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

Kerry didn't join the National Guard to avoid combat.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old September 7th 04, 11:59 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 07 Sep 2004 19:10:58 GMT, (OXMORON1) wrote:

George asked:
Since you've already done the research, did you happen to come across an
explanation as to why the 500 hour desired minimum that could routinely be
waived wasn't waived in his case?


One point of view, 500 hours was a "magic" number in a lot of a/c during the
60's. If you got to 500 hours in unit assigned aircraft you were thought to be
proficient in the airplane.
An example, in some units you had to have 500 hours to go cross country solo vs
a two ship deployment with a qualified flight lead. BUT if they needed someone
to go XC to pickup some parts, the 500 hour requirement could/would be waived.
I don't know if the 500 number was an AF Reg or lower mandate.

Rick Clark


And, upon completion of 100 combat missions over North Vietnam (a tour
that claimed 60% of those who started it), I amassed a total time for
my Form 5 of 404.9 hours in the F-105--training and combat total.

Of course, that allowed me to enter combat in the F-4 with 28 hours in
the F-4C and ZERO flying time in the F-4E before my first combat
mission over NVN.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
"Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
Both from Smithsonian Books
***
www.thunderchief.org
Ads
  #52  
Old September 8th 04, 12:14 AM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: Bob
Date: 9/7/2004 5:03 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:40:24 -0600, Jack wrote:

On 06 Sep 2004 18:53:52 GMT,
(B2431) wrote:

From: Jack


When mandatory drug testing was implemented as part of all flight
physicals, Bush refused to take his required physical and grounded
himself.

Drug testing is a comman function, not medical. They would not have tested

for
drugs suring a flight physical.

Bush was no longer filling a flying slot so no flight physical was

required.

Then again, you probably already knew that since you have done such
comprehensive research.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Random drug testing of the entire force and mandatory drug testing in
conjunction with flight physicals, at both CONUS and overseas bases,
was implemented in April, 1972. Not as command prerogative, but by
Air Force directive following DoD guidance. George W. Bush was
filling a flying slot until failing to appear for his annual flight
physical in August, 1972. And yes, I have done the research, thank
you...I was also there at the time.


I was there in 1972 on the enlisted side and don't remember "Random
drug testing of the entire force" until sometime around 1980. Didn't
really seem to get going until after 1975 and then it was airman under
four at first and then age I believe was another point. Around 1980
it was everyone. I


During the 1970s it was E-5 and below and 25 years old or younger for the
random tests.


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #53  
Old September 8th 04, 02:06 AM
Peter Stickney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Jack writes:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:25:04 -0400, (Peter Stickney)
wrote:


snip - Air Defence Command ORBAT for the U.S. Southeast, 1968-1972

LOL.... well my friend, that was a rather lengthy diatribe that said
very little and proved nothing concerning the point of the original
comment. To set the record straight, the real threat of airborne
invasion during the cold war was always from the north, thus NORAD.
Trying to make a couple of aircraft in Cuba sound like a viable threat
is really grasping for straws. However, in the extremely unlikely
event of a couple Cuban aircraft 'invading' the U.S.... Southern
Command and interceptor units out of Florida would have been tasked,
not some champaign unit in Texas. Yes, F-102's served in Viet Nam, as
did F-100's, O-2's, even A-1Skyraiders. All were considered obsolete
aircraft but fit a special niche requirement. No matter how you
attempt to spin it.... George W. Bush was in that unit specifically to
avoid combat.


I've been to a World's Fair, a Picnic, and a Rodeo, and that's the
stupidest thing I've seen come across a monitor.

You are aware, are you not, that NORAD stands for North American Air
Defence - that's North America, as in the continent that stretches
from the Isthmus of Panama to beyond the Arctic Circle. It was, at
the time, charged with the defence against air attacks of the entire
United States and Canada. (As in it is a dual-nation command, which
encompasses all US and Candadian Air Defence assets on the continent.
Back in those days, it included the USAF's Air Defence Command, The
RCAF, (And later, the small stub of CANFORCE) the odd U.S. Navy
squadron or two, and the U.S. Army's Surface-to-Air missile batteries.)

While the direct route from the Soviet Untion was, indeed, over the
Pole, it was also the least likely approach to have any success.
Soviet bombers would have been picked up above the Artic Circle by the
DEW Line, giving at least two hour's warning. They'd have been
intercepted as they crossed into the contiguous radar coverage of the
Mid-Canada Line, wnd been subject to interception for another 2 hours
or so before reaching their targets. It's rather doubtful that the
Soviets placed a lot of stock on their success in using that route.

