Fly Boy ?????

Art Kramer wrote:
Mike Marron wroteL
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I would think the operator would have better information on the ditching
behavior than would the manufacturer.

Glad to see you finally coming around Steven. There's no substitute
for experience but when I asked you how many hours you have in
a certain type your non sequitur response was "irrelevant."

We had 30 seconds to escape from a B-26 in training in Lake Charles.And some of
us didn't make it all the time. Navy guysawho have been through ditching drill
will understand. .The B-26 barely paused at the surface before flooding and
diving under.

I haven't been thru the Navy's ditching drills but I have ditched an
A/C before (for real) and I certainly understand. You're sitting there
fat, dumb and happy and the next thing ya know you're hanging
from the straps upside down. Here's a ditching story from one of
my UK bud's who went thru a similiar experience:

***

Well I had personal experience and I can tell you that when the trike
hits the water it is all over in a second and the wing wrapped around
the trike which tipped sideways and sank immediately. I would not
suggest undoing your seat belt if you intend to stay with the craft.

I panicked for a second underwater thinking I was trapped, I forgot
about my seat belt, then common sense took over and I relaxed, undid
it and felt my way out. In a rushing river or sea things will be even
worse. My river was slow moving and shallow enough to see a wing tip
sticking above the surface. One wing stayed in tact, the other
wrapped around the trike.

You won't be able to stall like a hang glider and just drop down to
the water unless you do a BIG stall which will take you up quite high.
The resulting drop will not be good. When they fly the English
channel, people fill their wings with air matresses to help keep the
wing afloat if they ditch.

I would not want to go through it again and I think I may take my
chances and jump next time before hitting the water, especially in
rough water or fast flowing rivers.

***

Bush's plane was a "floater" and often floated for hours. He should
have ditched.

Even if you're right, I'm afraid that ain't the point, Art. Have you
read Ed Rasimus' astute comments (and my followup) in this
thread? In case you missed it, here they are once again:

Ed said:

***

I've followed all this thread, biting my tongue in the process. What
amazes me is that the resident "if you ain't been, you ain't ****..."
curmudgeon is so eager to condemn someone who has been there.

Anyone who has been, knows that you all sign on--pilots, navs,
bomb-aimers, gunners, EWO's et. al. You go to war. You go with the
folks you are assigned to go with.

War happens in a heartbeat. It sometime works for you and sometime
against. Some folks die and some folks live. The live ones aren't
better or worse than the dead ones, simply luckier.

To second guess circumstances sixty years later, particularly based on
an author's creative account is to demean the whole warrior ethic.

I'm sorry. I survived. I didn't spend years in a POW camp. I wasn't
wounded in action. I didn't lose any crew members. I didn't lose any
aircraft. I saw a lot of losses.

The fact that is incontrovertible is that Bush (41) was a combat
pilot. He was younger than most. He was blooded. He lost an aircraft
in honorable combat. He survived. What is wrong with that?

Additionally, as I've previously noted in this forum, Bush (43) was a
graduate of UPT, a qualifier in a Century Series aircraft, and a
commissioned officer. Those are fine qualifications in my book.

***


My followup:

Well said and I agree wholeheartedly. Perhaps Teddy Roosevelt
summed it up best:


"It's not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the
strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done
better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the
arena......"