HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cpatten@flash.pax.tpa.com.au (Craig James Patten)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: American kill, Navy F16???
Date: 2 Jan 1993 22:09:25 +1030
Organization: PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide)
NNTP-Posting-Host: flash.pax.tpa.com.au

murphyed1@woods.ulowell.edu (The Butler) writes:

>Unless someone has been witholding information from me, I didn't know that the 
>F16 was flown by the navy, or had the legs to go from it's home port in the
>USA all the way to Iraq.  I think someone has made a mistake when watching the
>news, and is getting everything confused.

>At last check, the  KItty Hawk had just begun steaming for the gulf, and will
>arrive there in a while, it still has to clear the Atlantic, and the bottom of
>Africa.  It will be a while before the navy gets there....

I agree, however our local news services down here in South Australia
(which, I admit, get their overseas stuff from BBC/CNN/NBC) said a few
days earlier that US F-16's were flying missions from Saudi bases. Perhaps
the media got the correct plane, but the wrong base. :-)

Craig.

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|            Craig Patten - Internet: cpatten@pax.tpa.com.au              |
|               Opinions shown here are mine, obviously.                  |
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: air combat tidbits and a question...
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Distribution: rec
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:53:50 GMT


A short note, the first air combat occurred on November 31, 1913
between two Americans.  They were flying for opposing factions during
a Mexican revolution near Naco, Mexico.  The two pilots, Phil Rader
and Dean Ivan Lamb, exchanged pistol shots, but no damage (to pilots
or aircraft) were done.  It conjures an amusing image anyway.  :-)

Against high numerical odds: Major William C. Barker, RFC (a
Canadian), flying a Sopwith Snipe (sucessor to the famed Camel) on
October 27, 1918 engaged a German two seater.  In the process he was
attacked by multiple aircraft (mostly Fokker D.VIIs) and was shot
three times, once in each thigh and one which shattered his elbow.  In
the course of the fight Maj Barker fainted 3 times, shot down 4 of his
opponents and engaged 60 German fighters.  He crash landed on the
British side of the lines and recovered.  He was awarded the Victoria
Cross by King George V on November 30, 1918.  His aircraft, Sopwith
Snipe E8102, is reported to be in a museum in Canada.  does anyone
know the whereabouts of this aircraft?  I understand the fuselage is
the only part still extant.  Barker's final tally at the end of the
war was 53.

In WWII, on January 11, 1944, the 8th Air Force B-17s pounded
Oschersleben.  On the way home, the B-17s were seperated from their
escort, the 354th Fighter Group, except for a single P-51 Mustang.
The bombers were attacked by 36 Messerschmitt Me 110s.  Major James
Howard broke up the Me 110 attacks 5 times, destroying 3 of the Me
110s.  Jim Howard was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor (the
only British based American Fighter pilot so recognized).  He learned
hi trade flying with the American Volunteer Group (AVG, aka `Flying
Tigers').  His total score at the end of the war was 13.

--
Al Bowers                       bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
NASA F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, Lead Aero
NASA, Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, California
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: FW-190 (was Re: Bf 109)
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:02:48 GMT
 <1992Dec15.015848.18995@den.mmc.com> <1992Dec16.070915.7562@pixar.com> 
  <1992Dec18.174255.28802@apgea.army.mil>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Dec18.174255.28802@apgea.army.mil>
jmmatthe@apgea.army.mil (Jeffrey M. Matthews <jmmatthe>) writes:

> In an interesting footnote  to history, the Eighth Air Force was so
> impressed with the 190's all-around performance that in early '44 they
> traded an entire squadron of P-51B's for some black market FW's.  The
> Mustangs were, in turn, snapped up by the Luftwaffe, who were amazed by
> the projected production rates.  The scene was thus set for a classic
> meeting of the giants.

This is pretty interesting, if true.  Where did you hear about it?  I
know of only one Focke-Wulf that ended up in British hands and this was
in 1942, it was practically worn out with extensive testing.  And you
say there was a whole squadron of 190's used by the Americans?  And
that they actually escorted a flight of B-17's?  And not only that but
the Germans were able to put an entire squadron of Mustangs together
and not only that but attack a flight of B-17's?  Are you sure this
didn't come from a work of fiction?  I swear I've not heard of this in
20 years of reading military aviation history. I mean think of the
logistics, the need for armament, mechanics to keep them running
changing the radios, training in type and this scene would have to be
repeated for the Germans.  Did I miss some smiley's somewhere?

Corky Scott
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou)
Subject: Re: American kill...
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:37:29 GMT

Wow, there have been a lot of strong responses to my "curious situation". But 
most of them miss the point: i said "near the no-fly zone" no into. I don't 
think Saddam would be that stupid the send his birds just for being shot down.
Let me make the "curious situation" clearer:

Once every a few days, he would send a bird or two up, rushing to the no-fly 
zone but make a u-turn just outside it. So the "navy F-16s" must respond.
But since the Iraqi jets didn't actually enter the NFZ, the good guys can't
shoot their "IR AMRAAMs". Let this happen day and night. So the American 
flyboys have to maintain some a/c constantly in the air, not a very pleasant
vacation spot.

This might not work as one posting pointed out: in the air iraqis can not
pull any surprise on Americans. Just keep an AWACS constantly on station and
vector in fighters when detecting the bandits. Still some hassle.

Some postings suggest simply sending in waves of bombers and eliminate
iraqi AFBs and remaining fighters. Well, unless US wants to waive the image
of justice and protector of the weak, this will not happen. NFZ is not UN
sanctioned (unlike in Bosnia-Herzegovina). And I don't see UN will authorize
another Gulf War just for this "annoyance".
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: dmunroe@vcd.hp.com (Dave Munroe)
Subject: Re: American kill...
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:33:54 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard

In article <1992Dec30.194443.20437@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou) writes:

>Now is a curious situation. What if Saddam keeps harassing US? Well, he just
>sends a few jets near the no-fly zone sporadically, keeping US jets busy.
>What can American do? Launch another gulf war? This is something like a 
>guerilla war fought in the air, only harassing, not fighting.

What can we do?  We can target his airbases and attack them.  If this happens
a second time, this is exactly what I would do.  Saddam, however, is not
likely to engage in such a "guerilla war fought in the air" since he'd simply
lose too many aircraft and pilots trying it.

-Dave
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: asp+@pitt.edu (Anandeep Pannu)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Rescue/Special Forces Helicopters in Combat
Date: 30 Dec 92 16:04:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: blue.1227
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: asp@magma.lrdc.pitt.edu

Anybody know of any good books devoted to the activities of the rescue 
helicopters operated by the Air Force in Vietnam ? Any book I read about
the Vietnam Air War always has a reference to the Jolly Green Giants 
but I havent yet come across a book devoted completely to their activities.
I am especially interested in the SH-3s/HH-53s/MH-53s. I want to know how
they were like to fly, what kind of combat they took part in and other such
stuff. 

If there isnt a book about them, then I think it is high time someone wrote
one. I think this was a very courageous and skilled group of aviators who 
should get more attention. I had read a Flight magazine article (July 88?) 
about the Special Operations Wing at Hulburt Field, Florida and was very 
impressed by the kind of flying they do.

Please respond by e-mail or post. If there is enough interest, I will 
summarise and post.

Anandeep
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: F-86 question...
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 19:16:00 GMT


Just who was the high scoring ace in F-86s?  I have seen info that
says it was Major James Jabara (16.5) and other sources claim it was
Captain Joseph McConnell (16).

Looking at it, I'd say Jabar is it, but why the controversy?

--
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: asrgf@wombat.newcastle.edu.au
Subject: Aussie turbo prop powered Mustang!
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 11:57:58 GMT

   During 1975-76 there was a Mustang fitted with a Fokker Friendship Turbo
Prop engine in the private aircraft park at Canberra airport. I don't know if
it ever flew, but it looked very "mean" and "purposeful". I think that I read
somewhere recently that the airframe was a CAC ex-RAAF, and that it has been
refitted with the original type Merlin. Anyone know the details, particulary
why it was converted in the first place?

