RicodJour wrote:

They sort of glossed over the tri-sniper thing without
much technical explanation, beyond a cursory description with some
fancy computer graphics.

That's maybe because their explanation was made-up based on what
they saw on the evening news and the computer graphics aren't
remotely close to what actually happened. I am often astonished at
how sloppy the research and production is on those shows, and how
willing they are to use heavily-padded filler of doubtful history
veracity.

I saw the documentary. What were the main points of inaccuracy?

R

Please note my use of the word "maybe." I didn't claim any specific points
of inaccuracy in this particular show (which I have not seen). I suggested
an explanation for why they might have "glossed over the tri-sniper thing"
based on seeing umpteen other History Channel-style documentaries in which
anyone with a decent knowledge of the subject matter can spot numerous
errors. I'll also suggest that if they glossed over details it's because
the people who carried off this admirable rescue took pains not to provide
such details, and understandably so.