[Stig Jarlevik]

John et All

While I can agree with your general comments about so called historical programmes on the TV, I think you are basically too hard in your criticism.

I can imagine that anyone who is committed by the leadership in any channel to make ANY programme, do get a certain time to prepare such a show. We cannot expect people to spend years doing research for any such kind of programmes. If we wanted that, there would be nothing to watch in the first place. Neither can we expect these individuals to be experts in every field they are put to research. To get the right film sequences is also hard (I guess) since there is a wide difference in quality.
Some shows doesn't even come close, BUT in many cases the shown sequences (showing something totally different) can be just as exciting!!

I have a lot of taped programmes, mostly from Discovery Channel. Perhaps you guys outside Sweden are simply drowning in where and how to get hold of film sequences from all over the world, but I don't. My tapes have given me many happy hours watching films completely out of reach. I also know that some programmes are very good indeed, since I have friends who can vouch for that as well, being experts in their fields and interviewed for the shows.

Also if we only wanted fail safe TV, radio, magazines, newspapers etc, my advise is to stop looking, listen and read. You will never get that since it is always something that someone who knows better says is wrong. I use these programmes as a basis for questions not answers.

By the way John, if the Phantom was designed to combat the Backfire said bomber had to have been early indeed on the drawing board. I doubt the Backfire became known to the Allies until the 1970's. At the time of the mid 1950's US Navy was basically interested in getting something better than the Demon and the Phantom could be a choice. Change of mind turned the design into an attack aircraft and later again into an all-weather fighter. It's superlative performance did the rest I guess. I doubt the USN specified any Soviet aeroplane types to combat when writing their request for proposal. Far too little was known and they simply tried to get the most out of given performances. This the McDonnell team certainly did.

Leo, it is very hard to determine in any conflict what really happened in the air war. Most pilots, if given a choice, prefer to have been shot down by AA fire and not by any enemy pilot. All fighter pilots are trained to win and not to loose, US pilots probably more so than anyone else.
May I refer you to two books, Clashes by Marshall Michel III and Fighter pilots of North Vietnam by Roger Boniface? May I also say that my own belief is that some shoot downs over North Vietnam probably happened to pilots who never even saw the enemy or the missile that hit them. It happened in WW 1 and WW 2, also in Korea and Vietnam....

Cheers
Stig