#1 Jet of World War II

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Frank May" wrote in message
...

Probably 'cause it's considered a "flying bomb" or an early cruise
missile. Technically, it IS an enemy aircraft since it has wings &
flies, but it wasn't piloted & wasn't much of an adversary in that
aspect.

Exactly. Air combat is combat which takes place in the air, shooting down a
V-1 is obviously air combat.

How does that differ from downing a target drone?

Does one get a victory credit for a towed target sleeve?

Bill Shatzer ) wrote:




: On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

: "Frank May" wrote in message
: ...

: Probably 'cause it's considered a "flying bomb" or an early cruise
: missile. Technically, it IS an enemy aircraft since it has wings &
: flies, but it wasn't piloted & wasn't much of an adversary in that
: aspect.

: Exactly. Air combat is combat which takes place in the air, shooting down a
: V-1 is obviously air combat.

: How does that differ from downing a target drone?

One ton of high explosive?

: Does one get a victory credit for a towed target sleeve?

Do target sleeves blow up? I did not know that.


--
David Benjamin

Exactly. Air combat is combat which takes place in the air, shooting down a
V-1 is obviously air combat.

What about shooting down the Piper Cub? I suppose there were a couple
of Blond Knights of Chermany who made ace on the L-4.

And what about the airman with a PPL at the console controlling the
Predator drone? He must be engaged in air combat too. (There was at
least one such incident, although the drone lost.)

Let me guess: you guys are flight simmers, right?


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

Of course it is, don't be ridiculous.

Flight simmer, right?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message
...

How does that differ from downing a target drone?


Ours or theirs?

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

What about shooting down the Piper Cub? I suppose there were a couple
of Blond Knights of Chermany who made ace on the L-4.


An enemy aircraft is an enemy aircraft.



And what about the airman with a PPL at the console controlling the
Predator drone? He must be engaged in air combat too. (There was at
least one such incident, although the drone lost.)


Yup.



Let me guess: you guys are flight simmers, right?


Not me, just driven by logic.

Too late in
arrival to be other than a "flash in the pan".

That "flash" turned out to be the death kneal for several entire classes of
aircraft, that only months previously were considered the best in the world.
Prop combat aircraft of all types were on notice that they now represented
antiquated technology. It signalled to all the other nations that what used to
be good enough was now entirely obsolete - a watershed moment in aviation
history.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

Exactly. Air combat is combat which takes place in the air, shooting down a
V-1 is obviously air combat.

Seems a bit odd to call it "combat" when the V-1 can't shoot back, or
even maneuver.

What about shooting down the Piper Cub? I suppose there were a couple
of Blond Knights of Chermany who made ace on the L-4.

I've never been in that situation, Dan, nor have I seen any
statistics, but I suspect it was pretty darn hard to shoot down a Cub
that could fly so slowly and maneuver with such agility.

I do recall reading, at the time, of a case in which a liaison pilot
induced a Luftwaffe fighter pilot to fly into the ground.

And in _To War in a Stringbag_, a Swordfish pilot tells of
accidentally killing a fellow RNAS pilot the same way.

vince norris

Just define "fighting" as doing damage to or having the potential to do
damage to an enemy during an engagement. If you are fired on by an enemy a/c
and he misses, aren't you nonetheless in combat? A missile or a Mg bullet or
a cannon shell does the fighting for its pilot.

(This may be a reach, and certainly a tad off-ng, but if a ship were fired
on by a torpedo, that would certainly constitute peril to that ship, and
combat, wouldn't it? During an engagement in the Pacific, an IJN pilot who
had just taken off alertly noted a US torpedo wake heading for his 'carrier.
He promptly sacrificed his life by diving his a/c into the water just ahead
of the torpedo (allegedly, several US witnesses to this) and saved his ship
from certain punishment. Man vs an inanimate but certainly very deadly
object. I suggest that this incident was combat.) By analogy, a pilot who
downed a robot bomb without necessarily hurting or killing himself also
engaged in combat. Whether the bomb could protect itself is not truly
relevant. The only relevant thing, I suggest, is that if left unmolested,
the device could harm your side. Any action taken to prevent its successful
conduct should be called combat.


"vzlion" wrote in message
...
Don't you have to have an adversary to have any kind of combat.
By definition combat is fighting, A missile doesn't fight, it just
flies along until it hits something, Right?

Walt
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 15:31:33 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:35:19 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
.. .

Seems a bit odd to call it "combat" when the V-1 can't shoot back, or
even maneuver.


Well, then, an RAF bomber shot down by an unseen night fighter would be a
non-combat loss as well.

Well, the difference is that the bomber has the potential to detect
the enemy night fighter and fight back, the V-1 doesn't. It just flies
along until it quits or is shot down. BTW weren't a number of V-1s
destroyed by tipping them over and destroying the gyroscopes
effectiveness.
The pilots who destroyed the V-1s did an outstanding job and deserve
all our respect. Thay had a job to do and they did it, and very
effectively. And I'm sure they wouyld rather have been downing a
manned fighter or bomber. My hat is off to them. But, it's just not
the same as combat with something that can shoot back at you.

Walt



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----