Udet on History Channel

[Barrett]

I caught the late-show airing of the program, and all the above-cited criticisms are valid. However, in partial fairness to the History Channel, they merely redubbed the original German language program and inserted some subtitles.
More disappointments: WW I gets short shrift; they cut to the first commercial after 7 minutes of total air time, including the early credits and EU's childhood.
Good stuff: a number of looks at his fabled apartment in contemporary footage and some surviving artifacts. Comments by his daughter (!) who's probably about 65-70 and still a handsome woman. Recollections by friends or associates including Leini Riefenstahl who at 90-odd must set some kind of record with her long-time now 40-ish boyfriend/photographer/scuba diver.
One of Udet's two Curtiss Hawks, recently found in Poland, apparently. Incomplete airframe but the engine still runs.
Reinout picked the most notable segment: Udet's fabulous display of low-speed control within a couple feet of the ground. LOTS of throttle/rudder co-ordination with just about zero margin for error: you wouldn't believe how difficult it is to do what he habitually did. A 90-degree approach to the runway, hanging on the prop, and a flat-plate ("Batmobile") turn and flare at the last second. Udet in a D-VII must have been awesome.

But, not one word about Lo Zink!

If Udet was that good...imagine how good Guynemer was/would have been.

[leo]

I saw the show about Udet Wednesday evening and thought it was reasonably entertaining. I wish they could have had more about his WWI career, but I have "Ace of the Iron Cross" to fall back on.

Hiyo Jimbo! So sorry please. Really I'm not seeking perfection, just a little more accuracy please. The number of Udet's victories and the misidentification of Boelcke/MvR/Udet are not things subject to interpretation (at least not yet). I just think that if you are going to let the little things slip, God knows what else slips. What is really incredible to me that if this is a direct translation from a German production, well somebody should be stood against the wall at Lichterfeld and pelted with rotten scnitzel. You would think THEY would know who is who. Howsoever you and I have tilted over my perfectionism (or was it extremism?) before, and probably will again. I guess really my issue is the fact that WWI Aero gets so little attention outside the loop, that I am pretty ravenous when something does come down the pike. And it does annoy me to think I might see a post from a newbie claiming 26 kills for EU just because he/she saw it on the History Channel. BTW I didn't leave the room or bust a cap on the TV or anything, I watched the whole thing and enjoyed it. And I surely hope to see more. I just want Roger Mudd to be a little more careful. Seeya Jimbo.

Mikey,
So I gues it's like this...If Mikey doesn't like it, then it's not worth a d-amn. Must be pretty tough to live in an imperfect world with your penchant for perfectionism eh, MIKEY?!
See ya Mikey!
Jim

Read the post again swabbie. "I enjoyed it." If that was BB's score they screwed up the hue and cry would be astonishing. Not perfection; accuracy.

Mikey,
The way you came across was like... "WHAT? HOW COULD THEY? THEY SCREWED UP SO THEY SHOULD TURN IN THEIR CREDENTIALS! One thing you need to understand about media folks, they could screw up a wet dream. Just take the error with a grain of salt and move on. YOU know what the facts are, and if it bugs you that much then why haven't you written to them about the "glaring errors"? I DID write them about the errors and gave them the right names and counts. But to disparage them because of one or two mistakes IS a little extreme. When YOU publish something that is 100% accurate, then YOU have room to criticize! Until then there might be better ways of stating your beef without sounding like a total perfectionist. Take Hollywood for instance, they made the film 12 O'Clock High with Gregory Peck in it. During the film version of the Schweinfurt/Regensburg raid the B-17's come under attack by Fockewulf 190's. The film however shows BF-109's and P-47's, so go figure! It wasn't for ACCURACY it was for entertainment. The documentary on Udet WAS well done with a couple of minor mistakes! You just have to suck it up. Mistakes get made, life goes on, and nobody has infringed on your right to live and breathe. Veritas, lutulente!
See ya,
Jim
P.S. Swabbie and proud of it! What have you done for your country?

"12 O'Clock High" is a movie.Duh. Not a documentary. FYI I was one of the reasons the Navy was invented. Someone has to give the Marines a ride to the war.

[Barrett]

Evidently Roger Mudd's connection to the History Channel is that he's a distant relative of the doctor implicated in the Abe Lincoln assassination, more by bad luck than design.
Anyway, I tried posting this response yesterday when my dang computer locked up. The point I wanted to make is that we shouldn't be surprised when news readers recite dumb things about events long before they were born. Reason is that news readers as well as genuine journalists usually don't know squat about current military events, let alone "ancient history". During Desert Storm one of the Scud Studs said it was the first war even fought about oil (Hmmm...the Imperial General Staff in Tokyo would be interested in that statement) and the first time ballistic missiles had been used against civilians (hmmm...the residents of London, Antwerp, and assorted Iranian cities also would be interested.)
The point is: people like R Mudd simply recite what's on the teleprompter: Mudd never HEARD of Udet before filming that into and had no remote concept of the difference between 26 and 62, nor did it occur to him that if Udet was No. 2 on the Berlin Team, why the disparity between 80 victories and merely 26? TV personalities simply aren't wired that way.
There are "journalists" working today who cannot tell you the difference between a battalion and a brigade, an F-14 and an F-15, an AK-47 and an M16. There's a huge gap owing largely to the media's distaste for the warrior ethic, which is why knowledgable commentators like David Hackworth do so well. Hack may have critics, but he's BTDT and calls a spade a bleeping shovel, so he retains his credibility.