An approach more likely to meet with success (as in bombs on target)
was to stage airplanes out of Cuba. Which, in fact, they did. Now,
while the Il-28 may not have been the Hottest Rock in the sky, taht
really doean't matter much if you've got nothing there to intercept
them with. An H-bomb on New Orleans, Galveston, or Houston is going
to do as much damage if it was delivered by an Il-28 as it would if it
was delivered by an ICBM.
If you had the brains to look at a map, you'd see that Cuba isn't a
single speck on the map, but is about 700 miles long, from East to
West, and is pretty well situated to cover the entire U.S. Gulf Coast.

It's also worth pointing out that on several occasions, Cuban Military
aircraft have, indeed penetrated into U.S. Airspace, including a
MiG-17 that landed at Key West, and an An-24 that suddenly showed up
in the traffic pattern in New Orleans. These actions pointed out the
need for maintaining soem air defence presence in the Southeastern
U.S.

What you missed, btw, was the fact that since 1955, an integral part
of all U.S. Air Defence assets has been the Guard. Since the late
1960s, they've far and away provided the majority of airplanes on
alert, and since the ADTAC was dissolved, they're pretty much it.
They aren't amateurs. They train to the same standards as the Active
Compnent types, and are measured against them. Given their
performance at stuff like the FIghter Weapons Meets (Willian Tell),
where Guard units end up winning as often as not, one could claim that
they're on th ewhole more proficient at their particular tasks than
the Active Component types. (That's not too surprising, nor is it a
slap against the Active Component - You've got a large cadre of
experienced, prior service pilots and maintainers, most of whom have
worked together for years. That's tough to beat)


Southern Command was, at that time, a liason unit, tasked with
teaching Central American nations how to deal with whatever insurgents
they were dealing with. (When they werent' whacking on each other over
quarter-final matches in the World Cup) It was Headquartered in
Panama, and has as its flying assets, One Air Commando Squadron (A mix
of C-46s and U-10s)




Bush was in a chamgaigne unit to avoid the draft. Plain and simple.
However, he couldn't even honorably complete that cushy mission
without disappearing for a year.


Here's a hint - the airplane doesn't know or care if you're rich or
poor, or if you think someone's got political pull. It's just as
ready to kill you no matter what. Pull _might_ get you into an ANG
unit. (And the idea of a former Republican Congressman having being
able to pull strings in Johnson-dominated Texas is so bizzare that the
Twilight Zone wouldn't have filmed it) But it won't get you through
UPT, it won't get you through Transition Training, and it won't get
you Mission Qualified on the aircraft. The machine doesn't care - rich
or poor, if you screw up, you're dead. What it won't tolerate is
stupidity.


Scoring the lowest possible passing score, 25%, on his pilots aptitude
test, then leap frogging in front of 500 other qualified applicants
who applied for slots before he did wasn't simply a 'stroke of luck'
for George W. Bush! You're either extremely naive or so blinded by
partisanship you refuse to acknowledge the obvious. No, the aircraft
doesn't care if you're rich or poor or have political connections.
However, some of those in positions of authority, who made the
selections as to who got assigned to the few available slots obviously
did. The aircraft is simply a machine, it didn't do the recruiting!
Also, if you're implying Texas politics isn't and hasn't been
'bizzare' for the past 100 years, you have a lot to learn about Texas
and politics.


How many of those "500 applicants" (Although nobody counts applicants
- maybe it was 5, or 50, or 50 million) were willing to enter a long
term (6 year) commitment including two years active duty? The guys
looking to avoid the draft were signing on for the 6 Month + 2 year
(IIRC) hitch as an EM.
Whatever his score was, it doesn't matter. He graduated from UPT, he
went through the Instrument School and the F-102 qualification at
Perrin, and he was rated FMQ. Fully Mission Qualified is Fully
Mission Qualified. You can't fake it. (Well you can if you're the
Squadron Political Officer, but that was only in the IA-PVO)

So teach me about Texans and politics.
Considering that I've been accused by Ross Perot of trying to sabotage
his daughter's wedding... (How _do_ you sabotage a Texan's wedding?
Park the pickups too close to the hog spit? Put horse **** in Lone
Star bottles? How could you tell?)
Truth be told, I'm a fairly apolitical rent-a-thug. I've done
security and protection work for candidates of both parties.


When mandatory drug testing was implemented as part of all flight
physicals, Bush refused to take his required physical and grounded
himself. Shortly afterwards he disappeared. You connect the dots.


Mandatory drug testing didn't start until 1974-75, after Bush had
completed his service. You seem, like a lot of kids today, to have
problems with this "chronology" thing - the idea that anything that
occurred before you were born didn't happen in a bizzare jumble of
simultanaety.


Mandatory drug testing in conjunction with flight physicals, both in
the CONUS and overseas began in April, 1972. The flight physical
George W. Bush dodged was scheduled in August, 1972. I was in the
active duty Air Force, on flying status at the time, and am well aware
of the dates, thank you. That 'chronology' thing is a bitch, isn't
it.


Uhm, if you're not on flying status (GWB wasn't in 1972, since he
wasn't going to in long enough to justify transitioning to the F-101Bs
that his unit was receiving, and he wasn't an IP on the F-102 (The
111th FIS was the RTU for the F-102 for the entire Air Force at that
time) then he wouldn't be taking a flight physical.

Put-up time, sport. Lay your cards down. If you were in fact what
you claim, you wouldn't, with a straight face, be making some of the
claims you are.

To know the neocon chickenhawks.... watch what they do .... not what
they say...... Jack


Whereas you do nothing, and say nothing. Thet pretty much says it.


Says what??.... LOL.... you amateur history revisionists crack me up!


To quote the Bard, you are "A mass of sound and fury, signifying
nothing."

If you're a shill for the DNC's Internet campaign, they ought to be
asking for their money back.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
  #54  
Old September 8th 04, 02:14 AM
Peter Stickney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
(B2431) writes:
From: Jack


To set the record straight, the real threat of airborne
invasion during the cold war was always from the north, thus NORAD.
Trying to make a couple of aircraft in Cuba sound like a viable threat
is really grasping for straws. However, in the extremely unlikely
event of a couple Cuban aircraft 'invading' the U.S.... Southern
Command and interceptor units out of Florida would have been tasked,
not some champaign unit in Texas. No matter how you attempt to spin it....

George W. Bush was in that unit specifically to
avoid combat.


I have news for you, if a cerdible threat over the polar cap existed some ANG
units would have been federalized and souhern units would have been deployed.


Dan, that, in fact is what happened - The idea that an Air Guard unit
belongs to a particular State has been nonsence since the very
beginning of the AIr Guard - 1947. They're a Reserve Compnent of the
AIr Force. Since 1955, Air Guard Fighter Interceptor Suadrons (As
they were then, Fighter Squadrons now) have been required to maintain
readiness at the same levels as the Active Compnent forces, meet teh
same qualification criteria, and be standing 5-minute alert 24 Hrs/Day
7 Days/Week. They've always been under Air Force orders, vectored by
Air Force controllers. The State has nothing to say about that.
And they were all over the country, as well - most ANG FISs were, in
fact, in Norther Tier states.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
  #55  
Old September 8th 04, 02:40 PM
George Z. Bush
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 07 Sep 2004 19:10:58 GMT, (OXMORON1) wrote:

George asked:
Since you've already done the research, did you happen to come across an
explanation as to why the 500 hour desired minimum that could routinely be
waived wasn't waived in his case?


One point of view, 500 hours was a "magic" number in a lot of a/c during the
60's. If you got to 500 hours in unit assigned aircraft you were thought to be
proficient in the airplane.
An example, in some units you had to have 500 hours to go cross country solo
vs
a two ship deployment with a qualified flight lead. BUT if they needed someone
to go XC to pickup some parts, the 500 hour requirement could/would be waived.
I don't know if the 500 number was an AF Reg or lower mandate.

Rick Clark


And, upon completion of 100 combat missions over North Vietnam (a tour
that claimed 60% of those who started it), I amassed a total time for
my Form 5 of 404.9 hours in the F-105--training and combat total.

Of course, that allowed me to enter combat in the F-4 with 28 hours in
the F-4C and ZERO flying time in the F-4E before my first combat
mission over NVN.


Getting back to my still unanswered question, I'd have been satisfied with a
simple "I don't know" instead of the self-serving smoke. Thanks anyway. If you
were fishing for compliments, you were undoubtedly a hero and deserving of the
accolades that came your way, but I never questioned that and you didn't need to
defend yourself that way.

Unfortunately, I can't give you high marks for sticking to the subject; my
question and its answer had nothing to do with you or your experiences. You
still haven't told me if you knew why they asked for 500 hours for that
particular program or why they didn't accept 300 hours when, as you pointed out,
first of all, that they could have easily waived the 500 hour requirement and
then that they obviously didn't have a problem with tossing you into combat
without any time at all in the F-4E and only 28 hours in the F-4C.

I don't know about you but I have the impression that their requirements for
that program were probably unrealistically high and I can't help but wonder why
it was done that way. I don't have a clue....do you?

George Z.


 




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
Bush's guard record JDKAHN Home Built 13 October 3rd 04 09:38 PM
16 Aug 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 August 17th 04 12:37 AM
Donald Trump tells Bush. "You're fired" ArtKramr Military Aviation 20 July 19th 04 01:53 AM
Countering Widespread Ignorance About the National Guard Rick Folkers Military Aviation 80 March 14th 04 03:54 AM
bush rules! Be Kind Military Aviation 53 February 14th 04 05:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.