AviationBanter

AviationBanter (http://www.aviationbanter.com/index.php)
-   Military Aviation (http://www.aviationbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam (http://www.aviationbanter.com/showthread.php?t=9683)

Ian MacLure July 17th 04 06:47 AM

(B2431) wrote in
:

[snip]

One of the men from Doolittle's raid who survived Japanese captivity
went back to Japan as a missionary.


Which comes from an entirely different point of view than the
Enola gay crew.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source


Bill Shatzer July 17th 04 06:50 AM

Steve Mellenthin ) writes:
-snip-
Speaking out against a war takes courage but doing so in a way that encourages
the enemy, raises the level of danger to the men still in the line of fire, and
denigrates the service record of those who have served is not an act of
courage, it is an act of self serving political gratuity.


How would you suggest that might be done? Just how would one speak out
against the war while simultaneously not encouraging the enemy? Speaking,
but doing so so quietly that no one hears?

And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line
of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible.
Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful
sense.

--


"Cave ab homine unius libri"

Jack July 17th 04 07:01 AM

Regnirps wrote:

Did you ever see anyone come back with a glove caught in the canopy?


Nope.

Especially not from 50,000'. ;

4 PSI isn't much, but it's all you've got.



Jack

Jack July 17th 04 07:02 AM

Regnirps wrote:

They had an automatic landing system.


They had ILS, if that's what you mean, but no autopilot.


Jack

Ron July 17th 04 07:21 AM

There was one in TAP for about a year for one million, and with hot ejection
seats.


I think that was the one I used to see in the hangar in Wichita Falls (SPS).
It was blue, and I think one of the ENJJPT IPs was instructing the owner it it.

Ron
PA-31T Cheyenne II
Maharashtra Weather Modification Program
Pune, India


Ron July 17th 04 07:32 AM

One of the men from Doolittle's raid who survived Japanese captivity went
back
to Japan as a missionary.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


And one of the Japanese participants in Pearl Harbor later became a protestant
minister in the US.



Ron
PA-31T Cheyenne II
Maharashtra Weather Modification Program
Pune, India


ArtKramr July 17th 04 12:47 PM

Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: (Regnirps)
Date: 7/16/2004 10:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

(ArtKramr) wrote:

I don't think we need the Geneva convention to tell us 50 caliber heavy

machine
guns used against civilians is wrong.


Depends on what they are doing at the time. What about a lynch mob after you?

-- Charlie Springer


Excellant point. 50's for everybody.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


Steve Mellenthin July 17th 04 01:22 PM

Steve Mellenthin ) writes:
-snip-
Speaking out against a war takes courage but doing so in a way that

encourages
the enemy, raises the level of danger to the men still in the line of fire,

and
denigrates the service record of those who have served is not an act of
courage, it is an act of self serving political gratuity.


How would you suggest that might be done? Just how would one speak out
against the war while simultaneously not encouraging the enemy? Speaking,
but doing so so quietly that no one hears?


Certainly not by hanging out with peple who allow themselves to be photgraphed
sitting in a piece of AAA that was probably used agaist our forces within 12
hours. And not by making comments about how Americans are committing
atrocities in the combat zone, or hurling ones medals at the government only to
claim later it was staged.

One can disagree or speak out without speaking badly of the people who are
still serving and honorably following orders.
Would you rather have the military pick and choose their conflicts or follow
the orders of the Commander-in-Chief.



And the best way to reduce the danger level to those still in the line
of fire was to get them out of the line of fire as quickly as possible.
Especially as the VN conflict was not going to be "won" in any meaningful
sense.

--


That had been happening since 1971 and by 72 the only major combat troops were
air units blunting the North Vietnamese offensive into the south so it is hard
for me personally to see that JFK's actions weren't more for personal political
gain than opposition to the was. Just my opinion.

Regnirps July 18th 04 05:05 AM

Jack wrote:

Regnirps wrote:


They had an automatic landing system.


They had ILS, if that's what you mean, but no autopilot.


I'm pretty sure there was a system in the T-38's where you could throw the
panic switch on approah and it did the rest -- provided you met certain
constraints about being lined up right.

-- Charlie Springer


Dave Kearton July 18th 04 05:08 AM


"Regnirps" wrote in message
...
|
|
| I'm pretty sure there was a system in the T-38's where you could throw the
| panic switch on approah and it did the rest -- provided you met certain
| constraints about being lined up right.
|
| -- Charlie Springer
|



....and it's got a convenient yellow handle between the pilot's knees. ;-)







Cheers


Dave Kearton






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AviationBanter.com