Flyboys?

I do believe that Bradley really overworked the term in "Flyboys".
His continuous use of the term throughout the book reminded me of some of
these rock groups

As I get farther along, I find he's doing it with other terms. In
chapter three he explains that the cruder gang who took over the
Japanese military after the Russo-Japanese War concluded from that war
that everything depended on the spirit of the soldier. He segues from
that to calling them the Spirit Boys.

I guess it's just an irritating tic that I'll have to accept. The man
has discovered a few concepts and wants to make sure that we remember
them. Apart from that, I thought his ten-or--twelve page history of
Japan was a damn good summary of a world that westerners find it
almost impossible to understand. (We are still arguing about the
emperor's role in starting the war, never mind ending it.)

Thanks, everybody!


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

In article , Cub Driver wrote:

I was amazed that the author uses the term Flyboys throughout the
book, or at least throughout the first chapter. I'd assumed it was
just a cute title, but no: "Flyboys were over Chici Jima" etc.

That was only one of the things I found irritating and cute about the
book. Overall it struck me as overblown and posturing. Others
may have a different opinion. There were some passages where
I though "this guy should have had someone that knows something
about WWII military aviation read this," though I'm not going to
reread it to give citations. The good part was it was dirt cheap.
The "amazing revelations" weren't. I thought it was a trifle disingenuous
(if that's how you spell it...) to hype it as having something to do with
the first President Bush. It had almost as much to do with the Wright
Brothers.

However, it's a rare aviation book that isn't worth reading at all,
and this one was no exception. My advice is to get it from the
library and use the savings to buy a couple used copies of _Fate
Is The Hunter_ to give to friends for Christmas!

Happy anniverary of flight to everyone out there. Looks like the
weather in Minnesota won't encourage me to get up today.
Damn it.

Mike Beede

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

I do believe that Bradley really overworked the term in "Flyboys".
His continuous use of the term throughout the book reminded me of some of
these rock groups

As I get farther along, I find he's doing it with other terms. In
chapter three he explains that the cruder gang who took over the
Japanese military after the Russo-Japanese War concluded from that war
that everything depended on the spirit of the soldier. He segues from
that to calling them the Spirit Boys.

I guess it's just an irritating tic that I'll have to accept. The man
has discovered a few concepts and wants to make sure that we remember
them. Apart from that, I thought his ten-or--twelve page history of
Japan was a damn good summary of a world that westerners find it
almost impossible to understand. (We are still arguing about the
emperor's role in starting the war, never mind ending it.)

Thanks, everybody!


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

I noticed on the flyleaf that Bradley had accompanied George Bush Sr. on his
trip to the island. Bush's trip I understand, was arranged by one of the
cable channels; History I think, for the purpose of "filling in the blanks"
on Bush's war experiences near the island, and of course in the process,
generating some viewer interest in the History channel for it's sponsors :-)
Bradley's presence on this trip would indicate to me anyway, an association
of his book with the Bush legacy. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but
noteworthy just the same if one is viewing Bradley's book from a pure
historical standpoint.
What's interesting to me is that the story itself has some historical legs,
and could have been presented much better than the amateurish way it was.
The Japanese background workup into the story was fairly well done, but I'm
with the rest of you on the grossly overworked and sophomoric, not to
mention totally boring continuous use of catch phrases throughout the book.
Sad really!
The story had interesting characters, location, and historical timing. It
could have been a descent work with a better approach to presentation.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
news
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


I'll merely state that not once in my 26 years in the military
have I ever heard anyone call anyone a 'flyboy' with other than
derision in mind. Not once. Derision only. Sorry.

-Gord.

I take it that after we delete the unnecessary and unfortunately
predictable
vitriol, we have an opposing opinion here.

Vitriol?...God, you've lived a very sheltered life haven't
you?...

Not really, but fairly well educated...at least enough to know that vitriol
is defined as sharp or caustic speech or writing, such as your opening lines
to me below....you know, the stuff you "didn't include in your quote pickup
here :-)

I find it amazing that you could say that, Of course you've
amazed me before so I shouldn't be surprised I guess. I suppose I
shouldn't knock your misinterpetation here because you're
speaking from almost zero experience aren't you?. That shouldn't
surprise me by now either I guess.

Yup! That's vitriol, sheltered or unsheltered. :-)


"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques



Oh God!!...my ribs!...my ribs!!

I would have given a lot to have been a fly on your wall when you
saw your error here!

(I suppose you'll say that you included that on purpose?) sigh

You really should cut your losses and quit this before you make
any more of a fool of yourself dud old chappie

-Gord.

"I'm trying to get as old as I can,
and it must be working 'cause I'm
the oldest now that I've ever been"

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

snort ...you -are- a piece of work indeed...


--Gord.

"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques

Correct as always!
1. Manifold pressure and rpm equal power
2. The rotational energy of a 24D50 is less at 15 inches than it is at 61 if
the power is brought back past the high rpm limiter.
Simple! Since the limiter is physically impossible to eliminate from the
statement, it's existence and function is assumed.
Is there something about all this you don't understand? :-))
DH


Poor Dudley sigh

-Gord.

