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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ed wrote:
And, we have "Recce Pukes, Bomber Pukes, Trash-hauler Pukes and Training Command Pukes". We don't have Fighter Pukes. We have fighter pilots and pilots who fly fighters. So you say! I have met a few fighter pilots who would qualify as "Pukes". Granted a lot of them were either brown bars or staff wienies, not fully trained day to day fighter pilots. oxmoron1 MFE |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote in message . ..
On 8 Jun 2004 11:53:49 -0700, (Prowlus) wrote: Can't they say "ATTACK" Pilots anymore? if those "fighter" pilots are pounding grounmd targets there are no longer defined as true "Fighter Pukes" If they were in the USN, they would abide by Navy convention. In the USAF, aviators in high-performance tactical aircraft fly fighters. F-designated aircraft in the USAF do quite nicely in both roles, and with the shortage of air threats, they are economically re-roled as well. And, we have "Recce Pukes, Bomber Pukes, Trash-hauler Pukes and Training Command Pukes". We don't have Fighter Pukes. We have fighter pilots and pilots who fly fighters. OK, Ed; let's define which are "pukes". 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? Were "Trash Haulers" who landed their C-130s and C-123s into places like Khe Son pukes? Were the Misty Facs pukes? Were B-52 pilots who flew their Buffs over Hanoi during Linebacker pukes? Were the Jolly Greens pukes? Or the Sandys that covered for them? Or are the only "pukes" those "fighter pilots" who need to feel that they are the chosen few. JimThomas Fighter Pilot, also Sandy and more. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ed:
Thanks for clearing all that up. I don't understand "BTW, you still trying to scrub those green footprints off your back-side?" Jim Thomas Ed Rasimus wrote in message news 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? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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...." |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 14:46:06 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 8 Jun 2004 11:53:49 -0700, (Prowlus) wrote: Can't they say "ATTACK" Pilots anymore? if those "fighter" pilots are pounding grounmd targets there are no longer defined as true "Fighter Pukes" If they were in the USN, they would abide by Navy convention. In the USAF, aviators in high-performance tactical aircraft fly fighters. F-designated aircraft in the USAF do quite nicely in both roles, and with the shortage of air threats, they are economically re-roled as well. And, we have "Recce Pukes, Bomber Pukes, Trash-hauler Pukes and Training Command Pukes". We don't have Fighter Pukes. We have fighter pilots and pilots who fly fighters. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 And, apparently, all fighter types have egos at least ten orders of magnitude greater than either their abilities or their egos. Al Minyard |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:31:17 -0500, Alan Minyard
wrote: And, apparently, all fighter types have egos at least ten orders of magnitude greater than either their abilities or their egos. Al Minyard My ego is not bigger than my ego. It seems to hover around the same size, no matter which angle I view it from. As for my abilities, my ego is unrelated. Show me a humble fighter pilot and I'll show you a loser. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 02:26 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 04:24 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | Military Aviation | 120 | January 27th 04 10:19 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |