Rumsfeld and flying

On 06 Mar 2004 17:37:49 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: Ed Rasimus

If you return to the bios, you'll note that upon graduation from NROTC
(pretty serious commitment and additionally indicative of getting a
college degree without some sort of inheritance or paternal
influence), he fulfilled his active duty commitment in the '50s (after
Korea, before SEA). He could then have drifted out of service upon
completion of ready reserve requirements, but he didn't.

He appears to have moved down a pretty impressive career path before
SEA heated up. The fact that he simultaneously maintained his reserve
qualifications is adequate for me.

Ed Rasimus

WOW ! I'm really impressed. A trained skilled pilot who during a shooting war
got out of all combat commitments. Now that is what I call skill.


Arthur Kramer

Lemme see, Art, aren't you the one who was recently demanding total
obedience to orders. So, we've got this guy who goes through ROTC
(during a shooting war--Korea), then with the war over (not his
fault), he fulfills his active duty commitment, starts his real-world
career and is successful(!) Although he could abandon the military, he
continues to serve his country as a Naval Reserve officer and aviator.
His unit (through no fault of his own) is not called to active duty.
It could be, and he would go, but it isn't. So he serves and he
succeeds.

I don't see any "got out of all combat commitments" going on here. I
know you'd like to find some. Conversely, I might ask how long was
your reserve service after WW II? Didn't you realize there was a need
for your skills? Why weren't you in Korea? How old were you when
Vietnam heated up?--That would be rhetoric and cheap shots, so I won't
descend to them.

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 3/6/04 10:07 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 06 Mar 2004 17:37:49 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: Ed Rasimus

If you return to the bios, you'll note that upon graduation from NROTC
(pretty serious commitment and additionally indicative of getting a
college degree without some sort of inheritance or paternal
influence), he fulfilled his active duty commitment in the '50s (after
Korea, before SEA). He could then have drifted out of service upon
completion of ready reserve requirements, but he didn't.

He appears to have moved down a pretty impressive career path before
SEA heated up. The fact that he simultaneously maintained his reserve
qualifications is adequate for me.

Ed Rasimus

WOW ! I'm really impressed. A trained skilled pilot who during a shooting
war
got out of all combat commitments. Now that is what I call skill.


Arthur Kramer

Lemme see, Art, aren't you the one who was recently demanding total
obedience to orders. So, we've got this guy who goes through ROTC
(during a shooting war--Korea), then with the war over (not his
fault), he fulfills his active duty commitment, starts his real-world
career and is successful(!) Although he could abandon the military, he
continues to serve his country as a Naval Reserve officer and aviator.
His unit (through no fault of his own) is not called to active duty.
It could be, and he would go, but it isn't. So he serves and he
succeeds.

I don't see any "got out of all combat commitments" going on here. I
know you'd like to find some. Conversely, I might ask how long was
your reserve service after WW II? Didn't you realize there was a need
for your skills? Why weren't you in Korea? How old were you when
Vietnam heated up?--That would be rhetoric and cheap shots, so I won't
descend to them.

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8


Why do you take it that way? I am really impressed. (grin)


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

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.

Uhhh...Ed....let me introduce you to Art Kramer....


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(BUFDRVR) wrote:

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.

Uhhh...Ed....let me introduce you to Art Kramer....


BUFDRVR


I agree...you certainly don't seem to know him...
--

-Gord.

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: (BUFDRVR)
Date: 3/6/04 12:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.

Uhhh...Ed....let me introduce you to Art Kramer....


BUFDRVR


I think back to the days of my training in Texas. Every instructor we had was a
combat veteran who completed his tour of duty and came back to instruct. My
Bombing instructor was a veteran of 25 missions with the bloody 100th bomb
group. He flew them from England to Berlin without fighter escort taking
horrible losses. He not only tought us our basic job, but he let us know what
it acutually was like in combat and all during my tour of duty his training
resulted in the fact that there were no surprises for us in combat except
for the time we are attacked by an ME 262. I find it interesting that Rumsfeld
was an instructor who had never been to combat. I don't see that as a change
for the better in flight training.


