HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military



Hello all,

I need color info for a Curtis A-3B Falcon.  Color photos,
color drawings, or a pointer to an actual plane would be
great.  I am building a Radio Control model of this plane.
I have plans but need some coloring.

If any of you know where I might get something like this
please drop me a line.

Thanks
Chris Douglas
chrisd@hpisrhr.cup.hp.com

PS. A book with color pictures would also be great.
From: cwilliam@bbn.com (Christopher Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Why didn't Luftwaffe paint propeller tips?
Date: 6 Jan 1993 17:39:40 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: cwilliam@BBN.COM (Chris Williams)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com


Anybody know?  I've looked at thousands of photos of WWII aircraft, and
it appears that the Luftwaffe is the only air force that didn't paint
some sort of bright warning color on their propeller tips.

Later in the war, this might make sense as better comouflage while on
the ground.  But there were no painted tips even in the early air-
supremacy stages of the war.

Could this be a cultural thing?  Might the practice have originated only
with those countries that had carrier aviation, where there would be a
greater risk of walking into a prop on a crowded carrier deck?

Chris Williams
cwilliams@BBN.COM

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: strike variant of F-14
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:53:36 GMT

In article <C0pLx4.2CK@unccsun.uncc.edu> ebstokes@uncc.edu (Edward B Stokes) writes:

>I read somewhere (sorry, I forgot where) that there was a study some
>time ago about the possibility of replacing the F/A-18 with a modified
>F-14 (F/A-14?). It supposedly had greater speed, range, payload, etc.
>Has anyone heard anything about this?

I think you are refering to the F/A-18 E and F variants which are to
assist A-6s in their strike role.  grumman had proposed a `=ground
punder' version of the F-14 as a cheaper alternative fto the F/A-18
E/F.

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: pierre@synopsys.com (Pierre Wildman)
Subject: F22 - one more time
Followup-To: rec.aviation.military
Organization: Synopsys
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 04:58:27 GMT

I'm glad that there are lots of folks ou there who know lots and lots about
the F-22 incident/accident/crash.

To the original question, can anyone tell me the date of the event, or how
to get video footage of the whatever you want to call it?

Thanks in advance.

Pierre Wildman
Seneca N29461
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Subject: Re: P51s are Shiny Metal
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:28:32 GMT

In article <C0pFxB.IHJ@unccsun.uncc.edu> ebstokes@uncc.edu writes:
>In a computer game I have (Falcon3.0), the wingmen occasionally say "Alpha
 Mike Foxtrot". A,M,F, What does that mean? It's not in the manual.
>

No, I wouldn't think it would be. :)    The 'A' means "adios."  You can
probably figure out the 'M.F.' from that.  It's a VERY unofficial way of
saying goodbye to the adversary.  Your game is probably programmed to use
it as a punctuation following a kill.

TH



Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (John Clear)
Subject: Re: DC1/3
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 05:14:38 GMT

In article <8JAN199311593259@rover.uchicago.edu> frank@rover.uchicago.edu writes:
[...]
>	DC3. Only transport credited with a kill. Japanese zero pilot, frus-
>	trated after blowing all his ammo and the #$%^& is still flying,
>	tried to crash his plane into the DC3. Took off part of the tail,
>	and bought the farm doing it, but the DC3 managed to get to base.
>
>	Any air frame that can log 50 years and 1 million air hours gets
>	my vote.

	Dunno about the truth to it, but one of my cfi's along the way said 
that there are only two aircraft to never have a structural failure in flight.
The DC-3 and Cessna 172s.  I'm pretty sure he meant structural failure caused
by fatigue or airframe stress, and not events un-forseen in the design of the 
plane like being shot up/hit by a zero.  If anyone has info to back up or refute
this, please let me know.

John
-- 
John `SpaceCadet` Clear - jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu, clearja@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
PP-ASEL   C/LTC, CAP-NYW                                 
"When you think how well basic appliances work, it is hard to believe 
anyone ever gets on an airplane" -- Calvin and Hobbes
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: wcsswag@alfred.carleton.ca (The Charlatan)
Subject: Re: A FEW GOOD MEN AND F14'S
Keywords: F14 CUBA US NAVY
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:28:31 GMT

[History of base deleted]

 According to my book "The guide to US Navy". The rent was originally
in 1903 was $2,000 in gold. Now the cost is $4,085 a year. I don't if
Cuba used the Cash. BTW that works out $90 per Sq mile.
 Not a bad deal.
 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: djohnson@moose.uvm.edu (Dave C Johnson)
Subject: MiG ownership information
Organization: University of Vermont -- Division of EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 17:21:23 GMT


Greetings from Burlington Vermont...