"I'm trying to get as old as I can,
and it must be working 'cause I'm
the oldest now that I've ever been"

From: "Dudley Henriques"

What's interesting to me is that the story itself has some historical legs,
and could have been presented much better than the amateurish way it was.

While wading through Bradley's book, having read his flying tiger book I kept
wondering how much better presented the material would have been if old Cub
Driver had penned it instead. I have a suspicion that CD was thinking the same
thing when he read it


Chris Mark

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
news
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


I'll merely state that not once in my 26 years in the military
have I ever heard anyone call anyone a 'flyboy' with other than
derision in mind. Not once. Derision only. Sorry.

-Gord.

I take it that after we delete the unnecessary and unfortunately
predictable
vitriol, we have an opposing opinion here.

Vitriol?...God, you've lived a very sheltered life haven't
you?...

Not really, but fairly well educated...at least enough to know that
vitriol
is defined as sharp or caustic speech or writing, such as your opening
lines
to me below....you know, the stuff you "didn't include in your quote
pickup
here :-)

I find it amazing that you could say that, Of course you've
amazed me before so I shouldn't be surprised I guess. I suppose I
shouldn't knock your misinterpetation here because you're
speaking from almost zero experience aren't you?. That shouldn't
surprise me by now either I guess.

Yup! That's vitriol, sheltered or unsheltered. :-)


"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques



Oh God!!...my ribs!...my ribs!!

I would have given a lot to have been a fly on your wall when you
saw your error here!

(I suppose you'll say that you included that on purpose?) sigh

You really should cut your losses and quit this before you make
any more of a fool of yourself dud old chappie

-Gord.

I'm changing my mind about you Beamon. You actually might be this stupid.
That was no error. I've decided that I'm going to include this in every post
I answer from you just to illustrate to you how totally idiotic and stupid
you actually are by posting it yourself.
Let me clue you in on something old buddy. The quote is correct. You made a
mistake when you barged in on the seizure thread ranting on about power. You
completely forgot the rpm limiter didn't you? Hell Beamon, I know you know
about propellers. The problem is simply that you're an ass hole. You
couldn't resist trying to nail me, and you were totally wrong. The statement
stands. In fact, it stands scrutiny so well that I have no problem at all
using it as my own signature on any post I answer from you.
Here, take a good look below. It's no mistake. I'll discuss this quote with
anyone who cares to discuss it......even you Beamon.
Here's your "mistake";
DUDLEY HENRIQUES SAID ;

"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques

How's that Gordo? Do me a favor. Go read up on constant speed prop governor
rpm limiters for the 24D50 Hamilton ; then come back and I'll give you
another lesson; or post your usual personal attack tripe that skirts an
issue entirely. :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:


"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

snort ...you -are- a piece of work indeed...


--Gord.

"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques

Correct as always!
1. Manifold pressure and rpm equal power
2. The rotational energy of a 24D50 is less at 15 inches than it is at 61
if
the power is brought back past the high rpm limiter.
Simple! Since the limiter is physically impossible to eliminate from the
statement, it's existence and function is assumed.
Is there something about all this you don't understand? :-))
DH


Poor Dudley sigh

I notice that "poor Dudley" doesn't address constant speed prop governor
high rpm limiter does it Gordo? Com'on, you can do better than this can't
you? After all, you have 26 years experience dealing with these things. Go
on; tell me how the seizure momentum is the same at 15 inches as it is at
61?

and oh yes, let's not forget;

"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques

Waiting for your answer on seizure! :-)

"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Dudley Henriques"

What's interesting to me is that the story itself has some historical
legs,
and could have been presented much better than the amateurish way it was.

While wading through Bradley's book, having read his flying tiger book I
kept
wondering how much better presented the material would have been if old
Cub
Driver had penned it instead. I have a suspicion that CD was thinking the
same
thing when he read it


Chris Mark

I wouldn't be at all surprised. :-))

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:39:01 GMT, Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 16 Dec 2003 20:43:41 GMT, nt (Krztalizer) wrote:

Having been a ground pounder, then an aircrewman during the 1980s, my
experience with the term is limited. As jet mechs, we called the "pretty boys"
in flight suits that never had to stand a watch or get dirty by the negative
term "fly boys". Later, when it was my time in the flightsuit, periodically I
would be approached by women that used the term with much greater affection and
appreciation. I think that the term can be used like almost every other term,
either positively or negatively.

v/r
Gordon

While I can understand the jet mechs envy that the aviators never had
to "stand a watch or get dirty", I usually asked them how long the
average jet mech spent in Hanoi as a POW, or how many of them were
lost last week during their shift. It seems to quiet the envy and pull
the plug on the green-eyed monster.

As Art often reminds us, we don't always get to walk a mile in the
other guys shoes, but while I respect the eyeball-to-eyeball
experience of the grunt, I expect that he, in return, will offer me
similar respect for where I've been and what I've done.

I probably have been called "flyboy", but don't worry too much about
it.

I think that the difference between Navy and Air Force is related to
this. Think of the Forrestal fire, the Oriskany fire, or the Enterprise.
A lot of pilots saw a lot of their "ground crew" killed and horribly
burned trying to rescue the "junior birdmen". On a ship
everyone is in combat, from mess cook to Captain. No
remfs allowed.

Al Minyard