#1 Piston Fighter was British

"Gord Beaman" ) wrote in message . ..
(Kevin Brooks) wrote:


His own strawman. He once left the group with much fanfare--sort of
reminded me of Nixon's old "you won't have me to kick around anymore"
speech.

He did that (at one time at least) to punish me for taking him to
task when he indicated that the enlisted people in his crew
weren't intelligent enough to understand the workings of the then
new Nav system 'Gee' while the commissioned people grasped it
right away. I came down on him pretty hard...that kinda stuff
really ****es me off.

LOL! Your's was the case I was recalling in terms of his "NCO's are
not as smart as officers" crap. Heck, I ran into at least one NCO who
had his PhD, and a bunch of those who served with me often humbled me
by providing a more accurate analysis than what I was coming up with
at the time. Not to mention the PFC who, when we were all scratching
our heads trying to figure out how the heck to remove the loose, sandy
spoil from resulting from a shaped charge detonation (in preparation
for emplacing road cratering charges, and with a serious time crunch
dictated by the return of the SP arty unit in front of us conducting
an arty raid) when we found the posthole diggers just were not doing
the trick, quietly suggested, "Sir, how about we pour a little water
in their to get it to clump up?" Voila, the day was saved by a poor,
unprofessionaly edumacated PFC...


I'm certain that he thought that people would blame me for
'chasing a valuable asset' off. Some did indeed, and we got some
snarly posts aimed at me but I got a few posts and emails from
those who saw through his little trick too.

I believe a lot of those who roll their eyes and shake their heads at
his more profound antics just keep quiet and hope he'll either come
back to earth or go away.


A few posts ago he made a big snarl about refusing to be driven
off 'never in a million years' or some-such...I had to bite my
tongue to avoid snarling back...

Unfortunately, he came back, still spouting off his vitriolic
rants. He has at one time or another claimed that groundcrews and
support personnel did not serve with the same distinction as the
aircrews, that those who followed their orders and did not see direct
combat were somehow less deserving of being considered veterans, that
enlisted personnel were somhow less intelligent than officers, etc.
Each such claim has resulted in his own diminished reputation.


Exactly, and it's a God Damned shame...He's one of the few here
who've been there and DT. If he were a little less self-centered
and didn't **** people off so much then he'd be a great learning
tool for us who weren't called on back then.

Make no mistake, I admire and am thankful for what he did, but no
more than I admire any other member of the armed forces members
during those times.

I certainly do not admire him for his present personality, I find
him just short of being a jerk with his constant "Were you
there?".

Or worse, his belittling of the efforts of the others who were serving
in another "there" and doing their jobs as expected of them. I note he
is up to his usual antics which follow his getting pasted for comments
such as the ones that initiated this last episode; I gather he is back
to publishing copies of his "I love Art" letters for the NG's benefit.
I think this points to the real reason he is so quick to denigrate the
efforts of others--he is sorely in need of propping up his own
self-image, so he figures that tearing down the records that others
have achieved, along with posting a few self-congradulatory messages,
will give him that ego-boost he so obviously needs.

The funny thing is that one of my first posts to this NG (a couple of
years back) was a rather sharp defense of Art against some (what I
considered then) disrespectful comments directed at him by another
poster. Didn't take long to learn that he was merely reaping what he
had already sewed.


Brooks

If he attends tomorrow, I'll ask him.

He wasn't there today. I'll try to remembver to ask him next week or
whenever he shows up.

vince norris

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: (JonB)
Date: 7/6/03 9:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
. earthlink.net...
"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

We stood to on the 5th for D--Day. as did a few hundred other outfits..
It
was
scheduled for the 5th. You really know nothing do you?.


I know D-Day was June 6th. I'm sure you knew that at one time as well, but
sometime between 1944 and 2000 you came to "remember" D-Day as June 5th.

Art's right. It was intended to be the 5th. They embarked and then
they waited. On the 6th, they went. Every diary entry and letter home
written at the time would have had it down as the 5th (if any date at
all). It is only the 6th in retrospective news reports and history
books that overlook the delay.


Of course those of us that were there stood to on the 5th. Others never
noticed. (sigh)

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Transports are not combat aircraft. We led the combat units of the
9th on that morning.


It appears you forgot you wrote, "We did lead the way for the 9th Air Force
that morning.", and not, "We did lead the way for 9th Air Force combat
aircraft that morning."

In article ink.net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Transports are not combat aircraft. We led the combat units of the
9th on that morning.

I just watched the PBS show on D-day last night.
It showed fleets of DC-3s carrying paras over occupied France.
Each aircraft full of weapons and combat troops.
I don't know if that makes them combat aircraft, but if I
was in the left seat getting shot at, I'd probably think so.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: (Harry Andreas)
Date: 7/9/03 2:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ink.net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Transports are not combat aircraft. We led the combat units of the
9th on that morning.

I just watched the PBS show on D-day last night.
It showed fleets of DC-3s carrying paras over occupied France.
Each aircraft full of weapons and combat troops.
I don't know if that makes them combat aircraft, but if I
was in the left seat getting shot at, I'd probably think so.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Many non combat aircraft get shot at. It is shooting back thay makes them
combat aircraft.

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message

Many non combat aircraft get shot at. It is shooting back thay
makes them
combat aircraft.

So, a Mossie bomber with no machine guns is not a combat aircraft?
Didn't I read on this NG recently that some Mossies had no guns, not
even forward-firing ones?

Not picking on you specifically, Art. The baloney has been sliced
_very_ thin by most postings to this thread! ;-)

"ArtKramr" wrote

Many non combat aircraft get shot at. It is shooting back thay makes them
combat aircraft.

The US's largest conventional bombs are dropped by
that well-known bomber, the C-130. The C-130 can
have a few guns added, too, I hear.

Herc drivers, the elite of the USAF!

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Wolfie"
Date: 7/9/03 6:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote

Many non combat aircraft get shot at. It is shooting back thay makes them
combat aircraft.

The US's largest conventional bombs are dropped by
that well-known bomber, the C-130. The C-130 can
have a few guns added, too, I hear.

Herc drivers, the elite of the USAF!


Shhhhh ! Bfdrvr will hear you.(grin)

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

(ArtKramr) wrote in message ...
Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: (Harry Andreas)
Date: 7/9/03 2:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ink.net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Transports are not combat aircraft. We led the combat units of the
9th on that morning.

I just watched the PBS show on D-day last night.
It showed fleets of DC-3s carrying paras over occupied France.
Each aircraft full of weapons and combat troops.
I don't know if that makes them combat aircraft, but if I
was in the left seat getting shot at, I'd probably think so.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Many non combat aircraft get shot at. It is shooting back thay makes them
combat aircraft.


German transports were equiped with defensive guns, so were Russian
ones (and still were till the 1990s althout the Copius tail turret of
Russian transports was generaly eventualy converted to a toilet.

Ju52s and the Giant Me323s had guns. Both were intercepted by
Marauders while trying to suppy rommels Africa Corps.