B-17s straffing & IJN Aoba, & UK POWs

[a425couple]

While reading about the Japanese Heavy cruiser Aoba
(Unusual looking, with undulating decks, and remodel drasticly
changed what some consider 2 of the class, from 6 turrets to 3.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Aoba

I saw this unusual account:
"On April 3, ((1943)) while moored at Kavieng, New Ireland,
Aoba was bombed by Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses of the
Fifth Air Force's 43rd Bomb Group. A direct hit on Aoba caused
two Type 93 Long Lance torpedoes to explode and set the ship
on fire while the B-17's strafed the decks with machine guns.
Aoba had to be beached to avoid sinking."

Hmmm??, It's clarified by
http://www.combinedfleet.com/aoba_t.htm
"The big bombers skip-bomb from between 75 and 250 feet with
delayed-action fused 500-lb. bombs. A direct hit on AOBA explodes
two Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedoes stored aboard and sets the ship
afire while the B-17's .50-cal. machine guns strafe her decks."
I'll admit, I did not know the B-17s were used for skip bombing.

That site also has this,,, ahh 'irritating' story,
"18 March 1944: Departs Batavia. While enroute to Singapore,
Rear Admiral Sakonjo complies with the Imperial "disposal" policy
concerning POWs. He orders the beheading of each of the remaining
72 captives aboard TONE." (from British SS BEHAR)
----- "Postwar, the British try and convict Sakonjo as a war criminal,
then execute him at Hong Kong."

(IMHO, Aoba is interesting 'hard luck' story, as gradually over years,
damage reduced her from good CA cruiser, to slower,
to limping, to floating AA battery, to non-floating
'decoy target' ((hey every bomb that hit her could have
meant one less bomb hit a still OK ship ehh??))
Oh, by the way, I do have her in my 1/700 ship collection.)

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 2, 9:19*am, "a425couple" > wrote:
> While reading about the Japanese Heavy cruiser Aoba
> (Unusual looking, with undulating decks, and remodel drasticly
> changed what some consider 2 of the class, from 6 turrets to 3.)http://en..wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Aoba
>
> I saw this unusual account:
> "On April 3, ((1943)) while moored at Kavieng, New Ireland,
> Aoba was bombed by Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses of the
> Fifth Air Force's 43rd Bomb Group. A direct hit on Aoba caused
> two Type 93 Long Lance torpedoes to explode and set the ship
> on fire while the B-17's strafed the decks with machine guns.
> Aoba had to be beached to avoid sinking."
>
> Hmmm??, It's clarified byhttp://www.combinedfleet.com/aoba_t.htm
> "The big bombers skip-bomb from between 75 and 250 feet with
> delayed-action fused 500-lb. bombs. A direct hit on AOBA explodes
> two Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedoes stored aboard and sets the ship
> afire while the B-17's .50-cal. machine guns strafe her decks."
> I'll admit, I did not know the B-17s were used for skip bombing.
>
> That site also has this,,, ahh 'irritating' story,
> "18 March 1944: Departs Batavia. While enroute to Singapore,
> Rear Admiral Sakonjo complies with the Imperial "disposal" policy
> concerning POWs. He orders the beheading of each of the remaining
> 72 captives aboard TONE." (from British SS BEHAR)
> ----- "Postwar, the British try and convict Sakonjo as a war criminal,
> then execute him at Hong Kong."
>
> (IMHO, Aoba is interesting 'hard luck' story, as gradually over years,
> damage reduced her from good CA cruiser, to slower,
> to limping, to floating AA battery, to non-floating
> 'decoy target' ((hey every bomb that hit her could have
> meant one less bomb hit a still OK ship ehh??))
> Oh, by the way, I do have her in my 1/700 ship collection.)

I don't know about you guys, but I am highly impressed with the amount
of damage this ship absorbed during the war. Must have been a first-
rate crew with a decent skipper, or it would have been lost at any
number of times.

[Jim Wilkins[_2_]]

"a425couple" > wrote in message
...
> ...
> "The big bombers skip-bomb from between 75 and 250 feet with
> delayed-action fused 500-lb. bombs. A direct hit on AOBA explodes
> two Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedoes stored aboard and sets the ship
> afire while the B-17's .50-cal. machine guns strafe her decks." I'll
> admit, I did not know the B-17s were used for skip bombing. ...

