Sometimes it's a bit difficult, when in the first chapter of a book already, the author expresses a different
opinion, than my own ! Worse, if it isn't stated using just the big stick, but a with look into the history of
camouflage in aviation and ways to prevent detection. Such things really can provoke thinking about your
own opinion ! Highly dangerous and a bit unfair, isn't it ? 
Purists may argue, that most of the aircraft dealt with in this book, actually aren't flying wings, but tailless
aircraft. But I agree, that would make the title a bit unhandy ...
The 31 types (and some more, as the evolution of the Me 163) mentioned in the index are all shown in highly
detailed drawings, many as cut-aways and there are a number of perspective drawings and depictions of the
contemporary free-fall and guided weapons, too. All drawings on full page and the well known quality.
Working on projects from that era, especially German ones, often is similar to reconstructing dinosaurs from
bits of bones, but if the Tyrannosaurus Rex really looked, as we know from "Jurassic Park", is uncertain.
Such doubts and uncertainties are hardly ever expressed in publications, just see one discussion we had here
a while ago.
And that's, why I would adress a very special "Thank you !" to the author for actually daring to tag several
drawings as "speculative" ! That's really rare and should catch on to my opinion.
I would have liked to see a list of the used sources, maybe there was something, we didn't know still yet ?
But I was told recently, that with the exception of purely scientific publications, this is often dispensed with
today, just to prevent legal problems and nowadays Google probably comes up quickly with most sources.
Just would have been easier at the end of a good read.