IN reference to someones question about MiG ownership and parts,
you can contact a man here in Burlington about parts and purchasing..
His name is Dean Martin, he owns a couple of Mig 21s, a few 17's,
a few 15's, a pair of 29's, and I think I saw a Chinese J-7 airguard
in his hanger one day as we were parking some other planes. He is a
big collector. I know he does alot of flying with the fighting
158th, an f-16 squadron based here. I also believe he has govrnment
contract and helps out during red flag... ytou can send snail mail
to...

Dean Martin
WarPlanes Incorporated
Burlington Internation Airport
South Burlington, Vermont 05403

if I can help out any more please feel free to email me.

=- Dave
   djohnson@moose.uvm.edu callsign *doogie*
   Dave C Johnson
From: flanker@ics.omsk.su (Aleksey V. Stukalov)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Soviet "Flashlight" bomber
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 09:36:29 +0500
Distribution: world
Organization: Information-commercial systems LTD.
Reply-To: flanker@ics.omsk.su


In article <1992Dec29.022944.1182@cbnewsdcb.att.com>,
jfb200@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (joseph.f.baugher) writes:
>
>   I don't know the Yakovlev bureau numbers of either the *Firebar* or the
>   *Brewer*.  Anyone out there in Netland know?
>
"Firebar" is NATO name of Yakovlev Yak-28. It seems that "Brewer" is a
Yak-28 too, or Yak-28B to be exact.

Best regards,

--- 
===========================  Aleksey V. Stukalov  ===========================
                         +7 (3812) 255394  -0600 GMT
==================  flanker@ics.omsk.su (55.00 N 76.30 E)  ==================
From: haralds@ifi.unit.no (Harald Stegavik)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: MiG29 on TV
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:57:20 GMT
Followup-To: rec.aviation.military
Organization: Inst. for informatikk, UNIT, Norway

In article <65510007@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com>, tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com
(Tony Zugates) wrote:
> 
> The point I was trying to make was that Zuyev defected from 
> a communist government that was not to his liking.  
> 
> It seems that as soon as Ukraine got the chance they too "defected"
> 
> 
> And Latvia, and Lithuania ad nauseum....
> 
> I dont believe these states ever wanted to be part of Russia in 

They have never been part of Russia (ex. maybe many years ago) -
they have been members of the CCCP        


> the first place.  
> 
> So why dont they lighten up on the guy?
> 
>      v
> Tony Zugec

-----------------------------------------
Ph.D-student Harald Stegavik
Dept. of informatics
AVH, University of Trondheim
Norway
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: *** AF F15 Eagle/Strike Eagle vs. Navy F14 Tomcat ***
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:42:50 GMT

In article <C0poyM.9F4@srgenprp.sr.hp.com> jeffc@sad.hp.com (Jeff Crowell) writes:

>F-14 has some significant advantages over the F-15:

> variable-geometry wings, which are automatically controlled to optimize
>   to whatever speed/G/altitude the aircraft is.  I never had the chance
>   to take one on, but my buds always said that the -14 could take the
>   -15 below 20,000 feet, tho the -15 would win above (engines favored
>   up high, variable-sweep wins low).  Tomcat-Eagle fights therefore
>   usually turned into name-calling fests, as the Turkeys orbited low and
>   dared the Eagles to come down and fight like men, while the bluesuiters
>   stayed high and vowed they'd kick butt if the Navy would only come up
>   and take 'em on.

This also results in considerable disadvantages too.  Because of the
variable sweep mechanism, the G limit on the -14 was 6.3 symmetric and
4.3 asymmetric.  On the -15 this is 7.33 symmetric.  Can't recall the
asymmetric number for the -15.

One other (odd) place that variable sweep can hurt is once in a
turning fight, if a rolling scissors is allowed to develop into a
defensive spiral, variable goemtry will work _AGAINST_ you.  In a
defensive spiral you want to develop the highest G and create the most
induced drag (to force the overshoot of your opponent).  Variable
geometry is not what you want in this case.