General Kenney mentioned a B-17 that flew so low to fire into the
embrasure of a beach bunker that its tail scraped the sand when it
pulled out.

They were pretty free to do anything that got results out there, and
those who complained about broken regulations were sent home with
"combat fatigue".

jsw

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 2, 9:54*am, "Jim Wilkins" > wrote:
> "a425couple" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > ...
> > "The big bombers skip-bomb from between 75 and 250 feet with
> > delayed-action fused 500-lb. bombs. A direct hit on AOBA explodes
> > two Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedoes stored aboard and sets the ship
> > afire while the B-17's .50-cal. machine guns strafe her decks." I'll
> > admit, I did not know the B-17s were used for skip bombing. ...
>
> General Kenney mentioned a B-17 that flew so low to fire into the
> embrasure of a beach bunker that its tail scraped the sand when it
> pulled out.
>
> They were pretty free to do anything that got results out there, and
> those who complained about broken regulations were sent home with
> "combat fatigue".

One of my favorite stories of the air war over Europe features a
returning Lancaster dropping out of the sky to strafe retreating
German columns after a late war daylight Main Force raid. The visual
impression of a heavy bomber so completely disregarding its own safety
as well as the enemy light and medium AA fire to rain down a barrage
of MG fire and sow bombs on their cornered targets is quite striking

[[email protected]]

So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude level
bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?

Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?

[Dan[_12_]]

On 4/2/2012 3:05 PM, Gordon wrote:
> On Apr 2, 9:54 am, "Jim > wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> ...
>>> "The big bombers skip-bomb from between 75 and 250 feet with
>>> delayed-action fused 500-lb. bombs. A direct hit on AOBA explodes
>>> two Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedoes stored aboard and sets the ship
>>> afire while the B-17's .50-cal. machine guns strafe her decks." I'll
>>> admit, I did not know the B-17s were used for skip bombing. ...
>>
>> General Kenney mentioned a B-17 that flew so low to fire into the
>> embrasure of a beach bunker that its tail scraped the sand when it
>> pulled out.
>>
>> They were pretty free to do anything that got results out there, and
>> those who complained about broken regulations were sent home with
>> "combat fatigue".
>
> One of my favorite stories of the air war over Europe features a
> returning Lancaster dropping out of the sky to strafe retreating
> German columns after a late war daylight Main Force raid. The visual
> impression of a heavy bomber so completely disregarding its own safety
> as well as the enemy light and medium AA fire to rain down a barrage
> of MG fire and sow bombs on their cornered targets is quite striking

The only way to end such a mission is to do a barrel roll on climb
out after the strafing run followed by a similar roll at home station.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Bill Shatzer[_2_]]

wrote:
> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude level
> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>
> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?

Well, sorta.

http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu

[dott.Piergiorgio[_2_]]

Il 02/04/2012 18:19, a425couple ha scritto:

> That site also has this,,, ahh 'irritating' story, "18 March 1944:
> Departs Batavia. While enroute to Singapore, Rear Admiral Sakonjo
> complies with the Imperial "disposal" policy concerning POWs. He orders
> the beheading of each of the remaining 72 captives aboard TONE." (from
> British SS BEHAR)

I was under the impression that all were beheaded on TONE....

> ----- "Postwar, the British try and convict Sakonjo as a war criminal,
> then execute him at Hong Kong."
> (IMHO, Aoba is interesting 'hard luck' story, as gradually over years,
> damage reduced her from good CA cruiser, to slower, to limping, to
> floating AA battery, to non-floating 'decoy target'

The war scars and wear & tear of Aoba is in se one of most interesting
story of luck (not hard) and (apologies to Gene...) embodiement of
Japanese spirit on IJN ships

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[removal of unneded ng from X-post]

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[dott.Piergiorgio[_2_]]

Il 02/04/2012 22:56, Dan ha scritto:

>> One of my favorite stories of the air war over Europe features a
>> returning Lancaster dropping out of the sky to strafe retreating
>> German columns after a late war daylight Main Force raid. The visual
>> impression of a heavy bomber so completely disregarding its own safety
>> as well as the enemy light and medium AA fire to rain down a barrage
>> of MG fire and sow bombs on their cornered targets is quite striking
>
> The only way to end such a mission is to do a barrel roll on climb out
> after the strafing run followed by a similar roll at home station.

mhm... IMVHO perhaps was more safe an heavy four-engine TB, at least the
ventral and tail guns can suppress the AA fire from the ship's unengaged
side...

