Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam

Very well stated Sir. I could distill it down to its simplest terms:

The Demos (lead by Kerry) are running towards socialism while the
Repubs (lead by Bush) are jogging towards the same ultimate destination.

On 12 Jul 2004 12:12:07 -0700, (Sam Byrams)
wrote:

All this brings up several things.

One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT and has not flown as PIC or SIC since.
Neither military or elsewise. (Not counting the ride out to the boat
of late.)

Well, your inclusion of the "if I understand" is the bailout clause
for spouting a lot of crap. Learning to fly in the military at
government expense is quite simply the best way to get the best
aviation training in the world. Qualifying after UPT in an operational
single-seat jet takes, on average another eight to ten months and then
becoming operationally ready takes another six months.

Whether one flies as PIC again after completion of military service is
totally irrelevant. I have not flown as PIC or in any level of control
of an aircraft since my retirement from active duty in 1987. Doesn't
mean crap.

Kerry learned to fly not at government expense and apparently has
done so for a number of years.

I initially learned to fly J-3 Cubs, PA-22 Colts and PA-18 Super Cubs
at my own expense. I can't afford to fly at my own expense today
because I married a nice women who wasn't the recipient of fortune.
Doesn't mean crap.

Now, mind you, I don't like Bush or Kerry as a candidate. Bush was
born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. Kerry is also
apparently something of a rich kid, married Big Ketchup, Ivy League
(yecch), and to top it off is closely associated with a family I
detest and which makes my skin crawl for many reasons (not least of
which the same reason a certain baseball player hated them for every
day of the last 36 years of his life). I can tell you right now I'm
voting third party.

Voting third party is your privilege. But, you should note that the
government will continue despite your effective lack of participation.
Doesn't mean crap.

But-be honest-is there any reason I should prefer Bush over Kerry
from an aviation standpoint? Bush, a nonpilot as far as I'm concerned,
has done nothing for aviation in this country. Kerry isn't likely to
either, but how much worse could he be?

Voting from an "aviation standpoint" doesn't make any sense at all.
Voting from a principles, performance, and ideological standpoint
does. How much worse could he be? Gimme a break.

The other thing in all this discussion of what balls it takes to
strap on a single engine fighter, is the growing evidence that many
people are willing to pay a lot of money for the privilege.

Spending a lot of money for a once-in-a-lifetime thrill ride is a
whole lot different than strapping on a single-seat, single engine
fighter. Flying one operationally is well beyond just flying one.

Once
reserved for places like Mojave, the warjet deal is penetrating down
to the backward Midwest. I saw a Sabre and a Hawker Hunter poking
their tails up among the Aztecs and King Airs at the local spam can
patch this week out here. My guess is it costs roughly five hundred
bucks an hour to fly a Sabre.

Dr. Joe Bagadonutz, the wealthy proctologist buys a Mustang or even a
MiG-17 and successfully takes off and lands. He isn't, by any stretch
of the imagination, a fighter pilot. He isn't really, even that lesser
level, a pilot who flies fighters. He's simply an accident waiting to
happen.


And the civil warjet guys are killing
themselves at a rate that would have embarrassed the Air Force during
the glory days of "Every Man A Tiger".

Excuse me, but you obviously haven't read "Every Man A Tiger." It's
about Chuck Horner as the Air Component Commander of Desert Storm. The
lead-in chapters about Gen. Horner's early days flying F-105s in
Rolling Thunder are anything but glory days.

In and of itself flying fighters is no more heroic than riding a
chopped Harley with the Hells Angels or wreck diving with open circuit
scuba gear. It's what one does, and why, that sometimes might be
heroic.

Any scumbag can ride a Harley. If he's particularly disgusting, he can
become a member of a club. That's a long way from flying fighters
operationally and shouldn't, by any stretch be compared.


But just climbing up there-if I hit the lottery and could get
the FAA to let me I'd buy-after working my way up a little-the wildest
fighter I could. Simply because it would be-this is 2004, Marilyn's
dead, and she'd be 78 anyway- the biggest ego blast in the world to
taxi up to the ramp at the local FBO in front of all those square-ass
Gulfstream and Lear crews.