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: caraher@pn32.petnet.med.umich.edu
Subject: Re: A-10 Replacement
Organization: pet/cyclotron
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:29:59 GMT

In article <wardml.724683000@catfish26> wardml@rtsg.mot.com (Matthew L. Ward)
writes:
>On the subject of an A-10 replacement.
>
>A few years ago [ <5 ] a read an article in that great aviation magazine
"Popular
>Mechanics" (sarcasm)  that described a company building an updated P-51
airframe
>coupled with a modern engine for the CAS role.  The plane was touted as being
only
>1 million per plane while the A-10 was 10 million per plane.
>
>Anybody know what happened to that plane ?
>
>
Yes, it's sitting in the USAF museum at Wright-Pat. Quite a beast. It was in
the annex when I saw it in August. Don't know why it didn't pan out, though.
If I recall correctly it had a big turboprop engine, with an ugly exhaust port
just behind the cockpit on the left side. The entire underside of the wing was
littered with hardpoints for carrying stores, and it had more the look of one
of those counterinsurgency planes than a battlefield CAS platform.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: A-10 Replacement
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:46:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.162959.1838@med.umich.edu> caraher@pn32.petnet.med.umich.edu writes:

>In article <wardml.724683000@catfish26> wardml@rtsg.mot.com (Matthew L. Ward)
>writes:
>>On the subject of an A-10 replacement.

>>A few years ago [ <5 ] a read an article in that great aviation
>>magazine "Popular Mechanics" (sarcasm) that described a company
>>building an updated P-51 airframe coupled with a modern engine for the
>>CAS role.  The plane was touted as being only 1 million per plane
>>while the A-10 was 10 million per plane.

>>Anybody know what happened to that plane ?

>Yes, it's sitting in the USAF museum at Wright-Pat. Quite a beast. It was in
>the annex when I saw it in August. Don't know why it didn't pan out, though.
>If I recall correctly it had a big turboprop engine, with an ugly exhaust port
>just behind the cockpit on the left side. The entire underside of the wing was
>littered with hardpoints for carrying stores, and it had more the look of one
>of those counterinsurgency planes than a battlefield CAS platform.

Actually there were two of them.  They were built by the Cavalier
Aircraft Corporation in the late '60s and early '70s.  Cavalier
specialized in P-51 restorations, parts, refits, rebuilds, etc.
Cavalier tried to compete the aircraft (unsolicited) as a COIN
(COunter-INsurgency) aircraft, quite unsucessfully.  Neither was flown
and Cavalier dropped out, selling everything off to Piper Aircraft.
Piper completed both and both aircraft were evaluated here at Edwards
AFB in the late 70s and early 80s.  While both aircraft were quite
suited to the COIN and CAS role, they did not fit into the scheme of
things, and would not have survived long in a high tech battlefield
environment for too long (most recent wars have been low tech threat
environments, and this same complaint is made about the A-10 as well).
Only 13 percent of the airframe was made from Mustang tooling,
everything else was new tooling.

The second airframe is in the Edwards AFB surplus depot (dismantled).

--
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: anderson@zymurgy.bms.com (Jay Anderson)
Subject: Seen in misc.forsale
Organization: BMS Pharmaceutical Research Institute
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:32:06 GMT

Sorry if this has been hashed over already, but I just saw this in 
misc.forsale.

Jay
------- Start of forwarded message -------
From: valent@inavia.msk.su (Valentina N. Barinova)
Newsgroups: biz.misc,misc.forsale
Subject: FOR SALE: PLANES & HELIS An-12, An-24, Tu-154M, Mil-8T, Mil-8MTV, Mil-17 Tel/Fax +7-(095)361-6473
Date: 24 Dec 92 08:43:34 GMT
Reply-To: valent@inavia.msk.su
Organization: International Aviation Industry Exchange

1. Used An-12            Price   USD 2,500,000   Delivery after 15.01.93
2. Used An-24                        2,500,000   Delivery after 15.01.93
3. Used Mil-8T after
   plant repair (1992)                 450,000   10 pieces
4. Tu-154M brand new                10,500,000   4
5. Il-76TD Omega brand new          13,000,000   4
6. Mil-8T brand new                  1,025,000   10
7. Mil-8MTV brand new                1,225,000   10
8. Mil-17 brand new                  1,350,000   10
------- End of forwarded message -------
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Jay Anderson                      anderson@optical.bms.com
Imaging Systems Admin
Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute
Princeton, NJ 08543               Work: (609)-252-6039
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: What happened to the Blackjack? 
From: mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz (Mike Campbell)
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 06:46:37 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Me? Organized?