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[David E. Powell]

On Apr 3, 1:18*am, Bill Shatzer > wrote:
> wrote:
> > So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude level
> > bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>
> > Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
>
> Well, sorta.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu

Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge either
way, but wow!

[Nightjar]

On 03/04/2012 17:49, David E. Powell wrote:
> On Apr 3, 1:18 am, Bill > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude level
>>> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>>
>>> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
>>
>> Well, sorta.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu
>
> Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge either
> way, but wow!

The GT-1 does not seem to have been tested until 1943, so the caption
has to be wrong. The British Toraplane, a similar air launched gliding
torpedo was around in 1940*, but, of course, that would not have been
launched from a B-17.

* Work started in 1939 but was abandoned in 1942, as it proved to be
very inaccurate.

Colin Bignell

[Jim Wilkins[_2_]]

"Nightjar" > wrote in message
...
> On 03/04/2012 17:49, David E. Powell wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 1:18 am, Bill > wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude
>>>> level
>>>> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>>>
>>>> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
>>>
>>> Well, sorta.
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu
>>
>> Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge
>> either
>> way, but wow!
>
> The GT-1 does not seem to have been tested until 1943, so the
> caption has to be wrong. The British Toraplane, a similar air
> launched gliding torpedo was around in 1940*, but, of course, that
> would not have been launched from a B-17.
>
> * Work started in 1939 but was abandoned in 1942, as it proved to be
> very inaccurate.
>
> Colin Bignell

A field-expedient PBY torpedo attack from Guadalcanal:
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/cactus/jackcram.htm

jsw

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 6, 1:54*am, Nightjar > wrote:
> On 03/04/2012 17:49, David E. Powell wrote:
>
> > On Apr 3, 1:18 am, Bill > *wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >>> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude level
> >>> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>
> >>> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
>
> >> Well, sorta.
>
> >>http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu
>
> > Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge either
> > way, but wow!
>
> The GT-1 does not seem to have been tested until 1943, so the caption
> has to be wrong. The British Toraplane, a similar air launched gliding
> torpedo was around in 1940*, but, of course, that would not have been
> launched from a B-17.
>
> * Work started in 1939 but was abandoned in 1942, as it proved to be
> very inaccurate.
>
> Colin Bignell

Similar objects, (encased flying torpedos), were tried on Zeppelin
L-35 (LZ-80) during secret experiments in 1918 at Jueterbog (S. of
Berlin). Accuracy was said to be a problem then as well.

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 6, 2:37*am, "Jim Wilkins" > wrote:
> "Nightjar" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 03/04/2012 17:49, David E. Powell wrote:
> >> On Apr 3, 1:18 am, Bill > *wrote:
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude
> >>>> level
> >>>> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
>
> >>>> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
>
> >>> Well, sorta.
>
> >>>http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu
>
> >> Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge
> >> either
> >> way, but wow!
>
> > The GT-1 does not seem to have been tested until 1943, so the
> > caption has to be wrong. The British Toraplane, a similar air
> > launched gliding torpedo was around in 1940*, but, of course, that
> > would not have been launched from a B-17.
>
> > * Work started in 1939 but was abandoned in 1942, as it proved to be
> > very inaccurate.
>
> > Colin Bignell
>
> A field-expedient PBY torpedo attack from Guadalcanal:http://www.daveswarbirds.com/cactus/jackcram.htm

For decades, we had a docent taking tickets at our front desk that
kept a photo nearby of his "Black Cat" following a successful mission
- they were hit on their run and a shell carried away one of their
props, narrowly missing the cockpit as it careened on by with a roar.
Already committed, the pilot got his bombs off and accounted for a
troop ship with his single-engine Catalina. Just a little reminder
that men that go to war in elegant, pedestrian seaplanes are just a
little different than most.

[Jim Wilkins[_2_]]

-"Gordon" > wrote
-For decades, we had a docent taking tickets at our front desk that
-kept a photo nearby of his "Black Cat" following a successful mission
-- they were hit on their run and a shell carried away one of their
-props, narrowly missing the cockpit as it careened on by with a roar.
-Already committed, the pilot got his bombs off and accounted for a
-troop ship with his single-engine Catalina. Just a little reminder
-that men that go to war in elegant, pedestrian seaplanes are just a
-little different than most.

I'm impressed that they patrolled for reported (MAGIC) enemy carriers,
trusting their lives to their ability to hide from the CAP in whatever
clouds they might find.

jsw

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 6, 9:50*am, "Jim Wilkins" > wrote:
> -"Gordon" > wrote
> -For decades, we had a docent taking tickets at our front desk that
> -kept a photo nearby of his "Black Cat" following a successful mission
> -- they were hit on their run and a shell carried away one of their
> -props, narrowly missing the cockpit as it careened on by with a roar.
> -Already committed, the pilot got his bombs off and accounted for a
> -troop ship with his single-engine Catalina. *Just a little reminder
> -that men that go to war in elegant, pedestrian seaplanes are just a
> -little different than most.
>
> I'm impressed that they patrolled for reported (MAGIC) enemy carriers,
> trusting their lives to their ability to hide from the CAP in whatever
> clouds they might find.

"This is Strawberry Five. Have sighted enemy fleet. Please notify
next of kin."

almost as classic as, "Peccavi."

[Peter Stickney[_2_]]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 12:50:36 -0400, Jim Wilkins wrote:

> -"Gordon" > wrote -For decades, we had a docent
> taking tickets at our front desk that -kept a photo nearby of his "Black
> Cat" following a successful mission -- they were hit on their run and a
> shell carried away one of their -props, narrowly missing the cockpit as
> it careened on by with a roar. -Already committed, the pilot got his
> bombs off and accounted for a -troop ship with his single-engine
> Catalina. Just a little reminder -that men that go to war in elegant,
> pedestrian seaplanes are just a -little different than most.
>
> I'm impressed that they patrolled for reported (MAGIC) enemy carriers,
> trusting their lives to their ability to hide from the CAP in whatever
> clouds they might find.

The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
a couple of them fly.
It's a big airplane - it bulks out about the same as a B-17, with half
as many engines.
It kinda reminds me of a giant Aluminum seagull - optimized to get
the most distance out of a drop of fuel.

The guys that flew them were definitely a special breed - hours upon hours
of searching empty ocean, then instant adrenaline if/when they found something.

--
Pete Stickney
Failure is not an option
It comes bundled with the system

[Ian B MacLure]

Gordon > wrote in news:26c83642-7103-45c5-a0dc-
:

> On Apr 6, 9:50*am, "Jim Wilkins" > wrote:
>> -"Gordon" > wrote
>> -For decades, we had a docent taking tickets at our front desk that
>> -kept a photo nearby of his "Black Cat" following a successful mission
>> -- they were hit on their run and a shell carried away one of their
>> -props, narrowly missing the cockpit as it careened on by with a roar.
>> -Already committed, the pilot got his bombs off and accounted for a
>> -troop ship with his single-engine Catalina. *Just a little reminder
>> -that men that go to war in elegant, pedestrian seaplanes are just a
>> -little different than most.
>>
>> I'm impressed that they patrolled for reported (MAGIC) enemy carriers,
>> trusting their lives to their ability to hide from the CAP in whatever
>> clouds they might find.
>
> "This is Strawberry Five. Have sighted enemy fleet. Please notify
> next of kin."
>
> almost as classic as, "Peccavi."

Which is apparently what a teenage girl thought Napier ought
to have said. Peccavi being a Latin announcemnet of the capture
of Sindh in what is now Pakistan. Translates as "I have sinned".

But I digress.

Leonard Birchall certainly had a Strawberry Five experience.

IBM

[Dan[_12_]]

On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
> a couple of them fly.