No, asshole. The biggest ego blast in the world is walking away from
the jet, sweat-soaked and drained, looking back at the bird and
saying, "**** you. You could have killed me, but you didn't." And,
knowing that you do something every day that most other humans don't
even begin to conceive of. "Those square-ass Gulfstream and Lear
crews" aren't even part of the equation.

I know what the statistics are, and I don't
care. I suspect Bush Jr's motives were the same-booze, pussy and
kerosene!

And, who wouldn't be motivated by that?

Works for me.


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

From: Ed Rasimus

snip


I initially learned to fly J-3 Cubs, PA-22 Colts and PA-18 Super Cubs
at my own expense. I can't afford to fly at my own expense today
because I married a nice women who wasn't the recipient of fortune.

"A nice women?" Ed, I smite thee with a tarver stick

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:56:53 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

Qualifying after UPT in an operational
single-seat jet takes, on average another eight to ten months and then
becoming operationally ready takes another six months.

That seems to be about right in prexy's case. Bush was on full-time
duty ("active duty for training") from November 1968 to November 1969.
Back at Ellington, he remained on full-time duty until June 1970, when
he graduated from Combat Crew Training School. Altogether, about 21
months full-time service, after which he became a weekend warrior.

It's a bit sad that the left has to smear his service, which of course
few of them would admit was worth doing in any event! (Most of my
friends wouldn't go within spitting distance of a military man until
in desperation they signed on with the Wesley Clark campaign.
Suddenly, getting a hero was the most important qualifcation for a
Democratic primary.) Even the redoubtable Michael Moore hasn't
bothered to retread this tired old lie.

More at www.warbirdforum.com/bushf102.htm


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Ed Rasimus wrote:

"No, asshole. The biggest ego blast in the world is walking away
from the jet, sweat-soaked and drained, looking back at the bird
and saying, '**** you. You could have killed me, but you didn't.'
And, knowing that you do something every day that most other humans
don't even begin to conceive of.

and:

"Those square-ass Gulfstream and Lear crews" aren't even
part of the equation.


And _that_ is the truth!



Jack

One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT

I'm glad you put in the qualification, because clearly you don't
understand. Bush learned to fly in a bit more than a year of full-time
service, 1968-69, was an active duty pilot until his unit transitioned
to a different aircraft in 1972, and fulfilled his military obligation
in every respect, serving six and one-half years in total, or somewhat
more than two years of active duty for training, as it is termed.
www.warbirdforum.com/bushf102.htm



all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

On 12 Jul 2004 12:12:07 -0700, (Sam Byrams)
wrote:

One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,

No, you don't understand.

You don't even understand well enough not to repeat your posts. See my
answer to the earlier one. And now you get the old Control K.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Sam Byrams wrote:

I know what the statistics are, and I don't
care. I suspect Bush Jr's motives were the same
booze, pussy and kerosene!

As a former fighter pilot (or "pilot who flew fighters", compared to
guys like Ed, et al) I wish to disassociate myself from that remark.

It was JP-4, Pussy, and booze -- in that order and with appropriate
nomenclature and capitalization, please.


Jack

In '68 (not '72) public sentiment was divided.

Probably: by '72 it wasn't. You had a few hardasses and Birchers and
whatnot and everyone else was for getting out. I grew up in a
middle-sized town and one that was overwhelmingly 'AuH2064':yet even
the rednecks had serious questions by '72. Men in uniform-and even
then, although it was understood they were noncombatants, the
occasional female-were certainly not disrespectfully treated, but it
was expressed that we hoped the war would be over shortly -either way.


Bush got his training
slot when production for UPT was as high as it had been historically
since WW II. UPT was expanding from eight to eleven bases and capacity
at each site was increased. We were up to more than 5000 per year
input to UPT from all sources. (I was director of ATC Student Officer
Rated Assignments from 1970 to April 1972 and managing the program.)





My Presidential vote isn't going to count anyway since my state is
not remotely up for grabs and it's a winner-take-all state.

Since 48 out of 50 states are "winner-take-all" Electoral College
votes, your reasoning should get everyone to give up voting.