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

On 06 Mar 2004 20:26:41 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:


I think back to the days of my training in Texas. Every instructor we had was a
combat veteran who completed his tour of duty and came back to instruct. My
Bombing instructor was a veteran of 25 missions with the bloody 100th bomb
group. He flew them from England to Berlin without fighter escort taking
horrible losses. He not only tought us our basic job, but he let us know what
it acutually was like in combat and all during my tour of duty his training
resulted in the fact that there were no surprises for us in combat except
for the time we are attacked by an ME 262. I find it interesting that Rumsfeld
was an instructor who had never been to combat. I don't see that as a change
for the better in flight training.


Arthur Kramer

When a maximum mobilization war is on, you've got a lot of combat
veterans available to put into the training business. It was US policy
to limit combat exposure and rotate people out of the operational
units. Some other countries didn't do that.

But, Korea, Vietnam and the intervening conflicts haven't been maximum
mobilization wars. That means there weren't enough combat vets to put
into training, particularly at all levels. Interestingly enough, I was
running Air Training Command undergraduate flying training assignments
from '70-'72. That was a period of drastic production adjustments as
Nixon's Vietnamization policy instituted in '68 was cutting
requirements for bodies to fill combat pipeline cockpits. The Navy
walked into Pensacola one Saturday morning and sent several hundred
pilot trainees home or to other duties. Some were within two weeks of
graduation.

The AF chose another route. We kept everyone in the training pipeline,
but reduced acquisitions--stopped recruiting and reduced opportunities
for ROTC and AFA graduates to enter flying programs. But, we had a lot
of folks in training who needed seats when they graduated. The answer
was for each command to take a % of grads equal to their % of total
pilots in the AF. That meant Training Command had to absorb 28% of
pilot training graduates--immediate plowback into instructor pilot
duty upon graduation.

It wasn't an optimum situation, but it also was workable. With combat
experienced leadership at the flight commander level, a properly
trained recent graduate could be an effective instructor pilot at that
level.

Similarly when I went through my first operational training course, a
lot of the instructors were combat vets, but a lot weren't. Graduates
were going direct to the war, while experienced in the airplane
instructors weren't getting to go.

When I was halfway through my first combat tour, guys who had been my
instructors in F-105 training were showing up in the combat theater. I
was the experienced one and they were the new guys.

Bottom line is, we can't always have the "ideal". And, even guys who
want to get to war can't always get there when they want.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 3/6/04 2:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 06 Mar 2004 20:26:41 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:


I think back to the days of my training in Texas. Every instructor we had
was a
combat veteran who completed his tour of duty and came back to instruct. My
Bombing instructor was a veteran of 25 missions with the bloody 100th bomb
group. He flew them from England to Berlin without fighter escort taking
horrible losses. He not only tought us our basic job, but he let us know
what
it acutually was like in combat and all during my tour of duty his training
resulted in the fact that there were no surprises for us in combat except
for the time we are attacked by an ME 262. I find it interesting that
Rumsfeld
was an instructor who had never been to combat. I don't see that as a change
for the better in flight training.


Arthur Kramer

When a maximum mobilization war is on, you've got a lot of combat
veterans available to put into the training business. It was US policy
to limit combat exposure and rotate people out of the operational
units. Some other countries didn't do that.

But, Korea, Vietnam and the intervening conflicts haven't been maximum
mobilization wars. That means there weren't enough combat vets to put
into training, particularly at all levels. Interestingly enough, I was
running Air Training Command undergraduate flying training assignments
from '70-'72. That was a period of drastic production adjustments as
Nixon's Vietnamization policy instituted in '68 was cutting
requirements for bodies to fill combat pipeline cockpits. The Navy
walked into Pensacola one Saturday morning and sent several hundred
pilot trainees home or to other duties. Some were within two weeks of
graduation.