If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
are crowded inside. Take a look at:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/

If I wanted to make a comparison to B-17, it is cramped inside in
some places and open in other. To give you an idea stroll inside a B-17
from cockpit to aft crew door. The bracing for the bomb bay cat walk
makes one walk sideways even when bombs aren't present. I must admit I
had a bit of a belly last time I did that and it was a tight squeeze.
The waist, nose, cockpit and radio sections of B-17 are fairly roomy.
There are spaces and restrictions in the PBY. The engineer's feet block
the top foot or so of the cockpit door. If you want to open the blisters
you do so on your knees. Neither was built for luxury, but both had
character.

Plan on taking a full day at the museum if you go. The displays are
jammed together so photography can be a bit tricky.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Jim Wilkins[_2_]]

"Peter Stickney" > wrote in message
...
> ...>
> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've
> seen
> a couple of them fly.
> It's a big airplane - it bulks out about the same as a B-17, with
> half
> as many engines....
> Pete Stickney

The only one I was able to examine closely (at MHT) was IIRC a partly
restored former houseboat that had received the amphibian conversion
and a rear door after the war with whatever parts were available. It
was far from a museum-quality original.

I didn't know in advance how many rare classics would be at that
airshow so I took my pre-war Leica instead of the SLR and couldn't
capture interior detail.

jsw

[dott.Piergiorgio[_2_]]

Il 06/04/2012 19:59, Gordon ha scritto:

>> I'm impressed that they patrolled for reported (MAGIC) enemy carriers,
>> trusting their lives to their ability to hide from the CAP in whatever
>> clouds they might find.
>
> "This is Strawberry Five. Have sighted enemy fleet. Please notify
> next of kin."
>
> almost as classic as, "Peccavi."

well, in the Med was admitted the use (and sacrifice) of the air recon
for covering ULTRA, but OTOH, intel decrypt can't pinpoint an enemy
formation, and in many cases cant' notify in time, if even possible,
sudden changes in enemy plans; Med example again, in many case Italians
cancels or delay convoys, and I guess that from the Maltese logistics's
perspective is much better a recon a/c on empty sea than an torpedo
bomber squadron and fighter escort on empty sea...

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[truly extraneous X-post removed with the utmost prejudice]

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 6, 9:55*pm, Dan > wrote:
> On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
>
> > The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
> > a couple of them fly.
>
> * * If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
> cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
> are crowded inside. Take a look at:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/


That makes me happy, actually. That cutaway fuselage used to be
integral to the base survival school -- I have photos of it internally
and externally when I was going through aircrew candidate school in
81. When the survival school was condemned (it was from the 40s and
was not in very good shape even when I was there) a few years back,
quite a few of us cried foul and ultimately the Cat was saved. Back
in the day, the interior was completely restored, with all the
original equipment (weapons, SAR gear, electronics, etc.) that a
wartime aircraft would be expected to carry. Beside it was a full
size diorama of a pilot in his life raft, with all his goodies laid
out on the inflated part. Several years later, we overflew LCDR JM
Twiss, down at sea after his A-7 stalled. I had a momentary smile
when I realized he had all of his gear laid out on his raft-edge, just
like at the survival school we had both attended.


> * *If I wanted to make a comparison to B-17, it is cramped inside in
> some places and open in other. To give you an idea stroll inside a B-17
> from cockpit to aft crew door. The bracing for the bomb bay cat walk
> makes one walk sideways even when bombs aren't present. I must admit I
> had a bit of a belly last time I did that and it was a tight squeeze.
> The waist, nose, cockpit and radio sections of B-17 are fairly roomy.
> There are spaces and restrictions in the PBY. The engineer's feet block
> the top foot or so of the cockpit door. If you want to open the blisters
> you do so on your knees. Neither was built for luxury, but both had
> character.
>
> * *Plan on taking a full day at the museum if you go. The displays are
> jammed together so photography can be a bit tricky.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dan[_12_]]

