RE: Book review: Red Wings Over the Yalu: China, the Soviet Union and the Ai...

["Jack Hwang" <jackchwang@comcast.net>]

I am terribly sorry about the last posting.  I sent it out by mistake.
Please ignore it.

Jack

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu
[mailto:owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu]On Behalf Of Jack Hwang
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 2:47 PM
To: KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu
Subject: RE: Book review: Red Wings Over the Yalu: China, the Soviet Union
and the Ai...


???:

????????????????????????????
F86E???,?KORWALD??? Damaged during encounter with
MiGs  and a loss,?? Thompson & McLaren ? MiG Alley ???
06/24/1953 ??,??? Jackson,?? Mechanical / Burnout?

?????,Doug Evans ?????????????????
????????????????????????????
???????,????????????

Thanks

Light

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu
[mailto:owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu]On Behalf Of Joe Brennan
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 7:45 PM
To: KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu
Subject: Re: Book review: Red Wings Over the Yalu: China, the Soviet Union
and the Ai...


Cookie,

F-86E 50-645 wasn't lost this day (lost June 24, 1953 in an accident) but
hit with a single, probably 23mm, shell in the right horizontal stabilizer,
requiring replacement of the stabilizer and elevator assembly. One thing
I've found "looking under the hood" of Korwald is for F86's when it says
"damaged" and doesn't specifically say lost, it was almost always repaired
(for B-29's there are a higher % of damaged planes not returned to service
but still most were). Also not all damage incidents are in K (virtually all
outright losses are) and the day of the month is not always reliable for
damage (though this one
seems correct). Thompson/McLaren "MiG Alley" apendices are a better source
for F-86 fates than Korwald IMO, though a few mysteries remain in their
entries too, and they don't cover non-loss damage.

However the existence of another damaged a/c tends to contradict Evan's
(usually reliable I've found) statement that only his pair and Davis met any
MiG's at all on Feb 10, since he doesn't mention damage.

The reason I lean to the Chinese claim is more at the detail level of each
of the 3 accounts, the Russian one (Red Devils account as related by Zhang)
doesn't seem to describe the Davis combat, while the American and Chinese
ones seem to come closer to describing the same combat, albeit still with
signficant discrepancies. For the Russian one to work one has to assume they
came upon Davis and Littlefield (his wingman) attacking Chinese MiG's and
the times and Littlefield's account seem to weigh against this; he says
Davis was downed by MiG's they both saw that were already in the formation
they attacked before they attacked it.

Joe


----- Original Message -----
From: AMPSOne@aol.com
To: KOREAN-WAR-L@listproc.cc.ku.edu
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: Book review: Red Wings Over the Yalu: China, the Soviet Union
and the Ai...


Joe,

I have problems with this as well. The basic facts are these:

Two Chinese MiGs from the 12th Aviation Regiment, 4th Aviation Division,
were shot down with one pilot KIA and one who bailed out.

Officially the USAF credited Davis with two kills.

The Soviets claimed two F-86s shot down on that date.

KORWALD lists F-86E aircraft # 50-645 and #51-2752 (Davis) as shot down on
that date.

One can argue the case that it works out better towards the Soviet claim
than the Chinese one, based strictly on the "Who shot John" claims. ((Side
question: who was flying 50-645?  He was rescued and nobody so far seems to
have a name, but that could help sort things out a lot.))

Cookie Sewell
AMPS