But back to the original question.  The F-14 is an excellent Fleet Air
Defence (FAD) aircraft, second to none.  And the F-15 is an excellent
air superiority fighter, second to none.  Remember, that each has its
place, and its individual strengths and weaknesses.

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: good@pixar.com (You may find your self behind the wheel of a large automobile...)
Subject: Re: P51s are Shiny Metal
Organization: Pixar - Pt. Richmond, CA USA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:51:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.141415.11115@ryn.mro4.dec.com> pierson@empror.enet.dec.com (dave pierson) writes:

:	Interesting question.  One I have pondered since visiting Offut and
:	Dayton and looking at the SR71s.  They have exposed (tho flush)
:	"Phillips" head fasteners, notably on the leading edge, to fasten the
:	RAM wedges.  The also have numerous "patches"  (apparently repairs),
:	simply rivetted on.  with protruding rivets and the material of the
:	patch about 0.125" thick.  Seems curious, but there it is.
:
:	Discounting "disinformation", I _speculate_ that at those speeds, the
:	skin of the a/c becomes irrelavant.  Whats really doing the flying is
:	the boundary layer, so the roughnesses are hidden inside a "stalled" 
:	layer. 

The way I got it from a fluid dynamicist was that at the altitudes at which
the '71 operates the air is so thin that it doesn't act so much like a
viscous fluid as like a bunch of particles, making slick, laminar-flow type
surfaces unnecesary. It *is* interesting to see how bumpy the fastest known
airplane is.

		--Craig
-- 
	good@pixar.com
	At least Congress doesn't make death worse every year.
From: noah@cad.gatech.edu (Noah White)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Battle of Britain Shopping List
Date: 12 Jan 1993 12:07:13 -0500
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: cae.cad.gatech.edu

In <C0qs13.G6n@cs.bham.ac.uk> jpa@cs.bham.ac.uk (Jonathan P Alma) writes:

>Can anyone out there help with the following questions regarding the Battle of
>Britain.

>  - I need to know the following about the squadrons (RAF and Luftwaffe) 
>    involved in the BoB :
>	- where they were based
>	- the aircraft they flew (including specific models if possible)
>	- squadron size
>	- famous squadron members
>	- how effective/successful each squadron was
>    plus any other interesting info/stories about any squadron. 

>  - I need info on the RAF airfields (anything would be helpful).

>Sorry for having to ask, but my present references don't go down to this level.

    I would recommend you purchase (if you have a PC (IBM compat.)) the
game Their Finest Hour: The Battle of Brittan from Lucas Film gmaes.
The manual that comes with it is and incredible warehouse of facts about
both the German and Brittish involvement in the BoB. The game is quite
good also. Not I have no connection with the company, I'm just a satisfied
customer.

				-Noah


-- 
Noah White                                       Internet: noah@cad.gatech.edu
CAE/CAD Lab Staff & USENET Administrator
Georgia Institute of Technology
"Wheel in the sky keeps on turin. Oh I don't know where I'll be tomarrow."
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Iraqi MiG downing...
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 21:17:06 GMT


AvLeak reports the Iraqi MiG as a MiG-25.  Also it _was_ an F-16 C
(didn't say which Block release) and a AMRAAM (guess I have to eat my
words on that one).  The two MiGs were 20 miles south of the `no-fly'
zone and when the MiGs sited the F-16s they broke _into_ the Falcons.
The Falcon pilots took this to be a hostile gesture and fired on the
MiGs.  The second MiG immediately reversed course and returned north
of the `no-fly' line.

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
From: megazone@obsidian.WPI.EDU (MegaZone23)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: KC-10 Tankers for SR-71????? and quick Book Review
Date: 10 Jan 1993 09:21:19 GMT
Organization: WPI USAF -- United Society of Animation Fans
NNTP-Posting-Host: obsidian.wpi.edu

In article <C0MJnM.G4H@acsu.buffalo.edu> v111qheg@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (P.VASILION) writes:
>In article <1993Jan9.163732.26460@athena.mit.edu>, cid@athena.mit.edu (Derek H Cedillo) writes...
>>Summary:  The Russians Shuttle program sucks, they decide to capture an 
>>American shuttle with SDI payload to get a double bonus, and all kinds of 

Yeah... Ok, but the Russians purchased orbiter blueprints and many of the
wind tunnel models from NASA. Capturing a US orbiter wouldn't give them 
much. They'd still have to reverse engineer it, just to find that it matched
the blueprints. (I heard about the blueprints and models from a prof who
gave a lecture at WPI after visiting the Soviet Union -prebreakup-, he said
he saw them...)

