Fly Boy ?????

(ArtKramr) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

No, there were only *three* in that arena -- the pilot who survived,
and the turrent gunner and the belly gunner/radioman whom are
both deceased and have been for many decades now. If you're
having a tough time believing what the sole survivor says, I guess
you're just **** outta' luck!

I'm not outa luck at all. I made it through the war just fine, It is those two
airmen who are just **** outa luck as you so graciously expressed it,. Glad I
wasn't on that crew. and what a sole survivor says isn't always taken at face
value. especially by backseaters and other aircrew.

You can continue to engage in all this superfluous handwringing and
entertain these "lingering doubts" and "questions" if you wish, Art.
It's entirely up to you. But the only two guys who apparently are able
to de-mystify the issue in your mind are long gone and have been for
many DECADES now. That's why I said you're SOL (not because you
made it thru the war just fine...but because *they* didn't).

And the fact that a man is an officer, went to flight school and flew missions
doesn't mean his actions are above question. Especially by aircrew thinking
of their brothers who never made it back.

And one of your brothers and highly respected posters on this
NG who actually fought in another war has succinctly explained to you
that playing Monday Morning Quarterback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.

Subject: Fly Boy ?????
From: Mike Marron
Date: 10/23/03 9:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


terback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.


Anyone is free to note whatever they like.And I am free to reject their
position as they are free to reject mine.

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

(ArtKramr) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

terback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.

Anyone is free to note whatever they like.And I am free to reject their
position as they are free to reject mine.

Very well, then. It's unfortunate indeed that instead of wisely
joining Ed and the rest of us whom have seized the high road,
you've chosen to wallow around down in the mud.

Subject: Fly Boy ?????
From: Mike Marron
Date: 10/23/03 10:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

(ArtKramr) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

terback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.

Anyone is free to note whatever they like.And I am free to reject their
position as they are free to reject mine.

Very well, then. It's unfortunate indeed that instead of wisely
joining Ed and the rest of us whom have seized the high road,
you've chosen to wallow around down in the mud.


As I understand it Art is the only one in this NG that actually flew combat in
WWII as aircrew.So I will take his view above all those that never flew as
aircrew in WW II. As far as wallowing in the mud goes, look to yourself.

"Autocollimator" wrote in message
...

(Snip)

As I understand it Art is the only one in this NG that actually flew combat in
WWII as aircrew.So I will take his view above all those that never flew as
aircrew in WW II. As far as wallowing in the mud goes, look to yourself.

Just for the record, I flew Troop Carrier gooney birds in Italy during WWII,
Bad guys shot at us, and we didn't have anything but our .45s to shoot back
with, or bombs to drop on them, but I still think it was considered combat.

Anyway, since I started this thread with an innocent question, in recognition of
the **** storm it generated, I'm going to claim author's rights to revise my
question. AIR, we were talking about ditching characteristics, and I asked what
the manufacturer had to say on the subject.

In those days, before an aircraft hit the inventory, the only people who knew
how it was going to behave were the manufacturer and his test pilots. Before
they turned the aircraft over to the military for their acceptance testing, they
sat down and wrote a flight manual, which contained everything the operator
needed to know about how to make the bird go up and come back down in one piece.
Before the first of that model actually ditched in the water somewhere, its crew
should have familiarized themselves with every bit of the information in that
manual, including how it was going to behave when it hit the water and
recommendations on how best to make initial contact with the water.

After all of the back and forth about how smart the surviving pilots of
successful ditchings must have been, it boggles my mind that it hasn't occurred
to anyone that the reason for their survival may have been more a matter of what
they got out of their flight manuals than the luck of the draw and their
superior flying skills (superior to the manufacturer's test pilots, of course).

And since we were talking about Grumman's TBM, I don't recall that anyone
commented on what the manufacturer's flight manual said about ditching it. Now,
I really didn't need to hear about how smart the surviving pilots of ditched
TBMs were; I can easily assume that there were plenty of equally smart but far
unluckier pilots who didn't survive the experience. That there would be a
number of variables in every ditching situation is a given, including pilot
health, piloting skill levels, aircraft condition, weather conditions, ocean
surface conditions, etc. The only constant is the question of what was designed
into the aircraft, which would be the same regardless of the variables. For
that, you have to go to the manufacturer and his flight manual.

Shall we try again? Or am I all wet (no pun intended)?

George Z.

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

Anyway, since I started this thread with an innocent question, in
recognition of
the **** storm it generated, I'm going to claim author's rights to revise
my
question. AIR, we were talking about ditching characteristics, and I
asked what
the manufacturer had to say on the subject.

