Why was the USAF.....................

"Tex Houston" wrote in message
...

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote in message
...
(BUFDRVR) wrote in
:

Anyone with D model time, is long retired, or dead.


Not true. There a few "tall tail" guys around. They're all O-6
or above.

Or E-9...

Very good, bad on my part to exclude our gunners.

I'm a bit unclear on one thing, was the 0.50 quartet replaced
by the m61 on all the B52s and then, subsequently, removed from
service in the early 90s?


Regards...

I've copied two paragraphs from Joe Baugher's website and these only apply
to the B-52H.

Which might leave a false impression.

The defensive tail armament was changed. The quartet of 0.50-inch machine

Yes it was changed, but it was changed with the change in construction
model:
all B-52s before the B-52H had the quad 50 installation and the H model
factory
installation was changed to the 20mm Vulcan.
The previous models were not retrofitted with the Vulcan.

guns carried by earlier versions was replaced by a single General Electric
M61 20-mm six-barreled rotary cannon. The maximum firing rate was 4000
rounds per minute. The magazine carried 1242 rounds of ammunition. The
Emerson AN/ASG-21 fire control system was installed as standard. The
gunner
was still seated in the main crew compartment forward of the wing leading
edge, sitting in an upward-firing rearward-facing ejector seat beside the
electronic warfare officer.

It was with the G model (continuing through the H) that the gunner was moved
up with the rest of the crew.

In October of 1991, the gunner's station was removed as an economy
measure,
reducing the crew complement to only five. The gunner's ejector seat was,
however, retained, and can now be occupied by an instructor or flight
examiner who often goes along on training missions.

Before the gunner moved up front he was isolated in the tail with his guns
and
back there I don't believe he had an ejector seat: just blow the cover off
and
fall out the back. Of course by '91 all that was left in the active
inventory were
the G & H. The D's outlasted the Bs, C, Es & Fs but were gone too by about
'83.

The M61A1 Vulcan 20-mm
cannon in the tail was taken out during 1991-94 and the gun opening was
covered over by a perforated plate, although the wiring and instruments
associated with the gun were all retained so that the gun could in
principle
be reinstalled, although there are no longer any trained gunners available
to operate it.

Tex Houston

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...

Is a tail gun necessary on a B52? Has one ever been used as a defensive
measure in recent times?

The USAF's answer is obviously "no" since they have removed.
To the best I know the last time it was used in anger was over Vietnam.

Also, refresh my memory, it was a B52 that Slim Pickens was dropped from
in the movie ( as per BUFDRVR's signature )??

Yes, Slim Pickens was the pilot of a B-52 in "Dr. Strangelove"
(or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"),
I can't tell you off hand what model it was supposed to be.

It's been a long time since I saw the flick.

Me too. I may have a copy, perhaps I'll watch it this weekend...

And as more of a side note, was BUFDRVR's H
model built before or after the movie came out?

Before, depending on which particular airframe, by one to
three years I'ld say (I'm not real clear on when the movie came
out).

From: "John Keeney"
Date: 1/9/2004 12:57 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...

Is a tail gun necessary on a B52? Has one ever been used as a defensive
measure in recent times?

The USAF's answer is obviously "no" since they have removed.
To the best I know the last time it was used in anger was over Vietnam.

Also, refresh my memory, it was a B52 that Slim Pickens was dropped from
in the movie ( as per BUFDRVR's signature )??

Yes, Slim Pickens was the pilot of a B-52 in "Dr. Strangelove"
(or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"),
I can't tell you off hand what model it was supposed to be.

It's been a long time since I saw the flick.

Me too. I may have a copy, perhaps I'll watch it this weekend...

All I remember is it was a tall tail.

Good flick.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: "Pete"
Date: 1/8/2004 9:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Mike Marron" wrote

Comprende?

20+ posts in this thread, and still no information as to why you think the
USAF 'dropped the ball on 9/11 BIG TIME!"

Pete

You won't get one from him. He's convinced he doesn't have to back it up and
now he's convinced I am attacking him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: "John Keeney"
Date: 1/8/2004 11:57 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Mike Marron" wrote in message
.. .
"mg" wrote:

To blame the Air Force is like blaming the fire department for not
stopping
an arsonist.

Poor analogy. The Air Force is not entirely to blame for what happened
to 9/11, but it's not absolutely blameless either.

Actually the fire department likely has a bigger role in stopping arsonist
that the Air Force in investigating potential terrorist threats. In many
areas the fire department is responsible for criminal investigation of
arson and if it is a repeat offender they should have caught him last time.

