If you are going to be critical, shouldn't you be accurate?

[GuinnessMK]

The Daily Wail runs a story about the Beeb making a mistake about the content of a photo:-

"Spitfires at 4 o’clock? Not on the BBC’s Battle of Britain website which mistakenly used picture of US plane that didn’t even take part in 1940 conflict"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1305108/Sp...

A bit pedantic, but if accuracy is important, shouldn't they get their own text right?

"The aircraft was ordered from the US, but didn't arrive in the UK until September 1941, a year after the war had ended" ??????

[Jasandjules]

"The RAF did order the plane from the United States but didn’t receive the first models until September 1941, a year after the Battle of Britain."

Looks like they have noticed it now then.......

[Eric Mc]

And The Mail are showing that famous photo of Jan Zumbach's Spitfire V - a version of the Spitfire which didn't enter servbice until 1941.

The picture was actually taken in 1942.

[Eric Mc]

Jasandjules said:

"The RAF did order the plane from the United States but didn’t receive the first models until September 1941, a year after the Battle of Britain."

Looks like they have noticed it now then.......

And promptly given over to the Russians as the RAF found the Airacobra totally unsuitable for their operations. Only one squadron was ever equipped with them - 601.

The problem for many papers is that because they are now predominantly printed in full colour, they struggle to find appropriate colour shots from the WW2 era to illustrate their stories. Basically, if it's a colour photo, they'll print it - hang the accuracy.

Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 22 August 15:53

[carmonk]

This is the DM who pepper their ill-informed (and often entirely fabricated) articles with random photographs, and often use photos from other articles because they can't be bothered to check their facts, or do their job? At least normally if the BBC don't have information they don't write anything, which accounts for their pathetically empty website and ste news service.

[zakelwe]

Eric Mc said:

And The Mail are showing that famous photo of Jan Zumbach's Spitfire V - a version of the Spitfire which didn't enter servbice until 1941.

The picture was actually taken in 1942.

But isn't that the BBC photo correcting it? So the BBC got it wrong twice?

I don't really care to be honest, I'm glad the BBC are just putting up something about it after all these years. Lets be thankful for that. I doubt sat tv will be doing same if they took over the airwaves in the UK if the BBC ceased to exist.

Andy

[Eric Mc]

The BBC even showed pre-war Spitfire Is (two bladed props and no white in the roundels) in one picture. Disgraceful.

[Dunk76]

GuinnessMK said:

A bit pedantic, but if accuracy is important, shouldn't they get their own text right?

"The aircraft was ordered from the US, but didn't arrive in the UK until September 1941, a year after the war had ended" ??????

Along with claiming the Hurricane is part of the Spitfire family.

and 'High Flying Spitfires' - which include two Hurricanes

[CobolMan]

Here's a question for you all (OK, Eric) - practically every documentary about the BoB has a clip of the long-nosed He-111 (either a B, E or P model) but were these actually used by the Luftwaffe in the BoB?

[Eric Mc]

CobolMan said:

Here's a question for you all (OK, Eric) - practically every documentary about the BoB has a clip of the long-nosed He-111 (either a B, E or P model) but were these actually used by the Luftwaffe in the BoB?

No.

Most of them had gone by the invasion of Poland. Their main "arena" was the Spanish Civil War.

There are actually very few pieces of film available of the Battle of Britain and when programme makers are stitching together a documentary or news report on the Battle, they reach for this limited stock. Over time, a number of inappropriate pieces of footage have crept in, such as those early He111s. There is also footage of a pre war two bladed Spitfire I banking towards the camera 'plane which gets used a lot as well as footage from the ground of a Spitfire chasing a Ju88. The latter is from film taken during comparative performance testing by the RAE of a captured Ju88.

[Dunk76]

Eric Mc said:

CobolMan said:

Here's a question for you all (OK, Eric) - practically every documentary about the BoB has a clip of the long-nosed He-111 (either a B, E or P model) but were these actually used by the Luftwaffe in the BoB?

No.

Most of them had gone by the invasion of Poland. Their main "arena" was the Spanish Civil War.

There are actually very few pieces of film available of the Battle of Britain and when programme makers are stitching together a documentary or news report on the Battle, they reach for this limited stock. Over time, a number of inappropriate pieces of footage have crept in, such as those early He111s. There is also footage of a pre war two bladed Spitfire I banking towards the camera 'plane which gets used a lot as well as footage from the ground of a Spitfire chasing a Ju88. The latter is from film taken during comparative performance testing by the RAE of a captured Ju88.

Not half as much as the gun camera footage of the Hurricane getting a pounding; often when the firing comes from an Allied plane, and the FW190 which half rolls and the pilot bales out from; suitable for all documentaries from 1939 onward - even seen that used in documentary on the pacific theatre.

Detail matters

[Eric Mc]

There's also a gun camera shot of an Arado Ar96 training plane getting pasted which is often included in BoB documentaries. No doubt, it is really film of some poor unsuspecting student pilot geting jumped on by a marauding P-51 Mustang over the Fatherland sometiome around 1944.

Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 24th August 08:44