Sens , To make a point from a phrase in your above submission and illustrating our previous remarks which perhaps supports our common view.
Max Collier and Nigel Elsdon were probably not shot down by AAA according to the U.K. enquiry. It is believed that the aircraft was manouvered in to the ground attacking Tallil at night . This is what I believe , I knew both men well from our earlier lives and therefore followed this incident closely. However who , in the end, can be absolutely certain of what happened? And this is just one incident …….. Also I noted that some “sources” failed to record the loss of these two guys until a decade later. There was/is some confusion in some accounts as to whether they were even in the same aircraft… The fog of war and second-hand reporting, internet or not.

I think there are quite a lot of good open source shots of the Mig 31 on intercept from the late 80’s if anybody just bothers to look. For example “OKB MiG ” by Piotr Butowski pp216,217 amongst many others.
No comment on the above statement ! 🙂

Ask him if he remembers Bill Purvis his Flying Instructor in the early days 🙂

Re Sens. Thanks for your reponseThese are pretty much the established figures now. N.B. the 3:2 rule should be applied to claims made at the time.
Re :attrition . 5% loss rate =replacing entire force with crews every 20 missions. A nightmare for sustained operations .

Hi Sens,
Thanks for your perception of the problem. Even now there are emotive issues regarding what is accepted as “real” figures and what is accepted by some ( e.g. me)will not ever be accepted by others. In recalling 1967, both sides posted fairly extravagant claims at the time, in retrospect, apparently more so the Arabs . (However, in ’73 I recall the Israelis did take very much more of a hammering than they admitted at the time. )
I would only invite researchers to recover statements made during the combat and contrast them to what is becoming accepted now. To be honest I freely admit that I no longer have the precise claims of the time to hand as they have been long binned as being shown to be largely spurious and I have not now access to the resources to go back and repeat the exercise. The 3:2 rule did work fairly well as I recall, however I accept your legitimate question and do admit that I no longer have all the data to hand to substantiate my statement directly. Those with more time at hand are cordially invited to do historical research to check out contemporary statements versus currently published “accepted” figures. They can then face the flack from ‘experts’ who will then argue the issue ad infinitum.
Good call Sens -you got me!

A Father getting out late from work and going back home suddenly
remembers that it’s his Daughters birthday and that he has no present for
her. He stops his car in front of a toy store goes in and asks the saleslady
how much does the Barbie in the show window cost?

Nicely the saleslady replies. Which Barbie? We have:

“Barbie goes to the Gym” for $19.95
“Barbie plays Volleyball” for $19.95
“Barbie goes shopping” for $19.95
“Barbie goes to the beach” for $19.95
“Barbie goes dancing” for $19.95
“Barbie divorced” for $265.95

And the Father really surprised, asks: Uummm! Why does Barbie divorced
cost $265.95, when all the others are priced at only $19.95

The saleslady proudly replies. Sir…, “Barbie Divorced” comes with:
Ken’s car, Ken’s house, Ken’s cottage, Ken’s yacht, Ken’s furniture,
Ken’s computer and Ken’s best friend……………

Just swanning about I see…….

The “Mail” is a Madge- Much more interesting!