Paul wrote:
Dean, the gun camera footage you show is the wrong way around. Your "1st" is the second kill. This error is frequently made from people copying Dick Lords initial error.
Stefaan is correct, the radio messages attributed by the South Africans for the 1st MiG was actually the second MiG, both returned to base.
Very glad Dean get's in trouble for my mistake!
I will correct it.
The footage does actually better match the description of events when the footage is swapped around.
mamba wrote:
Kill no.1:
Kill no2:
What I still don't understand is that after all this time, now the story emerges that the second Mig survived? More than 30 years later!? If it is indeed true that there was proof that the second Mig survived, why still credit it? Was the propaganda train too far from station by then to recall it? If the wing man didn't see it as a kill, that would surely have come up during the return to base or debrief after the flight?
Information gathered later on conclusively proving otherwise I can perhaps understand. That could take a while to obtain which means by then there was probably already press pieces published and so on. That would make it much more difficult to recall. Yet then surely it would have got mentioned in books or articles? There are plenty such pieces which was written long after the war ended and the old government disbanded.
It just does not seem to make sense to me... Perhaps the reason is that they did not think the information was conclusive enough to warrant the withdrawal of the kill, i.e disprove the pilot's statement and his gun camera footage conclusively.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Anyway, someone needs to keep Dean on his toes. 
