#1 Piston Fighter was British

"Wolfie" wrote in message
om...

"ArtKramr" wrote

You can't win a war on the defense.

You can't win a war through the air alone, either,
short of nuclear annihilation.

Or flatulance in a closed room !



Richard.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Paul J. Adam"
Date: 7/10/03 1:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In message , ArtKramr
writes
Not bizarre at all. Carrying a bombload is the same as "shooitng back"
The
ability to harm the enemy is the active criteria.

Carrying a deadly payload counts: do _you_ want to tell the paratroopers
that you don't consider them to be dangerous?


--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam

I guess if thos troops got there on bicycles we would have to call the
bikes
combat vehlcles.

Well know we call APC's combat vehicles

And if a Piper Cub crashes and kills an enemy soldier we have
to designate the Piper Cub as a ground attack aircraft.(sheesh)


I'd suggest those pilots in WW2 who flew light aircraft in the
over enemy lines as artillery spotters were very definitely in combat.

You gotta wonder what he thinks of the guys who flew Dustoff missions
into and out of hot LZ's on a routine basis; I guess all of those
hours my brother logged, not to mention one shootdown, don't qualify
as "combat duty" in Artian World. And to think CWO Michael Novosel
(himself a former B-29 pilot from WWII who later reentered the service
to fly helos) got the MoH while flying just that kind of (unarmed)
mission for the 82nd Med Det in the RVN (and the MoH is reserved for
actions that take place *in combat*...Maybe Art thinks he can go take
it back from him?

Brooks


Keith

(ArtKramr) wrote in message ...
Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Paul J. Adam"
Date: 7/10/03 4:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In message , ArtKramr
writes
Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Paul J. Adam"
Date: 7/10/03 1:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:
Carrying a deadly payload counts: do _you_ want to tell the paratroopers
that you don't consider them to be dangerous?
I guess if thos troops got there on bicycles we would have to call the
bikes
combat vehlcles.

The Japanese used bicycles to transport troops and did so very, very
effectively in 1942. If you can manoeuvre your force faster than the
enemy, who cares _how_ you do it?

And if a Piper Cub crashes and kills an enemy soldier we have
to designate the Piper Cub as a ground attack aircraft.(sheesh)

I'd call a Piper Cub, or an Auster, doing artillery observation a
"combat aircraft" - the enemy recieving the fire are just as dead.

As is the pilot, if enemy AAA or fighters catch up with him.

If you're taking direct fire from the enemy, you're in combat. Hard to
argue with that definition.


How do you feel about latrine orderlies?

They no longer exist as a specialty (as if they ever did), nor do
those mess stewards you mentioned earlier (except maybe in the Navy,
and then they are usually sitting on the same *combat* ship as the
rest of the crew...). BTW, we no longer have blacksmiths serving with
the cavalry units, either...nor horses, for that matter.

Brooks


Arthur Kramer

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

How do you feel about latrine orderlies?

For **** sake, the military is all about being part of a team.

I guess if thos troops got there on bicycles we would have to call the bikes
combat vehlcles. And if a Piper Cub crashes and kills an enemy soldier we have
to designate the Piper Cub as a ground attack aircraft.(she

I'm glad the Cub made it into the discussion!

There was in fact at least one L-4 armed with bazookas, three? on each
wing strut. Dunno if it was actually used in combat.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

Sunny wrote:

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

How do you feel about latrine orderlies?

For **** sake, the military is all about being part of a team.

Exactly. Also, on individual service:

When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one talent which is death to hide
Lodg'd with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest he returning chide,
"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"
I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent
That murmur, soon replies: "God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts: who best
Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state
Is kingly; thousands at his bidding speed
And post o'er land and ocean without rest:
They also serve who only stand and wait."

-- John Milton
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: Cub Driver
Date: 7/11/03 2:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


I guess if thos troops got there on bicycles we would have to call the
bikes
combat vehlcles. And if a Piper Cub crashes and kills an enemy soldier we
have
to designate the Piper Cub as a ground attack aircraft.(she

I'm glad the Cub made it into the discussion!

There was in fact at least one L-4 armed with bazookas, three? on each
wing strut. Dunno if it was actually used in combat.



Never met a PIper Cub I didn't like. I have many hours stick time in cubs.
Have you ever flown a Feisler Storch? Sheesh. Now that ios an expirience.

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Hi Dan

Yes a handful of Piper L-4's of the 4th Division in Northwest Europe
were equipped with this field improvisation. It involved strapping three
bazookas on the left strut of the aircraft. The pilot would fire them
by reaching out the window and hauling on a lanyard.

Here are a couple of interesting notes on the L-4 and its effectiveness.

(a) The L-4 was such a menace to the German Army, that if a soldier shot
one down, he was sent to the rear for 15 days leave,

(b) The L-4 engaged in air-to-air combat. No ****!!! 1st Lieutenant
Duane Francis was flying an L-4 when he encountered a Fielser Storch.
He and his observer began to exchange sire arms fire with the crew of
the Storch. Guess who won??? Yep, the crew of the L-4. Not only did they
shoot down the Storch, they landed and captured its crew. Talk about
the ultimate in humility.


(c) While piloting an L-4, 1st Lieutenant Alf Schultz threw his
aircraft around to violently, that it caused the pilot of the pursuing
Bf-109 to fly his fighter into the ground. I guess he was so intent on
shooting the little warbug down that he lost all situation awareness.
Akin to target fixation I would think.


Cheers...Chris

In message , ArtKramr
writes
Subject: #1 Piston Fighter was British
From: "Paul J. Adam"
I'd call a Piper Cub, or an Auster, doing artillery observation a
"combat aircraft" - the enemy recieving the fire are just as dead.

As is the pilot, if enemy AAA or fighters catch up with him.

If you're taking direct fire from the enemy, you're in combat. Hard to
argue with that definition.

How do you feel about latrine orderlies?

Wouldn't award them combat medals unless they took and returned enemy
fire.

Would definitely consider them key personnel, because it's a
twentieth-century innovation that armies lose more troops to enemy fire
than to disease. Bombardiers sick with gastro-enteritis are as useless
as dead bombardiers until they get well (and they need decent sanitation
to get better)

The idea that an army consisted of nothing but fighting men died a
hundred and fifty years ago, and for damn good reason. The downside is,
instead of every soldier being recruited to trail the puissant pike, a
lot of troops get hired for unglamorous, boring, unheroic jobs like
field sanitation, oil changes on engines, FOD walkdowns and cook duty.

War heroes they ain't - but the heroes stand on their shoulders. If they
weren't essential they'd have been given rifles and sent to the front
(which was the traditional method): and the side with the best logistics
wins.

Art, when did your unit ever cancel missions because you were short of
spares, or bombs, or avgas, or .50cal ammo? (The enemy did, frequently)

When did you scrub sorties because flight crew were malnourished or
diseased? Do you not realise how lucky you were, to have such tremendous
logistic capability backing you?

Men made sure that your aircraft never lacked fuel, bombs, spares or
ammunition, and its crew were fed and healthy. Keeping a B-26 fed and
watered strikes me as a challenging job. Keeping an airbase's latrines
sweet in summer is a challenge I'd personally shy from. But _someone_
has to do it and it seems someone did, which let you fly your missions.

You don't value latrine orderlies? Fine, dig and maintain your own.
Don't appreciate cooks? Feed yourselves. And so it goes. Doesn't take
long before you're too busy trying to survive, to fly missions
effectively.



--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam

In article , ArtKramr
writes
And of of course carrying a bombload is the equivalent of "shooting back".

As did the V1 which was the start of this discussion, we seem to be
going round in circles...

--
John