It would seem to this political scientist (BS, MPS, MSIR) that the
closeness of the last election in so many states would indicate that
the value of every citizen's vote is critically important.

Ours wasn't close. And this one will unquestionably be farther
apart-Kerry will do worse than Gore.


They both suck. If I voted on pure principle I couldn't even vote
Libertarian-although they're closer. Kerry might really screw things
up so bad people would have to pull their heads out and in the long
run, like a dope bust,it might be beneficial for an addict.

If you can't differentiate between the basic ideological positions of
the two parties, you shouldn't vote. Good choice.


I am aware of what their platforms say. I concede some may consider
them fundamentally different. I consider them basically similar in
that they both seek to encode their politicoreligious notions in the
law. In one case it's a recognized religion, the other is an implicit
one. In practice, they differ only by amount, not by real principle.


Dr. Joe Bagadonutz, the wealthy proctologist buys a Mustang or even
a
MiG-17 and successfully takes off and lands. He isn't, by any stretch
of the imagination, a fighter pilot. He isn't really, even that
lesser
level, a pilot who flies fighters. He's simply an accident waiting to
happen.

He's equally likely to kill himself in a Bonanza for that matter.

The initial post was about flying "fighters". Yes, Bonanzas are
notorious for applying the principles of Darwin to doctors.

Actually some doctors are pretty good, even excellent, aviators.
Several aerobatic champions have been doctors. Same with other
professions. It is possible to become an excellent stick and rudder
pilot through civilian training if you have the time, money, and
drive. About the only thing you won't be able to learn as a civilian
is weapons delivery.


The phrase far predates that book. It was the grinder call in the 50s
era USAF and I can remember my uncle-who went through the air cadet
program in the 50s-talking about it. Hated the culture of USAF where
Fighter Pilots were gods-he was a C-133/C-130 pilot who dropped dead
six weeks after retiring from TWA at 60 as a four striper.

With all due respect to your uncle, we never won a war by hauling
more
trash than the enemy. Trash haulers help, but only because they
provide the warriors at the pointy end of the spear with the bombs,
beans and bullets to kill the enemy.

He was no fighter pilot, but he was a good guy and he's missed. He'd
planned to get involved in the EAA Young Eagles program and had signed
up for a soaring rating when he dropped dead-not a heart attack per se
but an electrochemical heart problem. The ambulance got there five
minutes too late but the doctors said he might have been
brain-impaired anyway, so "maybe it was for the best."


Haven't seen Mason't book, but if he thinks the "Tiger" attitude got
replaced by something less, he's sadly mistaken. Warriors are
professionals, but they'd better have a healthy dose of attitude.


Mason's book-wriitten for young adults (young male adults-it was
fifteen years before females wore USAF wings)-portrays the USAF air
cadet programs as basically unalloyed aggressiveness designed to crank
out winning fighter jocks-at the expense of a certain casualty rate,
and notwithstanding that most grads went to tankers, transports,
bombers, helos, or ocasionally directly to IP school. As I remember
the big change_according to Mason_ was that flight training "later on"
took in people who were already officers, not needing the boot camp
mentality, and was vastly less tolerant of accidents. Also the T-38
Talon was a big challenge for people whose total experience consisted
of under 200 hours in the T-37.

This agrees with accounts of flight training by many other writers,
including Richard Bach and several of the early astronauts, who went
through 50s era USAF flight training.

Bottom line as far as politics- I personally don't like Bush, right
or wrong, and I can't support a Kennedy, which Kerry as well may be,
nor would I vote for someone that liberal even if he is an active
pilot. (In general I tend to prefer Reps to Dems, provided they are
not so fundamentalist they can't separate church from state.) I don't
agreee with everything John McCain says but I'd work for his election
over Kerry. Voting third party expresses my dissatisfaction, and if it
clearly throws the election either way so much the better.

I believe that is the first time I have heard of the F-102 as a "safe
aircraft"! Were they really?


Compared to flying F-105's to Route Package Six, they were very safe when
compared to flying an F-102 over Houston.

Walt