The AF chose another route. We kept everyone in the training pipeline,
but reduced acquisitions--stopped recruiting and reduced opportunities
for ROTC and AFA graduates to enter flying programs. But, we had a lot
of folks in training who needed seats when they graduated. The answer
was for each command to take a % of grads equal to their % of total
pilots in the AF. That meant Training Command had to absorb 28% of
pilot training graduates--immediate plowback into instructor pilot
duty upon graduation.

It wasn't an optimum situation, but it also was workable. With combat
experienced leadership at the flight commander level, a properly
trained recent graduate could be an effective instructor pilot at that
level.

Similarly when I went through my first operational training course, a
lot of the instructors were combat vets, but a lot weren't. Graduates
were going direct to the war, while experienced in the airplane
instructors weren't getting to go.

When I was halfway through my first combat tour, guys who had been my
instructors in F-105 training were showing up in the combat theater. I
was the experienced one and they were the new guys.

Bottom line is, we can't always have the "ideal". And, even guys who
want to get to war can't always get there when they want.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8


Interesting stuff. I remember that we had only one non-combat instructor at Big
Springs. But he wasn't a flying instructor he was a navigation (DR) classroom
instructor and he stood out as not having any battle experience. And he often
made the mistake of saying to us, "and that is how it is in combat" and an
entire class would say under their breath, "how the hell would you know? Those
who flew an fought just seemed to get a higher level of respect than those who
never fought. But there was a war on so I guess that explains it.


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

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

w?
Those
who flew an fought just seemed to get a higher level of respect than
those who
never fought. But there was a war on so I guess that explains it.


I don't know if your last sentence was serious or sarcastic. But yes, it
does explain having combat-experienced instructors available. That
wasn't a choice for many years thereafter.

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Rumsfeld and flying
From: (BUFDRVR)
Date: 3/6/04 12:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

You served with honor. So did the SecDef. You had one situation, he
had another. Don't attempt to demean him or others to fit your agenda.
Or, at least if you do, then keep the ROE consistent.

Uhhh...Ed....let me introduce you to Art Kramer....


BUFDRVR


I think back to the days of my training in Texas. Every instructor we had
was a
combat veteran who completed his tour of duty and came back to instruct.
My
Bombing instructor was a veteran of 25 missions with the bloody 100th
bomb
group. He flew them from England to Berlin without fighter escort taking
horrible losses. He not only tought us our basic job, but he let us know
what
it acutually was like in combat and all during my tour of duty his
training
resulted in the fact that there were no surprises for us in combat
except
for the time we are attacked by an ME 262. I find it interesting that
Rumsfeld
was an instructor who had never been to combat. I don't see that as a
change
for the better in flight training.


Assuming he was an ASW pilot, where would he have seen combat?
Certainly, after the WWII ASW people retired, there was no one who saw
actual combat in that specialty, except a few Brits at the Falklands.
Did lots of ASW pilots participate in pindown, just-short-of-war
operations? Without question, in the Cold War.

Given that there were no airborne combat with subs between 1945 and
1982, how would you get people with experience in the current systems,
against a much more capable threat?

Howard Berkowitz wrote:



Assuming he was an ASW pilot, where would he have seen combat?
Certainly, after the WWII ASW people retired, there was no one who saw
actual combat in that specialty, except a few Brits at the Falklands.
Did lots of ASW pilots participate in pindown, just-short-of-war
operations? Without question, in the Cold War.

Given that there were no airborne combat with subs between 1945 and
1982, how would you get people with experience in the current systems,
against a much more capable threat?

You don't need to be firing live ammo, dropping live depth
charges and torps to get experience in using all the latest
gadgets and gizmos Howard.

It's a much practiced skill. World wide competitions are held in
the science by almost every Armed Force in existance.

Matter of fact you likely get more skill in their use when you
aren't worried about getting yer goodies blown off. ASW is about
99 percent work and skill in detection and localization and 1
percent in the coup de grace.

Doesn't take a lot of skill to drop a string of 8 mk54's at 50
foot spacing across a sub from 50 feet when you know exactly
where he is. Tends to ruin his day too .

Now, if you wanna have a beer in the mess with him tonight you
substitute 8 SUS (signals underwater sound) for the Mk 54's and
do so...
--

-Gord.