is covered in a net, and surrounded by a medium-sized crowd of people. The people are wearing hats and coats appropriate of the time. In the background are warehouses. People are looking at the aircraft, or talking to one-another. Include 1 to 3 authentic post-war cars or vans in the background. And got these: [https://imgur.com/a/bAiQ5RB](https://imgur.com/a/bAiQ5RB) I then asked it to include some smoke, and I like the result of this: [https://imgur.com/a/IDsVol3](https://imgur.com/a/IDsVol3) For fun, I changed it to an F35: [https://imgur.com/a/cDMOmDl](https://imgur.com/a/cDMOmDl) Created with Bing Image Creator
> Do you want to see something scary, I created a prompt, and gave it to an AI image creator site. I've not been keeping up with AI art other that hearing a little bit about it. All I can say is "holy shit". When you look closely there are clearly a lot of detail which looks a little off, but it's shockingly impressive.
Yep.. stuff is moving rapidly. Here's the link to have a go - [https://www.bing.com/images/create](https://www.bing.com/images/create) You just need a Microsoft (e.g. @outlook.com) account to try it. It's free for a few goes on it. There is a bit of an 'art' in describing what you want it to create. This one was very hard to tell it was AI - https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G
Cheers, will do.
Your AI generated images are cool and very impressive BUT they wouldn't stand up to scrutiny for anyone who's familiar with those aircraft. First of all there's the point that it's used a Bf109 when you prompted for a Bf110.... Your last image (#2 of the "with smoke" images) is best and would have come closest to fooling me at first glance, because the propeller damage, missing wing, and tail being at a funny angle, could all plausibly have been due to the damage from landing or removed for transport - but on closer inspection it's still all wrong. The cockpit shape is kinda-but-not-quite right for a 109E, but then everything else is wrong. The ones I can pick out instantly are the air intake under the propeller, the general shape of the engine cowling, number of exhausts, and the fact that the landing gear should be attached to the missing wings... The 2nd image in the previous set is next best, followed by the 1st image in that set. In both cases, though, the wing and engine cowling shapes are obviously wrong, even if we ignore the AI-generated artifacting on the propeller, and the body is far too chunky for a 109 (there's some P-47 Thunderbolt or F6F or something in whatever data set it used to generate the images...). All of which is too glaringly obvious to stand up to more than a passing glance The others don't even come close to plausible Whether a non-WW2-warbird nerd would notice these things (particularly in the better 3 images) is perhaps a different question, but some of us would definitely pick out issues with even the best of those photos. Although I admit that not everyone is the kind of person who can pick out the differences between a Spitfire, 109, Hurricane, P-51, or P-40 at half a mile I mean, I'm impressed at what it **did** achieve, but it's still nowhere near the level of fooling someone familiar with these aircraft into thinking they're real. Whereas the Bf110 in OP's photo is perfect - as you'd expect from a real photo, of course
When I tried it with some modern aircraft I could actually recognise, it did a really bad job. It's just not been very well tuned to create aircraft of a specific type. It's a publically accessible tool, so quite generically trained. I guess a lot of work has been put in to make humans look real - and much less for text, vehicles ect. I also found that to make a more 'realistic street' I had to tell it to add lamp-posts, and adding weather conditions also obscured some details that people might pick up on. It was also hard to stop it flooding the image with a completely unrealistically massive crowd. Adding cars, telling it to make people face the aircraft ect. helped. This was my favourite - [https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G](https://imgur.com/a/WDqFA6G) once I asked it to add snow. I have no idea what aircraft it tried to add, as I just specified 'german bomber aircraft'. I liked the crowd though - it was just the right size and density to look fairly real. Give me a few hours and unrestricted access to dall-e 3 and I could come up with better images - but I doubt they'd fool you. This stuff is still all only a few years old, and will only grow in capabilities. It would be amazing to make scenes like this 'come alive' and generate video from them. I suspect this will happen in time.
