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 » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Air Force fighter pilots train in tactic that scopes out enemy targets, By Franklin Fisher, Stars and Stripes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 9th 04, 05:08 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Prowlus" wrote in message
om...
"Vaughn" wrote in message

...
"Eunometic" wrote in message
om...
The perfect platform: Possibly the SEAD Tornados or F15E type

aircraft loaded
with sensors.


Or a UAV.



or howabout a helicopter gunship?


Yea, just ask the Apache's how well they did during OIF. They couldn't seem
to get above the AAA to be effective.



  #13  
Old June 9th 04, 04:41 PM
OXMORON1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ed wrote:
Reread the last sentence of my post slowly. Savor the nuance. You met
a few pilots assigned to fly fighters.


But Ed, they all claimed to be "fighter pilots". That is the trouble, "everyone
wants to be a fighter pilot" not all who make the claim are fighter pilots.
Thus my claim that some "fighter pilots" are "pukes".
You have to watch your step in a stag bar with a bunch of people who "look"
like "fighter pilots" Hell there might even be a WSO in the crowd!

Oxmoron1
MFE
Mapreading, DR Photo equipment operator. Known celestial observer when
everything else fails.
  #16  
Old June 11th 04, 03:16 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 10 Jun 2004 21:55:36 -0700, (Jim Thomas)
wrote:

OK, Ed; let's define which are "pukes".


Are we a bit peckish this morning?

Were recce pilots who flew "alone and unarmed" into North Vietnam in
RF-101s, and became the first POWs, pukes? Or their later RF-4
brothers?


Well, other than the hyperbole regarding "became the first POWs", you
make a point. Ev Alvarez and the guys who were early internees were
mostly tactical fighter types. We don't want to get into Kramerism
here regarding combat versus non-combat folks who through no fault of
their own had less than a total "opportunity to excel".

Were "Trash Haulers" who landed their C-130s and C-123s into places
like Khe Son pukes?


I like to reserve the appellation for guys who wouldn't give a buddy a
hop in their dead-head flight back to Naha, because the residual fuel
in the tank of the motor-bike they bought constituted "hazardous
cargo", hence no pax. Or the transport crews who scheduled their
in-theater rotations over the end of the month to get two months
credit for "combat pay" and tax exclusion.

Were the Misty Facs pukes?


I correspond regularly with Don Sheppard. As you know, the Mistys
included guys like Bud Day. They are Fighter Pilots.

Were B-52 pilots who flew their Buffs over Hanoi during Linebacker
pukes?


Lots of BUFF-Rats show up at Reunions each year. Highly regarded,
especially by the ex-cons who had a front line seat for the show.

Were the Jolly Greens pukes? Or the Sandys that covered for them?


By now, you're getting tedious. You know of course that the
Recce-puke, trash-puke, etc. are all terms of endearment. Hang around
a club stag bar for whatever type and you'll hear the other types
called "xxxx-pukes."

BTW, you still trying to scrub those green footprints off your
back-side?

Or are the only "pukes" those "fighter pilots" who need to feel that
they are the chosen few.


Well, you do know of course, that Fighter Pilots are indeed "the
chosen few." How could it be otherwise?


JimThomas

Fighter Pilot, also Sandy and more.


Cheers, and Check 6!



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8
  #17  
Old June 11th 04, 04:01 PM
OXMORON1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jim Thomas made a couple of comments ending with:
Or are the only "pukes" those "fighter pilots" who need to feel that
they are the chosen few.


Jim,
You are taking Ed too seriously! You have to understand the "Fighter Pilot"
mentality and sense of humor.

Ed is not knocking the valor or skills of the "pukes", he is stating the
"Fighter Pilot" outlook on life, "Dawn Patrol" and all that crap. It is part of
the "character" of fighter pilots in particular to take on the persona of "Yeah
though I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear no evil....'cause I am
the meanest SOB in the Valley".

In various forms the attitude affects most aircrew in different ways. What you
don't want is the B-52 pilot who thinks he can do a Cuban Eight in a BUFF or
the multiplace a/c pilot who "knows" he can do the whole enchilada by himself
or the Nav who "never" makes a mistake or the guy who thinks his war was the
only one ever fought or the expert who "knows" everything.

Oxmoron1
MFE
"Oh my GAWD! I lost my eraser!"
"You want me to do this in ink?"
"Tonight Wake City, Hot Damn"
"Number three is running a little rough!, No. 3 is Ok, it is 1, 2 and 4 that
are sick today"
"No LORAN, No Radar Altimeter, Overcast, No Sweat, I'll just DR for 14 hours
and declare Minimum Navaids when we bust the ADIZ"
"Right handle, left handle, squeeze right"

All of which are better than "The US Rifle, caliber .30, M-1 is a clip fed, gas
operated, semi-automatic shoulder weapon...."


  #18  
Old June 11th 04, 04:28 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:09:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 09 Jun 2004 15:41:45 GMT, (OXMORON1) wrote:

Ed wrote:
Reread the last sentence of my post slowly. Savor the nuance. You met
a few pilots assigned to fly fighters.


But Ed, they all claimed to be "fighter pilots". That is the trouble, "everyone
wants to be a fighter pilot" not all who make the claim are fighter pilots.
Thus my claim that some "fighter pilots" are "pukes".
You have to watch your step in a stag bar with a bunch of people who "look"
like "fighter pilots" Hell there might even be a WSO in the crowd!

Oxmoron1


The WSO might even be a "Fighter-gator" or, worse yet, a "Bear".

I used to tell the new guys in my squadron that they flew fighters.
They would be a "Fighter Pilot" when someone else told them they were.
Until then, they were authorized to say they "fly fighters."

You can always tell a fighter pilot....but you can't tell him much.

Cheers, and check six.

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


With all due respect, fighter pilots are no more special than any other
Serviceman. The OOD of a nuclear submarine has far more responsibility
than some guy flying around. Being a "fighter pilot" is no more (or less)
deserving of respect than a grunt Company Commander, a tanker pilot.
or a Surface Warfare OOD.

The self appointed "gods" that fighter types make of themselves only
serves to demean all Servicemen, including themselves.

Al Minyard


  #19  
Old June 11th 04, 04:30 PM
Jack
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Well, you do know of course, that Fighter Pilots are indeed "the
chosen few." How could it be otherwise?



I have mucho respect for former Thud drivers, as well as Jollys and Sandys. But,
I often wonder why it is that the Thud drivers are the ones who insist on their
own superiority in such an annoying manner? They aren't the only military units
that have been misused and abused, that's for sure. They just seem to whine
about it longer and louder (even worse than those F-4 blowhards).

If it's true, as I suspect, that a higher percentage of 105 pukes shot down
(than Sandys or Jollys) survived to become POWs, that could be perceived as an
advantage, though perhaps not more highly deserved.

As always, Sandys and Jollys drink for free around here. Those whose airplanes
are propelled by many very small enclosed rotating blades, without the use of a
few very large ones, should bring cash.



Jack
(SEA FAC)
 




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
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Boeing Boondoggle Larry Dighera Military Aviation 77 September 15th 04 02:39 AM
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk Jehad Internet Military Aviation 0 February 7th 04 05:24 AM
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? No Spam! Military Aviation 120 January 27th 04 11:19 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.