Friendly Fire Notebook

On 15 Apr 2004 18:34:07 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

We all do what we are told (please don't confuse me with Kramer this
AM.)

Well, then why the credibility issue with the BUFF crews? Its not like it was
there choice to fly "coconut knocking" sorties vise meaningful sorties up
north.

I avoid these "he said-she said" knockups, but you asked. There was a
conscious pomposity about the BUFF community--one that was ill-founded
as (in those days) it was the absolute bottom of every graduating
class out of UPT that went to SAC. There was an incredible amount of
cross-training going on and a desire to be on the point of the spear
could have been met. (I had several B-47 and B-52 re-quals going
downtown with me in both F-105s and F-4Es.)

It is inevitable that individuals who through no fault of their own
are doing what they are told are going to be looked down upon because
of higher level policy decisions. The various interpretations were
that SAC was "too valuable" or SAC equipment would be compromised or
whatever. SAC remained a specified command and not chopped to PACAF or
7th AF for employment. This very issue is the core of Michel's book,
"Eleven Days of Christmas."

Had SAC been a component of the force waging the war and been employed
in 1966 as they were in Decembe of '72, how many lives could have been
spared?

I remember a while back when you were quoting
Clodfelter to me as a demonstration of the total failure of Linebacker
II.

Ahh, you're miss quoting me, I never said LB II was a "total failure". What I
did say was that the NVN didn't agree to any additional stipulations in Jan
1973 that they hadn't already agreed to in Oct 1972.

Excuse me? If the prisoner release had been agreed to in October (when
Kissinger announced "peace was at hand", why were will still bombing
NVN below 20 degrees N. throughout November? The NVN/VC walked out in
Paris in November when we suspended bombing and refused to sign an
agreement.

All it did was end the war, bring the recalcitrant NVN/VC back to
the bargaining table and get the release of the POWs in six weeks.


Which was going to happen in Nov-Dec 1972 but for the South Vietnamese
governments "refusal" to agree with the Paris Peace Accord. Kissenger played
hardball with Thieu in Jan 73 telling him to go along with Paris or risk being
left completely alone (which, of course, he was anyway). Had Henry played
hardball in Nov 72, there would have been no reason for LB II. LB II showed the
NVN that congress wasn't prepared (yet) to cut off funding for the war, they
agreed to return to sign the already agreed upon truce, all that was left was
for SVN to give the U.S. a thumbs up, which they begrudingly did. The Freedom
Porch operations and Linebacker I did more to the end the war as far as NVN
material destruction then LB II did.

Linebacker I was significantly more effective than Rolling Thunder. We
had better equipment, more experience and more permissive ROE. But,
the damage inflicted by LB II was the decisive factor. Academic
interpretation of the events will not prevail as long as there are a
bunch of us participants still around to speak the truth.


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

"Tex Houston" wrote in message "Bob's Your Uncle"
wrote in message
In
In this reference, as is typical, the AOB who wrote the story got it
wrong.
the Pilots were known as 4, count 'em 4 -headed Monsters, 1.Pilot, 2.
Navigator, 3. Bombardier, 4. Radar Observer. They were RATED in all 4
Specialties and entitled to wear all 4 sets of Wings.

I know of two references to multi-headed monsters in B-47 units, one, the
original program (Mather AFB?) in which the bombardier/navigator/RADAR
observer graduates were called that and two, the follow-on where some of
these people went to flight school and became pilot/bombardier/navigators
also called triple headed monsters.

The 1st reference is to Navigators and Bombardiers of the WWII era who went
to Mather, NEVER were those AOB Graduate referrred to as 3-Headed monsters,
in SAC.
The Pilots, however, 1st went USAF Navigator School in Ellington AFB, TX,
then to Mather, to the same school and training,the Navigators and
Bombardiers went to for upgrading their WWII ratings.


In no case do I ever remember
four-headed term being used. Realize this though...back then I was mostly
an air defense type and was not that familiar with B-47 units.

If you were in SAC Tex, you would have known.

Too bad this
subject had not come up before as I had breakfast in Phoenix last month
with
a B-47 pilot.

Trust me.