>	As of August 1992, no KC-10's have been converted to carry JP-7.
>The KC-135Q is the only aircraft capable of delivering the light oil
>that the SR-71 burns. This from AF Colonel who is DO for 101st FIW.

Well, you may want to ask NASA about that. From what I recall they are using
normal KC-135s, the same as used for other aircraft. Mary, are you reading?

###############################################################################
# I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity.  Use your mind, think! #
#Email megazone@wpi.wpi.edu  Moderator, WPI anime FTP site 130.215.24.1 /anime#
###############################################################################
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: Ar-234's disapearing guns.
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
	<BOWERS.93Jan11114347@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:45:28 GMT

In article <BOWERS.93Jan11114347@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov> bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers) writes:

>The guns could only be mounted on the Ar 234 B-0 models (two Jumo
>004), as the landing skid on the A serties (and prototypes) took up
>the centerline location.  The C-3 models (four BMW 003) could also
>carry the two 20 mm cannon as well.  I don't know if the C-4 (photo
>recon model) could carry the guns or not.  They may have interferes
>with the camera view.  The C-0 through C-2 models (V6 and V8, I don't
>think C-1 ever flew) also could not carry the gun as these are also
>the skid aircraft with no centerline store location.

I went back and checked, the C series was a different line from what I
reported.  The C-1 was supposed to be a purpose built recon version
with no capability to carry armament.  The C-2 was a purpose built
bomber version to carry 4,400 pounds of bombs with a range of 472
miles.  The C-3 version was to do both (a multi-role aircraft), but
only 19 of these (another source lists 20) were produced before the
end of the war, none saw service.  Flugkaptain Joachim Carl (chief
test pilot for Arado) piloted one of the C-3 models to 520 mph at sea
level, with no payload.  Later versions were planned, usually refered
to as the D or P models.  The D-1 was to be a recon aircraft and D-2
as pure bomber.  The D series were two manned versions.  There were
P-1 through P-4 versions to be built as night fighters, but this never
happened.  One note about the night fighter versions, it is known that
Major Kurt Bonow was commanding an operational test group for night
fighting with the Ar 234, but my reference says that the source of
this information is obscure (no known Ar 234 versions were equipped as
night fighters).

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: augustho@aludra.usc.edu (August Horvath)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Why didn't Luftwaffe paint propeller tips
Date: 12 Jan 1993 11:26:02 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

Some general thoughts on vivid markings on WW2 combat a/c.

1. In general, the Luftwaffe had the most vivid unit and personal 
markings on their a/c, with the exception of the USAAF and even then
only during the 1944-45 period.  USAAC/AAF markings from 1939 to 1943
were mostly quite drab.

2. The AVG copied their shark teeth from the RAF's No.112 "Shark" Sqn
in N. Africa.  They also flew Tomahawks.

3. At least one Luftwaffe Bf-110 unit had big shark teeth painted on 
their aircraft, circa Battle of Britain.  Another unit had a big 
stylyzed wasp on the nose.  These predated both the RAF and AVG usage
of this marking.  Of course, the shark mouth is one of the oldest
fighter markings, going back to WWI.

4. When talking about personal markings (girlfriends' names, scantily-
clad women, etc.) we should not neglect an important variable:  whether
it was the practice of that air arm at that place and time to assign
a/c to individual pilots.  This has varied a lot.  In general, it can
be said that at most times and places, pilots at the squadron leader level
or above have had personal a/c, while newcomer pilots have not; but for
the rank-and-file majority, norms are not universal.  USAAF crews,
especially in the UK, were normally assigned to a/c; RAF pilots were not,
at least during the Battle of Britain period.  Obviously the lack of 
identification with a particular a/c makes it less likely that a pilot
will adorn it with personal markings.

