A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 3rd 07, 09:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Paul Elliot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 222
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 11:35 am, Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 10:55 am, "TMOliver" wrote:
"Daryl Hunt" wrote ...
Speaking of Doofus's and you show up. One person already showed
two links
that they were around as camera ships in the Actives up until
1959. But
don't let the facts get in the way of becoming a contributing
member of
the
404thk00ks. You live it down well.
No, they haven't. There were, unless you can find a competent
cite, one
with any hint of factual nature, no P-38 derived photo birds in
service in
1959 or in the years immediastely preceding. You don't seem to
comprehend
that P-38s were quick to leave the service because there were in
inventory,
both for conventional and photo missions literally thousands of
more capable
a/c gathering dust until Korea, and even Korea's needs were not
great enough
to summon elderly photo birds with less speed and range than the P-51
derivatives used for low altitude work. As late as 1957, there
may have
been a couple of TB-25s around for station "hack" service in the
Training
Command, and B-26s (NA, Not Martin), were still in ANG service (and
used by
the CIA/Cuban force strikes connected with the Bay of Pigs), but
you're
going to have to "show" us P-38s somewhere other than in your
agaonized
dreams before anybody will believe you...
To say that you are full of **** remains grotesque understaement.
You're
simply clueless, fallen well over the edge into "wackodom". You
ought to be
ashamed of yourself (in fact, probably would be, were you not too
simple
minded to comprehend that you've been emabarrassed so often as to
have all
potential credibility.
TMO
http://www.p-38online.com/recon.html
A quick and logical explanation for the death of the P-38, P-4 and P-5
was the birth of the U-2. Hardly likely that two such systems,
especially with the U-2's superior altitude performance, would co-
exist.
not really
The U2 was not suited for battlefield reconnaissance. USAF tried the
Canberra but it was a failure and then the RB-66 derived from the
skywarrior which was a success

Vince


They were used for that purpose in Cuba, one got shot down.
By October 19 the U-2 flights (then almost continuous) showed four
sites were operational.

and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2


Cuba was not a "battlefield"

Vince


Oh? Tell that to the guys who went ashore at the Bay of Pigs.

--
Heaven is where the police are British, the chefs Italian, the mechanics
German, the lovers French and it is all organized by the Swiss.

Hell is where the police are German, the chefs British, the mechanics
French, the lovers Swiss and it is all organized by Italians.

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/
  #2  
Old May 3rd 07, 09:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Jack Linthicum
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 301
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

On May 3, 4:12 pm, Paul Elliot wrote:
Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 11:35 am, Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 10:55 am, "TMOliver" wrote:
"Daryl Hunt" wrote ...
Speaking of Doofus's and you show up. One person already showed
two links
that they were around as camera ships in the Actives up until
1959. But
don't let the facts get in the way of becoming a contributing
member of
the
404thk00ks. You live it down well.
No, they haven't. There were, unless you can find a competent
cite, one
with any hint of factual nature, no P-38 derived photo birds in
service in
1959 or in the years immediastely preceding. You don't seem to
comprehend
that P-38s were quick to leave the service because there were in
inventory,
both for conventional and photo missions literally thousands of
more capable
a/c gathering dust until Korea, and even Korea's needs were not
great enough
to summon elderly photo birds with less speed and range than the P-51
derivatives used for low altitude work. As late as 1957, there
may have
been a couple of TB-25s around for station "hack" service in the
Training
Command, and B-26s (NA, Not Martin), were still in ANG service (and
used by
the CIA/Cuban force strikes connected with the Bay of Pigs), but
you're
going to have to "show" us P-38s somewhere other than in your
agaonized
dreams before anybody will believe you...
To say that you are full of **** remains grotesque understaement.
You're
simply clueless, fallen well over the edge into "wackodom". You
ought to be
ashamed of yourself (in fact, probably would be, were you not too
simple
minded to comprehend that you've been emabarrassed so often as to
have all
potential credibility.
TMO
http://www.p-38online.com/recon.html
A quick and logical explanation for the death of the P-38, P-4 and P-5
was the birth of the U-2. Hardly likely that two such systems,
especially with the U-2's superior altitude performance, would co-
exist.
not really
The U2 was not suited for battlefield reconnaissance. USAF tried the
Canberra but it was a failure and then the RB-66 derived from the
skywarrior which was a success


Vince


They were used for that purpose in Cuba, one got shot down.
By October 19 the U-2 flights (then almost continuous) showed four
sites were operational.


and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2


Cuba was not a "battlefield"


Vince


Oh? Tell that to the guys who went ashore at the Bay of Pigs.

