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

Vandalism, security measure, or something else?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 2nd 04, 07:19 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Vandalism, security measure, or something else?

I was in Tucson over the holidays. At the AFB there (Davis-Monthan), they
keep a lot of aircraft in storage. At the south end of the base, several
recent arrivals were parked near the fence. For some reason, the "U.S. Air
Force" markings on the side had been torn up.

Does anyone have any idea why this was done? There were eight or ten
airplanes, all the same make and model, all with the same kind of
defacement.

You can find a picture of one of the airplanes he
http://www.nwlink.com/~peted/Davis-MonthanAirplanes.jpg

(Bonus points for anyone who can remind me what kind of airplane they
are...I want to say C-141, but I could be way off base).

Pete


Ads
  #2  
Old February 2nd 04, 09:30 AM
Tom Sixkiller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
I was in Tucson over the holidays. At the AFB there (Davis-Monthan), they
keep a lot of aircraft in storage. At the south end of the base, several
recent arrivals were parked near the fence. For some reason, the "U.S.

Air
Force" markings on the side had been torn up.

Does anyone have any idea why this was done? There were eight or ten
airplanes, all the same make and model, all with the same kind of
defacement.

You can find a picture of one of the airplanes he
http://www.nwlink.com/~peted/Davis-MonthanAirplanes.jpg

(Bonus points for anyone who can remind me what kind of airplane they
are...I want to say C-141, but I could be way off base).

Look's like you're right.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-141.htm

As for the markings...there doesn't have to be a sensical reason, does
there?


  #3  
Old February 2nd 04, 09:31 AM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: "Peter Duniho"
I was in Tucson over the holidays. At the AFB there (Davis-Monthan), they
keep a lot of aircraft in storage. At the south end of the base, several
recent arrivals were parked near the fence. For some reason, the "U.S. Air
Force" markings on the side had been torn up.

Does anyone have any idea why this was done? There were eight or ten
airplanes, all the same make and model, all with the same kind of
defacement.

You can find a picture of one of the airplanes he
http://www.nwlink.com/~peted/Davis-MonthanAirplanes.jpg

(Bonus points for anyone who can remind me what kind of airplane they
are...I want to say C-141, but I could be way off base).

Pete


C-141B.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


  #4  
Old February 2nd 04, 04:15 PM
OXMORON1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter asked:
At the south end of the base, several
recent arrivals were parked near the fence. For some reason, the "U.S. Air
Force" markings on the side had been torn up.


Isn't the south end of the base directly accross the fence from the recycling
plants? IIRC the planes sold for scrap are moved directly to the demo plants to
be cut up and melted or crushed.

oxmoron1
  #5  
Old February 2nd 04, 04:26 PM
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote:

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
I was in Tucson over the holidays. At the AFB there (Davis-Monthan), they
keep a lot of aircraft in storage. At the south end of the base, several
recent arrivals were parked near the fence. For some reason, the "U.S.

Air
Force" markings on the side had been torn up.

Does anyone have any idea why this was done? There were eight or ten
airplanes, all the same make and model, all with the same kind of
defacement.

You can find a picture of one of the airplanes he
http://www.nwlink.com/~peted/Davis-MonthanAirplanes.jpg

(Bonus points for anyone who can remind me what kind of airplane they
are...I want to say C-141, but I could be way off base).

Look's like you're right.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-141.htm

As for the markings...there doesn't have to be a sensical reason, does
there?



Yes, they're C-141s. It looks as if someone drove a forklift or
something through the fuselage. Perhaps the plane is beyond its fatigue
service life? Is that the way the USAF now marks aircraft that are
beyond their service life?
  #6  
Old February 2nd 04, 08:29 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
Yes, they're C-141s. It looks as if someone drove a forklift or
something through the fuselage. Perhaps the plane is beyond its fatigue
service life? Is that the way the USAF now marks aircraft that are
beyond their service life?


I dunno. But I don't think that would be it. The thing that's interesting
is that the damage is ONLY where the "U.S. Air Force" markings are. I don't
see the connection between fatigue service life and paint on the side of the
plane. Seems like you could just as easily chop off the wings, for example
(and that would make moving the hunk of metal around the storage yard a lot
easier).

Of course, if the goal was to remove the USAF markings, there are better
ways to do that as well.

As the post you quoted suggested, I guess there doesn't have to be a
"sensical [sic]" reason for targeting the USAF label specifically. But I
was hoping there was one. On the face of it, I don't see any rational
reason for attacking the airplanes that way, which is precisely why I was
hoping someone here would know the answer.

Pete


  #7  
Old February 2nd 04, 08:52 PM
OXMORON1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A loooong time ago when the F-111B prototype was at DM, there was some graffiti
on it, and I quote: "F#%k the Navy"
Don't know when or where it got added.
This was about '76 and the a/c was barely a hulk back then.

Oxmoron1
MFE
  #8  
Old February 3rd 04, 12:02 AM
Peter Gottlieb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To show compliance with some treaty?


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message

news
Yes, they're C-141s. It looks as if someone drove a forklift or
something through the fuselage. Perhaps the plane is beyond its fatigue
service life? Is that the way the USAF now marks aircraft that are
beyond their service life?


I dunno. But I don't think that would be it. The thing that's

interesting
is that the damage is ONLY where the "U.S. Air Force" markings are. I

don't
see the connection between fatigue service life and paint on the side of

the
plane. Seems like you could just as easily chop off the wings, for

example
(and that would make moving the hunk of metal around the storage yard a

lot
easier).

Of course, if the goal was to remove the USAF markings, there are better
ways to do that as well.

As the post you quoted suggested, I guess there doesn't have to be a
"sensical [sic]" reason for targeting the USAF label specifically. But I
was hoping there was one. On the face of it, I don't see any rational
reason for attacking the airplanes that way, which is precisely why I was
hoping someone here would know the answer.

Pete




  #9  
Old February 3rd 04, 04:58 AM
Chris Schmelzer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Peter Gottlieb" wrote:

To show compliance with some treaty?



Ahh, yeah, that big, we don't have many jet heavy lift vehicles to,
ummm, crash into your buildings treaty?

umm, probably not
  #10  
Old February 3rd 04, 05:17 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Chris Schmelzer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Peter Gottlieb" wrote:

To show compliance with some treaty?


[...] umm, probably not


I dunno...Peter's guess is the most sensible suggestion I've heard yet. You
have a better theory?


 




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
18 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 January 19th 04 02:08 AM
09 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 January 9th 04 10:05 PM
"air security lies in deterrence" Cub Driver Military Aviation 7 January 8th 04 02:06 PM
27 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Military Aviation 1 November 30th 03 05:57 PM
07 Aug 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 August 8th 03 02:51 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.