In the pages of Air Classics (I think) a couple years ago there was
some controversy over what markings Greg Boyington's Corsair had (in
combat, as opposed to when it was tricked up for propaganda photos). 
One former VMF214 crew chief wrote in to say that Boyington had no
special markings because he had no personal a/c, he just took whatever
bird was handy like everyone else in 214.  If true, this would contradict
the representations offered by quite a few aviation artists, modellers,
and even the Naval Air Museum and Marine Air/Ground Museum, which both
display restored Corsairs representing Boyington's a/c and both carry
the number "86" usually associated with Boyington.  So this question of
personal markings is tied to whether the relevant unit has personal a/c.

August Horvath <augustho@usc.edu>
From: jem3@pyuxf.uucp (25312-mc killop)
Subject: Re: DC1/3
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:09:12 GMT

In article <1712@tdat.teradata.COM> wbj@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com writes:
>What relationship (if any) is there between the DC1 & DC3 aircraft? 


There was only one DC-1; it was built in 1933(?) and served as a
prototype for the DC-2 which went into production.  I believe that
the DC-1 was sold in Spain in the mid-30s and was destroyed in a 
crash in Spain in the late 30s.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: yukyuk@beta.lanl.gov (Craig B. Huffnagle)
Subject: Re: A FEW GOOD MEN AND F14'S
Keywords: F14 CUBA US NAVY
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:52:09 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.094133@usho72.hou281.chevron.com> hhtra@usho72.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.115017.1@cbr.hhcs.gov.au>, byrnes@cbr.hhcs.gov.au writes:
>|> I saw the movie "A Few Good Men" the other evening, and noticed in some of the
>|> scenes of the airstrip a few F14's deployed. Is it common for F14's to be based
>|> on ground bases like Guantanamo?
>
>  Quite common, I would think.  The Dallas NAS is several hundred miles
>  from any significant body of water yet F14s are stationed there.

Also, there are training squadrons for every aircraft, including F-14's, that
are land-based.  You gotta learn how to land on the ground before you can try
to land on an aircraft carrier.  Miramar (Top Gun) NAS is the west coast base
for F-14 training.

> TRAVIS

- Craig

-- 
Craig Huffnagle				      	      yukyuk@yuck.lanl.gov
"My mom always said that rain was God crying,
	She also said it was because of something I did."      Jack Handey
------------------- Think of a disclaimer, it applies. -------------------
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: P51s are Shiny Metal
Date: 12 Jan 93 10:30:34 ACST
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: eco.economics.adelaide.edu.au

In article <1i9otoINNi6t@transfer.stratus.com>, kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner) writes:
> 
> On the topic of WWII fighters.  I always see p51s (in movies,
> documentaries, models, pictures, museums, etc.) with an unpainted,
> polished metal finish.  Most other fighter planes of that era, appear
> painted (I seem to remember seeing some p-38s and p-47s shiny though).
> Most of the navel planes are painted blue which makes sense.  A lot of
> the fighters (p-40, spit, etc) are painted though.  Does anyone know
> the criteria they used for deciding whether to paint a plane and what
> color?



P-51s were painted for camoflage  when they expected opposition.  However once
air superiority has been gained then you can go to a lower drag metal finish
which gives you greater speed/range.  Once you have a huge air superiority
being seen doesn't worry you as much as it does when you have significant
opposition.  Some later Spits went unpainted as did many B-17's etc.  I am not
sure but due to their relative invulnerability (for several reasons including
altitude flown at, gun defences, lack of real opposition at the time of entry
into the war) I can't recall seeing a camouflaged B-29.  Of course I could be
wrong.



regs

Rob


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: KC-10 TANKERS FOR SR-71??
Date: 10 Jan 93 21:31:00 GMT
Reply-To: rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins)
Organization: The MATRIX BBS - Birmingham, AL - 205-323-2016

-> I was recently reading a book, one of
-> those techno-military books of tom clancy fame
-> (Him and Stephen Coonts worked with the author, Harrison Payne)

I recently started one about a potential third world war between Nato
and Warsaw pact. Written by an Australian Mil Intel fellow. It started
off with an F-18 shooting a ship with a Penguin Anti-Ship Missile then
using the other one to shoot down a Russian Recon plane. Of course while
this was going on the F-14 were bombing the heck out of a nearby Russian
Airfield with Mavericks! I didn't make it to the second chapter. <g>
                                        Rocky