BBC2 9pm The Spitfire : Britain's Flying Past

[Mr_B]

I don't imagine it is going to contain anything amazingly new, but hopefully lots of new footage and soundtrack in an hour long show must be worth a look in ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0153yb6

[Eric Mc]

If only they recognised some of the other RAF fighters of WW2.

[Simpo Two]

Pretty good although it wasn't made clear that Lardner-Burke didn't fly in the BoB. Oddly enough a Google finds another chap of the same surname: www.acesofww2.com/Safrica/aces/lardner-burke.html

Not sure what the tropicalised Spitfires were doing supposedly off the Kent coast but never mind

What did get the piss bubbling on more than one occasion was John Sargent's insistance on calling a Focke-Wulf a 'Fokker'. If Focke-Wulf is too long to say, please call it a '190'.

[Eric Mc]

I found that annoying too.

[Simpo Two]

At least they did show gun-camera footage of 190s and not Hurricanes

[dr_gn]

Simpo Two said:

What did get the piss bubbling on more than one occasion was John Sargent's insistance on calling a Focke-Wulf a 'Fokker'. If Focke-Wulf is too long to say, please call it a '190'.

Difficult to tell whether he abbreviated it to "Focke" or actually meant "Fokker".

Fokker (as in triplane) had nothing to do with the Focke-Wulf 190.

[Hard-Drive]

Good programme, if somewhat lacking in content. Two things got my piss simmering, one, the producer thinking that the glorious roar of a Merlin springing into life can somehow be "enhanced" with music.

Two, comparing the attitude and bravery of the 20 year old girls delivering spitfires or carrying on with thier work with a landmine dangling from the guttering compared to the fking brain donating girlie rioters who made the news the other month with that genius "well it's free stuff course ya gonna nick it innit". They must have been thinking "why did we even bother".

[Eric Mc]

dr_gn said:

Simpo Two said:

What did get the piss bubbling on more than one occasion was John Sargent's insistance on calling a Focke-Wulf a 'Fokker'. If Focke-Wulf is too long to say, please call it a '190'.

Difficult to tell whether he abbreviated it to "Focke" or actually meant "Fokker".

Fokker (as in triplane) had nothing to do with the Focke-Wulf 190.

I wasn't sure what he was saying either. However, I've never heard anyone abbreviate "Focke-Wulf" to just "Focke" before. The normal abbreviation is to use the official one, the letter "FW".

[Simpo Two]

dr_gn said:

Difficult to tell whether he abbreviated it to "Focke" or actually meant "Fokker".

Fokker (as in triplane) had nothing to do with the Focke-Wulf 190.

He was of course abbreviating it to Focke, but anyone who has ever made even a schoolboy-level study of the era would know they were never called that - if for no other reason than it sounds exactly like a completely different aeroplane.

As Sargent is a reporter by trade and professes to be an enthusiast on the era, I mark that as 'fail'. Also didn't like the way he glammed up/misquoted combat reports, for example saying 'swooped down' when the words in front of him said 'dived'. Just read the damn words man, it's sufficiently exciting not to need hyping up.

[Eric Mc]

Part of the beauty of reading these combat reports is the fact that they WERE written in matter of fact language (with the odd acerbic comment sometimes). There is no need for a journalist to "big-up" any of it.

There were some interesting bits of footage in the programme which I had never seen before but that made it all the more frustrating.

[paulrussell]

You are all forgetting that the programme was made for a very wide audience. You will always be disapointed as these sort of programes are always filled with over elaborate stories. Also don't blame John Sergeant for what he said, as it's all scripted.

[Eric Mc]

paulrussell said:

You are all forgetting that the programme was made for a very wide audience. You will always be disapointed as these sort of programes are always filled with over elaborate stories. Also don't blame John Sergeant for what he said, as it's all scripted.

The big assumption in that statement is that the "wide audience" somehow cannot handle facts and only wants emotions.

Raymond Baxter's 1976 "Spitfire" documentary was also made for a wide audience and was a lot better. Is the implication that the wide of audience of 1976 more intelligent than the wide audience of 35 years later?

Or is it that the programme makers of 1976 had more respect and higher expectations of their audience than the media trained and immersed programme makers of 2011?

[Turbodiesel1690]

Interesting programme, Sarge didn't seem to do much when he had the Spitfire controls though did he?

[Eric Mc]

His stomach probably got in the way of the control column.

[Simpo Two]

paulrussell said:

You are all forgetting that the programme was made for a very wide audience. You will always be disapointed as these sort of programes are always filled with over elaborate stories

It wasn't over-elaborate, just slightly wrong when it could so easily have been right.

Perhaps the scriptwriter, when faced with 'Focke-Wulf' being too long for the wide audience to understand, thought he would abbreviate it to 'Fokker' because then that sound a bit like 'fker' whch is a bit rude, tee hee.

[eccles]

It might have been nice if they'd mentioned the work the ground crew did a little more. There was a nice bit on the building of the aircraft, but barely a mention of the people who kept them flying.

[paulrussell]

Eric Mc said:

paulrussell said:

You are all forgetting that the programme was made for a very wide audience. You will always be disapointed as these sort of programes are always filled with over elaborate stories. Also don't blame John Sergeant for what he said, as it's all scripted.

The big assumption in that statement is that the "wide audience" somehow cannot handle facts and only wants emotions.

Raymond Baxter's 1976 "Spitfire" documentary was also made for a wide audience and was a lot better. Is the implication that the wide of audience of 1976 more intelligent than the wide audience of 35 years later?

Or is it that the programme makers of 1976 had more respect and higher expectations of their audience than the media trained and immersed programme makers of 2011?

I don't think people are as inteligent in 2011 than they were in 1976 unfortunatly. I also think very few people who are intrested in the subject get full control of the making of the programe, so we get inaccuracies which enthusiasts spot.

[Wacky Racer]

Simpo Two said:

Pretty good although it wasn't made clear that Lardner-Burke didn't fly in the BoB. Oddly enough a Google finds another chap of the same surname: www.acesofww2.com/Safrica/aces/lardner-burke.html

Not sure what the tropicalised Spitfires were doing supposedly off the Kent coast but never mind

What did get the piss bubbling on more than one occasion was John Sargent's insistance on calling a Focke-Wulf a 'Fokker'. If Focke-Wulf is too long to say, please call it a '190'.

Perhaps Stan Boardman wrote the script?

[Simpo Two]

paulrussell said:

I don't think people are as inteligent in 2011 than they were in 1976 unfortunatly. I also think very few people who are intrested in the subject get full control of the making of the programe, so we get inaccuracies which enthusiasts spot.

In 1976 the country was still run by the generation that fought the war and had a good idea of what was what, valued education, getting things right etc. Now the country is run by the Children of Blair, yeah whatever, and god help it.

[Fat Albert]

Eric Mc said:

Part of the beauty of reading these combat reports is the fact that they WERE written in matter of fact language (with the odd acerbic comment sometimes). There is no need for a journalist to "big-up" any of it.

My Other Grandfather (not the 19sqn Merlin Technician) kept a Diary between his release from the Siege of Tobruk until he went into the SRS (The SAS briefly changed its name after Stirling was captured) during that time he served with the Black Watch and then went into 1 Para and did his Parachute Training.

The diary is a stunning read and tells how boring the Italian Paratroopers were as they would surrender as soon as they started firing and also goes through his parachute training all from the perspective of someone who has to fight for their life every day of the week....apart from when he goes on the pi$$/pull in Cairo!