Regards,

Tex Houston

"Tex Houston" wrote in message ...

"Bob's Your Uncle" wrote in message
Never heard of a Bombardier-Navigator.
Regards,

Tex
What I meant to say was never heard of a Navigator-Bombardier in WWII.
The B-26/A-26 self-described Bombardier-Navigators were just that. None of
them were dual rated and were classified as Bombardiers. They were given
rudimentary Dead Reckoning, map reading and E-6B training.
Then the aircraft manufacturers designated the chap in the nose, a
Bombardier-Navigator.
The USAAC, the USAAF and the USAF never had a Military Occupational
Specialty Code or Air Force Specialty Code for a Navigator-Bombardier or a
Bombardier-Navigator, nor was there a set of Wings that identified such a
person or Aeronautical Rating.

"Bob's Your Uncle" wrote in message
...

If you were in SAC Tex, you would have known.

44SMW 63-66, Headquarters 15th Air Force 66-68, 92BW, 69-72. Sounds like
SAC to me.

Tex

It is inevitable that individuals who through no fault of their own
are doing what they are told are going to be looked down upon because
of higher level policy decisions.

Understand.

SAC remained a specified command and not chopped to PACAF or
7th AF for employment. This very issue is the core of Michel's book,
"Eleven Days of Christmas."

Yeah, Michel pretty much blames SAC for everything that went wrong in the world
after 1966, but that doesn't change the fact he was correct about their
involvement in what went wrong during LB II.

Excuse me? If the prisoner release had been agreed to in October (when
Kissinger announced "peace was at hand", why were will still bombing
NVN below 20 degrees N. throughout November?

Because Nixon didn't want to give the NVN the impression that by simply
agreeing to the Paris Peace Accord in principle, they were going to get relief
before they signed it. Secondly, and even more important, Nixon knew he was
leaving Theiu in a bad position. There were tens of thousands of NVA across the
border in South Vietnam and the Paris Peace Accord required the removal of
*none* of them. Nixon knew Thieu would take issue with it (and he did, this was
the main reason he wouldn't agree with the Paris Peace Accord. Of course, SVN
was not a signatory to it, so it only mattered to Nixon and Kissenger that
Thieu agreed) and he was determined to make the situation south of 20-North as
positive as possible for Thieu and SVN.

The NVN/VC walked out in
Paris in November when we suspended bombing and refused to sign an
agreement.

We suspended bombing north of the 20th on 18 October, as a good will gesture,
since Nixon believed the NVN were finally bargaining in "good faith". The NVN
walked out of the peace talks on 13 Dec, they didn't just walk out for the hell
of it. They walked out for two reasons; 1. We returned with new demands that
included the removal of all NVA troops and Viet Cong insurgeants. Le Duc Tho
had never even admitted that any NVA troops had crossed into SVN and he was
sure as hell not going to sign an agreement removing troops he had always
denied were there. The second reason goes hand-in-hand with the first. As the
delay grew for the final signing of the Paris Peace Accord, several democratic
congressman publically called for a House and Senate vote on suspending funding
for the war in SE Asia. Suddenly NVN could see themselves getting everything
they wanted without having to give up anything. As soon as we returned with new
demands, Le Duc Tho took a gamble and walked out. All LB II did was show Tho
that Nixon could still pull off strong military action without an uproar (or
even a vote on funding) from congress. Once Tho realized he wasn't going to get
the whole enchillada, he returned to sign *the original* peace accord.

Linebacker I was significantly more effective than Rolling Thunder.

Agree.

But,
the damage inflicted by LB II was the decisive factor.

I'll have to disagree with you there Ed. I did a lot of research for a 40 page
masters thesis and nearly every target struck during LB II had either already
been struck during LB I or was struck repeatedly during LB II basically turning
over rubble. Ed, B-52s alone dropped over 4,000 M-117 on the Kinh No
railyard...which had already been 60% disabled in November. BUFFs dropped over
3,000 M-117 on the Thai Nguyen Thermal Power Plant....also struck repeatedly in
November. I mean, come on Ed, they sent 36 B-52 sorties after the damn Hanoi
Radio site, dropped over 3,000 bombs, lost 4 B-52s and never even took the damn
thing out. On day #9 a pair of F-4Es hit it with a few LGBs and knocked it off
the air for months. No Ed, I'm going to have to disagree, we were mainly
turning over rubble and making a political statement during those days and
nights.