In article <urf.725702068@sw2001> urf@icl.se writes:

  > 
  > jfb200@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (joseph.f.baugher) writes:
  > 
  > >The NATO code name of this aircraft is *Blackjack*.  The aircraft is, in
  > >fact, in squadron service with the Russian Air Force. 
  > 
  > As well as the Ukrainan air force, but they are trying to get rid
  > of theirs. (Around 20, isn't it?)
  > 
  > Not because they're bad, but because they have to reduce the number
  > of aircraft in service to comply with CFE, and then of course you
  > sell off and scrap what you have least use for.

FLIGHT mag reckoned it was because the crews were Russian and refused 
to serve the new Ukranian Airforce - the Ukranians now have these 
great big lumps of junk littering their airfield, and want to get some 
cash for them :-)


Mike Campbell, Christchurch, New Zealand
mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: craigdo@microsoft.com (Craig Dowell)
Subject: Re: AMERICAN KILL...
Date: 03 Jan 93 00:37:47 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1459.417.uupcb@the-matrix.com> rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins) writes:
>So, the Navy has converted to F-16s eh. Must have been a blast trying to
>teach those young hotshot Air Force pukes to land their Falcons on a
>carrier deck. Especially without a naval type tail hook. <grin>

Let's get this right.  Navy and Marine Corps people don't call USAF folks
pukes -- that would be ingracious.  They're slimes! :)

-- Craig

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: steve@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Steve Bridges)
Subject: Re: A-10 Replacement
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:47:17 GMT

caraher@pn32.petnet.med.umich.edu writes:

>In article <wardml.724683000@catfish26> wardml@rtsg.mot.com (Matthew L. Ward)
>writes:
>>On the subject of an A-10 replacement.
>>
>>A few years ago [ <5 ] a read an article in that great aviation magazine
>"Popular
>>Mechanics" (sarcasm)  that described a company building an updated P-51
>airframe
>>coupled with a modern engine for the CAS role.  The plane was touted as being
>only
>>1 million per plane while the A-10 was 10 million per plane.
>>
>>Anybody know what happened to that plane ?
>>
>>
>Yes, it's sitting in the USAF museum at Wright-Pat. Quite a beast. It was in
>the annex when I saw it in August. Don't know why it didn't pan out, though.
>If I recall correctly it had a big turboprop engine, with an ugly exhaust port
>just behind the cockpit on the left side. The entire underside of the wing was
>littered with hardpoints for carrying stores, and it had more the look of one
>of those counterinsurgency planes than a battlefield CAS platform.

The Piper PA-48 (I think -- I don't remember what was in the data plate)
Enforcer was based on the P-51H airframe, and was intended to provide less
expensive CAS and counterinsurgency capability for low-threat environments.

I've always wanted to call up Piper and ask to buy one :-)
-- 
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
steve@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM   ___| Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
Sci.military moderator        | "The airplane does not recognize attitude,
providing a maneuver is conducted at one G" -- A.M. "Tex" Johnston
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: mew@controls.ccd.harris.com (Mark E. Warthling)
Subject: Re: Focke-Wulf 190 Dora
Organization: Harris Controls Division
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:32:34 GMT

>
>Finally, having read through the relevant passage, I found no reference
>to my allegation that the Dora was not as fast as the Mustangs or
>Thunderbolts.  I did come across a quote from one pilot who was flying
>a 190A who noted that at 30,000 feet, his aircraft was substantially
>slower than the Mustangs he had to deal with and felt lucky to escape
>with his life.  It just preceded the information about the Dora so I
>must have melded it together.  My apologies.
>
>Corky Scott

Thouroughly enjoyed all of that info on the 190's, it was very timely
with the Wings of the Luftwaffe episode on Discovery, 

thanks...