On 4/7/2012 11:27 AM, Gordon wrote:
> On Apr 6, 9:55 pm, > wrote:
>> On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
>>
>>> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
>>> a couple of them fly.
>>
>> If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
>> cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
>> are crowded inside. Take a look at:
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/
>
>
> That makes me happy, actually. That cutaway fuselage used to be
> integral to the base survival school -- I have photos of it internally
> and externally when I was going through aircrew candidate school in
> 81. When the survival school was condemned (it was from the 40s and
> was not in very good shape even when I was there) a few years back,
> quite a few of us cried foul and ultimately the Cat was saved. Back
> in the day, the interior was completely restored, with all the
> original equipment (weapons, SAR gear, electronics, etc.) that a
> wartime aircraft would be expected to carry. Beside it was a full
> size diorama of a pilot in his life raft, with all his goodies laid
> out on the inflated part. Several years later, we overflew LCDR JM
> Twiss, down at sea after his A-7 stalled. I had a momentary smile
> when I realized he had all of his gear laid out on his raft-edge, just
> like at the survival school we had both attended.
>

Gordon, the Navy knows how to put on a good display when they want
to. The cutaway has mannequins dressed in period flying kit placed in
several crew positions. This gives a better sense of scale than one gets
just standing next to it. If you get a chance to visit the museum it is
worth the time.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Gordon[_2_]]

On Apr 7, 9:53*am, Dan > wrote:
> On 4/7/2012 11:27 AM, Gordon wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 6, 9:55 pm, > *wrote:
> >> On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
>
> >>> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
> >>> a couple of them fly.
>
> >> * * *If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
> >> cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
> >> are crowded inside. Take a look at:
>
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/
>
> > That makes me happy, actually. *That cutaway fuselage used to be
> > integral to the base survival school -- I have photos of it internally
> > and externally when I was going through aircrew candidate school in
> > 81. *When the survival school was condemned (it was from the 40s and
> > was not in very good shape even when I was there) a few years back,
> > quite a few of us cried foul and ultimately the Cat was saved. *Back
> > in the day, the interior was completely restored, with all the
> > original equipment (weapons, SAR gear, electronics, etc.) that a
> > wartime aircraft would be expected to carry. *Beside it was a full
> > size diorama of a pilot in his life raft, with all his goodies laid
> > out on the inflated part. *Several years later, we overflew LCDR JM
> > Twiss, down at sea after his A-7 stalled. *I had a momentary smile
> > when I realized he had all of his gear laid out on his raft-edge, just
> > like at the survival school we had both attended.
>
> * * Gordon, the Navy knows how to put on a good display when they want
> to. The cutaway has mannequins dressed in period flying kit placed in
> several crew positions. This gives a better sense of scale than one gets
> just standing next to it. If you get a chance to visit the museum it is
> worth the time.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

i haven't been to that museum since the very early 90s, but I work
with their staff probably on a monthly basis... time to arrange some
Space A travel to P'cola :)

[Dan[_12_]]

On 4/7/2012 12:23 PM, Gordon wrote:
> On Apr 7, 9:53 am, > wrote:
>> On 4/7/2012 11:27 AM, Gordon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 6, 9:55 pm, > wrote:
>>>> On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
>>
>>>>> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
>>>>> a couple of them fly.
>>
>>>> If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
>>>> cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
>>>> are crowded inside. Take a look at:
>>
>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/
>>
>>> That makes me happy, actually. That cutaway fuselage used to be
>>> integral to the base survival school -- I have photos of it internally
>>> and externally when I was going through aircrew candidate school in
>>> 81. When the survival school was condemned (it was from the 40s and
>>> was not in very good shape even when I was there) a few years back,
>>> quite a few of us cried foul and ultimately the Cat was saved. Back
>>> in the day, the interior was completely restored, with all the
>>> original equipment (weapons, SAR gear, electronics, etc.) that a
>>> wartime aircraft would be expected to carry. Beside it was a full
>>> size diorama of a pilot in his life raft, with all his goodies laid
>>> out on the inflated part. Several years later, we overflew LCDR JM
>>> Twiss, down at sea after his A-7 stalled. I had a momentary smile
>>> when I realized he had all of his gear laid out on his raft-edge, just
>>> like at the survival school we had both attended.
>>
>> Gordon, the Navy knows how to put on a good display when they want
>> to. The cutaway has mannequins dressed in period flying kit placed in
>> several crew positions. This gives a better sense of scale than one gets
>> just standing next to it. If you get a chance to visit the museum it is
>> worth the time.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> i haven't been to that museum since the very early 90s, but I work
> with their staff probably on a monthly basis... time to arrange some
> Space A travel to P'cola :)