Academic
interpretation of the events will not prevail as long as there are a
bunch of us participants still around to speak the truth.

I'm sorry Ed, but I've researched every target hit by B-52s during LB II and
even the ones struck for the first time (and there were only 3 or 4) were hit
again and again. I used an accuracy of 1000 feet and plugged the numbers into
todays targeteering software and the .pd inflicted on nearly every BUFF target
was .8 or better after being struck the second time. Problem is most targets
were hit 3, 4 or even 5 times. I know you've seen me say this to Kramer before
Ed, but just because you were a participant doesn't mean you've got an accurate
view of events.

On a similar subject, I'll be attending Army General Command & Staff College
next year at Ft. Leavenworth and I just received my "book report" reading list
for the Air Force prep course preceeding the Army course (basic Air Force 101 I
guess ??). #21 on a list of 26 was "When Thunder Rolled". I guess I'll have to
pick it up Ed. Looking forward to reading it.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Subject: Friendly Fire Notebook
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 4/15/04 3:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time

It is inevitable that individuals who through no fault of their own
are doing what they are told are going to be looked down upon because
of higher level policy decisions. The various interpretations were
that SAC was "too valuable

Guys who died in bombers were just as dead as guys who died in fighters.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"Tex Houston" wrote in message .com...

"Bob's Your Uncle" wrote in message
If you were in SAC Tex, you would have known.

44SMW 63-66, Headquarters 15th Air Force 66-68, 92BW, 69-72. Sounds like
SAC to me.

Little late in the argument as you yourself just said- :-)

"In no case do I ever remember
four-headed term being used. Realize this though...back then I was mostly
an air defense type and was not that familiar with B-47 units.
Tex

(BUFDRVR) wrote in message ...
Never heard of a Bombardier-Navigator.

I believe its unique to the United States Navy....

The B-47 Pilot AC's were sent to Ellington for Navigation School, then
Mather for Radar and Bombardier Schools, thus authorizing them to be rated
in 4 Specialties and wear 4 different sets of Wings. They were known as
4 -Headed Monsters!

Interesting. Good thing they don't do that now, I've flown nearly an entire
sortie as the Navigator and I'm here to tell you I'm the worst navigator since
Marco Polo.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

I went to AOB(Air Observer, Bombardier) School at James Connally AFB,
TX in 1957 on my way from pilot training to a co-pilot position in
RB-47s at Little Rock AFB. It was a six month school with training in
dead reckoning, celestial navigation, radar navigation and radar
bombing. We picked up an additional rating, another set of wings and
were called "Triple-Headed-Monsters".

Gene Myers

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
When I recounted to him that I had been told he would take offense at
"BN"
he
looked some what quizzical, shrugged and said "No." "That's what I was, a
Radar
Navigator Bombardier."

He's much more laid back then other Radar vets I've met. The term "BN" is
short
for Bombardier Navigator, which depending on airframe could imply the job
description of operating the bombing radar, but not always. Seems the guys
I've
met try to seperate themselves from non-Radar bombing types. Current RN's
don't
really seem to care either way, at least most don't.

Well, he comes from a bit before your time. I'm not sure but I think
a bit before Ed's time as well. I know he flew missions over 'Nam
but I don't think I've ever heard him mentioning Hanoi.

Says the last time he went to an air show and looked up in the bomb
bay he recognized some of the mods they worked on while he was
at Boeing

"buf3" wrote in message
om...
I went to AOB(Air Observer, Bombardier) School at James Connally AFB,
TX in 1957 on my way from pilot training to a co-pilot position in
RB-47s at Little Rock AFB. It was a six month school with training in
dead reckoning, celestial navigation, radar navigation and radar
bombing. We picked up an additional rating, another set of wings and
were called "Triple-Headed-Monsters".

Gene Myers

What does an "Air Observer" do?