In those days, before an aircraft hit the inventory, the only people who
knew
how it was going to behave were the manufacturer and his test pilots.
Before
they turned the aircraft over to the military for their acceptance
testing, they
sat down and wrote a flight manual, which contained everything the
operator
needed to know about how to make the bird go up and come back down in one
piece.
Before the first of that model actually ditched in the water somewhere,
its crew
should have familiarized themselves with every bit of the information in
that
manual, including how it was going to behave when it hit the water and
recommendations on how best to make initial contact with the water.


Unless the manufacturer actually ditched the aircraft whatever was written
in the manual was theory.

Subject: Fly Boy ?????
From: "Steven P. McNicoll"
Date: 10/24/03 11:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: t


"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

Anyway, since I started this thread with an innocent question, in
recognition of
the **** storm it generated, I'm going to claim author's rights to revise
my
question. AIR, we were talking about ditching characteristics, and I
asked what
the manufacturer had to say on the subject.

In those days, before an aircraft hit the inventory, the only people who
knew
how it was going to behave were the manufacturer and his test pilots.
Before
they turned the aircraft over to the military for their acceptance
testing, they
sat down and wrote a flight manual, which contained everything the
operator
needed to know about how to make the bird go up and come back down in one
piece.
Before the first of that model actually ditched in the water somewhere,
its crew
should have familiarized themselves with every bit of the information in
that
manual, including how it was going to behave when it hit the water and
recommendations on how best to make initial contact with the water.


Unless the manufacturer actually ditched the aircraft whatever was written
in the manual was theory.



Of course once the crew ditched the aircraft threory became practice pretty
friggin fast. Or hadn't that occured to you?
..

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

Anyway, since I started this thread with an innocent question, in
recognition of
the **** storm it generated, I'm going to claim author's rights to revise
my
question. AIR, we were talking about ditching characteristics, and I
asked what
the manufacturer had to say on the subject.

In those days, before an aircraft hit the inventory, the only people who
knew
how it was going to behave were the manufacturer and his test pilots.
Before
they turned the aircraft over to the military for their acceptance
testing, they
sat down and wrote a flight manual, which contained everything the
operator
needed to know about how to make the bird go up and come back down in one
piece.
Before the first of that model actually ditched in the water somewhere,
its crew
should have familiarized themselves with every bit of the information in
that
manual, including how it was going to behave when it hit the water and
recommendations on how best to make initial contact with the water.


Unless the manufacturer actually ditched the aircraft whatever was written
in the manual was theory.

Actually, some manufacturers (and maybe all, for all I know), did do exactly
that with scaled models of their new aircraft. In any case, I'd rather have
some applied theory from an aeronautical engineer who designed the aircraft than
guesswork from somebody who thought he knew how it would react better than the
bird's designers.

Since you seem committed to pooh-pooh the manufacturer's knowledge no matter
what, what does the pilot who has the misfortune of having to ditch the first of
that model aircraft rely on? Who tells him the best approach speed for that
bird, or the best escape routes out of the aircraft after impact, or the things
that he needs to do to give himself the best odds possible of surviving the
experience. If not the manufacturer, who? Somebody else who hasn't gone
through the drill?

George Z.

(Autocollimator) wrote:
(ArtKramr) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

terback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.

Anyone is free to note whatever they like.And I am free to reject their
position as they are free to reject mine.

Very well, then. It's unfortunate indeed that instead of wisely
joining Ed and the rest of us whom have seized the high road,
you've chosen to wallow around down in the mud.

As I understand it Art is the only one in this NG that actually flew combat in
WWII as aircrew.So I will take his view above all those that never flew as
aircrew in WW II. As far as wallowing in the mud goes, look to yourself.

Spoken like a true chickenous coward who flames people while
hiding behind some asinine AOL screen name like "autocollimator."
BTW, congrats. Ya nailed both me and Kramer in a single shot while
managing to remain anonymous your own self. Don't golfers call it a
"hole-in-one" or something like that?

Coward.

Subject: Fly Boy ?????
From: Mike Marron
Date: 10/24/03 7:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

(Autocollimator) wrote:
(ArtKramr) wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

terback after all these years
is to demean the whole warrior ethic. The fact that you have chosen
to conveniently ignore his pointed comments aimed squarely at
YOU is duly noted, BTW.

Anyone is free to note whatever they like.And I am free to reject their
position as they are free to reject mine.

Very well, then. It's unfortunate indeed that instead of wisely
joining Ed and the rest of us whom have seized the high road,
you've chosen to wallow around down in the mud.

As I understand it Art is the only one in this NG that actually flew combat
in
WWII as aircrew.So I will take his view above all those that never flew as
aircrew in WW II. As far as wallowing in the mud goes, look to yourself.

Spoken like a true chickenous coward who flames people while
hiding behind some asinine AOL screen name like "autocollimator."
BTW, congrats. Ya nailed both me and Kramer in a single shot while
managing to remain anonymous your own self. Don't golfers call it a
"hole-in-one" or something like that?

Coward.




Still wallowing down in the mud huh.