Mark
From: hhtra@usho21.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: American kill...
Date: 30 Dec 92 21:54:46 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <1992Dec30.194443.20437@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou) writes:
|> Now is a curious situation. What if Saddam keeps harassing US? Well, he just
|> sends a few jets near the no-fly zone sporadically, keeping US jets busy.
|> What can American do? Launch another gulf war? This is something like a 
|> guerilla war fought in the air, only harassing, not fighting.

 They'll do what they just did.  If any Iraqi aircraft crosses into the
 no-fly zone and ignores warnings to leave, it'll be shot down.  Good
 practice for our guys.  It probably breaks up the boredom of just 
 orbiting around, patrolling endless miles of sand.

 Since he doesn't have a big reserve of aircraft and pilots and isn't 
 likely to get any replacements in the near future, such tactics won't 
 last long.

 Of course, this kind of "harassing" has gone on since aircraft were used
 in combat.  How many thousands of times have the US and Russia "probed"
 each other's air defenecs/zones/space over the years?  When I was 
 stationed in Okinawa, Japan the F-4s and F-15s must of scrambled out of 
 Kadena AFB at least twice a month to go meet Chinese bombers. How many 
 hundreds of times have each side shot at each other's aircraft during 
 peace times?  The North Koreans probably still shoot at our helicopters
 patrolling the DMZ.

 BTW, since that was the first combat shoot-down by an AMRAAM, that 
 makes it "combat proven" and its value in the defense market just
 went up.  Remember the Exocet?  It more than tripled in price after
 the first Britsh ships were hit?  So that'll be good for our defense
 industry.  Thanks Saddam.


 TRAVIS
 hhtra@hou281.chevron.com
From: mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz (Mike Campbell)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Aurora 
Distribution: world
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 18:56:06 GMT
Organization: Me? Organized?


In article <8079@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM> drchambe@tekig5.pen.tek.com writes:

  > Also Gemini. I recall no ejection seats, and in the Smithsonian display I
  > noticed no provision for them.

Didn't they have little rockets mounted on the nose of the crew 
capsules to pull them up and away in case of trouble?



Mike Campbell, Christchurch, New Zealand
mike@aloysius.equinox.gen.nz
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 13:15:03 EST
From: <TLT101@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Aircraft beauty: B-17
 <65510002@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> <1992Dec30.034119.17784@netcom.com>


In article <1992Dec30.034119.17784@netcom.com>, tssmith@netcom.com (Tim
Smith) says: > >Never did care for the B-17x.  Have you ever seen a live one
up close?  >Amazing how small they are by today's standards (military and
>commercial).  And how quiet, for that matter.

Yes they are small by today's standards.  They are fairly quiet alone
compaired to a jet I suppose, but in a group they sure make a bit of noise.
They also look better when there are 5 or 6 of them together flying as a
group.

Best thing I saw was with a B-17 with a P-51 on each wingtip.  Rather nice
formation, sounds great too.

Tim Thompson, PPSEL, TLT101@PSUVM.PSU.EDU

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: What happened to the Blackjack?
Keywords: none
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Distribution: global
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 10:11:56 GMT

In article <tomcat.725662871@cwis> tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo) writes:
>>For some reason or another, I was wondering about this last night.  Does
>>anyone out there know what ever happened to the (then-)Soviet "Blackjack"
>>bomber?  As I vaguely recall, it was supposed to be a sort of super-Backfire,
>>but I don't remember having heard much about it after about the late '80s.
>
>>Any thoughts, ideas, vague memories, etc.?
>
>>Greg Anderson
>>greg@perry.berkeley.edu
>
>I heard that it crashed some time ago during either an airshow or a flight
>test...if I remember correctly, the aircraft attempted a loop or something
>and didn't quite make it.  I remember seeing pictures of the plane nose diving
>into the ground...pretty good pictures too.
>I could be wrong..this could be about another plane, but not quite sure.
>*shrug* Maybe som

You might have seen either pictures of the 1973 crash of the Tu-144 SST
at the Paris Air Show, or a picture of the crash of a Mig-29 at the Paris
show in 1991 (I think).

Simon

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military