It was there to put the fire out (endless CAP mission ever since),
but it could not have prevented it.

Given better intelligence, the USAF could have easily prevented it.

Yes, but the Air Force is not tasked with intelligence analyst of
that nature. Rarely they'll be tasked with some of the gathering that
requires their technical assets but in those cases they are more
likely than not to have no idea why they are acquiring it.

Or why not blame the Army for not having a AAA battery stationed in NY or
DC.
Or why not blame the Navy for not having a ship on the Potomac or in NY
harbor that could have prevented it.

Actually, you're absolutely right. Why not blame the Army or Navy?

Because they too, are not very involved in that area.
Well, actually, army & navy special forces might be involved if
requested by civilian agencies.

In what far fetched way could the USAF have prevented 9/11?

A preemptive strike, perhaps? Recall the Israeli attack on the Osiraq
nuclear powerplant near Baghdad back in 1981.

Yes, with better intelligence the USAF could have preemptively targeted
Ossama. But the Air Force would not have gathered the intelligence,
the Air Force would not have analyzed the intelligence and the Air
Force wouldn't have decided it sufficient to act upon.

You are aware that the Army, Navy and Air Force are not allowed
to launch preemptive strikes on their own?

Several of us have attempted to talk rationally to marron.

Several of us have asked him to explain just how the USAF was responsible in
whole or in part for 9/11 or retract the accusation. He refuses to do either.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Mark asked:
Also, refresh my memory, it was a B52 that Slim Pickens was dropped from
in the movie ( as per BUFDRVR's signature )?? It's been a long time
since I saw the flick. And as more of a side note, was BUFDRVR's H
model built before or after the movie came out?

IIRC the rmovie elease date was late '63 or early '64. The movie really P.O'd
my ROTC instructor, "If they are going to put the '52 in the movies, they ought
to make the interior correct!"
The USAF didn't cooperate with the movie company very muchm if at all. Sat in
the enclosed portion of the drive-inm ate popcorn, drank a beer or three,
damned near choked from laughing so much.
Finally got my Dad to watch it twenty years later. He thought General Ripper
was a perfect match for his squadron CO in 1944.

oxmoron1
The movie also convinced me to do what it took to stay out of SAC. Sorry
Buffdrvr, but wvwn MAC was more attractive to me then.

"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: Mike Marron

Hiya Mary. I didn't get into the details with B2421 because it simply
isn't worth my time arguing with a humorless old prude/killjoy, but
suffice to say that we mostly got tastes of wine at the dinner table
and only on special occasions such as Thanksgiving and Christmas,
etc. No big deal. Sheesh!

You said you drank beer with your father's buddies.

Assuming you turned 20, you said you spent your first 20 years on ADC
bases,
when the last ROs left ADC in the early 1970s then the odds are you were
drinking beer illegally. With very few exceptions the nation wide drinking
age
was 21. The exceptions were states like Illinois that allowed 3.2 beer at
18.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I was able to legally purchase beer
at the age of 18, and Mississippi did not sell 3.2 stuff.

"John Keeney" wrote in message
...

You are aware that the Army, Navy and Air Force are not allowed
to launch preemptive strikes on their own?


Probably not.

"John Keeney" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

A preemptive strike, perhaps? Recall the Israeli attack on the Osiraq
nuclear powerplant near Baghdad back in 1981.

Yes, with better intelligence the USAF could have preemptively targeted
Ossama.

Right. Of course, I said exactly that right from the get go!

But the Air Force would not have gathered the intelligence,
the Air Force would not have analyzed the intelligence and the Air
Force wouldn't have decided it sufficient to act upon.

Wrong. The Prez may have the final decision whether or not to
act, but in conjunction with other military services and national
agencies, Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
(ISR) specialists are heavily involved with counterterrorism
operations.

On 09 Jan 2004 02:55:22 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

From: Mike Marron

Hiya Mary. I didn't get into the details with B2421 because it simply
isn't worth my time arguing with a humorless old prude/killjoy, but
suffice to say that we mostly got tastes of wine at the dinner table
and only on special occasions such as Thanksgiving and Christmas,
etc. No big deal. Sheesh!

You said you drank beer with your father's buddies.

Assuming you turned 20, you said you spent your first 20 years on ADC bases,
when the last ROs left ADC in the early 1970s then the odds are you were
drinking beer illegally. With very few exceptions the nation wide drinking age
was 21. The exceptions were states like Illinois that allowed 3.2 beer at 18.

Kids can be given alcoholic beverages in non-public settings with
their parents' consent in over half the states. I believe he said his
father was present, too.

That means he wasn't doing it illegally.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer