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 |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Juvat wrote:
Regarding the Berlin call-up (there's that expression again) there were bright spots (no aircraft lost in the deployment) and some less than stellar deals like three of the four provisional Fighter Wings BUSTING their ORIs, one actually busted twice. All deployed ANG tactical fighter (versus interceptor) squadrons were not currently qualified in conventional surface attack, but had mistaken qualified in nukes.... Sometimes stuff just jumps out at me and I've got to comment. The "omigod, they busted an ORI" business, for example. In January of '73, the 388th wing at Korat had an ORI. This, commencing just days after the end of Linebacker II, when the Korat wing exclusively flew all of the SAM-suppression, both day and night for all the effort. When we flew all of the EB-66 counter-measures and where we had successfully absorbed and integrated the three squadron wing of the 354th with A-7s. The LG, Chief of Maintenance, Chief of supply and Munitions Squadron CC were all off the base within 24 hours. I became exec to Jack Chain *(later CINCSAC), as he moved from Wing DO to become LG and "fix" things as well as respond to the IG report. Was Korat not "operationally ready"? By whose warped interpretation? Or, there was the "operationally ready" issue when after a bit of time in the F-4, I asked if I qualified for the Operational Readiness Medal, which took three or four years of OR status. I learned that my time in the F-105 didn't count. I was never "operationally ready"!!! Despite 110 combat missions, I was never OR, because I never had the requisite checkride. Something is occasionally rotten in Denmark and in the Inspector's offices. It ain't always what the reports say that indicates the fact. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (ret) ***"When Thunder Rolled: *** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam" *** from Smithsonian Books ISBN: 1588341038 |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Juvat wrote in message . ..
Kevin Brooks posted: By deploying them into the theater of operations from their current station would be one manner of "calling up" an AC unit. OK but that's not how I would interpret it when I was active duty. Different strokes... I took it as a total force question. Again, fair enough...not how I read it. Take away the "strictly"; as it was indeed used in ground attack missions, albeit not very effectively...why put blinders on only in regards to the F-102's history? Not trying to put blinders on it, I did post that Scott was incorrect on this score. He made an easy mistake. Sorry to inform you of this, but this thread began to meander (something that is rather common in Usenet) after Scott made his post and tried to link it to an anti-GWB thrust. As others have commented, the only folks who seem restricted to the ANG-only approach appear to be you and Scott. OK, guilty as charged I was honestly trying to keep it on topic. Respectfully, I'm happy NOT to discuss GWB service record. Nuff said. OK. So your earlier statement that no ANG units were deployed was apparently misworded--I would assume that you mean no F-102 units were activated? You are correct on that score, I fumble fingered the text when I left out F-102. Which would be true enough--but that leaves one wondering whether F-102 units would indeed have been activated if sufficient *volunteers* had not stepped forward? A very small detail regarding F-102 pilots on active duty from Colonel (PhD) Gross' "Prelude to the Total Force..." page 150 "Pilot shortages due to Southeast Asia operations increasingly affected the Air Guard. Small numbers of Air Guard F-102 were encouraged to volunteer for temporary active duty overseas. In July 1968, twenty-four of these pilots were on active duty at bases in Holland, Germany, Alaska, the Philippines, and Okinawa." I believe what he is describing here was the Palace Alert program; I had thought that was a SEA-only operation, but in reading some info found on the web during this discussion I noted that the program sent ANG pilots to various locales. Since it was/is impossible for the USAF to activate individuals (other than IRR, which likely had few F-102 pilots at the time), the use of volunteers was required. Had those volunteers not materialized, the only real solution (given that they were apparently *required*, not just "nice to have along" assets) would have been to activate an F-102 squadron (and this could easily have been the case in 68, as you are well aware of the other activations of both ANG and ARNG units that happened at this time). Gee, I was unaware you were so picky... Good enough? The devil is in the details... Well, the folks in Bien Hoa did not have to deploy into the theater of operations after the Gulf resolution, now did they (see, this playing with finite word definitions can work both ways)? You win...my sincere apologies for not staying on topic. I did read where the 509th FIS claims to have been the first unit to deploy into the RVN after the GT incident--is that wrong? My humble apologies again, since there were so many deployments to SEA from back in 1961 up until the GT incident, I honestly don't think a great deal about which outfit gets the "honor" of being first. But it is germane to the fact that the USAF already regarded the ANG as a real, honest to goodness go-to-war asset well before the entry of GWB into ANG service. I encourage you to read Gross' book, it might get you to reconsider that remark. Regarding the Berlin call-up (there's that expression again) there were bright spots (no aircraft lost in the deployment) and some less than stellar deals like three of the four provisional Fighter Wings BUSTING their ORIs, one actually busted twice. All deployed ANG tactical fighter (versus interceptor) squadrons were not currently qualified in conventional surface attack, but had mistaken qualified in nukes.... Anyway lots of great stuff in the book. Good and bad. Not unusual. That the units had problems with the ORI is not a surprise; it leaves wanting the more important question of how good the pilots and their ground crews were (and yes, a unit, be it ground or air, with superlative crews could still bust a major inspection, for as you note "the devil is in the details"). As to the question of nuclear versus conventional delivery training, the fault would have to lie with the AC on that one--those units training plans had to be approved ultimately by the AC side of the house, and if they were that far off-track, then they had to have either (a) been given bad training guidance, or (b) were given guidance without requisite resourcing to allow accomplishment of the additional tasks. I can recall one of my (Regular Army) tac officers in college, who had entered active duty back in the mid-70's, commenting about the quality of Guard units--he was amazed at the teamwork they displayed, if not their (universal) military bearing. He laughed about his active duty mortar platoon having been rather humiliated in a competition with an ARNG mortar platoon that was training with them, said they may have looked like old geezers who called each other by their first names, but by golly could they hustle in setting up their tubes and putting rounds downrange and on-target. And this was during one of the Guard's worst periods (but then again, it was not such a swell time to be in the "Volar" army, either). No bad blood. But I get a bit tired when folks like Scott traipse out the old "the Guard was a bunch of draftdodgers" mantra, ... The first is a gross exaggeration born of enough folks making the claim in the past, so it must be true, right? Again read Gross, he writes..."President Johnson's decision to rely on draftees rather than reservists raised questions about the expense and military utility or reserve programs. Many Americans were incensed that their sons and husbands were being drafted to risk death in Southeast Asia while men who received drill pay stayed home. The draft-exempt status of the National Guard, as well as other reserve programs, became a major incentive to volunteer for those programs." You can disagree with Gross, but I think he nailed it. "Many Americans" also served in the Guard, or had friends or relatives who did. More than a few thousand of them served in Vietnam (and yes, there were even cases of Guardsmen volunteering for active duty during the war), and ISTR something like seven to eight thousand ARNG troops found themselves deploying to Vietnam during the 68-69 timeframe (a few arty units, a lot of CS/CSS units, and that infantry brigade that was broken down to provide replacements to the AC divisions already in country; even, IIRC, Co D/51st Inf Rgt (Ranger), which was an Indiana ARNG LRRP unit). I believe Mr. Gross is making a generalization that does not serve the purposes of accuracy, either in the fact that Guardsmen did indeed serve in Vietnam (and LBJ's mistake was not their doing), or that there was some kind of universal groundswell of identifying the Guard as a "draftdodgers haven". Finally...my apologies, reasonable men can disagree (still scratching my head over Dan's post) and with that you are welcome to the last word. Hey, I have not seen you step beyond the bounds of amicable discussion here, nor have I seen you really endorse all of Scott's comments, so no problem. Brooks Juvat |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Peterson wrote in message ...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote: No bad blood. But I get a bit tired when folks like Scott traipse out the old "the Guard was a bunch of draftdodgers" mantra, not to mention why he had to even enter into the "bash GWB" mode in the first place. The first is a gross exaggeration born of enough folks making the claim in the past, so it must be true, right? The second was just another attempt at a backhanded swipe at a guy who performed military service and flew combat aircraft in the defense of this nation-- a much better alternative to refusing to serve at all, and then attacking those who did, as many of his then-compatriots did, and none of which he should be ashamed of, IMO. Interesting. I mentioned George W. in one post. You have in seven that I've counted so far, using me as the excuse. Of course, it does make a good excuse to avoid other questions. I have not avoided squat. Seems like you have the problem here. Nope, seems like you made the mistake of trying to insert an irrelevant, and essentially incorrect, political point into a military discussion. That more than a couple of folks have called you on it may tell you something, if you have the common sense to consider it. As far as what the NG is/was, I guess it was just coincidence that as draft rates went up in the sixties, so did guard enlistments and waiting lists. ....and when they went down, so did...... What service did they dodge? Those ANG and ARNG folks who were sent to Vietnam in 68-69; what kind of "dodging" was that? Or those AC vets who went into the Guard--what were they "dodging"? How about the members of that "champagne unit" you ridiculed who volunteered for Palace Alert, were they "shirkers"? Are you beginning to see the problem with making overly generalized characterizations of groups like the Guard? Pure coincidence, I suppose. FYI, *none* of the military services were *real* popular in the aftermath of Vietnam (do you even know what a "VOLAR blanket" was?). That the cessation of the draft hurt Guard recruiting efforts was undeniable (as it also hampered AC efforts), but you are forgetting that those who had joined the Guard because they thought it may (a big *may* in the case of those who found themselves activated anyway) have kept them from being drafted were not "dodging" the draft, but instead were performing military service that exempted them from it. Not unlike the folks who volunteered for the USN or USAF instead of waiting for their draft notices--does that make those services "havens for draft dodgers"? Brooks Scott Peterson |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Marron" wrote in message ... Having said that and for those who are interested, my Dad was one of the first group of fighter pilots to operate supersonic fighters (e.g: Dueces) with operational FIS squadrons back in the mid to late '50's. A while back I shared with the NG a local newspaper story about him ejecting from an F-102 over Wisconsin (predictably, the nitpicker contingent here even picked apart THAT!) Anyway, he especially loved the Duece's maneuverability and often spoke fondly of the ol' bird. Seems Walt BJ who also flew the Duece felt exactly the same way about it. Perchance was your dad flying out of Truax at Madison? My Dad was a Pilot for the ANG squadron at Madison. When he joined the unit in about 1956 they were flying F89s, in late 1964 Dad was TDY to Perrin in Texas to learn to fly the 102, he flew the Deuce from then until his retirement from the unit in 1972. This doesn't have much to do with the 102 in SEA discussion, please accept my apologies. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
"David Hartung" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote: Having said that and for those who are interested, my Dad was one of the first group of fighter pilots to operate supersonic fighters (e.g: Dueces) with operational FIS squadrons back in the mid to late '50's. A while back I shared with the NG a local newspaper story about him ejecting from an F-102 over Wisconsin (predictably, the nitpicker contingent here even picked apart THAT!) Anyway, he especially loved the Duece's maneuverability and often spoke fondly of the ol' bird. Seems Walt BJ who also flew the Duece felt exactly the same way about it. Perchance was your dad flying out of Truax at Madison? My Dad was a Pilot for the ANG squadron at Madison. When he joined the unit in about 1956 they were flying F89s, in late 1964 Dad was TDY to Perrin in Texas to learn to fly the 102, he flew the Deuce from then until his retirement from the unit in 1972. This doesn't have much to do with the 102 in SEA discussion, please accept my apologies. No apologies necessary. Yes, he was out of Truax when he bailed out and he also checked out in the Duece at Parrin in the mid/late '50's. Here's the post I sent to RAM last year: *** My Dad punched out of an F-102A over Wisconsin in the late '50's. Here's a few excerpts from local newspaper clippings: Truax Jet Crashes; Pilot Safe PORTAGE -- A Dagger F-102 jet from Truax Field crashed and exploded in a wooded swamp north of here today, minutes after the pilot, 1st Lt. Robert Marron, 29, jumped to safety. The plane crashed about 10 miles from the spot where Marron's parachute landed. The Air Force put up a security guard around the wreckage this afternoon. The plane crashed in a sparsely populated area on the Marquette-Columbia County line. An Air Force spokesman at Truax Field said the plan suffered "mechanical difficulties" during a two-plane flight. The spokesman said Marron stayed with the plane until he had guided it away from populous areas then bailed out. The Air Force spokesman indicated that the plane was armed and probably caused a tremendous explosion when it crashed into the swamp. An eyewitness, Gary Stevens, was plowing about a quarter mile away, ran across the swamp and arrived at the plane, "just as the pieces stopped smouldering." He said that the plane exploded "like a small atomic bomb" when it hit the ground and that when he reached the scene "there wasn't a piece of the plane so big you couldn't hold it in your hand." Stevens watched the pilot come down and said later that he "just got there when the pilot walked over to me." Truax Field immediately sent a team to the scene to disarm and retrieve the armaments and to take wreckage back to Madison where investigators will attempt to determine the cause of the fire. Marron, a pilot, with the 325th fighter interceptor squadron, has been stationed at Truax since he graduated from pilot school in 1957. #30# Of course, over a few beers, Dad explained his ejection story in much more vivid detail. One particular aspect of his story that stands out in my memory is when the flabbergasted farmer ran over to him and asked, "Are you OK!??!??" His typical fighter-pilot manner of irreverence reply to the farmer was, "Yeah...are *you* OK?!!?" ;-)) -Mike Marron Clearwater, FL *** -Mike Marron |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Juvat wrote in message . ..
Kevin Brooks posted: Be that as it may, what matter is that they were serving in a first line role through mid-73 with the AC, and still standing full alert even later with the ANG. And again... July 73 for the AC (57th FIS), and October 76 with the ANG (a HIANG unit). Please allow me to apologize in advance if you are offended by the question...but what the heck is AC? You posted that several times and I'm sure it means Active C-something. I used AD for Active Duty or are slipping in some army jargon on us AF types? Juvat (curious minds want to know) Active Component, versus RC (Reserve Component). I believe the term is commonly used in both the Army and Air Force these days. I believe it can prevent some degree of confusion, because RC units frequently are on "AD" of one type or another, as are their individual unit members. A lot of ANG and ARNG units are on "active duty" right now in Iraq--but they remain "reserve component" units. Brooks |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Peterson wrote in message ...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote: Then why make the comment in this forum? It has to be either safety through remoteness, or a case of a really bad slip-of-the-tongue(typing finger)--I'd hope it was the latter. Becaue it's not what I said. Are you saying you did NOT say, "Guard units were regarded as draft dodgers refuges. Specifically, the TxANG 147th fighter group was considered a "champagne" unit"? It's your incorrect intrepretation that I'm responding to. It is not that hard to interpret that quote. Was no longer a "first line aircraft"? Uhmmm...care to guess when the last F-102's left active duty? From what I have, the last ADC units in the Air Force were converted in 1973. It was a unit in Iceland. In the Pacific, it was 1971. In Alaska, it was 1970, Europe, 1970. Almost all ANG units were converted to other aircraft by 1975. The last units, the 195th in the Calif. ANG in 1975 and the 199th ANG in Hawaii, stopped flying them in Jan, 1977. Dates vary. The 57th FIS did indeed not give their last Deuces up until July 73--meaning that by *any* definition they were in "first line" service until then. Fine, then what is "any" definition. To me, the fact that they were still in use by an Air Force unit does not mean it was a first-line unit. Cynically, I'd think that there was a good reason that unit was chosen to be last, but I don't know what it was in this case. Well gee, I guess the USAF routinely placed incapable aircraft at a location that saw a significant chunk of the active intercepts of that period? ISTR that the 57th FIS was frequently out and about intercepting Soviet Bears, Bisons, etc.? The actual last use by the ANG is a bit more murky from what I have read--the 77 date is floated, but at least one source I ran into indicated that the HIANG actually conducted its last operational Deuce flight in October 76. They claim 1/77, but who knows. I believe that was the official date that they began operating the F-4C (IIRC), but they had ceased being an operational F-102 element back in October of 76 according to what I read at one of the various websites; sounds reasonable to me. Oh....so combat is not a realistic possibility unless it has already occurred? I believe you were insinuating that US interceptors of that period faced no real danger, right? I am having a bit of a problem here, since the previous statements have been snipped. Again, you are misquoting me me for your own benefit. No, because there is no "quote" there; I ammerely trying to define your position based upon your statements. It appeared to me (again, the snippage makes it a bit difficult...) that you were saying that because they saw no combat action in their CONUS ADC role, the likelihood of their seeing combat in that role was not a realistic possibility. A bit of a logic fault in that approach if you ask me. This was a very touchy situation. There's always the possibility of accidents on both sides. But neither side ever did shoot at each other. Along the CONUS border, you are correct. But that does not mean that we should have, or could have, dismantled our air defenses at that point in time. The F-102 was a significant player in that air defense network up through the early 70's. I've always wondered what the orders given to the intercepting aircraft were in these cases. Given the very serous consequences of an incident, did they have permission to fire if fired on or would they have had to wait for a decision by their superiors. I believe a former F-102 pilot (Walt?) lurks hereabouts and could answer that question. It's sneering to say they were tied to a state? No, the sneering bit was your snide little "Guard as a haven for draftdodgers" crap in the earlier paragraph. Well, as stated elsewhere, that's the way I remember it, but I really don't have time to look up why people joined back then. You don't have to. Answer one question--do you think that all of the Guardsmen who were already serving before the war heated up just pulled pitch and left the Guard in 1965-68? How does your "draft dodger" moniker fit them? That you are one of the number who have never served in a Guard unit--the meaning is rather clear if you actually read the wording. I did read it several times. ....and no, I never served in a Guard unit. I have, and in the company of a fair number of Vietnam veterans who did not dodge diddly. Also, that's not how I understood it, but if you can expand on how the NG units were not tied to a state, I'd appreciate your explaining how it did work. Nice try, but nope, that is not what I said. I seem to recall that you were mumbling about the Guard being much more firmly state controlled during the Vietnam era (hard to get your wording right, as it has been snipped and I lack the resolve to dig back into the old posts). I believe that is a much exaggerated claim--please show me what area(s) the state exerted real control over? In fact, the states really have their "control" limited to administrative matters (and then only IAW federal guidelines and significant federal supervision). Discussed in another post. And yes, the guard did report to and take orders from the governor of the state, unless the unit was federalized. OFCS, then please tell us what that Governor actually controlled? Training plans and inspections? Nope. Officer appointments? Not without federal approval of each and every one. Equipment? Nope. Organization? Nope again. Logistical support? No. Funding? Heck no. So what was this tremendous control they exerted over their state Guard units? I am sure you are harkening back to the sinister "GWB got appointed unfairly..." stance, Among others..... Gee, you cover your political sentiments so well... That the demise was quick after it began is immaterial. That the AC was replacing the F-102 with F-106's as quickly as possible is true, and understandable. But from an operational standpoint, there is no way you can claim that the F-102 was out-to-pasture while it was still being flown by active duty squadrons (especially the 57th in Iceland, where they ran a pretty regular Bear greeting service IIRC). The fact is that while GWB was training and beginning his squadron service the Deuce was not some has-been/never-going-nowhere player as you would have us believe, but was still serving with both frontline units on the AC side and was standing alert at various CONUS stations as well. I disagree. The fact that it was still being flown by Air Force squadrons does not mean that it's regarded as a first-line aircraft. The Air Force bought 1,000 of the things and they were still a usable aircraft, just not the best. As far as the 57th continuing to fly them. I would speculate that that the 102 was a adequate aircraft for that location and that role even into the Seventies. The only hostile aircraft they would be expecting there would be the subsonic Bears....which are exactly what they were designed to intercept. And just what the heck do you think your "first line" F-106's and F-4C's would have been facing in CONUS? Reallly looong range high performance Migs? le tme get this straight--since the Bear was the primary threat, it was OK to have the F-102 serve in Iceland, but those same F-102's were somehow outclassed when facing the *same* threat here in CONUS?? Because while I am sure it may have happened (just as I am equally sure that Senator Shmedlap could have influenced the Army's decision to have his son serve as a clerk on a rather short tour--or maybe Senator Gore?), I am reluctant to smear folks without darned good evidence (which apparently in the case of GWB has never been given, even after journalists from such anti-GWB forums as the Boston Herald and the Washington Post (or Washington Pravda as we used to refer to it) spent considerable effort trying to do just that), for one. I would suggest that you do a web search on GWB and National Guard. A number of sites have his entire military history on line. Give this an honest look to sites reporting all POV's and see if you still want to discuss it. You are trolling without bait. GWB joined, he trained, and he flew. Condemn that if you waqnt, but it ain't gonna carry much water with most of us. Ever notice how the military, down at the rubber-hits-the-road-level, responds to GWB when he appears with them? Compare that to how they conducted themselves when his predecessor was in office (you do recall the incident where that predecessor flew out to a CVN (without the media whining that accompanied GWB's similar trip) and was actually booed by his audience?). Case closed. Second, when you take that tack, you run the risk of smearing a lot of other good folks, especially when you use wording such as that that you chose in your earlier post--there were a lot of folks serving in the Guard before the war ever began, for example, and more than a few vets joined Guard units upon their return. I never said all. But I think that suggesting that the NG's popularity during the Viet Nam years was not due to the draft borders on ridiculous. And volunteering for service in another military branch or component does not equate to "draft dodger". Or are you gonna fling that accusation at all of those folks who joined the Navy, Coast Guard, or Air Force because they preferred that to serving in the Army? My, what a long list of "draft dodgers" you have created there... Brooks Not to mention the fact that, despite LBJ/McNamara's stupid mistake of not using Guard and Reserve forces earlier, there were a significant number of both ANG and ARNG folks mobilized during the conflict, and a number of other ANG crews and personnel performed support missions as well (to include transport runs into the RVN, IIRC). And BTW, are you sure that ALL of the Guard units had those waiting lists? Rather definitive and inclusive statement you are making there... Individuals, not units. You're right, though. ALL is very inclusive. What guard units did not have long waiting lists at this time? It would be intersting to try to figure out why..... Scott Peterson |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
the ANG units are much more often activated for federal military service deployed. The New Hampshire Air Guard was, as I recall, called up for a couple weeks every December to fly packages to Vietnam. While this tour of duty would no doubt be sneered at by the Good People who never in their lives put on a uniform, it did serve a purpose. In Vietnam in 1964, I fell into conversation with a C-123 pilot who'd been stationed next door to me at (then) Pease AFB. He'd been flying B-52s (I think) and was really really annoyed when he found himself assigned to an aerial pickup truck in Vietnam. Some of his SAC mates, he said, had gotten out of the service rather than suffer the indignity. But he had concluded that flying for the air force was better than not flying for the air force, so he took the assignment and found himself enjoying it. It ain't how you got there that matters, it's how the do the job once you're there. all the best -- Dan Ford email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9 see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
"Frank Vaughan" wrote in message ... In message , Ed Rasimus wrote: Something is occasionally rotten in Denmark and in the Inspector's offices. It ain't always what the reports say that indicates the fact. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (ret) ***"When Thunder Rolled: *** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam" *** from Smithsonian Books ISBN: 1588341038 When I was loading nukes on B-52's for SAC, we used to joke that we could predict with great accuracy when the next ORI would "happen". The following conditions had to be met: Payday was on a Friday. It was a 3-day weekend. There was a Saturday somewere in the middle of that weekend. Never failed! My only SAC ORI experience was at Anderson, we had an advantage over other Bases. The IG Team came through Hickam, we had at least eight hours notice that they were on the way, and yes, the managed to show up on Friday! I had been at Anderson about two weeks, and was not yet on a load crew, thus I played gopher, and discovered that B52 generations can be an interesting spectator sport. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Marron" wrote in message ... "David Hartung" wrote: "Mike Marron" wrote: Having said that and for those who are interested, my Dad was one of the first group of fighter pilots to operate supersonic fighters (e.g: Dueces) with operational FIS squadrons back in the mid to late '50's. A while back I shared with the NG a local newspaper story about him ejecting from an F-102 over Wisconsin (predictably, the nitpicker contingent here even picked apart THAT!) Anyway, he especially loved the Duece's maneuverability and often spoke fondly of the ol' bird. Seems Walt BJ who also flew the Duece felt exactly the same way about it. Perchance was your dad flying out of Truax at Madison? My Dad was a Pilot for the ANG squadron at Madison. When he joined the unit in about 1956 they were flying F89s, in late 1964 Dad was TDY to Perrin in Texas to learn to fly the 102, he flew the Deuce from then until his retirement from the unit in 1972. This doesn't have much to do with the 102 in SEA discussion, please accept my apologies. No apologies necessary. Yes, he was out of Truax when he bailed out and he also checked out in the Duece at Parrin in the mid/late '50's. Here's the post I sent to RAM last year: *** My Dad punched out of an F-102A over Wisconsin in the late '50's. Here's a few excerpts from local newspaper clippings: Truax Jet Crashes; Pilot Safe PORTAGE -- A Dagger F-102 jet from Truax Field crashed and exploded in a wooded swamp north of here today, minutes after the pilot, 1st Lt. Robert Marron, 29, jumped to safety. The plane crashed about 10 miles from the spot where Marron's parachute landed. The Air Force put up a security guard around the wreckage this afternoon. The plane crashed in a sparsely populated area on the Marquette-Columbia County line. An Air Force spokesman at Truax Field said the plan suffered "mechanical difficulties" during a two-plane flight. The spokesman said Marron stayed with the plane until he had guided it away from populous areas then bailed out. The Air Force spokesman indicated that the plane was armed and probably caused a tremendous explosion when it crashed into the swamp. An eyewitness, Gary Stevens, was plowing about a quarter mile away, ran across the swamp and arrived at the plane, "just as the pieces stopped smouldering." He said that the plane exploded "like a small atomic bomb" when it hit the ground and that when he reached the scene "there wasn't a piece of the plane so big you couldn't hold it in your hand." Stevens watched the pilot come down and said later that he "just got there when the pilot walked over to me." Truax Field immediately sent a team to the scene to disarm and retrieve the armaments and to take wreckage back to Madison where investigators will attempt to determine the cause of the fire. Marron, a pilot, with the 325th fighter interceptor squadron, has been stationed at Truax since he graduated from pilot school in 1957. #30# Of course, over a few beers, Dad explained his ejection story in much more vivid detail. One particular aspect of his story that stands out in my memory is when the flabbergasted farmer ran over to him and asked, "Are you OK!??!??" His typical fighter-pilot manner of irreverence reply to the farmer was, "Yeah...are *you* OK?!!?" ;-)) -Mike Marron Clearwater, FL Thanks for the info, since I was born in 1954, my memories of the late fifties to not include much ANG stuff, I do remember that the Regular AF flew out of Truax, and that when they moved out, the ANG took over their facilities. I also seem to recall that after the Deuce unit left Madoson, there was a detachment of 101s there for a while. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The joke called TSA | Spockstuto | Instrument Flight Rules | 58 | December 27th 04 12:54 PM |
RV-7a baggage area | David Smith | Home Built | 32 | December 15th 03 04:08 AM |
Info on a P-51 mustang called "Spare Parts" | eg | Home Built | 3 | October 28th 03 02:02 AM |
Australia tries to rewrite history of Vietnam War | Evan Brennan | Military Aviation | 34 | July 18th 03 11:45 PM |