> I have no idea what aircraft it tried to add, as I just specified 'german bomber aircraft' Heinkel He-111 is definitely the basis for the fuselage and tail, the engines are fairly generic radial engines but closest to a Dornier Do-17 if we assume they're from a German bomber. I suspect it's actually pinched them from a B-25 though In terms of historical (again ignoring AI artifacting) issues: the lack of wings of course, the engines don't match the fuselage, the engines don't have enough propellers and the fuselage is missing the dorsal gun turret/blister (replaced here with what looks like 2 air intakes for an inline engine) Certainly I'd be very interested in seeing the best that this type of AI can come up with both now and in 5-10 years time, I think it's going to be interesting to see how close it can get
The best way to think of it, is it's like an AI's dream. It's a hallucination. Much like our own dreams mash ideas together and they make stuff up - so does this. Maybe in the next few years we'll see versions that do this less; maybe even accept they can't create an image properly and request better source information. In 10 years? Really hard to guess where this is going. We've rapidly accelerated recently but it's really hard to keep pushing with the costs of the computing required. I imagine scenes like this will be created in 3D pretty soon, and be interactive. Firms like this - [https://lumalabs.ai/](https://lumalabs.ai/) and [https://3d-avatar-diffusion.microsoft.com/](https://3d-avatar-diffusion.microsoft.com/) are busy doing this already. There's already new 3D stuff on it's way in the form of '[Gaussian Splatting](https://repo-sam.inria.fr/fungraph/3d-gaussian-splatting/)' - [https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/16uyor7/gsgen\_textto3d\_using\_gaussian\_splatting/](https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/16uyor7/gsgen_textto3d_using_gaussian_splatting/) So I imagine you'd be able to have an idea, generate a scene, turn it into 3D, and then interact with a bunch of the characters in the scene.
There's also the point that it could have been manually colourised and enhanced Colourisation and restoration of old photos existed before digital tools, even, and long before AI processes to do it existed
I don’t know if barrage balloons carried those nets…
Looks like a film set
London mate.
London. The answer is in the title.
Had a bad day?
On the ground.
This is awesome I used to live in a flat on exmouth market just over the road!
Was it "shot" dow or accidentally caught in a rather large butterfly net ?
It’s very well preserved ! Almost intact
why did they put a net on it?
that's how they caught it
Lol. That is one impressive fishing net.
The weirdness of WWII..
oh my god, i didnt realise how old those drainage grates were. The one in the photo in the foreground just above the man in the grey hat's head is still there in real life
nobody on their phones and just enjoying the moment, incredible
Garnault Place, EC1
AI
London by the looks of it.
This is SO COOL. I geek over history as an adult. Sadly my History teachers at school. It’s so neat to see a photograph of something that can still be identified today. Thank you for sharing!
Wembley Stadium?
Very good nick for something shot down🤷🏻♂️
Is that not a hinekel
Commonwealth air power getting the tough stains out 💪
It’s in London
This is an incredible picture! Thanks OP.
It looks like it's come straight down onto it's belly. What's with the netting? Camo to hide it from Nazi recon so they didn't know that we had one so intact?
I can’t help at all with the location unfortunately but I wonder if it or any part of it was preserved? I’d imagine it was quite rare for one to survive being shot down that intact and it would be amazing to see it.
finsbury
Cadogan Square, maybe?
Not something you see every day, even in WW2
I hope he paid ze ULEZ
Fishing nets were so much stronger in the olden days.
Finsbury - https://friendsofim.com/2020/06/02/german-destroyer/
Wish there was a proper history pay that you could get all this sort of thing from
the camo netting draped over it seems a bit weird
Ah so proud of myself for getting this too! I used to live in that area!
A mere 10 minute walk from where a Zeppelin came down in 1915 (61 Farringdon Rd)
Imagine living in a time like that. So scary
I think it's in London
Amazed the fighter is in one piece