I recently watched an old episode of "Dogfights!" from the History Channel. I noticed that the F6F Hellcat (and previous models) were strikingly similar to the P47 Thunderbolt. I went on google to see if I could find any information that correlated to the sharing of aircraft design between the military branches during the war, but could not find anything.

Was the AAC P47 Thunderbolt design the inspiration behind the Navy F6F Hellcat? If so, were there any other planes that shared a design but were deployed by a different branch either in a different role, or modified for a different role?

Did the Treaty of Versailles, or most parts of it, have any ultimate "end condition" that would remove continuing restrictions on Germany, such as after payment of all reparations and/or years passed? I am aware at least some articles pertaining to occupations had end conditions, but its not clear to me how many other articles such as other economic and military restrictions could also be ended by Germany meeting certain conditions, or if most of the restrictions were indeed intended to be enforced in perpetuity.

I'm not too well-versed in Irish history, but it seems odd to me that Fenian refers to those Irish in Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, when the Fenian Brotherhood was an independence movement.

Prior to the discovery of Sildenafil (the active ingredient of Viagra and it’s competitors), was there any type of substance known to have been used for erectile enhancement? If so, what, when and by whom?

Gunsmith student here, when going over the assigned book on firearms technology development, (The Story of the Gun), it posits the two main reasons firearms took such a foothold in colonial America was violence between colonists and autochthonous peoples and more importantly, that colonists had the freedom to hunt game in the new world; whereas in Europe, most land belonged to a monarchy that heavily regulated the use of its land and game.

Is this true? Is it more complicated than that? Not even close? Would love to have a more nuanced perspective.

Hello, everyone. I am currently trying to write a book centered in the late XV and early XVI centuries, however I have not a lot of knowledge of the armor worn by people in those specific centuries, so I came here seeking guidance from the real historians.

My question is: How would you equip an army with low-cost equipment and good overall protection?

I know that plate armor was too expensive to equip everyone with and that chainmail was out of date, (I think) because it became too excruciating to make thus rising the price so I have literally no clue whatsoever.

I’m a law student in a civil law country. As part of my curriculum I have to study Roman law, I actually really enjoy it, but whenever I’ve researched I run into texts written by English speaking academics and I find that they’re just weird or wrong. They almost always cite legal texts instead of jurists and present roman law as this weird thing that doesn’t even resemble the legal roman tradition. What they write sometimes contradicts authors like Alvaro d’ors or Juan Iglesias who are widely considered the top scholars of roman law in history.

It seems to me that there’s a huge difference between how common law countries (UK, US, Canada, etc) and civil law countries view Roman law, it seems to me that English speaking historians avoid consulting legal scholars that follow the roman legal tradition and they end up making this weird amalgamation of romanised common law thing.

Follow up question in case there is not much on this topic; how were the Hemshin people treated under the Ottomans?

I just find it intriguing that any random guy can just decide to form military unit And possibly succeed. It's so different from the way the military works now I'm just trying to understand how they worked.

Uniforms had camouflage, helmets had it and tanks also had it but I've never really seen it on WW2 weapons. More recent videogames set during WW2 have heavily included weapon camouflages so I'm wondering if it's actually based on anything real or just there to add variety and sell cosmetics.

I can't find anything about this topic Online so I'll see if the people on here have any knowledge about this.

The podcast series 'Blowback' on the history of US-Cuban relations has an episode about the Cuban missile crisis. In this episode the hosts state that in the early 60s Khrushchev was given info from Soviet intelligence that the US had been planning a premptive nuclear attack on the Soviet union, and that they had called off this attack after a Soviet nuclear test showed their capabilities to be beyond what the us had believed. This led Khrushchev to believe it a sensible deterrent strategy to place nuclear weapons in Cuba. What the podcast didn't cover was whether or not this Intel wass accurate so I thought I'd ask here. Was the us actually planning a premptive strike on the Soviet union? If so what were these plans? If not why did Soviet intelligence believe this?

I've heard frequently that WWI was inevitable. If not for the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, what would likely be the next trigger to set off the war?

I'm reading "The Big Show" by the French RAF pilot Pierre Clostermann, an account of his time flying Spitfires and Tempests with the RAF.

He frequently mentions pilots turning off their radio as they approach the runway to land. This often results in tragedy as the pilot lacks crucial information from the runway controller. For example a Tempest was coming in to land, unaware of a lower flying Avro Anson carrying fresh reinforcement pilots. The two collided on approach to the runway as the Tempest pilot didn't get the warning from runway control.

Why not leave the radios on until they grounded?

Hi, so as the title says, I'm planning out my latest novel. But the plot requires some rather grueling historical work. Not that I'm not up to the challenge of course, but I wanted to ask the historians of Reddit for their insight. It might get me from point A to point B light-years faster.

Okay, so, my book specifically encircles the year 1801 and onward. My question is, who were the great minds present in 1801? Scientists, engineers, leaders, artists, etc. I might be a bit overzealous on this, but I'd like to know who the landmark people of the early 1800s were. World shapers. Society builders. What were the minor events that go unlooked? What were the scientific revelations of 1801 and onward? The tech advancements and the science are most vital to me.

I picked the year 1801 because it's a more or less bland year, but this is intentional and very much necessary. I needed to pick a year on the timeline where there's some technology, but very very little of it.

If anyone could contribute some sources, some insight on something they know specifically, that'd be great. I don't expect anyone to give me an essay on the year 1801 and onward, but any important things and people and advancements to know would be fantastic.

I appreciate anyone who responds with as little or big an answer they have. I was going to do all the research myself but didn't know where to go or where to start. Then I realized that this is exactly what the internet is for!

Anyway, thank you again,

Cheers

A lot of times I hear how Columbus was stupid, that his calculations were completely off and that other scientists knew this, nevertheless he got founds for his journey, which I think is kind of weird. So I was wondering if this is just some kind of "anti" myth formed to counter the previous misconceptions?

My questions:

Was he more wrong in calculating the earth's circumference or the size of the Asian continent?

What are the actual numbers he calculated of the earth's circumference and the width of Asia+Europe? How do these compare to the consensus at the time?

If he was so obviously wrong, how did he get the funding?

The decade included the Supremes, the Temptations, Otis Redding, Marvin Gaye, Ray Charles, and others. The era was followed by the rise of Disco, which also provided a mainstream platform for many black musicians. How did this fit with the ongoing social and racial issues during this time?