They did a major rebuild a few years ago. I was last there in
December. They are still expanding.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[george152]

On 4/7/2012 4:55 PM, Dan wrote:
> On 4/6/2012 10:24 PM, Peter Stickney wrote:
>> The PBY is an amazing beast - I've never been inside one, but I've seen
>> a couple of them fly.
>
>
> If you ever get the chance to go to Pensacola NAS the museum has a
> cutaway Catalina fuselage. They may look big on the outside, but they
> are crowded inside. Take a look at:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuttertime2009/4728119350/
>
> If I wanted to make a comparison to B-17, it is cramped inside in
> some places and open in other. To give you an idea stroll inside a
> B-17 from cockpit to aft crew door. The bracing for the bomb bay cat
> walk makes one walk sideways even when bombs aren't present. I must
> admit I had a bit of a belly last time I did that and it was a tight
> squeeze. The waist, nose, cockpit and radio sections of B-17 are
> fairly roomy. There are spaces and restrictions in the PBY. The
> engineer's feet block the top foot or so of the cockpit door. If you
> want to open the blisters you do so on your knees. Neither was built
> for luxury, but both had character.
>
> Plan on taking a full day at the museum if you go. The displays are
> jammed together so photography can be a bit tricky.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>
>
We have one here currently airworthy that shows up at Airshows.
All the Airline pilots who can't afford WW2 fighters are lined up to get
ratings on it

[Vaughn]

On 4/7/2012 1:23 PM, Gordon wrote:

> i haven't been to that museum since the very early 90s, but I work
> with their staff probably on a monthly basis... time to arrange some
> Space A travel to P'cola :)

While you're at it, check the Blue Angel's practice schedule. The link
is on this page:http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/show/ 8 months out of
the year, they have practice dates right behind the museum at Pensacola.
It is really a great way to see them. And free!

I can't tell you why, but what really sticks in my mind about the naval
air museum is their lighter-than-air exhibits. I don't know anywhere
else in the world you can see that stuff.

Vaughn

[Tankfixer[_2_]]

In article <32ad7fe8-20d2-453a-a9a8-
>, - Gordon
spouted !
>
> On Apr 6, 2:37*am, "Jim Wilkins" > wrote:
> > "Nightjar" > wrote in message
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 03/04/2012 17:49, David E. Powell wrote:
> > >> On Apr 3, 1:18 am, Bill > *wrote:
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>> So, by then, the B-17 crews had figured out that high altitude
> > >>>> level
> > >>>> bombing of moving ships wasn't working out very well?
> >
> > >>>> Did anyone ever try equipping the B-17 with torpedoes?
> >
> > >>> Well, sorta.
> >
> > >>>http://tinyurl.com/7sr3lmu
> >
> > >> Thank you! If this was 1940 than this stuff is huge! It's huge
> > >> either
> > >> way, but wow!
> >
> > > The GT-1 does not seem to have been tested until 1943, so the
> > > caption has to be wrong. The British Toraplane, a similar air
> > > launched gliding torpedo was around in 1940*, but, of course, that
> > > would not have been launched from a B-17.
> >
> > > * Work started in 1939 but was abandoned in 1942, as it proved to be
> > > very inaccurate.
> >
> > > Colin Bignell
> >
> > A field-expedient PBY torpedo attack from Guadalcanal:http://www.daveswarbirds.com/cactus/jackcram.htm
>
> For decades, we had a docent taking tickets at our front desk that
> kept a photo nearby of his "Black Cat" following a successful mission
> - they were hit on their run and a shell carried away one of their
> props, narrowly missing the cockpit as it careened on by with a roar.
> Already committed, the pilot got his bombs off and accounted for a
> troop ship with his single-engine Catalina. Just a little reminder
> that men that go to war in elegant, pedestrian seaplanes are just a
> little different than most.

My late father-in-law flew as an AM in various models of PBY during WW2.

I could never get him to talk about that part of his Navy career..