--
Heaven is where the police are British, the chefs Italian, the mechanics
German, the lovers French and it is all organized by the Swiss.

Hell is where the police are German, the chefs British, the mechanics
French, the lovers Swiss and it is all organized by Italians.

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/


Vince is a lawyer, he thinks that if he says the same wrong thing over
and over that will eventually make it true or the listeners will be
asleep. The Air Force Cross given Major Anderson must have been a real
goof by the Air Force and Kennedy.

http://cworld.clemson.edu/Fall2000/12thday.htm

  #3  
Old May 3rd 07, 09:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Vince
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 134
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 4:12 pm, Paul Elliot wrote:
Vince wrote:


http://new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/


Vince is a lawyer, he thinks that if he says the same wrong thing over
and over that will eventually make it true or the listeners will be
asleep. The Air Force Cross given Major Anderson must have been a real
goof by the Air Force and Kennedy.

http://cworld.clemson.edu/Fall2000/12thday.htm


There is nothing that prevents the president from giving a medal to an
air force officer flying for the CIA

He was unquestionably engaged in an activity that was a violation of
international law. He could not have been "ordered" on the mission.

Vince
  #4  
Old May 3rd 07, 11:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Arved Sandstrom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

"Vince" wrote in message
...
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 4:12 pm, Paul Elliot wrote:
Vince wrote:


http://new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/


Vince is a lawyer, he thinks that if he says the same wrong thing over
and over that will eventually make it true or the listeners will be
asleep. The Air Force Cross given Major Anderson must have been a real
goof by the Air Force and Kennedy.

http://cworld.clemson.edu/Fall2000/12thday.htm


There is nothing that prevents the president from giving a medal to an air
force officer flying for the CIA

He was unquestionably engaged in an activity that was a violation of
international law. He could not have been "ordered" on the mission.

Vince


What was he in violation of, specifically?

AHS


  #5  
Old May 4th 07, 07:28 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

Vince wrote:

Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 4:12 pm, Paul Elliot wrote:
Vince wrote:


http://new.photos.yahoo.com/paul1cart/albums/


Vince is a lawyer, he thinks that if he says the same wrong thing over
and over that will eventually make it true or the listeners will be
asleep. The Air Force Cross given Major Anderson must have been a real
goof by the Air Force and Kennedy.

http://cworld.clemson.edu/Fall2000/12thday.htm


There is nothing that prevents the president from giving a medal to an
air force officer flying for the CIA


You do know that the USAF operated U2's as well?

He was unquestionably engaged in an activity that was a violation of
international law. He could not have been "ordered" on the mission.


Um... Wrong.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
  #6  
Old May 3rd 07, 09:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Vince
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 134
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

Paul Elliot wrote:
Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:


Cuba was not a "battlefield"

Vince


Oh? Tell that to the guys who went ashore at the Bay of Pigs.

we were discussing the Cuban missile crisis


vince
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
US aviation hero receives RP recognition [email protected] General Aviation 0 November 30th 06 01:14 AM
"Going for the Visual" O. Sami Saydjari Instrument Flight Rules 101 May 18th 04 05:08 AM
Face-recognition on UAV's Eric Moore Military Aviation 3 April 15th 04 03:18 PM
Visual Appr. Stuart King Instrument Flight Rules 15 September 17th 03 08:36 PM
Qn: Casein Glue recognition Vassilios Mazis Soaring 0 August 20th 03 10:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.